A89732:1131
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.
The distinction you mention and call it a shift, I find not in the Chapter cited.
The distinction you mention and call it a shift, I finde not in the Chapter cited.
Though M. Forbes do distinguish between the Sacrifice of obedience, and the natures, office, and person of Christ considered apart; yet you do him great and open wrong to speak of him, as if he excluded the influence of the person, office, or concurrence of both natures from Christs passive obedience. Of the impropriety of the use of those words [Christs God-head or Priestly nature] hath been spoken before. To make the actions, i. e. the active obedience of Christ God-man Mediator, part of the matter of a sinners righteousness ⟨p. 252⟩(viz. not properly, as if they were personally done by us, but virtually because done by our Surety) is to assert a great and necessary truth.
Though M. Forbes do distinguish between the Sacrifice of obedience, and the natures, office, and person of Christ considered apart; yet you do him great and open wrong to speak of him, as if he excluded the influence of the person, office, or concurrence of both natures from Christs passive obedience. Of the impropriety of the use of those words [Christs God-head or Priestly nature] hath been spoken before. To make the actions, i. e. the active obedience of Christ God-man Mediatour, part of the matter of a sinners righteousnesse ⟨p. 252⟩(viz. not properly, as if they were personally done by us, but virtually because done by our Surety) is to assert a great and necessary truth.