A64002:836
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.
for their vaunt was, that they could not be refuted by any reason Philosophical, but only by certain naked authorities Theological, (as I have heard of a Scholar, sometimes challenged by a friend and kinsman of his, for being given (as he heard) to the Arminian Tenet, made a ready answer with protestation, that that opinion was very plausible, but that St Paul was against it.) And therefore Bradwardine undertakes to confute them by reason Philosophical; so far off was he from being cowed with their vain boasts and brags. His words are these; Sicut antiqui Pelagiani ventoso nomine secularium scientiarum inflati consistorium Theologicum contemnentes Philosophicum flagitabant; ita & moderni. Audivi namque quosdam advocatos Pelagii, licet multum provectos in sacris apicibus; affirmantes Pelagium nusquam potuisse convinci per naturalem & Philosophicam rationem; sed vix arguebatur utcunque, per quasdam authoritates Theologicas, maxime autem per authoritatem Ecclesiae, quae Satrapis non placebat: Quapr opter per rations & authoritates Philosophicas ipsos disposui reformare. And for my part, though I affect not in those points, to go beyond Scripture and Christian reason, yet I am content to be led whithersoever my adversary thinks good to lead me: And as a Scholar of my acquaintance being left handed, and accordingly casting his cloak over the right shoulder, was answered by a Citizen observing it, when he enquired his way, saying, when you shall come to such a place, you must turn on your right hand, meaning indeed, on the left; so likewise I am nothing afraid of this mans Philosophy, nor his Abettors neither, nothing doubting, but as many as I find opposing this divine truth, which we maintain, their best dexterity, in Philosophical and rational discourse, will prove but a left handed Philosophy: and in this very field of argumentation, I purpose to lay upon him ere we part. But let us first consider the things that he replies.
for their vaunt was, that they could not be refuted by any reason Philosophicall, but only by certain naked authorities Theologicall, (as I have heard of a Schollar, sometimes challenged by a friend and kinsman of his, for being given (as he heard) to the Arminian Tenet, made a ready answer with protestation, that that opinion was very plausible, but that St Paul was against it.) And therefore Bradwardine undertakes to confute them by reason Philosophicall; so farre off was he from being cowed with their vain boasts and braggs. His words are these; Sicut antiqui Pelagiani ventoso nomine secularium scientiarum inflati consistorium Theologicum contemnentes Philosophicum flagitabant; ita & moderni. Audivi namque quosdam advocatos Pelagii, licet multum provectos in sacris apicibus; affirmantes Pelagium nusquam potuisse convinci per naturalem & Philosophicam rationem; sed vix arguebatur utcunque, per quasdam authoritates Theologicas, maxime autem per authoritatem Ecclesiae, quae Satrapis non placebat: Quapr opter per rationes & authoritates Philosophicas ipsos disposui reformare. And for my part, though I affect not in those poynts, to goe beyond Scripture and Christian reason, yet I am content to be led whethersoever my adversary thinks good to lead me: And as a Schollar of my acquaintance being left handed, and accordingly casting his cloake over the right shoulder, was answered by a Cittizen observing it, when he enquired his way, saying, when you shall come to such a place, you must turne on your right hand, meaning indeed, on the left; so likewise I am nothing afraid of this mans Philosophy, nor his Abettors neither, nothing doubting, but as many as I find opposing this divine truth, which we maintain, their best dexterity, in Philosophicall and rationall discourse, will prove but a left handed Philosophy: and in this very field of argumentation, I purpose to lay upon him ere we part. But let us first consider the things that he replies.