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…

shall therefore the potter forgo his sovereignty in making of the same lump one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? What if God should tell Nebuchodonosor that after he is dead, his scull should be turned to some such base use, and that some common jakes should have the bottom of it pitched with his bones; and he thereupon should wish he had never been rather; shall this be sufficient to derogate from the Sovereign power of God, or restrain him from the like, or from giving Jehoiakim's body no better burying then the burial of an Ass? Or cause stately and proud Jezebels body to be eaten of dogs? O what base manner of discourses are these to deflower the Power and Sovereignty of the Almighty! but I wonder not if after men have prostituted all honesty in opposing the grace of God, they are soon found to loose their wits also. Yet I have not done, I must not pretermit to answer his Scripture passage. What if it had been good for Judas he had never been borne; it were as true if there were no absolute decree of God for his damnation, but foreknowledge only that he would be damned; but shall God therefore be forbidden upon the forfeiture of the reputation of his goodness, to bring forth Judas into the World? But by the way our Saviours words do not import hereby, that it were better for him he had not been; for a being he might have had though never borne into life, as many a one hath had, that never saw the light of the Sun, their womb being their grave. But because some mens tongues run riot against me, for the interpretation of this passage, which I make in my Vindiciae, not sparing to profess they will turn Atheists, when that is true, and as ready they have been to profess under their hand, that they will sooner deny there is a God then concur with the Contra-Remonstrants in their Doctrine of Reprobation: I pray let them be enquired of, whether they, or any wise man else, was ever known after such a manner to outface the interpretation that Maldonate gives of that very place, which here I will subjoin for special reason: thus then Maldonate, De quo verbo nimis fortasse subtiliter quidam disputant, quomodo melius Judae fuisset, natum non esse, cum non esse, nullum, damnatum esse, aliquod bonum sit; aliquid enim est, qui damnatus est; omne autem quod est, qua est, bonum est.

shall therefore the potter forgoe his soveraignty in making of the same lumpe one vessell unto honour, and another unto dishonour? What if God should tell Nebuchodonosor that after he is dead, his scull should be turned to some such base use, and that some common jakes should have the bottome of it pitcht with his bones; and he thereupon should wish he had never been rather; shall this be sufficient to derogate from the Soveraigne power of God, or restrain him from the like, or from giving Jehoiakims body no better burying then the buriall of an Asse? Or cause stately and proud Jezabells body to be eaten of doggs? O what base manner of discourses are these to deflower the Power and Soveraignty of the Almighty! but I wonder not if after men have prostituted all honesty in opposing the grace of God, they are soon found to loose their witts also. Yet I have not done, I must not pretermit to answer his Scripture passage. What if it had been good for Iudas he had never been borne; it were as true if there were no absolute decree of God for his damnation, but foreknowledge only that he would be demned; but shall God therefore be forbidden upon the forfeiture of the reputation of his goodnesse, to bring forth Iudas into the World? But by the way our Saviours words doe not import hereby, that it were better for him he had not been; for a being he might have had though never borne into life, as many a one hath had, that never saw the light of the Sunne, their wombe being their grave. But because some mens tongues runne ryot against me, for the interpretation of this passage, which I make in my Vindiciae, not sparing to professe they will turne Atheists, when that is true, and as ready they have been to professe under their hand, that they will sooner deny there is a God then concurre with the Contra-Remonstrants in their Doctrine of Reprobation: I pray let them be enquired of, whether they, or any wise man else, was ever known after such a manner to outface the interpretation that Maldonate gives of that very place, which here I will subjoyne for speciall reason: thus then Maldonate, De quo verbo nimis fortasse subtiliter quidam disputant, quomodo melius Iudae fuisset, natum non esse, cum non esse, nullum, damnatum esse, aliquod bonum sit; aliquid enim est, qui damnatus est; omne autem quod est, qua est, bonum est.