This book made available by the Internet Archive.

PREFACE.

1 HE editionft heretofore fxuhlhhcd of the Disaerfatlons^ the one concerning the end Jor which God cheated the world ^ and the other, on the Miture of Virtue, which ha-i uniformly been put with it ; but is filaced in the second volume of this collection, have had prefxed to them th" following Preface^ v^hich, because it contains seoeral just remarks^ aplilicable a<i well to the Treatise on Original Sin, as to the Dissertations, it is thought fir oper here to insert.

" The author had designed these dissertations for the public view ; and wrote them out as they now apprar: Though it is probable, that if his life had been spared, he woidd have revised them, and rendered them, in some rcsfiects more complete. Sjme new sentiments, here and there, might probably have been added j and some passages brightened with farther illustrations This may be conjectured, from some brief hints, or sentiments minuted down, on loose papers, found in the 7nanuscripts.

" But those sentiments concisely sketched out, which^ it is thought, the author intended to enlarge, and digest into ihe body of the work....cannot be so amplified by any other hand, as to do justice to the author : It is therefore probably best that nothing of this kind should be attempted.

" As these dissertations were more especially designed for the learned and inqidsitive, it is expected that the judicious and candid, will not be disposed to object that the manner in which these subjects are'trcat-d, is something above the level of common read" ers. For though a superficial way of discourse and loose harangues may well enough stnt some s ibjects, and answer some valuable purposes; yet other subjects dc7nand more closeness and accuracy. And if an author should neglect to do justice to a sub-

jert, fnrjear that the skimpier sort should not fit Ihj understand hinu he might expect to be deemed a trifler by the more intelligent.

'< Our author had a rare talent to fienetrate deefi in search of trvth ; to rake an extensive survey of a siibject, and look through it into remote consequences. Hence many theorems., that appear-ed hard and barren to others., were to him pleasant and fruitful fields., nvhere his mind would expatiate with peculiar ease, profit and entertainment. Those studies, which to some were too fa-tiguing to the mind., and wearing to the constitution, were to him but a natural filay of genius ; and which his mirul, without labor, would freely and spontaneously perform. A close and concilia sivi^waij of reasoning upon a controversial point was easy and natural to him,.

" This may serve, it is conceived, to account for his usual manner of treating ai.struse and controverted subjects, which some have thought haa been too metaphysical. But the truth isy that his critical rnethod of looking through the nature of his subject ; his accuracy and precision in canvassing truth, comparing ideas., drawing consequences, pointing out and exposing absurdities....naturally led him to reduce the evidence in favor of truth into trie form of demonstration. Which doubtless, where it can be obtained., is the most eligible, and by far the most satisfying to great uud noble minds. And though some readers may find the labor hard., to keefipace with the wri'er, in the advances he rnakes, where ihf ascent is arduous ; yet in general all was easy to him : Such was his peculiar love and discernment of truth, and na ural propensity to search after it. His own ideas were clear to him, tvhere some readers have thought them obscure. Tiius many things in the works ofJVewton and Locke, which appuar either quit: unintelligible, or very obscure to the illiterate, were clear and bright to those illustrious authors, and their learned readers.

" The subjects here handled are stibliine and important. 2^he end i:hich God r.ad in view in creating the world, was doubtless worthy of him ; and consequently the most excellent and glorious fiossible. This, therefore must be worthy to be hiown by all the inttiltgerit creation, as excellent in itself, arid worthy of their pursuit. And as true virtue distinguishes the inhabitants of heaven

mnd all fh^ hapfiy candidate.^ for that world of glory^ from all others. Ihf-r cannot surely be a more interesting .subject,

« Thp notions which some men entertain conce'-ning God's end in crrating the world, and conreming true virtue, in our late author's ofiinion, have a natural tendency to corrufit Christianity^ and to destroy the gos/iel of our divine Redeemer. It was therefore, no doubt, in the exercise of a fii us concern for the honor and glory of God, and a tender res/iect to the best interests of Ma fellow men, that this devout and learned writer undertook the following work.

" May the father of lights smile ufioti the fiious and benevot lent aiiiifi and labors of /liig servant^ an4 crown them with his Messing I EDITOR.

July 12, 1765."

ADVERTISEMENT,

FOR THE TREATISE ON ORIGINAL SIN.

When the page is referred to in this manner, p. 40, p. 50. without mentioning the book, thereby is to be understood such a page in Dr Taylor's Scripture Doctrine of Original Sin. S intends the Supplement When the word, Key, is used to signify the book referied to, thereby is to be understood Dr Taylor's Key to the Apostolic IVritings. This mark [^v] with figures or a number annexed, signifies such a section or parasjraph in his Key, When after mentioning Preface to Par. on Epist. to Romans, there is subjoined P 145-47> o*" '^" '''^**> thereby is intended P'jre an^ Paragr ph. page 145,^ Para-» ph 47 The references suit the London editions of Dr. Taylor's books, priuud about the year 17(^0,

DISSERTATION

CONCERNING THE END

FOR WHICH

GOD CREATED THE WORLD,

DISSERTATION

CONCERNING THE END FOR WHICH GOD CiiEATED THE WORLD.

INTRODUCTION:

Containing Explanations of Terms, and general Positions.

1 O avoid all confusion in our inquiries and reasonings, concerninc:; the end for which God created the world, a distinction should be observed between the chief end for which an agfcnt or tfficient exerts any act and performs any work, and the ultinrate end. These two phrases arc not always precisely of the same signification : And though the ehie/tix\d be always an ultimate end, yet every ultimate end, is not always a chief end.

A chief end is opposite to an inferior end : An ultimate end Is opposite to a subordinate end. A subordinate end is somelhing that an agent seeks and aims at in what he does ; but yet does not seek it, or regard it at all rpon its own account, but Avholly on the account of a further end, or in order to some other thing, which it is considered as a means of. Thus, when a man that goes a journey to obtain a medicine to cure him of some disease, and restore his health, the obtaining that medicine is his subordinate end ; because ir is not an end that he seeks for itself, or values at all upon its flwn account, but wholly as a means of a furt her end, viz. his

Vor,. VI. B

liealtli. Separate the medicine from that further end, and it is esteemed good for nothing ; nor is it at all desired.

An ultimate end is that which the agent seeks in what he does, for its own sake : That he has respect to, as what he loves, values and takes pleasure in on its own account, and not merely as a means of a further end. As when a man loves the taste of some particular sort of fruit, and is at pains and cost to obtain it, for the sake of the pleasure of that taste, which he values upon its own account, as he loves his own pleasure ; and not merely for the sake of any other {^ood, which he supposes his enjoying that pleasure will be the means of.

Some ends are sul)ordinate ends, not only as they are subordinated to an ultimate end, but also to another end that is itself but a subordinate end : Yea, tuere may he a succession or chain of many subordinate ends, one dependent on another....one sought for another : The first for the next, and that for the sake of the next to that, and so on in a long series befo' e you come to any thing, that the agent aims at and seeks for its own sake : As when a man sells a garment to get money....to buy tools....to till his land....to obtain a crop....to supply him with food....to gratify the appetite* And he seeks to gratify his appetite, on its own account, as what is grateful in itself. Here the end of his selling his garment, is to get money ; but getting money is only a subordinate end : It is not only subordinate to the last end, his gratifying his appetite; but to a nearer end, vjz. his bijying husbandry tools ; and his obtaining these, is only a subordinate end, being only for the sake of tilling land ; And the tillage of land is an end not sought on its own account, but for the sake of the crop to be produced ; and the crop produced is noi an ultimate end, or an end sought for itself, but only for the sake of making bread ; and the having bre id, is not sought on its own account, but for the sake of gratifying the appetite.

Here the gratifying the appetite, is called the ultimate end ; because it is the last in the chain, where a man's aim and pursuit stops and rests, obtaining in that, the thing finallv"

aimed at. So whenever a man comes to that in which his desire terminates and rests, it being something valued on its own account, then he conies to an ultimate end, let the chain be lon.^er or shorter; yea, if there be but one link or one step that he takes before he comes to this end. As when a man that loves honey puis it into his mouth, for the sake of the pleasure of the taste, without aiming at any thing further. So that an end which an agent has in view, may be both his immediate and his ultimate end ; his next and his last end. That end which is sought for the sake of itself, and not for the sake of a further end, is an ultimate end ; it is ultimate or last, as it has no other beyond it, for whose sake it is, it being for the sake of itself: So that here the aim of the agent stops and rests (without going further) being come to the good which he esteems a recompense of its pursuit for its own value.

Here it is to be noted that a thing sought, may have the nature of an ultimate, and also of a subordinate end ; as it may be sought partly on its own account, and partly for the sake of a further end. Thus a man in what he does, may seek the love and respect of a particular person, partly on its own account, because it is in itself agreeable to men to be the objects of others' esteem and love : • And partly, becausfe he hopes, through the friendship of that person to have his assistance in other affairs ; and so to be put under advantage for the obtaining further ends.

A chief end or highest end, which is opposite not properly to a subordinate end, but to an inferior end, is something diverse from an ultimate end. The chief tiid is an end that is most valued ; and therefore most sought after by the agent in what he does. It is evident, that to be an end more valued than another end, is not exactly the same thing as to be an end valued ultimately, or for its own sake. This will appear, if it be considered.

1. That two different ends may be both ultimate ends, and yet not be chief ends. They may be both valued for their own sake, and both sought in the same work or acts, and yet one valued more highly and sought more than anoth-

J2 END IN CREATION.

er : Thus a man may £?o a j'^urney to obtain two different benefits or enjoyments, both which may be agreeable to him in tliemselves considered, and so both may be what he values on their own account,and seeks for their own sake ; and yet one may be much more apcreeable than the other ; and so be ■what he sets his heart chitfly upon, and seeks most after in his t^oins> a journey. Thus a man may go a journey partly to obtain the possession and enjoyment of a bride that is very dear to him, and partly to gratify his curiosity in looking in a telescope, or some new invented and extraordinary optic girss : Both may be ends he seeks in his journey, and the one not properly subordinate or in order to another. (Jne ■may not depend on another, and therefore both may be ulti-mate ends ; but yet the obtaining his beloved bride may be his chief end, and the benefit of the optic glass, his inferior end. The tormer may be what he sets his heart vastly most upon, and so be properly the chief end of his journey.

2. An ultimate end is not always the chief end, because some subordinate ends may be more valued and sought after than some ultin>ate ends. Thus for instance, a man may aim at these two things in his going a journey ; one may be to visit his friends, and another to receive a great estate, or a large sum of money that lies ready for him at the place to which he IS going. The latter, viz. his receiving the sum of money may be but a subordinate end : He may not value the silver and gold on their own account, but only for the pleasure, gratifications and honor"; that is Ihc ultimate end, and not the money which is valued only as a means of the other. But yet the obtaming the money, may be what is more valued? and so an higher end of his journey, than the pleasure of seeing his friends ; though the latter is what is valued on its own account, and so is an ultimate end.

