A57980:935
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
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.
2. Antinomians tell us often of imputed righteousness, which supposeth Christ was a true real Man, and God-Man in one person, and that we are saved by the merit an satisfaction of his obedience and death imputed to us. But Saltmarsh and Familists her• tell us, Christ is a mere figure, sampler, document or example only, in which God discovers to us grace and love, And, all that is spoken of Christ as in that person, (not in that person really, but figuratively as in that person) that was borne of a virgin, who was circumcised ▪ &c. is spoken in figure of the whole nature. What? Was not Christ real and very Man, our only surety, Mediator, High Priest, who offered a real sacrifice for us? Is he nothing but a figure? and if Adam was not the first man in whom all stood and fell, so that all have sinned in him, neither can Christ be the second Man, in whom all his sons are justified, redeemed, and saved. But Familists deny that Adam was the first man in whom all stood and fell, as Saltmarsh told us before, and therefore Familists deny that doctrine of the first and second Adam, Rom. 5. and 1 Cor, 15.
2. Antinomians tell us often of imputed righteousnesse, which supposeth Christ was a true reall Man, and God-Man in one person, and that we are saved by the merit an satisfaction of his obedience and death imputed to us. But Saltmarsh and Familists her• tell us, Christ is a meere figure, sampler, document or example onely, in which God discovers to us grace and love, And, all that is spoken of Christ as in that person, (not in that person really, but figuratively as in that person) that was borne of a virgin, who was circumcised ▪ &c. is spoken in figure of the whole nature. What? Was not Christ reall and very Man, our only surety, Mediator, High Priest, who offered a reall sacrifice for us? Is he nothing but a figure? and if Adam was not the first man in whom all stood and fell, so that all have sinned in him, neither can Christ be the second Man, in whom all his sonnes are justified, redeemed, and saved. But Familists deny that Adam was the first man in whom all stood and fell, as Saltmarsh told us before, and therefore Familists deny that doctrine of the first and second Adam,