A26862:1013
Aphorisms of justification, with their explication annexed wherein also is opened the nature of…Aphorismes of justification, with their explication annexed wherein also is opened the nature of…
Aphorisms of justification, with their explication annexed wherein also is opened the nature of the covenants, satisfaction, righteousness, faith, works, &c. : published especially for the use of the church of Kidderminster in Worcestershire / by their unworthy teacher Ri. Baxter.Aphorismes of justification, with their explication annexed wherein also is opened the nature of the covenants, satisfaction, righteousnesse, faith, works, &c. : published especially for the use of the church of Kederminster in Worcestershire / by their unworthy teacher Ri. Baxter.
Hague: printed by Abraham Brown, 1655
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.
His citing of Tossanus words is nothing for him: For when he saith, that All the Elect are justified in Christ, in respect of the merit thereof it is no more then to say that Christ hath merited their justification: which who denieth?
His citing of Tossanus words is nothing for him: For when hee saith, that All the Elect are justified in Christ, in respect of the merit thereof it is no more then to say that Christ hath merited their justification: which who denyeth?
But the great Argument which he and all of his judgement do trust to, is this: If the surety ⟨p. 309⟩so undertake or discharge the debt, that the creditor rest satisfied with that undertaking or discharge; then is the debtor free from the debt. But Christ hath so undertaken and discharged the particular debts of the Elect; therefore the Elect are freed.
Answ. 1. Payment is refusable, or not refusable: That payment which is of the same thing in the Obligation, either by our selves or our Delegate, is not by the Creditor refusable; so that if we had paid it, or Christ had been our Delegate, appointed by us to pay the same that was due, then God could not have refused to take that payment: But Christ being appointed to this by the Father, and not by us; and also paying not the very same, but the value, God might have refused the payment.