A89732:302
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 sum of what you say touching the word Made to be a word of Election or Ordination (how improperly soever) concluding that God ordained concerning Christ, so as he might make his soul a sin-offering, concludes not against, but consequently for us and against you, from the typical nature of a sin-offering; Of which in the fore-going Chapter.
The summe of what you say touching the word Made to be a word of Election or Ordination (how improperly soever) concluding that God ordained concerning Christ, so as he might make his soul a sin-offering, concludes not against, but consequently for us and against you, from the typicall nature of a sin-offering; Of which in the fore-going Chapter.
Dialogu. The Apostle doth explain the word Sin, Psal. 40.6. ⟨p. 54⟩thus (for sin) Heb. 10.6. therefore seeing the Apostle doth explain the word Sin by the particle for, I may well conclude that Christ was not made sin by Gods Imputation.
Answ. What David expresseth by Sin Psal. 40.6. is expressed by For sin, Heb. 10.6. both places intend the sin-offering, therefore you still argue against your self and for us: it is called a sin-offering because sin was typically imputed to it; it is said to be for sin, because it was offered for the expiation of sin; the same offering is said to be a sin-offering in respect of its nature, and said to be for sin, that is for the expiation of sin in respect of its use: the use of a thing destroyeth not the nature of it. The particle For besides the taking away of sin, notes the manner of its taking away, viz. by way of expiation.