But here several things may be noted :

First, That when it is suid, that some subordinate endsmay be more valued than some ultimate ends, it is not supposed th-rtt ever a subordinate end is i-nore valued than that ultimate end or ends to which it is suboidii'ate ; because a subordinate end has no value, but what it derives from its ultiniate end •

For that reason it is called a subordinate end, because it Is valued and so\!p;ht, not for its own sake, or its own value, but onlv in svibordinution to a further end, or for the sake of the «I ia-.aie end, that it is in order to. But yet a subordinate end may be valued more than some other ultimate end that it is not subordinate to, but is independent of it, and does not be-lon?^ to that -series, or chain of ends. Tiius for instance : If a Tnan 'e:oes a journey to receive a sum of money, not at all as an ultimate end, or because he has any value for the silver and gold for fheir own sake, but only for the value of the pleasure and honor that the money may be a means of. In this case it is impossji^le that the subordinate end, viz. his bavins^ the money should be more valued by him than the pleasure and honor, for which he values it. It would be absurd to suppose that he values the means more than the end, when he has no Talue for the means but for the sake of the end, of which it is the means : But yet he may value the money, though but a subordinate end, more than some other ultimate end, to which it is not subordinate, and with which it has no connexion. For instance, more than the comfort of a friendly visit ; which was one end of his journey.

Secondly, Not only is a subordinate end never superior to that uldmate end, to which it is subordinate ; but the ultimate end is always (not only equal but) superior to its subordinate end, and more valued by the agent; unless it be when the ultimate end entirely depends on the subordinate : So that he has no other means by which to obtain his last end, and also is looked upon as certainly connected with it....then the subordinate end may be as much valued as the last end ; because the last end, in such a case, does altogether depend tapon, and is wholly and certainly conveyed by it. As for instance, if a pregnant womiAu has a peculiar appetite to a certain rare fruit that is to be found orly in the garden of a particular friend of hcr's, at a distance ; and she goes a journey to go to her friend's house or garden, to obtain th?t fruit....the ultimate end of her jouiney, is to gratify that strong appetite : The obtaining that fruit, is the subordinate end of it. If sue looks upon it, that the appetite can be gvarjfied by no other

means than the obtaining that fruit ; and that it Avill certainly be gratified if she obtains it, then she will value the fruit as much as she values the ^^ratification of her appetite. But otherwise, it will not he so : If she be doubtful whether that fruit •will satisfy her craving, then she will not value it equally with the gratification of Iser appetite itself; or if there be some other fruit that she knows of, that will gratify her desire, at least in part; which she can obtain without such inconvenience or trouble as shall countervail the gratification ; which is in effect, frustrating her of her last end, because her last end is the pltasure of gratifying her appetite, without any trouble that shall countervail, and in eflect destroy it. Or if it be so, that her appetite cannot be gratified without this fruit, nor yet with it alone, without son^elhing else to be compounded with it....then her value for her last end will be divided be^ tween these several ingredients as so many subordinate, and no one alone will be equally valued with the last end.

Hence it rarely happens among mankind, that a subordinate end is equally valued with its labt end ; because the obtaining of a last end rarely depends on one single, uncom-pounded means, and is infallibly connected with that means: Therefore, men's last ends are commonly their highest ends.

Thirdly, If any being has but one ultimate end, in all that he does, and there be a great variety of operations, his last end may justly be looked upon as his sufirone end : For in such a case, every other end but that one, is an end to that end; and therefore no other end can be superior to it. Because, as was observed before, a subordinate end is never more valued, than the end to which it is subordinate.

Moreover, the subordinate effects, events, or things brought to pass, which all are means of this end, all uniting to contribute their sl-are towards the obtaining the one last end, are very various ; and therefore, by what has been now observed, the ultimate end of all must be valued, more than any one of the particular means. This seems to be the case with the works of God, as may more fully ajjpear in the sequel.

From what has been said, to explain what is intended by an ultimate end, the following things may be observed con-ceruins; ulliniale ends in the stnbc cxnlained.

Fourthly, Whatsoever any asjent has in view in any thing he does, which he loves, or which is an immediate gratification of any appetite or inclination of nature ; and is agreeable to hirti in itself, and not merely for the sake of something else, is regarded by thai agent as his last end. The same may be said, of avoiding of that which is in itself painful or disagreeable : For the avoiding of what is disagreeable is agreeable. This will be evident to any bearing in mind the meaning of the terms. By last end being meant, that which is regarded and sought by an agent, as agreeable or desirable for its own sake ; a subordmate that v\rhich is sought only for the sake of something else.

Fifthly, From hence it will follow, that, if an agent in his works has in view more things than one that will be brought to pass by what he does, that are agreeable to him, considered in themselves, or what he loves and delights in on their own account....then he must have more things than one that he regards as his last ends in what he does. But if there be but one thing that an agent seeks, as the consequence of what he does that is agreeable to him, on its own account, then there can be but one last end which he has in all his actions and operations.

But only here a distinction must be observed of things which may be said to be agreeable to an agent, in themselves considered in two senses. (I.) What is in itself grateful to an agent, and valued and loved on its own account, simfUij and ab-solutely considered, and is so universally and originally, antecedent to, ■a.x\fMndcfie7ide7it o^ sM conditions, or any supposition of paiticular cases and circumstances. And (2) What may be said to be in itself agreeable to an agent, hyfiothetically and consequentially : Or, on supposition or condition of such and such circumstances, or on the happening of such a particular case. Thus, for instance : A man may originally love society. An inclination to society may be implanted in his very nature : And society may be agreeable to him antecedent to all presupposed cases and circumstances : And this may cause him to seek a family. And the comfort of society may be originally his last cikI, in seeking a family. BiU after he has

a family, peace, good order and itiutiial justice and friend-£ihip in his family, may be agreeable to him, and what he delights in for their own sake ; and therefore these things may be his last end in many things he does in the government and regulation of his family. But they were not his original end with respect to his family. The justice and peace of a family was not properly his last end before'he had a family, that induced him to seek a family, but consequentially. And the case being put of his having a family, then these things wherein the good order and beauty of a family consist, become his last end in many things he does in such circumstances. In like manner we must suppose that God before he created the world, had some good in view, as a consequence of the world's existence that was originally agreeable to him in itself considered, that inclined him to create the world, or bring the universe, with various inleliigent creatures into existence in such a manner as he created it. But after the worI4 was created, and such and such intelligent creatures actually had existence, in such and such circumstances, then a wise, just regulation of them was agreeable to God, in ilselfconsid-ered. And God's love of justice, and hatred of injus ice, would be sufficient in such a case to induce God to deal justly with his creatures, and to prevent all injustice in him towards them. But yet there is no necessity of supposing, that God's love of doing justly to intelligent beings, and hatred of the contrary, was what originally induced God to create the world, and make intelligent beings ; and so to order the occasion of doing either jus;ly or unjustly. The justice of God's nature makes a just regulation agreeable, and the contrary disagreeable, as there is occasion, the subject being supposed, and the occasion given : But we must suppose so 'eihing else that should incline him to create the subjects or order the occasion.

So that perfection of God which we call his faithfulness, or his inchnaiion to fulfil his promises to his creatures, could not properly be what moved him to create the world ; nor could 5uch a fulfilment of his promises to his creatures, be his-last end, in g iving the creatures being. But yet after th«

world is created, after intelligent creatures are made, and God has bound himself by pronr'i-e to them, then that disposition which is called his faithfulness may move him in his providential disposals towards them : Aud this may be the end of many of God's works of providence, even the exercise of his faithfulness in fulfilling his promises. And may be in the lower sense his last end. Because faithfulness and truth must be supposed to be what is in itself amiable to God, and, what he delights in for its own sake. Thus God may have ends of particular works of providence, which are ultimate ends in a lower sense, which were not ultimate ends of the creation.

So that here we have two sorts of ultimate ends ; one of which may be called an original, and independent ultimate end ; the other consequential and dependent. For it is evident, the latter sort are truly of the nature of ultimate ends : Because, though their being agreeable to the agent, or the a-gent's desire of them, be consequential on the existence, or supposition of proper subjects and occasion ; yet the subject and occasion being supposed, they are agreeable and amiable in themselves. We may suppose that to a righteous being, the doing justice between two parties, with whom he is concerned, is agreeable in itself, and is loved for its own sake, and not merely for the sake of some other end : And yet we may suppose, that a desire of doing justice between two parties, may be consequential on the being of those parties, and the occasion given.

Therefore, I make a distinction between an end that in this manner is consequential^ and a subordinate end.

It may be observed, that when I speak of God's ultimate end in the creation of the world, in the following discourse, I commonly mean in that highest sense, viz. the original ultimate end.

Sixthly, It may be further observed, that the oriii^inal ultimate end or ends of the creation of the world is alone, that which induces God to give the occasion for consequential endb, by the first creation of the world, and the original disposal of it. And the more original the end is, the more ex-

VoL. VI. T G

tensive and universal it is. That which God had primarily in view in creatinp;, and the original ordination of the world, must be constantly kept in view, and have a governing influence in all God's works, or with respect to every thing that he does towards his creatures. And therefore,

Seventhly, If we use the phrase ultimate end in this high* est sense, then the same that is God's ultimate end in creating the world, if we suppose but one such end, must be what he makes his ultimate aim in all his works, in every thing he does either in creation or providence. But we must suppose that in the use, which God puts the creatures to that he hath wade, he must evermore have a regard to the end, for which he has made them. But if we take vUimate end in the otner lower sense, God may sometimes have regard to those things as ultimate ends, in particular works of providence, which could not in any proper sense be his last end in creating the ■world.

Eigh'.hly, On the other hand, whatever appears to be God's ultimate end in any sense, of his works of providence in general, that must be the ultimate end of the work of creation itself. For though it be so that God may act for an end, that is an ultimate end in a lower sense, in some of his woiks of providence, which is not the ultimate end of the creation of the world r Yet this doth not take place with regard to the Viorks of provii.encc in general. But n'e may justly look upon whatsoever has the nature of an ultimate end of God's works of providence in general, that the same is also an ultimate end of the creation of the world ; for God's works of provuience in general, are the same with the general use that he puts the world to that he has made. And we may well argue fram what we see of the general use which God makes of the world, to the general end for which he designed the world. Though there may be some things that are ends of particular works of providence, that were not the last end of the creation, which are in themselves grateful to God in such particular emergent circumstances ; and so are last ends in an inferior sense : Yet this is only in certain cases.

or particular occasions. But if they are last ends of God's proceedings in the use of the ■world in general, this shews that his making them last ends does not depend on particular cases and circumstances, but the nature of things in general, and his general design in the being and constitution of the universe.

Ninthly, If there be but one thing that is originally, and independent on any future, supposed cases, agreeable to God, to be obtained by the creation of the world, then there can be but one last end of God's work, in this highest sense : But if there are various things, properly diverse one from another, that are, absolutely and independently on the supposition of any future given cases, agreeable to the divine being, which are actually obtained by the creation of the world, then there were several ultimate ends of the creation, in that highest sense.

CHAPTER I.

Wherein is considered, what Reason teaches co7i-cerning this Affair.

SECTION I.

Some Things observed in general, which Reason dictates.

Having observed these things^ which are prosier to be taken ?iO' tice oJ\ to prevent confusion in discourses on this subject^ I now /iroeeed to consider ivhat may, and tvliat maij not be supposed to be God's ultimate end in the creation of the

world.

