A86003:62
Male audis or An answer to Mr. Coleman his Malè dicis. Wherein the repugnancy…
Male audis or An answer to Mr. Coleman his Malè dicis. Wherein the repugnancy of his Erastian doctrine to the word of God, to the solemn League and Covenant, and to the ordinances of Parliament: also his contradictions, tergiversations, heterodoxies, calumnies, and perverting of testimonies, are made more apparent then formerly. Together with some animadversions upon Master Hussey his Plea for Christian magistracy: showing, that in divers of the afore mentioned particulars he hath miscarried as much, and in some particulars more then Mr Coleman. / By George Gillespie, minister at Edinburgh. Published by authority.Male audis or An answer to Mr. Coleman his Malè dicis. Wherein the repugnancy of his Erastian doctrine to the word of God, to the solemne League and Covenant, and to the ordinances of Parliament: also his contradictions, tergiversations, heterodoxies, calumnies, and perverting of testimonies, are made more apparent then formerly. Together with some animadversions upon Master Hussey his Plea for Christian magistracy: shewing, that in divers of the afore mentioned particulars he hath miscarried as much, and in some particulars more then Mr Coleman. / By George Gillespie, minister at Edinbrugh. Published by authority.
London: printed for Robert Bostocke, 1646
No title page in the transcription: set from the catalogue record.
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.
Seventhly, He saith, pag. 35. Nothing can be said of Christ as second Person in Trinity in opposition to Mediator, but in opposition to man there may. So that he will not admit of this opposition; Christ as the second Person in the Trinity is equal and consubstantial to the Father, but as Mediator he is not equal to his Father, but less then his Father, and subject and subordinate to his Father; a distinction used by our Divines against the Antitrinitarians and Socinians. Now by his not admitting of this distinction, he doth by consequence mire himself in Socinianism, for Christ as Mediator is the Fathers servant, Isa 42. 1. and the Father is greater then he, Joh. 14. 28. and as the head of the man is Christ, so the head of Christ is God, 1 Cor. 11. 3. If therefore it cannot be said of Christ as he is the second Person in the Trinity, that his Father is not greater then he, and that he is not subordinate to God as his head, then fare-well Anti-Socinianism. I dare boldly say, it is impossible to confute the Socinians, or to assert the eternal God-head of Jesus Christ, except somewhat be affirmed of him as the second Person of the Trinity, which must be denied of him as he is Mediator, and something be denied of him as he is the second Person in the Trinity, which must be affirmed of him as he is Mediator.
Seventhly, He saith, pag. 35. Nothing can be said of Christ as second Person in Trinity in opposition to Mediator, but in opposition to man there may. So that he will not admit of this opposition; Christ as the second Person in the Trinity is equall and consubstantiall to the Father, but as Mediator he is not equall to his Father, but lesse then his Father, and subject and subordinate to his Father; a distinction used by our Divines against the Antitrinitarians and Socinians. Now by his not admitting of this distinction, he doth by consequence myre himselfe in Socinianisme, for Christ as Mediator is the Fathers servant, Isa 42. 1. and the Father is greater then he, Joh. 14. 28. and as the head of the man is Christ, so the head of Christ is God, 1 Cor. 11. 3. If therefore it cannot be said of Christ as he is the second Person in the Trinity, that his Father is not greater then he, and that he is not subordinate to God as his head, then fare-well Anti-Socinianisme. I dare boldly say, it is impossible to confute the Socinians, or to assert the eternall God-head of Jesus Christ, except somewhat be affirmed of him as the second Person of the Trinity, which must be denied of him as he is Mediator, and something be denied of him as he is the second Person in the Trinity, which must be affirmed of him as he is Mediator.