# Durham's Twisse reference



## Prufrock (Dec 5, 2008)

Not to resurrect an old heated debate, but from an accuracy perspective I am troubled and want clarification on Durham's statement re: Twisse as alluded to in this thread. Here are well read and scholarly people who have a fundamental disagreement as to something seemingly simple: whether Durham represents Twisse as holding a view, or as merely quoting someone who holds a view. Which is it? Can anyone post that portion of the text so we can read it?

I'm quite curious.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Dec 5, 2008)

See pages 16 and 17 from _"_Concerning the extent of the merit of Christ's death; is it a satisfaction for all men?" in _The Blue Banner_* Volume 12 Issue 2. April-June 2003.*TIn the OPP edition of the Commentary on Revelation, see page 397-998. I may be wrong in the attribution to Riches of God's Love. 

That we may follow this conditional redemption
a little, it is otherwise in some things expressed by
some others, thus: viz. that Christ in some sense
is a ransom for all, and yet not in that special
manner as for his people: he has brought others
under the conditional gospel covenant, but them
under the absolute: he has according to the tenor
of this covenant procured salvation to all, if they
will believe; but he has procured for his chosen,
even this condition of believing. Thus learned

Baxter in his Saint’s Rest (part 1. page 153),*[FONT=&quot]6[/FONT]*
which may be yet variously understood as to one
branch thereof. For though he there speaks of all
to be conditionally redeemed, and elsewhere often
hints this, yet by several expressions of his it
would seem to be restricted, at least in a special
manner to the visible church: because, he says,
these are by his death brought under the
conditional gospel covenant, which elsewhere viz.
in the appendix to his Aphorisms (page 241),*[FONT=&quot]7 [/FONT]*in
the last edition, is acknowledged to be that which
is revealed, and offered in the church. And in that
part of his Saint’s Rest, page 156, it is said not to
be offered to all; and that expression is used by
him, that the conditional covenant is made with
all, at least with the church. Also, others have
many hints to this purpose, and the learned
Tuisse [Twisse] cites this saying out of Vorstius
(lib. pri. page 195):*[FONT=&quot]8 [/FONT]*_Et sane nisi pro vocatis saltem_
_omnibus, mortuus esset Christus, tum frustra hi_
_omnes credere juberentur. _Therefore it will be meet
to touch a little this conditional redemption, as it
may relate to all men indifferently, and more
particularly as it may relate to the visible church;
and because of the nearness of the matter, and
grounds thereof, both may be done as we do go
on.
Although this opinion, as thus expressed, may
seem more plausible; yet we conceive that it will
neither be found agreeable to the former grounds,
nor to the text, nor to reason, nor yet any way
more conducing to remove, or prevent these
difficulties which are supposed to follow upon the
doctrine of particular redemption, as it was
formerly explained.

*[FONT=&quot]6 [/FONT]*Ed. Richard Baxter (1615-1691). _[FONT=&quot]The saints everlasting rest, or, A[/FONT]_
_[FONT=&quot]treatise of the blessed state of the saints in their enjoyment of God in[/FONT]_
_[FONT=&quot]glory … [/FONT]_(London: Printed by Rob. White for Thomas Underhil and
Francis Tyton …, 1650). This is the first of many editions published in
the 1650s.
*[FONT=&quot]7 [/FONT]*Ed. Richard Baxter, _[FONT=&quot]A holy commonwealth, or Political aphorisms,[/FONT]_
_[FONT=&quot]opening the true principles of government: for the healing of the[/FONT]_
_[FONT=&quot]mistakes, and resolving the doubts, that most endanger and trouble[/FONT]_
_[FONT=&quot]England[/FONT]__[FONT=&quot] at this time … [/FONT]_(London: Printed for Thomas Underhill and
Francis Tyton … , 1659).
*[FONT=&quot]8 [/FONT]*Ed. Probably: William Twisse (1578?-1646). _[FONT=&quot]The riches of Gods[/FONT]_
_[FONT=&quot]love unto the vessells of mercy, consistent with his absolute hatred or[/FONT]_
_[FONT=&quot]reprobation of the vessells of wrath, or, An answer unto a book[/FONT]_
_[FONT=&quot]entituled, Gods love unto mankind …. [/FONT]_(Oxford : Printed by L.L. and
H.H. ... for though. Robinson, 1653).


----------



## Prufrock (Dec 5, 2008)

I thank you very much, and especially for the link to the larger passage.


----------



## MW (Dec 5, 2008)

For what it's worth, I could not find the Vorstius reference in Riches of God's Love or Dr. Jackson's Vanity, which leads me to think it is probably in his Latin tome.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Dec 5, 2008)

I had to occasion to research Vorstius earlier this week. 

Conrad Vorstius - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Prufrock (Dec 5, 2008)

VirginiaHuguenot said:


> I had to occasion to research Vorstius earlier this week.
> 
> Conrad Vorstius - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Learn anything interesting?


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Dec 5, 2008)

Prufrock said:


> VirginiaHuguenot said:
> 
> 
> > I had to occasion to research Vorstius earlier this week.
> ...



His commentaries on the epistles of Paul are highly regarded, but he fell into Arminianism, was condemned by the Synod of Dort, and later is said to have openly professed Socinianism.


----------



## Prufrock (Dec 5, 2008)

I've only ever encountered him in secondary works (i.e., Turretin bashing his views, etc). Are there any electronic sources available on him?


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Dec 5, 2008)

Prufrock said:


> I've only ever encountered him in secondary works (i.e., Turretin bashing his views, etc). Are there any electronic sources available on him?



I'm not aware of any works by Vorstius available in electronic form today, although I haven't done a thorough search. 

One can read what King James I said here:

Extracts from A Declaration against Vortius, King James I., Intro and TOC

and the judgment of the Synod of Dort against him is available here:

Synod of Dort -Concerning Vorstius;


----------