AND in the first place, I woxild observe some things which reason*seems to dictate in this matter. Indeed tiiis affair, seems properly to be an affair of divine revelation. In order to be determined what was aimed at, or designed in tlie creating of the astonishing fabric of the universe which we behold, it becomes us to attend to and rely on what he has told us, who was the architect that built it. He best knows his own heart, and what his own ends and designs were in the wonderful works which he has wrought. Nor is it to be supposed that mankind, who, while destitute of revelation, by the utmost iimprovements of their own reason, and advances in science and philosophy, could come to no clear and established determination who the author of the world was, would ever have obtained any tolerable settled judfrmcnt of the end which the author of it propo.scd to himself in so vast, complicated and wonderful a woik of his hands. And though

END IN CREATION. SI

it be true, that the revelation which God has p;iven to rnen, ■■ which has been in the world as a light shining in a dark place, has been the occasion of great improvement of their facuhies, has taught men how to use their reason ; (in which regard, notwithstanding the nobleness and excellency of the faculties which God had given them, they seemed to be in themselves almost helpless.) And though mankind now, through the long, continual assistance they have had by this divine light, have come to attainments in the habitual exercise of reason, which are far beyond what otherwise they would have arrived to ; yet I confess it would be relying too much on reason, to determine the affair of God's last ^nd in the creation of the world, only by our own reason, or without bein-i-herein principally guided by divine revelation, since God has given a revelation containing instructions concerning this tnatter. Nevertheless, as in the disputes and wranglin^-s which have been about this matter, those objections, which have chiefly been made use of against what I think the scriptures have truly revealed, have been from the pretended dictates of reason....! would in the first place soberly consider m a few things, what seems rational to be supposed concerning-this affair ; and then proceed to consider what light divine revelation gives us in it.

As to the first of these, viz. what seei^is in itself rational to be supposed concerning this matter, I think the following things appear to be the dictates of reason :

1. That no notion of God's last end in the creation of the world is agreeable to reason, which would truly imply or infer any indigence, insufficiency and mutability in God ; or any dependence of the Creator on the creature, for any part ■of his perfection or happiness. Because it is ev;Jent, by' both scripture and reason, that God is infinitely, eternally, unchangeably, and independently glorious and happy ; that he stands in no need of, cannot be profited by, or receive anv thing from the creature ; or be truly hurt, or be the subject of any sufferings, or impair of his glory and felicity from anv other being. I need not stand to produce the proofs of God's being such a one, it being so universally allowed and main-

tained by such as c?A\ themselves Christians. The noUon of God's crcalin^ the world in order to receive any thing properly from the creature, is not only coturary to the nature of God, but inconsistent with the notion of creation ; which imi-plies a being's receiving its existence, and all that belongs to its being, out of nothing. And this implies the most perfect, absoUue, and universal derivation and dependence. Now, if the creature receives its all from Gud entirely and perfectly, how is it possible that it should have any thing to add to God, to make him in any respect more than he was before, and so the Creator become dependent on the creature ?

2. Whatsoever is good and valuable in itself, is worthy that God should value for itself, and on jts own account ; op Avhich is the same thing, vulue it with an ultimate value or respect. It is therefore worthy to be ultimately sought by God, or made the last end of his action and operation, if it be a thing of such a nature as to be properly capable of being attained in any divine openuion. For it may be supposed that some things, which are valuable and excellent in themselves, are not properly capable of being attained in any divine operation ; because they do not remain to be attained ; but their existence in all possible respects, must be conceived of as prior to any divine operation. Thus God's existence and infinite perfection, thougli infinitely valuable in themselves, and infinitely valued by God. yet cannot be supposed to be the end of any divine operation. For we cannot conceive of them as in any respect consecjuent on any works of God : But Nvhatever is in, itself valuable, abscluiely so, and that is capable of being sought and attained, is worthy to be made a last end of the divine operation.

The > 2 fore,

3.. Whiitever that be which is in itself most valuable, and was so originally, prior to the creation of the world, and which is aUii'.uablc by Hie creation, if there be any thing which was superior in value to all others, that must be worthy to be God's last end in t!>c creation ; and also worthy to be his highest end.

In consequence of this, it will rollow,

4. That if God himself be in any respect properly capable of beiiis his own end in tiie creation of the world, then it is reasonable to suppose that he had respect {o/n?nse/f as his last and highest end in this work ; because he is worthy in hiniself to be so, beins; infinitely the greatest and best of be-inrs. AH ?hl:if;s else, v.ith rc;;aid to worlliineas, importance and CAcellcnce, a e pjrfectly as nothin;^- in comparison of him And. therefore, if God esteems, values,and has respect to tbino-s according; to their nature and proportions, he noust ntccs'^arily have the greatest respect to himself. It would be against the perfection of his nature, his Vvisdoni, holiness, and perfect rectitude, whereby he is disposed to do every thing that is fit to be done, to suppose otherwise. At least a great part of ii'C mcra! rectitude of the heart of God, whereby he is disposed to every tiling that is fit, suitable and annabie in itself, consists in his having infinitely the highest regard to that A\liich is in itself infinitely highest ?.nd best : Yea, it is in this that iJ. seems chiefly to consist. The moral rectitude of God's heart must consist in a proper and due respect of his heart to things that are objects of moral respect ; that is, to intelligent beings capable of rnoral actions and rt-lations. And therefore it must chiefly consist in giving due respect lo that Being to whom most is due ; yea, infinitely most, and in effect all. For God is infinitely the most worthy of regard. The worthiness of others is as nothing to his: So that to him belongs all possible respect. To him belongs the whole of the respect tlxit any moral agent, either God, or any iutelligetit Being is capable of. To him belongs all the heart. Therefore, if mora! rectitude of heart consists in paying the respect or regard of tiie heart which is due, or which fitness and suitableness requires, fitness requires infinitely the greaicst regard to be paid to God ; and the denying supreme regard here, would be a conduct infi.iitely the ■most unfit. Therefore a proper regard to this Being, is what the fitness of regard does infinitely most consist in. Hence it will follow....That the moral rectitude and fitness of the disposition, inclination or aficction of God's heart, does

chiefly consist in a respect or regard to himself infinitely above his regard to all other beings : Or, in other words, his holiness consists in this.

And if it be thus fit that God should have a supreme regard to himself, then it is fit that this supreme regard should appear, in those things by which he makes himself known, cr by his nvord and works ; i. e. in what lie says, and in what he docs. If it be an infinitely amiable thing in God, that he should have a supreme regard to himself, then it is an amia-able thing that he should act as having a chief regard to himself ; or act in such a manner, as to shew that he has such a regard ; that what is highest in God's heart, may be highest in his actions and conduct. And if it was God's intention, as there is great reason to think it was, that his works should exhibit an image of himself their author, that it might brightly appear by his works what manner of being he is, and afford a proper representation of his divine excellencies, and especially his moral excellence, consisting in the dinjiodtion of bis heart; then it is reasonable to suppose that his works are so wrought as to shew this supreme respect to himself, wherein his moral excellency does primarily consist.

When we are considering with ourselves, v/hat would be most fit and proper for God t© have a chief respect to, in his proceedings in general, with regard to the universality of things, it ^ay help us to judge of the matter with the greater ease and satisfaction to consider, what we can suppose would be judged and determined by some third being of perfect wisdom and rectitude, neither the Creator nor one of the creatures, that should be perfectly indifferent and disinterested. :")r if we make the supposition, that wisdom itself, or infinitely wise justice and rectitude were a distinct, disinterested person, whose office it w as to determine how things shall be most fitly and p^-operly ordered in the whole system, or kingdom of existence, including king and sul)jects, God and his creatures ; and r.pon a view of the whole, to decide what regard should prevail and govern in all proceedings. Now such a judire in adjusting the proper measures and kinds of regard that every part of existence is to have, would weigh things in

an even balance ; takini^ care, that greater, or more existence should have a greater share than less, that a greater part of the whole should be more looked at and respected, than the lesser in proportion (other things being equal) to the measure of existence, liiat the more excellent should be tiiore regarded than the less excellent: So that the degree of regard should always be in a proportion, compounded of the proportion of existence, and proportion of excellence, or according to the degree of greatness and goodness, considered conjunctly. Such an arbiter, in considering the system of created intelligent beings by itself, would determine that the system in general, consisting of many millions, was of greater importance, and worthy of a greater share of regard, than only one individual. For however considerable some of the individuals might be so that they might be much greater and better, and have a greater share of the sum total of existence and excellence than another individual, yet no one exceeds others so much as to countervail all the rest of the system. And if this judge consider not only the system of created beings, but the system of being in general, comprehending the sum total of universal existence, both creator and creature ; still every part must be considered according to its weight and importance, or the measure it has of existence and excellence. To determine then, what proportion of regard is to be allotted to the creator, and all his creatures taken together, both must be as it were put in the balance ; the Supreme Being, with all in him, that is great, considerable and excellent, is to be estimated and compared with all that is to be found in the whole creation ; and according as the former is found to outweigh, in such proportion is he to have a greater share of regard. And in this case, as the whole system of created beings in comparison of the creator, would be found as the light dust of the balance, (which is taken no notice of by him that weighs) and as nothing and vanity ; so the arbiter must determine accordingly with respect to the degree in which God should be regarded by all intelligent existence, and the degree in which he should be regarded in all that is Vol. VI. D

done through the whole universal system ; in all actions and proceedings, determinations and effects whatever, whether creating,preserving, using, disposing, changing, or destroying. And as the creator is infinite, and has all possible exis'tence, perfection and excellence, so he must have all possible regard. As he is every way the first and supreme, and as his excellency is in all respects the supreme beauty and glory, the original good, and fountain of all good ; so he must have in all respects the supreme regard. And as he is God over all, to whom all are properly subordinate, and on whom all depend, worthy to reign as supreme head with absolute and universal dominion ; so it is fit that he should be so regarded by all and in all proceedings and effects through Uie whole system : That this universality of things in their whole compass and series should look to him and respect him in such a manner as that respect to him should reign over all respect t» other things, and that regard to creatures should universally be subordinate and subject.

When I speak of regard to be thus adjusted in the universal system, or sum total of existence, I mean the regard of the sum total ; not only the regard of individual creatures, or all creatures, but of all intelligent existence, created, and uncreated. For it is fit that the regard of the creator should be proportioned to the worthiness of objects, as well as the regard of creatures. Thus we must conclude such an arbiter, as I have supposed, would determine in this business, being about to decide how matters should proceed most fitly, properly, and according to the nature of things. He would therefore determine that the whole universe, including all creatures, animate and inanimate, in all its actings, proceedings, revolutions, and entire series of events, should proceed from a regard and with a view, to God, as the supreme and last end of all: That every wheel, both great and small, in all its rotations, should move with a constant, invariable regard to him as the ultimate end of all; as perfectly and uniformly, as if the whole system were animated and directed by one common soul ; or, as if such an arbiter as I have before supposed, one possessed of perfect wisdom and rectitude

became the com-mon soul of the universe, and actuated and

governed it in all its rnotions.

Tims I have gone upon the supposition of a third person, neither creator nor creature, but a disinterested person stepping in to judge of the concerns of both, and state what is most fit and proper between them. The thing supposed is impossible ; but the case is nevertheless just the same as to what is most fit and suitable in itself. For it is most certainly proper for God to act, according to the greatest fitness, in his proceedings, and he knows what the greatest fitness is, as much as it perfect rectitude were a distinct per^-son to direct him. As therefore there is no third being, beside God and the created system, nor can be, so there is no reed of any, seeing (iod himself is possessed of that perfect discernn>cnt and rectitude which have been supposed. It belongs to him as supreme arbiter, and to his infinite wisdom and rectitude, to state all rules and measures of proceedings. And seeing these attributes of God are'',infinite, and most ab-. solutely perfect, they are not the less fit to order and dispose, because they ave in him, who is a being concerned, and not a third person that is disinterested. For being interested unfits a person to be arbiter or judge, no otherwise than as interest tends to blind and mislead his judgment, or incline him to act contrary to it. But that God should be in danger of either, is contrary to the supposition of his being possessed of discerning and justice absolutely perfect. And as there must be some supreme judge of fitness and propriety in the universality of things, as otherv^ise there could be no order nor regularity, it therefore belongs to God whose are all things, who is perfectly fit for this office, and who alone is so to state all things according to the most perfect fitness and rectitude, as much as if perfect rectitude were a distinct person. We may therefore be sure it is and will be done.

