C 14 A P. q. asain ft the Imputation of Chrijits Aire obedience. 507 Law to redeem theta, that were under the Law : And that what the Law could not do , in that it was weak through the flesh , God , fending his own Son in the likenefs of finful flesh , & for fin condemned fin in the flesh , that the Righteoufnefs of the Law might be fulfilled in us. See Phi!. 2: 7, S. G41. 4: 4. ikon. S: 3, 4. (2) There_ is nothing in tt.efe texts excluftve of Chriit's obedience : And it is loofe argueing to fay , Chrift's death only is mentio- ned in three or foure places Of Scripture. Ergo nothingelfe is mentioned , or to be under flood , any where elle : the particle Only is not here to be found , neither exprefly , nor tacitely. (3) Bende that in all thee paflages, there is not one word of a Righteoufnefs , rno expreffion , fignif, ing the matter of imputed Righteoufnefs to confiff therein ; or that Chrifl was our Righteouf- nefs ,. upon the account thereof: Nay , neither here, nor no -where finde we Chrift called our Righteoufnefs, becaufe he died for us. Nor doth the Apoale attribute our Righteoufnefs unto his blood only Kom. 5: 9. Ephef. r : 7. Col. 1: 14. No fuck thing appeareth there. Neither Pardon , nor Jullifi- cation , which only are there fpoken of area Righteoufnefs, or our Righ- teoufnefs , but the confequences , freites or effects thereof. His argueing , That without shedding of bloud , there is no remiffion 3 d? from Feb. 6. & to. That Chrifi dieth no more, Therefore aryl is appointed our Righte- oufne fs e peace in nothing but in lois death c^' bloud of his croffe , is molt loofe, & can onlycconcludeagainft thofe (if there be any fuch, that fay, By Chrift's 'obedience active only,& not at all by his death & fufferings have we peace& remißîon of fins. \° e willingly grant , that without shedding of bloud there is no remit ion ; But this faites not , that shedding of bloud alone is all our Righteoufnefs. We conjoine both his aive & his paffìve obedience , St. .fo we take in his whole Mediatory work, which rnakethup his compleatSu- retl - Righteoufnefs : and fay that this mull be imputed to us , in order to our Juflification , Peace; Pard,In & Acceptance. He argueth next from Adam as the Type Ram 5. & fayeth,that thisType teàchethus fonre things. i.That our Righteoufnefs should proceed from one man iejus Chrif . 2. That our kighteoufnefr should confttft in the obedience ofthat one man. 3.That our Righteoufnefs should conftft in one obedience only of that one man. 4. That our R.ighteou fnef s should conf'fi in the only one obedience of that one man , once only performéd. Anf. ( ) If our Righteoufnefs confift in the obedience of Ch ía , & that in oppofition to Adam's difobedience ro the Law ; then it muff not confia in his fot erings alone; for fufferings, as fuch , are no obe- dience to t he Law : And further Chrift's obedience is called his Righ *.eóuf - nefs from. 5: a $. but fuffering & dying is no Righteoufnefs. (t) here is no ground to affert either of the two lap} , much lefs both : for though Adam's act of difobedience was one and that done at once ; Yet it will not follow that therein he was a Typ of Chrift; or that therefore Chrift's.obedience mull be one alt only , & that performed at one time only : for Paul hinteth no fuch comparifon, and we mutt not make typical fimilitudes without war. rand.' And againe , one act of difobedience , once committed , is a viola- tion ofthe Law, & enough -to conflitute one unrighteous; but oneac-t of obedience, howbeit frequently performed, far:lefs once only. performed, Rrr cart- .
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=