A89732:1176
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.
Part 2 › Section 2 › Chapter 9: Of Atonement or Reconciliation.
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.
Answ. The Dialogue throughout all its Discourse concerning Atonement, Par. 2. seemeth to understand pardon of sin by atonement: See pag. 151. and 162. here it seemeth by Atonement to understand reconciliation, and so indeed it is to be understood.
Answ. The Dialogue throughout all its Discourse concerning Atonement, Par. 2. seemeth to understand pardon of sinne by atonement: See pag. 151. and 162. here it seemeth by Atonement to understand reconciliation, and so indeed it is to be understood.
The Reader is here desired to keep in mind, that our Question is not, Whether justification and Adoption are parts of Atonement. The affirmative whereof, the Author (therein following M. Wotton) asserts in this place. But whether the obedience of Christ be the matter of a sinners righteousness. Although therefore that the Dialogue here said the truth, yet it is impertinent, according to the sense of the Orthodox, neither making for, nor against, as concerning the matter of the controversy.
The Reader is here desired to keep in minde, that our Question is not, Whether justification and Adoption are parts of Atonement. The affirmative whereof, the Authour (therein following M. Wotton) asserts in this place. But whether the obedience of Christ be the matter of a sinners righteousnesse. Although therefore that the Dialogue here said the truth, yet it is impertinent, according to the sense of the Orthodox, neither making for, nor against, as concerning the matter of the controversie.
Atonement or Reconciliation, as also Justification and Adoption, are joint effects of the same cause, viz. the Mediatorly obedience of Christ, which was the Sacrifice of Atonement; but it doth not therefore follow that Justification and Adoption are parts of atonement, one joint or fellow-effect, because a fellow-effect is not therefore a part of its fellow-effect.