I should think that these things might incline us to suppose that God has not forgot himself, in the ends which he proposed in the creation of the world ; but that he has so stated these ends (however he is selfsufficient, immutable, and independent) as therein plainly to shew a supreme re^ar^

to himself. Whether this can be, or whether God has done thus, must be considered afterwards, as also what may be objected against this view of thint^s.

5. Whatsoever is good, amiable and valuable in itself, absolutely and originally, which facts and events shew that God aimed at m the creation of the world, must be supposed to be regarded, oi aimed at by God ultimately, or as an ulti-rnaie end of creation. For we must suppose from the perfection of God's nature, that whatsoever is valuable and amiable in itself, simply and absolutely considered, God values simply for itself; it is agreeable to him absolutely on its own account, because God's judgment and esteem are according to truth. He values and loves things accordingly, as they are worthy to be valued and loved. But if God values a thing simply, and absolutely, for itself, and on its own account, then it is the ultimate object of his value ; he does not value it merely for the sake of a further end to be attained by it. For to suppose that he values it only for some farther end, is in direct contradiction to the present supposition, which is, that he values it absolutely, and for itself. Hence it most clearly follows, that if that which God values ultimately and for itself, appears in fact and experience, to be what he seeks by any thing he does, he must regard it as an ultimate end. And therefore if he seeks it in creating the world, or any part of the world, it is an ultimate end of the work of creation. Having got thus far, we may now proceed a step further, and assert,

6. Whatsoever thing is actually the effect or consequence of the creation of the world, which is simply and absolutely good and valuable in itself, that thing is an ultimate end ol God's creating the world. We see that it is a good that God aimed at by the creation of the woild ; because he has actually attained ii by that means. This is an evidence that he intended to attain, or aimed at it. For we may justly infer what God intends, by what he actually does ; because he does nothing inadvertently, or without design. But whatever (iod intends to attain from a value for it; or in other words, whatever he aims at in his actions and wovksj that he

values; he seeks that thing in those acts and works. Because, for an agent to intend to attain something he values by means he uses, is the same thing as to seek it by those means. And this is the same as to make that thing his end in those means. Now it being by the supposition what God values ultimately, it must therefore by the preceding position, be aimed at by God as an ultimate end of cveating the world.

SECTION II.

So?ne farther observations concerning those things which reason leads us to sufi/iose God aimed at in the creation of the world, shewing particularly what things that are absolutely good, are actually the consequence of the creation of the world.

FROM what was last observed it seems to be the most proper and just way of proceeding, as we would see what light reason will give us respecting the particular end or ends God had ultimately in view in the creation of the world ; to consider what thing or things, are actually the effect or consequence of the creation of the world, that are simply and originally valuable in themselves. And this is what I would directly proceed to, without entering on any tedious metaphysical inquiries wherein fitness, amiableness, or valuable-ness consists ; or what that is in the nature of some things, which is properly the foundation of a worthiness of being loved and esteemed on their own account. In this I must at present refer what I say to the sense and dictates of the reader's mind, on sedate and calm reflection. I proceed to observe, 1. It seems a thing in itself fit, proper and desirable, that the glorious attributes of God, which consist in a sufficiency to certain acts and effects, should be exerted in the production

of such effects, as might manifest the infinite power, wisdom, righteousness, goodness, ccc. which arc in God. If the wotid had not been created, these attributes never would nave had any exercise. The power of God, which is a sufficiency in him to produce great eiTccts, must for ever have been dormant and useless as to any effect. The divine wisdom and prudence would have had no exercise in any wise contrivance, any prudent proceeding or disposal of things ; for there would have been no objects of contrivance or disposal. The same Tnight be observed of God's justice, goodness and truth. Indeed God miglit have known as perfectly that he possessed these attributes, if they had never been exerted or expressed in any effect. But then if the attributes which consist in a sufficiency for correspondent effects, are in themselves excellent, the exercises of them must likewise be excellent. If it be an excellent thing that there should be a sufficiency for a certain kind of action or operation, the excellency of such a sufficiency must consist in its relation to this kind of operation or effect; but that could not be, unless the operation itself ■were excellent. A sufficiency for any act or work is no farther valuable, than the work or effect is valuable.* As God therefore esteerns these attributes themselves valuable, and delia;hts in them ; so it is natural to suppose that he delights in their proper exercise and expression. For the same reason that he esteems his own sufficiency wisely to contrive and dispose effects, he also will esteem the wise contrivance and disposition itself. And for the same reason as he delights in his own disposition, to do justly, and to dispose of things ac-

♦ As we must conceive of things, the end and perfection of these attributes does as it were consist in their exercise : " The end of wisdom (says Mr. G,* Tennent. in his Sermon at the opening of the P:esbyterian church of Philadelphia) is design ; the end of power is action ; the end of goodness is doing good. To si'ppose these perfections not to be exerted, would be to repre-sei t thzm as insignificant. Of what use would God's wisdom be, if it had nothing to design or direct ? To what purpose his almightiness. if it never biought any thing to pass ? And of what avail his goodness, if it never did any good ?"

cording to truth and just proporuon ; so he must deli;>ht in such a righteous disposal itself.

2. It seems to be a thing in itself fit and desirable, that the glorious perfections of God should be known, and the operations and expressions of them seen by other beings besides himself. If it be fit, that God's power and wisdom, &c. should be exercised and expressed in some effects, and not lie eternally dormant, then it seems proper that these exercises should appear, and not be totally hidden and unknown. For if they are, it will be just the same as to the above purpose, as if they were not. God as perfectly knew himself and his perfections, had as perfect an idea of the exercises and effects they were sufficient for, antecedently to any such actual operations of them, as since. If therefore it be nevertheless a thing in itself valuable, and worthy to be desired, that these glorious perfections be actually expressed and exhibited ia their correspondent effects; then it seems also, that the knowledge of these perfections, and the expressions and discoveries that are made of them, is a thing valuable in itself absolutely con'jidered ; and that it is desirable that this knowledge should exist. As God's perfections arc things in themselves excellent, so the expression of them in their proper acts and fruits is excellent ; and the knowledge of these excellent perfections, and of these glorious expressions of them, is an cxcei-Sent thing, the existence of which is in itself valuable and desirable. It is a thing infinitely good in itself that God's glory-should be known by a glorious society of created beings. And that there should be in them an increasing knowledge of God to all eternity, is an existence, a reality infinitely worthy to be, and worthy to be valued and regarded by him, to whom it belongs to order that to be, which, of all things possible, is fittest and best. If existence is more worthy than defect and nonentity, and if any created existence is in itself worthy to be, then knowledge or understanding is a thing worthy to be; and if any knowledge, then the most excellent sort of knowledge, viz. that of God and his glory. The existence of the created universe consists as much in it as in any thing : Yea this knowledge, is one of the highest, most real and sub-

S2 END IN CREATION.

stantial parts, of all created existence, most remote from nonentity and defect.

3. As ii is a thing valuable and desirable in itself that God's glory should be seen and known, so when known, it seems equally reasonable and nt, it should be valued and esteemed, loved and delii^hted in, answerably to its dignity. There is no more reason to esteem it a fit and suitable thing that God's glory should be known, or that there should be an idea in the understanding corresponding unto the glorious object, than that there should be a corresponding disposition or affection in the will. If the perfection itself be excellent, the knowledge of it is excellent, and so is the esteem and love of it excellent. And as it is fit that God should love and esteem his own excellence, it is also fit that he should value and esteem the love of his excellency. For if it becomes any being greatly to value another, then it becomes him to love to have him valued and esteemed: And if it becomes a being highly to value himself, it is fit that he should love to have himself valued and esteemed. If the idea of God's perfection in the understanding be valuable, then the love of the heart seems to be more especially valuable, as moral beauty especially consists in the disposition and affection of the heart.

4. As there is an infinite fulness of all possible good in God, a fulness of every perfection, of all excellency and beauty, and of infinite happiness ; and as this fulness is capable of communication or emanation ad extra ; so it seems a thing amiable and valuable in itself that it should be communicated or flow forth, that this infinite fountain of good should send forth abundant streams, that this infinite fountain of light should, diffusing its excellent fulness, pour forth light all around....And as this is in itself excellent, so a disposition to this, in the divine being, must be looked upon as a perfection or an excellent disposition, such an emanation of good is, in some sense, a multiplication of it; so far as the communication or external stream may be looked upon as any tiling besides the fountain, so far it may be looked on as an increase of good. And if the fulness of good that is in the fountain, is in itself excellent and worthy to exist, then the emanation,

END IN CREATION. S3

or that which is as it were an increase, repetition or multiplication of it, is cxcellcn' and worthy to exist. Thus it is Et, since (here is an infinite fountain of light and knowledge, that this lij^ht should shine forth in beams of communicated knowledge and understanding : And as theie is an infinite fountain of holiness^ moral excellence and beauty, so it should flow out in communicated holiness. And that as there is an infinite fulness of joy and happiness, so these should have an emanation, and become a fountain flowing out in abundant streams, as beams from the sun.

From this view it appears another way to be a thing in itself valuable, that there should be such things, as the knowledge of God's glory in other beings, and an high esteem of it, love to it, and delight and complacence in it: This appears I say in another way, \iz. as these things are but the emanations of God's own knowledge, holiness and joy.

Thus it appears reasonable to suppose, that it was what God had respect to as an ultimate end of his creating the ■world, to communicate of his own infinite fulness of good ; oc rather it was liis last end, that tliere might be a ghnious and abundant emanation of his infinite fulness of good ac? e.rj;-a', or M'ithout himself, and the disposiuon to communicate hini-self, or diffuse his own fulness,* which we must conceive of as being originally in God as a perfection of his nature, was what moved him to creaie the world. But here as much as possible to avoid confusion, I observe, that there is some impropriety in saying that a disposition in God to communicate himself ;'o ?/2e creature, moved him to create the world. For though the diffueive disposition iii the nature of (jod, that moved him to create the world, doubtless inclines him to communicate himself to the cretitiut, when the creaiure exists ; yet tl is cannot bf nil: Because i.n inclination ia God to communicate himself to an object, seems to presuppose the

* I shall often use the phrase God's fulna.', as signifying and comprehending all (he goor which is m God natural and moral, eith-r excellence or happiness ; partly bixause I know of no better phrase to be used in this general meaning ; and partly bec.iuse I am led hereto by some of the inspired writers. Particularly the -ipostie Paul, who often u-eih the phrase ia thisseuse,

existence of the object, at least in idea. But the diffusive disposition that excited Ood to give creatures existence, was rather a communicative disposition in general, or a disposition in the fulness of the diviniiy to flow out and diffuse itself. Thus the disposition there is in the root and stock of a tree to diffuse and send forth its sap and life, is doubtless the reason of the communication of its sap and life to its buds, leaves •and fruits, after these exist. But a disposition to communicate of its life and sap to its fruits, is not so properly the cause of its producing those fruits, as its disposition to communicate itself, or diffuse its sap and life in general. Therefore to speak more strictly according to truth, we may suppose, that a dispoiiitio7t in God, as an original property of his nature, to an emanation of his own infinite fulness, was what excited him to create the world ; a?id so that the emanation itself was aimed at hy him as a last end of the creation.

