A57980:1686
A survey of the spiritual antichrist opening the secrets of familism and antinomianism in…A survey of the spirituall antichrist opening the secrets of familisme and antinomianisme in…
A survey of the spiritual antichrist opening the secrets of familism and antinomianism in the antichristian doctrine of John Saltmarsh and Will. Del, the present preachers of the army now in England, and of Robert Town, by Samuel Rutherfurd ...A survey of the spirituall antichrist opening the secrets of familisme and antinomianisme in the antichristian doctrine of John Saltmarsh and Will. Del, the present preachers of the army now in England, and of Robert Town, by Samuel Rutherfurd ...
London: printed by J.D. & R.I. for Andrew Crooke, 1648
Part 2 › Chapter 64: Antinomian differences between the Law and the Gospel, confuted.
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.
Answ. The Law never, neither before,1 nor after the fall of Man, did command obedience as a merit and deserving cause of having God to be our God, for so Antinomians speak of all Law-obedience, that it hireth God, and of all our Gospel-obedience, that it putteth God in our debt, as if we were hirelings, and God a Master obliged in a Legal way, and in terms of buying and selling, to pay us our wages.
Answ. The Law never, neither before,1 nor after the fall of Man, did command obedience as a merit and deserving cause of having God to bee our God, for so Antinomians speake of all Law-obedience, that it hireth God, and of all our Gospel-obedience, that it putteth God in our debt, as if we were hirelings, and God a Master obliged in a Legall way, and in termes of buying and selling, to pay us our wages.
- 1Law-obedience did not win God to be our God in the first covenant, nor Evangel•ek believing, or acting, to be our God in covenant of grace.Law-obedience did not winne God to be our God in the first covenant, nor Evangel•ek beleeving, or acting, to be our God in covenant of grace.
2. How will Saltmarsh prove God was not Adams God, till he should work out his days work of Legal service perfectly, and win his wages, without a slip or sin? This is a conjecture. I would conceive, by creation the Lord was Adams God, and the indenture or paction to reward his obedience with eternal life was to go on, that Adam should have his other reward of life by doing, according as he kept the Law. But I take it thus, God could not require Law-obedience at all of Adam, but he was first his God, but God was to remain his God, no longer then Adam should perfectly serve God.