Selected quad for the lemma: mercy_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
mercy_n	goodness_n	great_a	sin_n	6,173	5	4.6117	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A90683	The divine philanthropie defended against the declamatory attempts of certain late-printed papers intitl'd A correptory correction. In vindication of some notes concerning Gods decrees, especially of reprobation, by Thomas Pierce rector of Brington in Northamptonshire.	Pierce, Thomas, 1622-1691.	1657 (1657)	Wing P2178; Thomason E909_9; ESTC R207496	223,613	247

that useth it not Both which are Acts of his free Oeconomy his liberty to do what he will with his own and no way depending unlesse it be in the execution on any act of our will But 4. though I am thus an Assertor of Gods Decrees and as well of those that are absolute as of those that are conditional yet my Correptory Corrector will not be pleased unlesse I also will assert that God decreed the fall of Adam that Source and Fountain of all our sins and that I will not thus far comply with his Masters and himself as to make the Spirit of Holinesse to be the Decree and predeterminer of all events whether holy or unholy clean or unclean good or evil I thank him as much as if I did God forbid that I should think any such Treasonable thought against his Majesty and Goodnesse as that he decreed what he hated the Apostacy of Adam or of the Angels he gave them liberty and only permitted them to abuse it Nor can I beleeve the irreversible damnation or preterition of far more then half the whole World upon no other score then Adams sin the Second Adam being given to raise up all them that had been fallen in the first but also upon the score of their manifold personal and actual sins It being more agreeable to the nature of God to reject Men for those sins which they wilfully committed in their particular persons then for the one sin of one man committed many thousand years before these Reprobates were born Which is not to write against Decrees but to define what they are which are owned by God and what they are which are not § 2. To that word in my Title Reprobation Mr. B. opposeth that I should rather have said Damnation which he saith I confound with preterition or Negative Reprobation p. 1. T is very well that he discovers so much knowledge of his opinions as to put these Figleaves upon their shame Shame may possibly make way for penitence and it is easier many times to confute the hardnesse of a Forehead then the darknesse of an Vnderstanding This is one of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which have been infamously invented to disguise and palliate the frightful rigidnesse of their Doctrine their disclaiming the old words Reprobation or Damnation and flying for refuge to the smoother Terms Preterition or Negative Reprobation But first suppose there were a very real difference might not I have the liberty in my Notes to discourse of what I thought good or to be silent as I saw occasion Might not I insist upon the Absolute Reprobation spoken of by some without extending to the negative spoken of by others If I pitcht upon the Subject which M. B. was most asham'd of was that my fault or his misfortune I will not be responsible for other mens infelicities especially when I shew them the way to prosper and by prosperity I mean Amendment I did but minde Mr. B. in a friendly Letter that if he needs would be medling he should do very well To keep close to his Text which lay before him from the Presse and neither call me by ill names which would but tend to my Advantage and his Dishonour nor affirm any thing to be mine which I had already very heartily and very knowingly disown'd when he return'd me this Answer That he wondred at my injustice and at my monstrous uncharitablenesse telling me that I prescrib'd him Dictatoriâ nescio quâ potestate some Rules for his future proceeding And though my advice was the same which he received from those Men who even loved his very Cause a great deal better then his Person yet here in Print he upbraids me for pursuing the very Subject which I had chosen for my Discourse But 2. What if it appear that there is no real difference betwixt preterition and reprobation or betwixt a negative and positive reprobation as Mr. B. and others are fain to Cant it Sure they that are passed by being not approved and they that are not approved being all rejected and all they that are rejected being certainly to be cast into fire unquenchable proves the lamentable distinction to be no more then a trick insufficient to Buoy up a sinking Cause For what is to reprobate but not to approve or to reject And what sense is it to say there is a negative not-approving or reprobation and a positive not-approving or reprobation or if reprobation is taken in a positive sense only as it cannot be both at once positive and negative what sense is it to say there is a Negative positive and a Positive Positive I will therefore put my Demand a little farther When all that are passed by are damn'd and all are damn'd that are passed by what real difference can be assign'd betwixt Preterition and Damnation as to the justifying unconditional Decrees of reprobation they are Identical propositions which are converted or reciprocated Per simplicem conversionem The not-approved are rejected because they are not approved and the rejected are not-approved because they are rejected supposing the rejection to be made either in or Ante Massam as our Adversaries do whether of the upper or lower way nor need it better be proved ad hominem then by the saying of Mr. Calvin Whom God passeih by saith he he reprobates and that for no other cause then his will to exclude them from the Inheritance which he predestins to be his Sons What a mockery then is this to the Justice and Mercy and goodnesse of God and what a bitter jeere to the far greater part of all mankinde to say they are rejected without respect unto their sins but yet not damn'd without respect unto their Sins when the same men do say that all the rejected are damned and therefore damned because rejected Mr. B. professeth p. 135 that I no where seeme to understand Reprobation otherwise then as he would have me that is to signifie a decree to damn How chanceth he then to write against me or rather why against himself for he confesseth he knows not one the more is his ignorance who will not readily yeeld that God did not absolutely decree the Reprobation positive of any Creature but upon prescience and supposition of wilful Rebellion and Impenitence which is as much as to say that though my opinion must needs be true and he cannot choose but confesse it when in a lucid Interval he can discerne its necessity yet lest he seem to be worsted or to have erred heretofore or to be the convert of one who is not a Presbyterian he will put my opinion into new words and say he is not of my opinion because he speaks it in other words and he will do so because he will differ and differ he will because forsooth he will not yeeld But 't is too late to say he will not for he hath done it distinctly in that confession which in the Margin is pointed