A89732:829
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 cause of Adams not believing in Christ in the state of innocency, was not through the defect of a principle enabling him thereunto: But by reason, First, of the inconsistency of justifying faith with that estate. Secondly, By reason of the not revealing of the object of faith.
The cause of Adams not beleeving in Christ in the state of innocency, was not through the defect of a principle enabling him thereunto: But by reason, First, of the inconsistency of justifying faith with that estate. Secondly, By reason of the not revealing of the object of faith.
Adam in innocency had a principle enabling him to parental duties, yet never was he called thereunto, as also to duties of mercy and charity, which yet were inconsistent with that estate: the Saints in glory have a principle whereby they are able to perform the duties of repentance, patience, mortification; the like may be said of Christ, though neither Christ nor the Saints are called thereunto; those services inconsisting with their estate. More might be added to evince this truth if that were the Question, but it may suffice that by what is spoken your Argument taken from the engraving of faith in Adams heart, to prove that the term Moral is unfitly applied to the ten Commandments, is of no force. The Law of works was the same to Adam before and after the fall, because the Covenant of works is always the same; the Law being the same the obligation is the same. Such duties after the fall as are inconsisting with the Covenant of works, are temporary; neither infer any alteration in the Law, nor do they exceed the compass of its former obligation.
Adam in innocency had a principle enabling him to parental duties, yet never was he called thereunto, as also to duties of mercy and charity, which yet were inconsistent with that estate: the Saints in glory have a principle whereby they are able to perform the duties of repentance, patience, mortification; the like may be said of Christ, though neither Christ nor the Saints are called thereunto; those services inconsisting with their estate. More might be added to evince this truth if that were the Question, but it may suffice that by what is spoken your Argument taken from the engraving of faith in Adams heart, to prove that the term Morall is unfitly applied to the ten Commandments, is of no force. The Law of works was the same to Adam before and after the fall, because the Covenant of works is allwaies the same; the Law being the same the obligation is the same. Such duties after the fall as are inconsisting with the Covenant of works, are temporary; neither infer any alteration in the Law, nor do they exceed the compasse of its former obligation.