A64002:2022
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.
Now this is the very proof which formerly I laboured to disprove, by showing the inconsequence thereof, yet the proposition whereon you rely, either must depend upon this proof, or upon none at all. But I will proceed with you a little farther upon these Syllogisms you propose.
Now this is the very proofe which formerly I laboured to disprove, by shewing the inconsequence thereof, yet the proposition whereon you rely, either must depend upon this proofe, or upon none at all. But I will proceed with you a little farther upon these Syllogismes you propose.
2. Sin (you say, and that truly) is necessarily required to make men capable of pardon. And this general truth brancheth it self into two specials:
2. Sinne (you say, and that truly) is necessarily required to make men capable of pardon. And this generall truth brancheth it selfe into two specialls:
1. Sin original is necessarily required to make men capable of pardon for sin original.
1. Sinne originall is necessarily required to make men capable of pardon for sinne originall.