A85829:26
A mistake, or misconstruction, removed. (Whereby little difference is pretended to have been acknowledged…
A mistake, or misconstruction, removed. (Whereby little difference is pretended to have been acknowledged between the Antinomians and us.) And, Free grace, as it is held forth in Gods Word, as well by the prophets in the Old Testament, as by the apostles and Christ himself in the New, showed to be other then is by the Antinomian party in these times maintained. In way of answer to some passages in a treatise of Mr. John Saltmarsh, concerning that subject. / By Thomas Gataker, B. of Divinity and pastor of Rotherhith.A mistake, or misconstruction, removed. (Whereby little difference is pretended to have been acknowledged between the Antinomians and us.) And, Free grace, as it is held forth in Gods Word, as wel by the prophets in the Old Testament, as by the apostles and Christ himself in the New, shewed to be other then is by the Antinomian party in these times maintained. In way of answer to some passages in a treatise of Mr. John Saltmarsh, concerning that subject. / By Thomas Gataker, B. of Divinity and pastor of Rotherhith.
London: printed by E.G. for F. Clifton, 1646
Title page typeset from the transcription.
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.
Yea suppose we that the Antinomians and we were acknowledged ⟨p. 5⟩to agree in those two heads at first propounded: or in those three, which they are afterward sliced out into, (which this Author the rather pitched upon, that he might say all these, which of two only so congruously he could not) or in many more points then those three, to make out his & caetera, which he was pleased to annex, as if there had been more behind, wherein consent and concurrence should be acknowledged, whereas indeed no more then those three are mentioned, & those not, as he would have it, to be granted, as on both sides agreed in, but to be laid aside, as impertinent to the question in hand. But grant, I say all these, to be agreed in, and more then all that is there mentioned: yet would not all this be of force sufficient to infer, that therefore there is little difference between the Antinomians and us. no more then if one of ours should in precise terms say, there is no controversy between the Papists and us about the unity of the Deity, the Trinity of Persons, the Deity of Christ, his suffering to save sinners, his rising from the dead, his ascension into Heaven, his return to judgement; it could thence be inferred, that therefore there is little difference between the Papists and us. The one inference sure would be as good as the other; neither sound nor of validity to bring so near together either the one couple or the other.
Yea suppose we that the Antinomians and we were acknowledged ⟨p. 5⟩to agree in those two heds at first propounded: or in those three, which they are afterward sliced out into, (which this Autor the rather pitched upon, that he might say all these, which of two onely so congruously he could not) or in many more points then those three, to make out his & caetera, which he was pleased to annex, as if there had been more behind, wherein consent and concurrence should be acknowledged, whereas indeed no more then those three are mentioned, & those not, as he would have it, to be granted, as on both sides agreed in, but to be laid aside, as impertinent to the question in hand. But grant, I say all these, to be agreed in, and more then all that is there mentioned: yet would not all this be of force sufficient to infer, that therefore there is little difference between the Antinomians and us. no more then if one of ours should in precise tearms say, there is no controversie between the Papists and us about the unity of the Deity, the Trinity of Persons, the Deity of Christ, his suffering to save sinners, his rising from the ded, his ascention into Heaven, his return to judgement; it could thence be inferred, that therefore there is little difference between the Papists and us. The one inference sure would be as good as the other; neither sound nor of validity to bring so neer together either the one couple or the other.