SECTION III.

Wherein it is considered how, on the svfifiosiiion of God's mak' ing the forementioned things his last end, he 7nanifests a su-fireme and ultimate regard to himself in all his works.

IN the last section I observed some things, which are actually the consequence of the creation of the world, which seem absolutely valuable in themselves, and so worthy to be made God's last end in this work. I now proceed to inquire, how God's making such things as these his last end is consistent with his making himself his last end, or his manifesting an ultimate respect to ! imself in his acts and works. Because this is a thing I have observed as agreeable to the dictates of reason, that in all his proceedings he should set himself highest....Therefore I would endeavor to shew with respect to each of the forementioned things, that God, in making them his end, makes himself his end, so as in all to shew a supreme

and ultimate respect to himself; and how his infinite love to himself and delight in himself, will naturally cause him to value and delit^ht in tliese things : Or rather how a value to these things is implied in his love to himself, or value of that infinite fulness of good that is in himself.

Now with regard to the first of the particulars mentioned above, viz. God's regard to the exercise and expression of those attributes of his nature, in their proper operations and eflects, which consist in a sufficiency for these operations, it is not hard to conceive that God's regard to himself, and value for his own perfections, should cause him to value these exercises and expressions of his perfections ; and that a love to them will dispose him to love their exhibition and exertment : Inasmuch as their excellency consiss in their relation to use, exercise and operation ; as the excellency of wisdom consists in its relation to, and sufliciency for, wise designs and effects. God's love to himself, and his own attributes, will therefore make him delight in that, which is the use, end and operation of these attributes. If one highly esteem and delight in the virtues of a friend, as wisdom, justice, 8cc. that have relation to action, this will make him delight in the exercise and genuine effects of these virtues : So if God both esteem, and delight in his own perfections and virtues, he cannot but value and delight in the expressions and genuine efifects of them. So that in delighting in the expressions of his perfections, he manifests a delight in his own perfections themselves : Or in other words, he manifests a delight in himself; and in making these expressions of his own perfections his end, he makes himself his end.

And with respect to the second and third particulars, the matter is no less plain. For he that loves any being, and has a disposition highly to prize, and greatly to delight in his virtues and perfections, must, from the same disposition, be well pleased to have his excellencies known, acknowledged, esteemed and prized by others. He that loves and approves any being or thing, he naturally loves and approves the love and approbation of that thing, and is opposite to the disapprobation and contempt of it. Thiis it is when one loves

another, and highly prizes the virtues of a friend. And thus it is fit it should be, if it be fit that the other bhould be beloved, and his qualification prized. And therefore thus it will necessarily be, if a being loves himself and highly prizes his owTi excellencies : And thus it is fit it should be, if it be fit he should thus love himself, and prize his own valuable qualities. That is, it is fit that he should take delight in his own excel-lenc ies being seen, acknowledged, esteemed, and delighted in. This is implied in a love to himself and his own perfections. And in seeking this, and making this his end, he seeks himself, and makes himself his end.

And with respect to the fourth and last particular, viz. God's being disposed to an abundant communicaiion, and glorious emanation of that infinite fulness of good which he possesses in himself; as of his own knowlcdge> excellency, and happiness, in the manner which he does ; if we thoroughly and properly consider the maiter, it will appear, that herein also C.ocl makes himself his end, in such a sense, as plainly to manifest and testify a supreme and ultimate regard to himself.

Merely in this disposition to ditTuse himself, or to cause an emanation of his glory and fulness, which is prior to the existence of any other being, and is lo be considered as the inciting cause of creation, or giving existence to other beings, God cannot so properly be said to make the creature his end, as himself....For the creature is not as yet considered as existing. This disposition or desire in God, must be prior to the existence of the creature, even in inieniion and foresight. For it is a disposition that is the original ground of the existence of the creature ; and even of the future intended and foreseen existence of the creature.- God's love,

or benevolence, us it respects the crea'ure, may be taken either in a larger, or stricter sense. In a larger sense it may signify notliing diverse from that good disposition in his nature to comnmnicale of his own fulness in general ; as his knowledge, his holiness, and happiness; and to give creatures cxisicnce in order to it. This may be called benevolence or love, because it is the same good disposition that is

exercised in love ; it is the very fountain from whence love originally proceeds, when taken in the most proper sense ; and it has the same general tendency and effect m the creature's well being....But yet this cannot have any particular present or future created existence for its object ; because it is prior to any such object, and the very source of the fu-turilion of the existence of it. Nor is it really diverse from God's love to himself; as will more clearly appear afterwards.

But God's love may be taken more strictly, for tiiis general disposition to communicate good, as directed to particular objects. Love, in the most strict and proper sense, presupposes the existence of the object beloved, at least in idea and expectation, and represented to the mind as future. God did not love angels in the strictest sense, but in consequence of his intending to create them, and so having an idea of future existing angels. Therefore his love to them was not properly what excited him to intend to create them. Love or benevolence strictly taken, presupposes an existing object, as much as pity, a miserable, suffering object.

This propensity in God to diffuse himself, may be consid" ered as a propensity to himself diffused ; or to his own glory existing in its emanation. A respect to himself, or an infinite propensity to, and delight in his own glory, is that which causes him to incline to its being abundantly diffused, and to delight in the emanation of it. Thus that nature in a tree, by which it puts forth buds, shoots out branches, and brings forth leaves and fruit, is a disposition that terminates in its own complete self. And so the disposition in the sun to shine, or abundantly to diffuse its fulness, warmth and brightness, is only a tendency to its own most glorious and complete state. So God looks on the communication of himself, and the emanation of the infinite glory and good that are in himself lo belong to the fulness and completeness of himself; as though he were not in his most complete and glorious state without it. Thus the churcli of Christ (toward whom, and in whom are the emanations of his glory and communications of his fulness) is called the ful-

S8 END IN CREATION.

liess of Christ: As though he were nut in his complete state •without her, as Adam was in a defective state without Eve, And the church is called the glory of Christ, as the woman is the glory of the man, 1 Cor. xi. 7.. Isaiah xlvi. 13. " I will place salvation in Zion, for Israel my glory." Very remarkable is that place, John xii. 23, 24. " And Jesus answered thera, saying, The hour is conie that the Son of Man should be glorified. Verily I say unto you, except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone ; but if it die it bringeth forth much fruit." He had respect herein, to the blessed fruits of Christ's death, in the conversion, salvation, and eternal happiness and holiness of those that should be redeemed by hi.n. This consequence of his death he calls his glory ; and his obtaining this fruit he calls his being glorified ; as the flourishing beautiful produce of a corn of wheat sown in the ground is its glory. Without this he is alone as Adam was before Eve was created ; but from him by his death proceeds a glorious offspring; in which he is communicated, that is his fulness and glory : As from Adam in his deep sleep proceeds the woman, a beautiful companion to fill his emptiness, and relieve his solitariness. By Christ's death, his fulness is abundantly diffused in many streams ; and expressed in the beauty and glory of a great multitude of his spiritual offspring....Indeed, after the creatures are intended to be created, God may be conceived of as being moved by benevolence to these creatures, in the strictest sense, in his dealings with, and works about them. His exercising his goodness, and gratifjing his benevolence to them in particular, may be the spring of all Ciod's proceedings through the universe, as being now the determined way cf gratifying his general inclination to diffuse himself. Here God's acting for himself, or making himself his last end, and his acting for their sake, are not to be set in opposition, or to be considered as the opposite parts ot a disjunction. They are rather to be considered as coinciding one with the other, and implied one in the other. Bat yet God is to be considered as first and original in his regard ; and the creature is the object of God's regard consequentially and by implication as

it were comprehended in God ; as shall be more particularly observed presently.

But how God's value for and delight in the emanations of his fulness in the work of creation, ar!2;ues his delight in the infinite fulness of good there is in himself, and the supreme respect and regard he has for himself; and that in making these emanations of himself his end, he dees ultimately make himself his end in creation, will more clearly appear by considering more particularly the nature and circumstances of these communications of God's fulness which are made, and which we have reason either from the nature of things, or the word of God to suppose shall be made-One part of that divine fulness which is communicated^ is the divine knowledge. Thai communicated knowledge which must be supposed to pertain to God's last end in creating the world, is the creature's knowledge of him. For this is the end of all other knowledge ; and even the faculty of understanding would be vain without this. And this knowledge is most properly a communication of God's infinite knowledge which primarily consists in the knowledge of himself. God, in making this his end, makes himself his end. This knowledge in the creature, is but a conformity to God. It is the image of God's owa knowledge of himself. It is a participation of the same. It is as much the same as it is possible for that to be, which is infinitely less in degree : As particular beams of the sun communicated, are the light and glory of the sun in put.

Besides, God's perfections, or his glory, is the object of this knowledge, or the thing knov/n ; so that God is glorified in it, as hereby his excellency is seen. As therefore God values himself, as he delights in his own knowledge ; he must delight in every thing of that nature : As he delights in his own light, he must delight in every beam of that light : And as he highly values his own excellency, lie must be well pleased in having it manifested, and so p;lorified.

Another thing wherein the emanation of divine fulnesa that is, and will he made in consequence of the creation of the world, is the communicntion of virtue and holiness to the creature. This Is a communication of God's holiness ; so that hereby the creature partakes of God's own moral excellency ; which is properly the beauty of the divine nature. And as (iod delights in his own beauty, he must necessarily delight in the creature's holiness ; which is a conformity to, and participation of it, as truly as the brightness of a jewel, held in the sun's beams, is a participation or derivation of the sun's brightness, though immensely less

in degree And then it must be considered wherein this

holiness in the creature consists ; viz. in love, which is the comprehension of all true virtue ; and primarily in love to God, which is exercised in an high esteem of God, admiration of his perfections, con^placency in them, and praise of them. All which things are nothing else but the hearts exalting, magnifying, or glorifying God ; which as I shewed before, (^od necessarily approves cf, and is pleased with, as he loves himself, and values the glory of his own nature.

Another part of (iod's fulness which he communicates, is his happiness. This happiness consists in enjoying and rejoicing in himself; and so does also the creature'^ happiness. It is, as has been observed of the other, a participation of what is in God ; and God and his glory are the objective ground of it. The happiness of the creature con. sists in rejoicing in God ; by which also God is magnified and exalted : Joy, or the exulting of the heart in God's glory, is one thing that belongs to praise....So that God is all in all, with respect to each part of that communication of the divine fulness which is made to the creature What is communicated is divine, or something of God : And-each communication is of that nature, that the creature to whom it is made, is thereby conformed to God, and united to hiin, and that in proportion as the communication is greater or less. And the coinmunication itself, is no other, in the very nature of it, than that wherein the very honor, exaltation and praise of God coniiists.

