A26977:711
Of the imputation of Christ's righteousness to believers in what sense [sic] sound Protestants…Of the imputation of Christ's righteousness to believers in what sence [sic] sound Protestants…
Of the imputation of Christ's righteousness to believers in what sense [sic] sound Protestants hold it and of the false devised sense by which libertines subvert the Gospel : with an answer to some common objections, especially of Dr. Thomas Tully whose Justif. Paulina occasioneth the publication of this / by Richard Baxter a compassionate lamenter of the Church's wounds caused by hasty judging ... and by the theological wars which are hereby raised and managed ...Of the imputation of Christ's righteousness to believers in what sence [sic] sound Protestants hold it and of the false divised sence by which libertines subvert the Gospel : with an answer to some common objections, especially of Dr. Thomas Tully whose Justif. Paulina occasioneth the publication of this / by Richard Baxter a compassionate lamenter of the Church's wounds caused by hasty judging ... and by the theological wars which are hereby raised and managed ...
London: printed for Nevil Simmons and Jonathan Robinson, 1675
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.
But if he think, 1. That Adams Person did commit the sin of Cain, and of all that ever were since committed; and that Judas his act, was Adams personal act. 2. Or that Adams sin was a total or necessitating Cause of all the evil since committed; so do not I, (nor doth he, I doubt not). And now I am cast by him on the strait, either to accuse him of differing de re, and so of Doctrinal error, or else that he knoweth not when the difference is de re, and when de nomine, but is so used to confusion, that Names and Things do come promiscuously ⟨p. 91⟩into the Question with him: And which of these to choose, I know not.
But if he think, 1. That Adams Person did commit the sin of Cain, and of all that ever were since committed; and that Judas his act, was Adams personal act. 2. Or that Adams sin was a total or necessitating Cause of all the evil since committed; so do not I, (nor doth he, I doubt not). And now I am cast by him on the strait, either to accuse him of differing de re, and so of Doctrinal errour, or else that he knoweth not when the difference is de re, and when de nomine, but is so used to confusion, that Names and Things do come promiscuously ⟨p. 91⟩into the Question with him: And which of these to chuse, I know not.
The Reader may see that I mentioned [Actual Sin, and Guilt]: And I think few will doubt, but Adams [Actual sin, and Cains,] were divers; and that therefore, the Guilt that Cains Children had of Adams sin and of Cains was not the same: But that Causa causae is Causa causati, and so that all following Sin was partly (but partly) caused by Adam's, we shall soon agree.
He addeth that I must make good that new Original Sin (for he can make use of the word New, and therefore made it) doth mutare naturam, as the Old doth. Ans. And how far it changeth it, I told him, and he taketh no notice of it: The first sin changed Nature from Innocent into Nocent; the Second changeth it from Nocent into more Nocent: Doth he deny this? Or why must I prove any more? Or doth nothing but Confusion please him?