A89732:455
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.
If Christs death was a suffering then the formal cause thereof was not that active separation of his soul from his body, so often mentioned by the Dialogue, otherwise Christ should have been his own afflicter, yea, and in this case his own Executioner, which last the Dialogue it self expressly rejecteth. But the Dialogue resuming and insisting further upon this distinction elsewhere, let the fuller speaking thereunto be referred till then.
If Christs death was a suffering then the formall cause thereof was not that active separation of his soul from his body, so often mentioned by the Dialogue, otherwise Christ should have been his own afflicter, yea, and in this case his own Executioner, which last the Dialogue it self expresly rejecteth. But the Dialogue resuming and insisting further upon this distinction elsewhere, let the fuller speaking thereunto be referred till then.
Though Haman according to the true sense of that Text, Est 8.7. be said to lay his hand upon the Jews, yet are the Jews no where said to be slain by Haman. Abraham is said to have offered up Isaac, yet Isaac is no where said to be slain by Abraham, as Abraham did sacrifice Isaac, so was Isaac sacrificed, that is, interpretatively or virtually, ⟨p. 85⟩not actually. But how often do we read in Scripture that Christ was actually crucified and put to death by the Jews, Act. 2.37. & 4.10. 1 Cor. 2.8. By this reason it may be said, that the Jews only endeavoured to offer violence unto Christ, and put him to smart, but did not actually and really, because they could do neither without the permission of the Divine nature, nor did either without both his Mediatorly permission and consent. The Jews accounting of Christ as of a Malefactor or Transgressor, was that the Scripture might be fulfilled,