A64002:630
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.
TWICE. Consideration.
TWISSE. Consideration.
Here be odd gambols; as when he saith the proposition here is negative, whereas the propositions are two, and the latter affirmative, as well as the former is negative. As for the taking of it distributively, as he speaks, the Text expresseth the negative distributively; implying belike, that when we interpreted the ⟨p. 116⟩former place de generibus singulorum, it was not to be taken distributively, which is a very shallow conceit, for it is apparent we distribute it de generibus singulorum; and more then that, of the particulars of each kind, only we do not distribute it of all the particulars. In like manner, though the Text in this place expresseth a distribution, saying, not willing, any to perish, this distribution is not extended to all: Nay, it admits of a greater limitation then the former place did by our interpretation; for [Greek or Hebrew] here must be referred to that which goes before in these words, God is patient to us ward not willing any to perish, that is, [Greek or Hebrew], any of us to perish, but all to come to repentance, that is [Greek or Hebrew], all of us; which can admit of no other sense then all such as the Apostle was; he saith it is contrary to absolute reprobation; that is wind; when he proveth it then we will believe it, his word is no oracle.
HEre be odde gambolls; as when he saith the proposition here is negative, whereas the propositions are two, and the latter affirmative, as well as the former is negative. As for the taking of it distributively, as he speaks, the Text expresseth the negative distributively; implying belike, that when we interpreted the