A64002:418
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.
2. The Remonstrants second argument is this.
What God cannot perform that God cannot will. But God cannot damn a man for infidelity flowing from such a decree of Reprobation.
What God cannot performe that God cannot will. But God cannot damne a man for infidelity flowing from such a decree of Reprobation.
Resp. 1. But who saith that infidelity floweth from the decree of reprobation? Not one that I know, but Piscator upon these words, Ye therefore hear not my words, because ye are not of God. But understand him aright, it is as if he 1should say, Therefore such a man goeth lame, because the Physician will not cure him: yet it is well known the cause of his lameness is from within, and perhaps procured by some distemper of his own: yet in case a Surgeon could cure him and will not, he may be said to be the cause of lameness; but how? per modum non removentis. This is well known by the learned to be a kind of cause whereof notice is taken in Natural Philosophy. And in this sense and no other, ⟨p. 73⟩it is well known that Piscator makes God the cause of infidelity, and that according to the express Word of God. But in my judgement Piscator mistakes the phrase, To be of God, which he conceives to denote election. I rather take it to denote regeneration, as much as to say, ye therefore he are not my words, because God hath not hitherto by regeneration cured that natural infidelity which is in you.
Resp. 1. But who saith that infidelity floweth from the decree of reprobation? Not one that I know, but Piscator upon these words, Yee therefore heare not my words, because yee are not of God. But understand him aright, it is as if he