A64002:684
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. It was wont to be accounted that man was the image of God, not in respect of the qualities of his mind and will only, but even in respect of his Essence also; And some have been anciently condemned for denying this: why then do we not say that the Essence of man is of the same nature with the Essence of God differing only in degree. In the next place the power of understanding and liberty of will in man a bodily creature, brings him nearest to God, of all bodily creatures: it was wont to be said that all other creatures had vestigia Dei, but man was imago Dei; as in whom is represented the Divine Nature as intelligent and free; so far forth, as a compound creature of ⟨p. 126⟩body and soul can represent him; but who hath ever said that the understanding of God was of the same nature with the understanding of man: and the will of God of the same nature with the will of man? It is well known that the understanding, and will humane, are but natural faculties in man; but the understanding and will Divine, is the very essence of God; and if mans essence be not of the same nature with his faculties, doth it become us to profess that the essence of God is of the same nature with the natural faculties of man? As for the graces of Gods spirit, what are these but the three Theological virtues; all other are but Moral virtues sanctified by these; Now show me what Faith there is in God of the same nature with our Faith differing only in degree? What hope there is in God of the same nature with our hope, differing only in degree, what charity there is in God of the same nature with our Charity, differing only in degree. These indeed being of all other the most peculiar fruits of regeneration, whereby we are renewed after the image of God, as touching the adventitious qualification of our natures, should have Attributes divine answerable unto them (if any) of the same nature with them, differing only in degree. Yet herein (as I conceive) consists not so much our participation of the Divine Nature, as in that, the Spirit of God the Father, and God the Son is communicated unto us, given unto us to be the immediate fountain of all actions and motions spiritual in us.
2. It was wont to be accounted that man was the image of God, not in respect of the qualities of his mind and will only, but even in respect of his Essence also; And some have been anciently condemned for denying this: why then doe we not say that the Essence of man is of the same nature with the Essence of God differing only in degree. In the next place the power of understanding and liberty of will in man a bodily creature, brings him nearest to God, of all bodily creatures: it was wont to be said that all other creatures had vestigia Dei, but man was imago Dei; as in whom is represented the Divine Nature as intelligent and free; so farre forth, as a compound creature of