A89732:1042
A discussion of that great point in divinity, the sufferings of Christ; and the…
A discussion of that great point in divinity, the sufferings of Christ; and the question about his righteousness active, passive : and the imputation thereof. Being an answer to a dialogue entitled The meritorious price of redemption, justification, &c. / By John Norton teacher of the church at Ipswich in New-England. Who was appointed to draw up this answer by the general court.A discussion of that great point in divinity, the sufferings of Christ; and the question about his righteousnesse active, passive : and the imputation thereof. Being an answer to a dialogue intituled The meritorious price of redemption, justification, &c. / By John Norton teacher of the church at Ipswich in New-England. Who was appointed to draw up this answer by the generall court.
London: printed by A.M. for Geo. Calvert, 1653
Title page typeset from the transcription.
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.
Dialogu Faith it self is not a sinners righteousness, and therefore it cannot be accounted as a sinners righteousness, in stead of the righteousness of the Law, as some would have it. For if faith were a sinners righteousness no otherwise but in the place or stead of the righteousness of the Law, then faith could not justify a sinner any further then the Law would do, if it could be supposed that a sinner could by any means attain to the righteousness of the Law, and then truly faith would be but a poor righteousness to cover a sinners nakedness. For if a sinner could keep the whole Law in every circumstance of it, from his birth unto his death, yet it would not be sufficient to justify him from his original sin.
Dialogu Faith it self is not a sinners righteousnesse, and therefore it cannot be accounted as a sinners righteousnesse, in stead of the righteousnesse of the Law, as some would have it. For if faith were a sinners righteousnesse no otherwise but in the place or stead of the righteousnesse of the Law, then faith could not justifie a sinner any further then the Law would do, if it could be supposed that a sinner could by any means attain to the righteousnesse of the Law, and then truly faith would be but a poor righteousnesse to cover a sinners nakednesse. For if a sinner could keep the whole Law in every circumstance of it, from his birth unto his death, yet it would not be sufficient to justifie him from his originall sin.
Answ. It doth not follow though faith is not, therefore atonement is a sinners righteousness. None of us say that faith is a sinners, righteousness, otherwise then relatively for the sake of the object apprehended by faith; and so the Apostle saith expressly, Abraham's faith was accounted to him for righteousness: Yea, the Dialogue, if atonement might pass for righteousness, acknowledgeth, that faith for the atonements sake received by it, is accounted for righteousness. No marvel though the Dialogue denieth faith to be accounted a sinners righteousness in stead of the righteousness of the Law; the righteousness ⟨p. 233⟩of the Law being righteousness properly and truly so called, which the Dialogue simply denieth to have any influence into the matter of justification. There is no need unto mere justification that faith should justify a sinner further then the Law requireth: yet faith doth not only justify a sinner, which the Law could not,