END TN CREATION. U

And it is farther to be considered, tljat the thing Avhich God aimed at in the creation of the world, as the end which he had idtimately in view, was that communication of himself, which he intended throughout all eternity. And if we attend to tlie nature and circumstances of this eternal emanation of f!i\ine f;ood, it will more clearly shew how in niukinc^ this his end, Cjod testifies a supreme respect to himself, and. makes himself his end. There arc many reasons to think that what God has in view, in an increasing communication of himself throughout eternity, is an increasing knowledge of God, love to him, and jov in him. And it is to be considered that the more those divine communications increase in the creature, the more it becomes one with God ; for so much the more is it united to God in love, the heart is drawn nearer and nearer to God, and the union with him becomes more firm and close, and at the same time tlie creature becomes more and more conformed to God. The image is more ahd more perfect, and so tiie good that is in the creature comes forever nearer and nearer to an identity with that which is in God. In the view therefore of God, who has a comprehensive prospect of the increasing union and confoi-mity ihiough eternity, it must be an infinitely stiict and perfect nearness, conformity, and oneness. For i' will forever come nearer and nearer to that strictness and perfection of union which there is between the Father and the Son ; so that in the eyes of God, who perfectly sees the v hole of it, in its infinite progress and increase, it must c<-.me to an eminent fulfilment of Christ's request, in John xvii. 21, '22. " That they all may be one^ as thou. Father, ait in me, and I in thee, that tliey also may be one in us, I in tiiem, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in vnr." In this vi^^w, those elect creatutes which must be Ic< k' d upon as the end of all the rest of the creation, con-sidoeci with respect to the whole of their eternal duration, and as such made God's end, must be viewed as being, as it were, one with God. They were respected as brought home to him, united with him, centering most perfectly in him, and as it were swallowed up in him ; so that his

Vox. VI. F

respect to them finally coincides and becomes one and the same with respect to himself. The interest of the creature, is, as it were, Gotl's own interest, in proportion to the degree of their relation and union to God. Tlius the interest of a man's family is looked upon as the same •with his own interest ; because of the relation they siund in to him; his propiiety in them, and their strict union with him. But consider Gnd's elect creatures with respect to' their eternal duration, so they are infinitely dearer to God, than a man's family is to him. What has been said, shews iha as all things are from God as their first cause and fountain ; so all things tend to him, and in their progress come nearer and nearer to him through all eternity : Which argues that he who is their first cause is their last end.

SECTION IV.

So7ne objections considered which may be made against the rcas' onableness ofivhat has been said of God's making himself his last end.

Objection 1. SOME may object against what has been said, as inconsistent with God's absolute independence and immutability, particularly the representation that has been made, as though God were inclined to a communication of liis fulness and emanations of his own glory, as being his own most glorious and cotrtplcte state. It may be thought that this does not well consist with God's being selfexistent from all eternity, absolutely perfect in himself, in the possession of infinite and independent good. And that in general, to suppose that God makes himself his end, in the creation of the world, seems to suppose that he aims at some interest or happiness of his own, not easily reconcileable with his being happy, perfectly and infinitely happy in him-

self. If it could be supposed that God needed any thing ; or that the goodness of his creatures could extend to him ; or that they could be profitable to him ; it iifiight be fit, that God should make himself, and his own interest, his highest and last end in creating the world; and there would be some reason and ground for the p'eceding discourse. But seeing that God is above all need and all capacity of being added to and advanced, made belter or happier in any respect ; to what purpose should God make himself liis end ; or seek to advance himself in any respect by any of his ■works ? How absurd is it to suppose that God should do such great things with a view to obtain what he is already nosi perfectly possessed of, and was so from all eternity ; and therefore cannot now possibly need, nor with any color of reason be supposed to seek ?

Answer 1. Many have wrong notions of God's happiness, as resulting from his absolute selfsufficience, independence, and immutability. Though it be true, that God's glory and happmess are in and of himself, are infinite and cannot be added to, unchangeable for the whole and every part of which he is perfectly independent of the creature ; yet it does not hence follow, nor is it true, that God has no real and proper delight, pleasure or happiness, in any of his acts or communications relative to the creature ; or effects he produces in them ; or in any thing he sees in the creature's qualifications, dispositions, actions and state. God may have a real and proper pleasure or happiness in seeing the happy state of the creature ; yet tills may not bs different from his delight in himself; being a de!i?;ht in his own infinite goodness ; or the exercise uf that glorious propensity of his nature to diffuse and communicate himself, and so gratifying this inclination of his own heart. This deliglit which God has in his creature's happiness, cannot properly be said to be what God receives from the creature. For it is only the effect of his own work in, and communications to the creature, in making it, and admitting it lo a participation •f his fulness. As the sun receives nothing from the jewel

that receives its light, and shines only by a participation oi'ita brightness.

"Wiih respttt also to the creature's holiness : God may have a proper delii^ht and joy in imparling this to the creature, as g;raufying hereby his inclination, to communicate of his own exce lent fulness. God may dclitijht with true and great pleasure in hchoklin^ that beauty which is an imat^e and communication of his own beauty, an expression and ■manifestation of his own loveliness. And this is so far from being an instance of his happiness not being in and from, himself, tliat it is an evidence that he is happy in himself, or delights and has pleasure in his own beauty. If he did not take pleasure in the expression of his own beauty, it would rather be an evidence that he docs not delight in his own beauty ; that he hath not his happiness and enjoyment in his own beauty and perfection. So that if we suppose God has real pleasure and hajipiness in the holy love and praise of his saints, as the image and communication of his own holiness, it is not proptily r.ny pleasure distinct from the pleasure he has in himself; but is truly an instance of it.

And with respect to God's being glorified in this respect, that those peritciions wherein his glory consists, are exercised and expressed in tlieir proper and corresponding effects ; as his wisdom in wise designs and wellcontrived works....his power in great fcifects....his justice in acts of righteousness ....his goodness in communicating happiness ; and so his shewing forth the glory of his own nature, in its being exercised, cxliibited, comniunicated, known, and esteemed ; his having delight herein does not argue that his pleasure or happiness is not in himself, and his own glory ; but the contrary. This is the necessary consequence of his delighting in the glory of his nature, that he delights in the emanatioa and effulgence of it. t

Nor do any of these tilings argue any dependence in God on the creature for iiappiness. Though he has reaF pleasure in the creature's holiness and happiness ; yet this is not properly any pleasure which he receives from the ?:reature. Fbr these things are r/hut he gives t!ie creature..

They are wholly and eiiiirely from him. Therefore they are nothin<2: that they give to God by which they add to him. His rejoicing therein, is rather a rejoicing in his own acts, and his own glory expressed in those acts, than a joy derived from the creature. God's joy is dependent on nothing besides his own act, which he exerts with an al)Solute and independent power. And yet, in some sense it can be truly said that God has the more delight and pleasure for the holiness and happiness of his creatures. Because God would be less happy, if he was less good : Or if he had not that perfection of nature which consists in a propensity of nature to diffuse of his own fulness. And he would be less happy, if it were possible for him to be hindered in the exercise of his goodness, and his other perfections in their proper eflPects. But he has complete happiness, because he has tht-se perfections, and cannot be hindered in exercising and displaying them in their proper eflFecls. And this surely is not thus, because he is dependent ; but because he is independent on any other that should hinder him.

From this view it appears, that nothing that has been said is in the least inconsistent with those expressions in the scripture that signify that man cannot be profitable to God ; that he receives nothing of us by any of our wisdom and righteousness. For these expressions plainly mean no more than that God is absolutely independent of us; that we have nothing of our own, no stock from whence we can give to God ; and that no part of bis happiness originates from man.

From what has been said it appears, that the pleasure that God hath in those things which have been mentioned, is rather a pleasure in diffusing and communicating to the creature, than in receiving from the creature. Surely, it is no argument of indigence in God, that he is inclined to communicate of his infinite fulness. It is no argument of the emptiness or deficiency of a fountain, that it is inclined to overflow ...Another thing signified by these expressions of scripture is, that nothing that is from the creature, adds to or alters God's happiness, as though it were changeable either by increase or diminution. Nor does any thing that has been

advanced in the least suppose or infer that it does, or is it iti the least incorisislent with the eternity, and most absolute

immutability of God's pleusme and happiness For though

these communications of God, these exercises, opera'ions, ePerts and expressions of his glorious perfections, which God rejoices in, are in time ; yet his joy in them is without beginning or change They were always equally present in the divine itiind. Ho beheld them with equal clearness, certainty and fulness in every respect, as he doth now. They were alw. ys equally present; as with him there is no variableness or succession. He ever beheld and enjoyed them perfectly in his own independent and immutable power and will. And his view of, and joy in the ^i is eternally, absolutely perfect unchangeable and independent. It cannot be added to or di-TTiinished by the power or will of any creature ; nor is in the least dependent on any thing mutable or contingent.

2. If any are not satisfied with the preceding answer, but still insist on the olijection : Let them consider whether they can devise any other scheme of God's last end in creating the world, but what will be equally obnoxious to this objection in its full force, if there be any force in it. For if God had any last end in creating the world, then there was something, in some respect future, that he aimed at, and designed to bring to pass by creating the world ; Something that was agreeable to his inclination or will: Let that be his own glory, or the happiness of his creatures, or what it will. Now if there be somethinp; that God seeks as agreeable, or grateful to him, then in the accomplishment of it he is gratified. If the last end which he seeks in the creation of the world, be truly a thing grateful to him, (as certaiidy it is if it be truly his end and truly the object of his will) then it is what he takes afcal deliglu and pleasure in. But then according to the argument of the objection, how he can have any thing future to desire or seek, who is already perfecily* eternally and immutably satisfied in himself? What can remain for him to lake any delight in or to be further gratified by, whose eternal and unchangeable delight is in himself as his own complete object of enjoyment ? Thus the objector will be press-

ed with his own objecilon ; let him embrace what notion he will of God's end in the creation. And I think he has no way left to answer but that wliich has been taken above.

It may therefore be proper here to observe, that let what will be God's last end, that, he must have a real and proper pleasure in : Whatever be the proper object of his will, be is gratified in. And the thing is either gratefni to him in itself; or for something else for which he wills it : And so is his further end. But whatever is God's last end, that he wills /o7- its own sake ; as grateful to him in itself; or which is the same thing ; it is that wliich he truly delights in ; or in which he has some degree of true and proper pleasure. Otherwise we must deny any such thing as will in God with rcspLxt to any thing brought to p-iss in time ; and su must deny his work of creation, or any work of his providence to be truly voluntary. But we have as much reason to suppose that God's works in creating and governing the world, are properly the fruits of his will, as of his understanding. And if there be any s\ich thing al all, as what we mean by acls of will in God ; then he is not indifferent whether his will be fulfilled or not. And if he is not indifferent, then he is truly gratified and pleased in the fulfilment of his will : Or which is the same thing, he has a pleasure in it. And if he has a real pleasure in attaining his end, then the attainment of it belongs to his happiness. That in which God's delight or pleasure in any measure consists, his happiness in some measure consists. To suppose that God has pleasure in tilings, that are brought to pass in time, only figuratively and metaphorically ; is to suppose that he exercises will about these things, and makes them his end only metaphorically.

3. The doctrine that makes God's creatures and not himself, to be his last end, is a doctrine the farthest from having a favorable aspect on God's absolute selfsufficience and independence. It far less agrees therewith than the doctrine against which this is objected. For we must conceive of tli^ efficient as depending on his ultimate end. He depends on this end, in his desires, aims, actions and pursuits ; so that he fails in all his desires, actions vj\d pursuits, if he fails of his

cnrl.. Now if God himself be his last end, Ihen in his de-'

pendence on his end, he depends on nothin^^ but himself. If all lhinE!:s be of him, and to him, and he the first and the last, this shews him to be all in all : He is all to himself. He goes not out of himself in what he seeks ; but his desires and ])ursuits as they originate from, so they terminate in himself ; and he is dependent on none but himself in the bes^inning or end of any of his exercises or operations. But if not himself, but the creature, be his last end, then as he depends on his last end, he is in some sort dependent on the creature.

