A26977:712
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.
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?
3. He saith, I must prove that the Derivation of Progenitors sins is constant and necessary, not uncertain and contingent. Ans. Of this also I fully said what I held, and he dissembleth it all, as if I had never done it: And why must I prove more? ⟨p. 92⟩By what Law can he impose on me what to hold?