A64002:1920
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
An Answer to a Letter of D. H. concerning Gods Decrees definite or… › Part 1
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.
and this conceit, after Suarez, is embraced with great approbation by Hurtado de Mendoza. Which because it concerneth a manner of Gods concourse, and that a very strange one, as they expound it; I have taken occasion to consider it in a peculiar digression. So that in that case the particular produced is not intended by nature at all (as being indifferent to any) but left to be determined by the will of God. And as for nature universal, whose end is the maintenance of the universe in the several kinds of the parts thereof; it likewise, so there be particulars succeeding whereby the species rerum are maintained, regards not at all, whether these particulars be produced or others. But these intentions are not answerable to the intentions of God, which are altogether of particulars, whereupon mans understanding works in drawing therehence unities specific and generical, according to that of Aristotle, Animal aut nibil est aut posterius est. And Navarrettus, writing of divine concourse; suppo•endum est id quod solent Logici & Metaphysici dicere de unitate universa•• quae non est unitas positiva sed negativa: Non enim universale est positive unum in multis sed cum reperiatur plurificatum in multis, & non magis determinatum ad unum quam ad alterum, habet in se quandam indifferentiam, non quidem positivam respectu multorum, atque adeo non habet unit atem positivam; sed negative se habet ad illa multa, & consequenter, est unum negative in multis, hoc est, habet unitatem quae non magis reperitur in uno inferiorum quam in altero. But yet the case I say in present consists not in comparison between a species and the singulars thereof, but between particulars and particulars; either as indefinitely considered under the notion of aliqui, or definitely under the notions of Hic & ille.
and this conceit, after Suarez, is embraced with great approbation by Hurtado de Mendoza. Which because it concerneth a manner of Gods concourse, and that a very strange one, as they expound it; I have taken occasion to consider it in a peculiar digression. So that in that case the particular produced is not intended by nature at all (as being indifferent to any) but left to be determined by the will of God. And as for nature universall, whose end is the maintenance of the universe in the severall kinds of the parts thereof; it likewise, so there be particulars succeeding whereby the species rerum are maintained, regards not at all, whether these particulars be produced or others. But these intentions are not answerable to the intentions of God, which are altogether of particulars, whereupon mans understanding works in drawing therehence unities specificall and genericall, according to that of Aristotle, Animal aut nibil est aut posterius est. And Navarrettus, writing of divine concourse; suppoendum est id quod solent Logici & Metaphysici dicere de unitate universa quae non est unitas positiva sed negativa: Non enim universale est positive unum in multis sed cum reperiatur plurificatum in multis, & non magis determinatum ad unum quam ad alterum, habet in se quandam indifferentiam, non quidem positivam respectu multorum, atque adeo non habet unit atem positivam; sed negative se habet ad illa multa, & consequenter, est unum negative in multis, hoc est, habet unitatem quae non magis reperitur in uno inferiorum quam in altero. But yet the case I say in present consists not in comparison between a species and the singulars thereof, but between particulars and particulars; either as indefinitely considered under the notion of aliqui, or definitely under the notions of Hic & ille.