A26862:82
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.
Satisfaction is the paying of somewhat that was not directly in the Obligation, but is given to satisfy the creditor in stead of the debt, which payment the Creditor may choose to accept; and if he do not consent to ⟨p. 18⟩accept it, though it were paid, yet the debtor should not be acquit. So also in regard of suffering.
Satisfaction is the paying of somewhat that was not directly in the Obligation, but is given to satisfye the creditor in stead of the debt, which payment the Creditor may chuse to accept; and if hee do not consent to ⟨p. 18⟩accept it, though it were paid, yet the debtour should not be acquit. So also in regard of suffering.
Here we take payment and satisfaction in the strict legal sense and not in the large sense wherein they are confounded. And now the Question is, whether Christs suffering were the payment of the very debt, or of somewhat else in its stead? The resolving of this depends upon the resolving of two other questions both great and difficult.
Here we take payment and satisfaction in the strict legall sence and not in the large sence wherein they are confounded. And now the Question is, whether Christs suffering were the payment of the very debt, or of somewhat else in its stead? The resolving of this depends upon the resolving of two other quaestions both great and difficult.
1. What it was which the Law did threaten 2. What it was that Christ did suffer?