A64002:2433
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.
JEANS
IEANES
First, I say of this your comment, as you did of D. Twice his notion upon the place, this is said but not proved, Nor indeed probable, because
FIrst, I say of this your comment, as you did of D. Twisse his notion upon the place, this is said but not proved, Nor indeed probable, because
First, Scripture is a stranger to this acception of remission.
Secondly, 'tis very irrational to take remission in this sense, which by your Doctrine may be consistent with its contrary: to wit condemnation. Though this particular sin of their crucifying him, were not imputed to them by way of bar unto their repentance, either by any sudden or speedy destruction, or by delivering them up to such a spirit of obstinacy or obduration, under which men seldom or never repent. yet according unto what you teach of grace, and ascribe unto the power of mans will, they might notwithstanding all this not believe and repent, but resist the grace of God, and dye in final unbelief and impenitency, even for this sin, and so consequently be condemned for it. Christs prayer might be granted, this particular sin of their crucifying Christ might be forgiven unto them, and yet they might be everlastingly damned for it, and their other sins. How you can reconcile these things passeth my understanding, but I shall not be unwilling to learn.