A89732:283
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 1 › Chapter 6: The Vindication of Exod. 20.10. Lev. 1.4. & 4.29. Lev. 8.14. & 16.20, 21.
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.
A private mans imposition cannot represent Gods act, the imposition of the hands of the Elders cannot, for the Elders actions represent the Churches actions: neither can the imposition of the Priests and High-Priests, they were types of Christs Priestly nature, and not of the father.
A private mans imposition cannot represent Gods act, the imposition of the hands of the Elders cannot, for the Elders actions represent the Churches astions: neither can the imposition of the Priests and High-Priests, they were types of Christs Priestly nature, and not of the father.
Answ. If these Reasons were good for what they are alleged, yet they are impertinent as not reaching the mind of Expositors (at least generally) upon the place. There is nothing repugnant in the nature of the thing, but that the act of a private person was capable (if God so pleased) to become a type of Gods act, which is also true concerning the Elders, Priests, and High-Priests. The act of an Israelite ⟨p. 50⟩(though a private person) in letting his Hebrew servant go free for nothing, either at the seventh year, Exo. 21.2. or at the year of Jubilee, Lev. 25.40. figured or represented God the Fathers gift of free redemption by Jesus Christ.
Answ. If these Reasons were good for what they are alledged, yet they are impertinent as not reaching the minde of Expositors (at least generally) upon the place. There is nothing repugnant in the nature of the thing, but that the act of a private person was capable (if God so pleased) to become a type of Gods act, which is also true concerning the Elders, Priests, and High-Priests. The act of an Israelite ⟨p. 50⟩(though a private person) in letting his Hebrew servant go free for nothing, either at the seventh year,