A64002:1830
The riches of Gods love unto the vessels of mercy, consistent with his absolute…The riches of Gods love unto the vessells of mercy, consistent with his absolute…
The riches of Gods love unto the vessels of mercy, consistent with his absolute hatred or reprobation of the vessels of wrath, or, An answer unto a book entitled, Gods love unto mankind ... in two books, the first being a refutation of the said book, as it was presented in manuscript by Mr Hord unto Sir Nath. Rich., the second being an examination of certain passages inserted into M. Hord's discourse (formerly answered) by an author that conceals his name, but was supposed to be Mr Mason ... / by ... William Twice ... ; whereunto are annexed two tractates of the same author in answer unto D.H. ... ; together with a vindication of D. Twice from the exceptions of Mr John Goodwin in his Redemption redeemed, by Henry Jeans ...The riches of Gods love unto the vessells of mercy, consistent with his absolute hatred or reprobation of the vessells of wrath, or, An answer unto a book entituled, Gods love unto mankind ... in two bookes, the first being a refutation of the said booke, as it was presented in manuscript by Mr Hord unto Sir Nath. Rich., the second being an examination of certain passages inserted into M. Hords discourse (formerly answered) by an author that conceales his name, but was supposed to be Mr Mason ... / by ... William Twisse ... ; whereunto are annexed two tractates of the same author in answer unto D.H. ... ; together with a vindication of D. Twisse from the exceptions of Mr John Goodwin in his Redemption redeemed, by Henry Jeanes ...
Oxford: printed by L.L. and H.H. for Tho. Robinson, 1653
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
In like manner the Author of the book, De vocatione Gentium, which is commonly thought to be Prospers, though Vossius affects to entitle it unto another upon no other ground, but because he conceits that Author, not to be so rigorous in the doctrine of predestination, as Prosper. But let the judicious compare Prospers carriage in this particular, with that Authors, and observe whether they do not exactly agree For that Author holds up that text of Paul, God will have all to be saved, as Prosper doth, without assaying to clear it by interpretation as Austin doth, and will have it go for a secret; and withal he expressly concurs with Prosper in expressing first, that God doth not give grace for mens good works sake, nor denies it for their evil works. For the ages wherein God so plentifully communicated his grace were no better then the former. Observe farther that Austin himself in his Enchiridion treating of this place of Paul, God will have all to be saved, after he hath given two interpretations thereof, the last whereof interpreting it of genera singulorum, 1not singula generum, is most generally received, as most congruous both to Scripture phrase in general, and in special unto this very text of Paul, as Piscator observes, and Vossius against himself improvidently confesseth. Yet see the ingenuity of this great light in Gods Church. If any man can give any other convenient interpretation, let him, provided we be not driven to deny the first article of Creed, whereby we confess that God is omnipotent. And this I conceive proceeded out of a desire to hold up the meaning of that text to the uttermost, that the very letter of it may be applied so we might not be driven to so foul an inconvenience, as to say that God willeth that mans salvation, which is never saved; which is as much as to say, that such a one therefore is not saved, because God cannot save him. Observe farther; in the days of Hincmarus and Remigius, these controversies being revived in the cause of Goteschalk, the church of Lyons writes a book wherein it treats of the meaning of this place of Paul, whereof he gives four expositions according to the ancient fathers. First, That it is to be understood of genera singulorum, not singula generum; of all sorts of men, not of all men of all sorts. Secondly, That none is saved but by the will of God.
In like manner the Authour of the booke, De vocatione Gentium, which is commonly thought to be Prospers, though Vossius affects to entitle it unto another upon no other ground, but because he conceits that Authour, not to be so rigorous in the doctrine of predestination, as Prosper. But let the judicious compare Prospers cariage in this particular, with that Authours, and observe whether they do not exactly agree For that Authour holds up that text of Paul, God will have all to be saved, as Prosper doth, without assaying to cleare it by interpretation as Austin doth, and will have it goe for a secret; and withall he expresly concurres with Prosper in expressing first, that God doth not give grace for mens good workes sake, nor denyes it for their evill workes. For the ages wherein God so plentifully communicated his grace were no better then the former. Observe farther that Austin himselfe in his Enchiridion treating of this place of Paul, God will have all to be saved, after he hath given two interpretations thereof, the last whereof interpreting it of genera singulorum,