A64002:751
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.
Yet who of our Divine saith, that God for one offence hath determined death and tortures to any reprobate of ripe years? Do they not all profess, that as many as dye in actual sins unrepented of, God determined to damn them for those actual sins unrepented of? I do not think he can allege any that denies this. Again, what one of our Divines maintains that Infants perishing in original sin, are damned for that sin, which is made theirs only by imputation? What a shameless habit hath he gotten to himself to deliver untruths? yet will he not (I warrant you) be accounted a Pelagian, neither will he plainly deny original sin as Grevincovius is said to have done, and that testibus convinci potuit. Their Tenets are nothing less shameful, then Pelagius his Tenets were, only they have not that ingenuity which Pelagius had, in professing plainly, that there was no original sin conveyed unto us by propagation.
Yet who of our Divine saith, that God for one offence hath determined death and tortures to any reprobate of ripe years? Doe they not all professe, that as many as dye in actuall sinnes unrepented of, God determined to damne them for those actuall sinnes unrepented of? I doe not think he can alleadge any that denies this. Againe, what one of our Divines maintaines that Infants perishing in originall sinne, are damned for that sinne, which is made theirs only by imputation? What a shamelesse habit hath he gotten to himselfe to deliver untruths? yet will he not (I warrant you) be accounted a Pelagian, neither will he plainly deny originall sinne as Grevincovius is said to have done, and that testibus convinci potuit. Their Tenets are nothing lesse shamefull, then Pelagius his Tenets were, only they have not that ingenuity which Pelagius had, in professing plainly, that there was no originall sinne conveyed unto us by propagation.
Now he comes more closely unto the matter, yet but a little neither; a loose and dissolute discourse is most suitable with his Genius.