Objection 2. Some may object, that to suppose that God makes himself his hii^hest and last end, is dishonorable to him ; as it in effect supposes, that God does every thing from a selfish spirit. Selfishness is looked upon as mean and sordid in the creature I Unbecoming and even hateful in such a worm of the du't as man. We should look upon a man as of a base and contemptible character, that should in every thing he did, be governed by selfibh principles ; should make his private interest his governing aim in all his conduct in life. How far then should wc be from attributing any such thing to the Supreme Being, the blessed and only potentate ! Does it not become us to ascribe to him, the most noble and generous dispositions ; and those qualities that are the most remote from every thing that is private, narrow and sordid?

Answer 1. Such an objection must arise from a very ignorant or inconsiderate notion of the vice of selfishness, and the virtue of generosity. If by selfishness be meant, a disposition in any bemg to regard himself; this is no otherwise vicious or unbeconung, than as one is less than a multitude ; and so the public weal is of greater value than his particular intertst. Among created beings one single person must be looked upon as inconsiderable in comparison of the generality ; and so liis in'crcst as of little importance compared with the interest of the whole system : Therefore in them, a disposition to prefer self, as if it were moVe than all is exceeding vicious. But it is vicious on no other account, than as it is a disposition that docs not agree with the nature of things ; and that which is indeed the greatest good. And a disposition

in any one to forego his own interest for the sake of others, is no further excellent, no further worthy the nanrie of generosity than it is a treating things according to their true value ; a prosecuting something most worthy to be prosecuted ; an expression of a disposition to prefer something to selfinterest, that is indeed preferable in itself. But if God be indeed so great, and so excellent, that all other beings are as nothing to him, and all other excellency be as nothing and less than nothing, and vanity in comparison ot his ; and God be omniscient, and infallible, and perfectly knows that he is infinitely the most valuable being ; then it is fit that his heart should be agreeable to this, which is indeed the true ^nature and pro-portio 1 of things, and agreeable to this infallible and all comprehending understanding which he has of them, and that perfectly clear light in'which he views them ; and so it is fit and suitable that he should value himself infinitely more than his creatures.

2. In created beings, a regard to selfinterest may properly be set in opposition to the public welfare ; because the private interest of one person may be inconsistent with the public good ; at least it may be so in the apprehension of that person. That, which this person looks upon as his interest may interfere with, or oppose the general good. Hen< e his private interest may be regarded and pursued in opposition to the public. But this cannot be with respect to the Supreme Being, the an'hnr and head of the whole system, on whom all absolutely depend ; who is the fountain of being and good to the whole. It is more absurd to suppose that his interest should be opposite to the interest of the universal system, than that the welfare of the head, heart, and vitals of the natural body, should be opposite to the welfare of the body. And it is impc-jsible that God, who is omniscient, should apprehend the matter thus, viz. his interest, as being inconsistent with the good and interest of the •whole.

3. God's seeking himself in the creation of the world, in the manner which has been supposed, is so far frotn being inconsistent with the good of his creatures, or any Vol. \I, G

possibility of being so ; that it is a kind of regard to himself that inclines hiin to seek the good of his creature. It is a regard to hinfself that disposes him to diffuse and communicate himself. It is such a deHght in his own internal fulness and glory, that disposes him to an abundant effusion and emanation of that glory. The same disposition, ihat inclines him to delight in his glory, causes him to delight in the exhibitions, expressions and communications of it. This is a natural conclusion. If there were any person of such a taste and disposition of mind, that the brightness and light of the sun secmtd unlovely to him, he would be willing that the sun's brightness and light should be retained within itself: But they, that delight in it, to whom it appears lovely and glorious, will esteem it an amiable and glorious thing to have it diffused and communicated through the world.

Here by the way it may be properly considered, whether some writers are not chargeable with inconsistence in this respect, viz. thnt whereas they speak against the doctrine of God's making himself his own highest and last end, as though this were an ignoble selfishness in God ; when indeed he only is fit to be made the highest end, by himself and all other beings; inasmuch as he is the highest Being,

and infinitely greater and more worthy than all others

Yet with regard to creatures who are infinitely less worthy of supreme and ultimate regard, they (in effect at least) suppose that they necessarily at all times seek their own happiness, and make it their ultimate end in all, even their most virtuous actions : And that this principle, regulated by wisdotTi and prudence, as leading to that which is their true and highest happiness is the foundation of all virtue and every thing that is morally good and excellent in them.

(Objection 3. To what has been supposed, that God makes himself his end in this way, viz. in seeking that his glory and excr.llent perfection should be known, esteemed, loved and delighted in by his creatures, it may be objected, that this seenis unworthy of God. It is considered as below a truly great man, to be much influenced in his conduct, by

•jL desire of popular applause. The notice and admiration of a gazirii^ iTiullitude, would be esteemed but a low end, to be aimed at by a prince or philosopher, in any great and noble cnteiprize. How muc.li more is it unworthy the great God, to perlorrn his magnificent works, e. g. the cieaticn of the vast universe, out of regard to the notice and admiration of worms of the dust : That the displays of his magnificence may be gaztd at, and applauded by tho^e who are infinitely more beneath him, than the meanest rabble are beneath the greatest prince or pliilosopher.

This objection is specious. It hath a shew of argument: But it wdl appear to be nothing but a siiew....if we consider,

1. Whether or no it be not worthy of God, to regard and value what is excellent and valuable in itself, and so to take pleasure in its exiitence.

It seems not liable to any doubt, that there could be nothing future, or no future existence worthy to be desired or sought by God, and so worthy to be made his end, if no future existence was valuable and worthy to be brought to effect. If when the world was not, there was ary possible future thing fit and valuable in itself, I think the knowledge of God's glory, and the esteem and love of it must be so. Understanding and will are the highest kind of created existence. And if they be valuable, it must be in their exercise. But the highest and most excellent kind of their exercise, is in some actual knowledge and exercise of will. And certainly the most excellent actual knowledge and will, that can be in the creature, is the kn?>wledge and the love of God. And the most true, excellent knowledge of God is the knowledge of his glory or moral excellence, and the most excellent exercise of the will consists in esteem and love, and a delight in his glory. If any created existence is in itself worthy to be, or any thing that ever was future is worthy of existence, such a communication of divine fulness, such an emanation and expression of the divine glory is worthy oi existence. But if nothing that ever Avas future was worthy to exist, then no future thing Avas worthy to be aimed

at by God ill creatinj!^ the world. And if nolhiiif;- was worthy to be aimed at in creation, then nothing was worthy lo be God's end in creation.

If God's own excellency and glory is worthy to be highly valued and delighted in by him, then the value and esteem hereof by others, is worthy to be regarded by him ; for this is a necessary consequence. To make this plain, let it be considered how it is with regard to the excellent qualities of another. If we highly value the virtues and exi ellencies of a friend, in proportion as we do so. we shall approve of and like others' esteem of them ; and shall disapprove' and dislike the contempt of them. If these virtues are truly valuable, they are worthy that we should thus approve others' esteem, and disi^pprove their contempt of them. And the case is the same with respect to any being's own qualities or attributes. If he highly esteems them, and greatly -Jelights in them, he will naturally and necessarily love lo see esteem of them in others, and dislike their disesteem. And if the attributes are worthy to be highly esteemed by the being who hath theni, so is the esteem of-thcm in others worthy to be proportionably approved and regarded. I desire it may be considered, whether it be unfit that God should be displeased with contempt of himself. If not, but on the contrary, it be fit and suitable that he should be displeased with this, there is tiie same reason that he sliould be pleased with the proper love, esteem and honor of himself.

The matter inay be also cleared, by considering what it would become us to approve and value with respect to any public society we belong to, e, g. our nation or country. It becomes us to love our country, and therefore it l^ecomes lis to value the just honor of our country. But the same that it becomes us to .value and desire for a friend, and the same that it becomes us to desire and seek for the community, the same does it become God to value and seek for himself; i. e. on supposition it becomes God to love himself as well as it docs men lo love a friend or the public ; which 1 think has been before proved.

i-iere are two things that ought particularly to be adverted to 1. That in God, the love of himself, and the love of the public are not to be distinguished, as in man, because God's being, as it were, comprehends "nil. His existence, beino; infinite, must be equivalent to universal existence. And for the same reason that public affection in the creature is fit and beautiful, God's regard to himself must be so likewise. 2. In God, the love of what is fit and decent, or the love of virtue, cannot be a distinct thint^ fiom the love of himself. Because the love of Gud is that wherein all virtue and holiness does primarily and chiefly consist, and God's own holiness must primarily consist in the love of himself, as was before observed. And if God's holiness consists in love to himself, then it will imply an approbation of, and pleasedncss with the esteem and love of him in others ; for a being- that loves himself, necessatily loves love to himself. If holiness in God consist chiefly in love to himself, holiness in the creature must chiefly consist in love to him. And if God loves holiness in himself, he must love it In the creature.

Virtue, by such of the late philosophers as seem to be in chief repute, is placed in public affection or general benevolence. And if the essence of virtue lies primarily in this, then the love of virtue itself is virtuous no otherwise than as it is implied in, or arises from this public affection, or extensive benevolence of mind. Because if a man truly loves the public, he necessarily loves love to the public.

Now, therefore, for the same reason, if universal benevolence in the highest sense, be the same* thing with benevolence to the Divine Being, \vho is in effect universal being, it will follow, that love to virtue itself is no otherwise virtuous, than as it is implied in or uiises from love to the Divine Being. Consequently God's o^vn love to virtue is implied in love to himself; and is virtuous no otherwise than as it arises from love to himself, bo that God's virtuous disposition, appearing in love to holiness in th.c creature, is to be resolved into the same thin;^- with love to himself. And consequently whereinsoever he makes virtue his

end, he makes himself his end In fine, God, being, as

it were, an all compiehcndinij Bting, all his moral perfections, as his holiness, justice,'grace and benevolence are some way or other to be resolved into a supreme and infinite regard to himself ; and if so it will be easy to suppose that it becomes him to make himself his supreme and last end in his works.

I would here observe by the way, that if any insist that it becomes God to love and take delight in the virtue of his creatures for its own sake, in such a manner as not to love it from regard to himself, and that it supposeth too much selfishness to suppose that all God's delight in virtue is to be resolved into delight in himself: This will contradict a former objection against God's taking pleasure in communications of himself, viz. that inasmuch as God is perfectly independent and sclfsufficient, therefore all his happiness and pleasure consists in the enjoyment of himself. For in the present objection it is insisted that it becomes God to have' some pleasure, love or delight in virtue distinct from his delight in himself. So that if the same persons make both objections, they must be inconsistent with themselves.

2, In answer to the objection we are upon, as to God's creatures whose esteem and love he seeks, being infinitely inferior to God as nothing and vanity ; I would observe that it is not unworthy of God to take pleasure in that which in itself is fit and amiable, even in those that are infinitely below him. If there be iiifinite grace and condescension in it, yet these are not unworthy of God, but infinitely to his honor and glory.

They who insist that God's own glory was not an ultimate end of his creation of the world ; but that all that he had any ultimate regard to was the happmess of his creatures ; and suppose that he made his creatures, and not himself, his last end, do it under a color of exalting and magnifying God's benevolence and love to his creatures....But if his love to them be so great, and he so highly values them as to look upon them worthy to be his end in all his great works as they suppose ; they are not consistent v'ith them-

selves, in supposing that God lias so Utile value for their ]ove and esteem. For as the naiure of love, especially great love, causes him that loves to value the esteem of the person beloved ; so 'hat God should take pleasure in the creature's just love and esteem will follow both from God's love to himself and his love to his creatures. If he esteem and love himself, he must approve of esteem and love to himself, and disapprove the contrary. And if he loves and values the creature, he must value and take delight in their mutual love and esteem, because he loves not because he needs them.

3. As to what is alleged of its being unworthy of great men to be governed in their conduct and achievements by a regard to the applause of the populace ; I would ^serve, what makes their applause to be worthy of so little regard, is their ignorance, giddiness and injustice. The applause of the multitude very frequently is not founded on any just view and understanding of things, but on humor, mistake, folly and unreasonable affections. Such applause is truly worthy to be disregarded. But it is not beneath a mart of the greatest dignity and wisdom, to value the wise and just esteem of others, however fnferior to him. The contrary, instead of being an expression of greatness of mind, would shew an haughty and mean spirit. It is such an esteem in his creatures only, that God hath any regard to : For it is such an esteem only that is fit and amiable in itself.

Objection 4. To suppose that God makes himself his ultimate end in the creation of the woild derogates from the freeness of his goodness, in his beneficence to his creatures ; and from their obligaticns to gratitude for the good communicated. For if God, in communicating his fulness, makes himself, and not the creatures, his end ; then what good he does, he does for himself, and not for them ; for his own sake, and not their's.

Answer. God and the creature, in this affair of the emanation of the divine fulness, are not properly set in opposition, or made the opposite pans of a disjunction. Nor ought

God's glory and the creature's good to be spoken of as if they Avere properly and entirely distinct, as they are in the objection. This snpposetli, that God's having respect to his glory, and the communication of good to his creatures, are things altogether cliflcicnt : That God's communicating his fulness for himself, and his doing it for them, are things standing in a proper disjunction and opposition. Whereas if we were capable of having more full and perfect views of God and divine things, which are so much above us, it is probable it would appear very clear to us, that the matter is quite otherwise ; and that these things, instead of appearing entirely distinct, are impUed one in the other. That God, in seeking his glory, therein seeks the good of his creatures. Because the emanation of his glory (which he seeks and delights in, as he delights in himself and his own eternal glory) implies the communicated excellency and happiness of his creature. And that in communicating his fulness for llxem, he does it for himself. Because their good, which he seeks, is so much in union and communion with himself. God is their good. Their excellency and happiness is nothing but the emanation tmd expression of God's glory. God, in seeking their glory and 1 oppiness, seeks himself, and in seeking himself, i. e. him>^elf diffused and expressed, (which he delights in, as he delights in his own beauty and fulness) he seeks their glory and happiness.

This will the better appear, if we consider the degree and rnanncr in which he aimed at the creature's excellency and happiness in his creating the world ; viz. the degree and manner of the creature's glory and happiness during the whole of the designed eternal duration of the world, he was about to create ; which is in greater and greater nearness and strictness of union with himself, and greater and greater communion and participation with him in his own glory and happiness, in constant pro'j:ression, throughout all eler-nitv. As ihe creature's good was viewed in this manner when (iod made the world for it, viz. with respect lo the •whole of ihe eternal duration of it, and the eternally progressive union and communion with hiin ; so the creature

must be viewed as in infinite strict union with himself. In this view il appears that God's respect to the creature in the whole, unites with his respect to himself. Both regards are like two lines which seem at the beginning to be separate, but aim finally to meet in one, both being directed to the same centre. And as to the good of the creature itself, if viewed in its whole duration, and infinite progression, it must be viewed as infinite ; and so not only being some communication of God's glory, but as coming nearer and nearer to the same thing in its infinite fulness. The nearer any thing comes to infinite, the nearer it comes to an identity with God. And if any good, as viewed by God, is beheld as infinite, it cannot be viewed as a distinct thing from God's own infinite glory.

The apostle's discourse of the great love of Christ to men, Eph. V. 25, to the end, leads us thus to think of the love of Christ to his church, as coinciding with his love to himself, by virtue of the strict union of the church with him. Thus, " Husbands, love your wives, as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it, that he might present it to himself a glorious church. So ought men to love their wives, as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself, even as the Lord the church ; for we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones."

Now I apprehend that there is nothing in this manner of God's seeking the good of the creatures, or in his disposition to communicate of his own fulness to them, that at all derogates from the excellence of it, or the creature's obligation.

God's disposition to commimicate good, or to cause his own infinite fulness to flow forth, is not the less properly called God's goodness, because the good that he communicates, is something of himself; a communication of his own glory, and what he delights in as he deligh'.s in his own glory. The creature has no less benefit by it ; neither has such a disposition less of a direct tendency to the creature's benefit ; or the less of a tendency to love to the creature, when the creature conies to exist. Nor is this disposition in Vol. VI. H

God (o communicate of and diffuse his own good, the les3 excellent, because it is implied in his love and regard to himself. For his love to himself does not imply it any otherwise, than as it implies a love to whatever is worthy and excellent. The emanation of God's glory, is in itsdf worthy and excellent, and so God delights in it ; and his delight in this excellent thing, is implied in his love to himself, or his own fulness ; because that is the fountain, and so the sum and comprehension of every thing that is excellent. And the matter standing thus, it is evident that these things cannot derogate from the excellency of this disposition in God, to an emanation of his own fulness, or communication of good to the creature.

Nor does God's inclination to communicate good in this manner, i. e. from regard to himself, or delight in his own glory, at all diminish the freeness of his beneficence in this communication. This will appear, if we consider particularly in what ways doing good to others from selflove, may be in-consisient with the freeness of beneficence. And I conceive there are only these two ways :

1. When any does good to another from confined self-love, that is opposite to a general benevolence. This kmd of selflove is properly called selfishness. In some sense, the most benevolent, generous person in the world, seeks his own happiness in doing good to others, because he places his happiness in their good. His mind is so enlarged as to take them, as it were, into himself. Thus, when they are happy, he feels it, he partakes with them, and is happy in their happiness. This is so far from bting inconsistent with the freeness of beneficence, that on the contrary, free benevolence and kindness consists in it. The most free beneficence that can be in men, is doing good, not from a confined selfishness, but from a disposition to general benevolence, or love to beings in general.

But now, with respect to the Divine Being, there is no such thing as such confined selfishness in him, or a love to himself, opposite to general benevolence. It is impossible, because he comprehends all entity, and all excellence

in his own essence. The first Being, the eternal and infinite Being, is in effect, Being in general ; and comprehends universal existence, as was observed before. God, in his benevolence to his creatures, cannot have his heart enlarged in such a manner as to take in beings that he finds, who are originally out of himself, distinct and independent. This cannot be in an infinite being, who exists alone worn eternity. But he, from his goodness, as it were enlarges himself in a more excellent and divine manner. This is by communicating and diffusing himself; and so instead of finding, making objects of his benevolence ; not by taking into himself what he finds distinct from himself, and so partaldng of their good, and being happy in them, but by fiowing forth, and expressing himself in them, and making them to partake of him, and rejoicing in himself expressed in them, and communicated to them.

2. Another thing, in doing good to others from selflove, that derogates froin the freeness of the goodness, is doing good to others from dependence on them for the good we need or desire ; which dependence obliges. So that in our beneficence we are not selfmoved, but as it were constrained by something without ourselves. But it has been particularly shewn already, that God's making himself his end, in the manner that has been spoken of, argues no dependence, but is consistent with absolute independence and selfsuf-ficience.

And I would here observe, that there is something in that disposition in God to communicate goodness, which Bhews him to be independent and seifmoved in it, in a manner that is peculiar, and above what is in the beneficence of creatures. Creatures, even the most gracious of them, are not so independent and selfmoved in their goodness, but that in all the exercises of it, they iire excited by some object that they find ; something appearing good, or in some respect worthy of regard, presents itself, and moves their kindness. But God, being all and alone, is absolutely self-moved. The exercises of his communicative disposition are absolutely from within himself, not finding any thing, or any

object to excite them or draw them forth ; but all that is good and worthy in the object, and the very being of the object, proceeding from the overflowing of his fulness.

These thin;5S shew that the supposition of God's making himself his last end, in the manner spoken of, does not at all diminish the creature's obligation to gratitude, for communications of good it receives. For if it lessen its obligation, it must be on one of the following accounts. Either, that the creature has not so much benefit by it, or that the disposition it flows from is not proper goodness, not having so direct a tendency to the creature's benefit, or that the disposition is not so virtuous and excellent in its kind, or that the beneficence is not so free. But it has been observed that none of these things take place, with regard to that disposition, which has been supposed to have excited God to create the world.

I confess there is a degree of indistinctness and obscurity in the close consideration of such subjects, and a great imperfection in the expressions we use concerning them, arising imavoidably from the infinite sublimity of the subject, and the incomprehenbiuleness of those things that are divine. Hence revelation is the surest guide in tliese matters, and what that teaches shall in the next place be considered. Nevertheless,the endeavors used to discover what the voice of reason is, so far as it can go, may serve to prepare the way, by obviating cavils insisted on by many ; and to satisfy us that what the Word of God says of the matter, is not unreasonable, and thus prepare our minds for a more full acquiescence in the instructions it gives, according to the more natural and genuine sense of words and expressions, we find often used there concerning* this subject,

END IN CREATION.

CHAPTER ir.

Wherein it is inquired, what is to be learned from thehoXy Scriptures cancerning God's last End m the Creation, of the florid.

SECTION I.

TAe scrifitures represent God as ?naking himself his oivn last end in the creation of the world.

IT is manifest, that the scriptures speak, on all occasions, as though God made himself his end in all his works ; and as though the same being, who is the first cause of all things, were the supreme and last end of all things. Thus in Isa xliv. 6. " Thus saith the Lord, the king of Israel, and his redeemer the Lord of Hosts, I am the first, I also am the last, and besides me there is no God." Chap xlviii. 12. "I am the first, and I am the last." Rev. i. 8. « I am alpha and omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and was, and which is to come, the Almighty." Verse 11. "lam alpha and omega, the first and tlie last." Verse 17. " I am the first and the last." Chap. xxi. 6. « And he said unto me, it is done, I am alpha and omega, the beginning and the end." Chap. xxii. 13. <« I am alpha and omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last."

And when God is so bften spoken of as tlie last as well as the first, and the end as well as the beginruug, what is meant (or at least implied) is, that as he is the first efficient cause and fountain from whence all things originate ; so he is the last final cause for which they are made ; the final term to which they all tend in their ultimate issue. This seems to

a^ END IN CREATION.

be the most natural import of these expressions ; and is cou-firmed by otlier parallel passages ; as Rom. xi, 36. " For of him, and through him, and to him are all things." Col. i. 16. " For by him were all thins^s created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones or dominions, principalities and powers, all things were created by him, and for him." Hcb. ii. 10. " For it became him, by whom are all things, and for whom are all ihing-s." In Prov. xvi. 4. It is said expressly, " The Lord hath made all things for himself."

And the manner is observable, in which God is said to be the last, to whom, and for whom are all things. It is evident-ly spoken of as a meet and suitable tiiinyj, a branch of his glory ; a meet prerogative of the great, infini e and eternal being ; a thing becoming tlie dignity of him who is infinitely above all o'her beings; from whom all things are, ;tnd by %vhom they consist, and in comparison with whom, all other things are as nothing.

SECTION II.

jH~herein some positions are advanced concerning a just metliod of arguing in this affair, from what nve find in holy Scrip-

WE have seen that the scriptures speak of the creation of the world as being for God, as its end. What remains therefore to be inquired into, is, "iv/iich nvaij do the scriptures represent God as making himself his end ?

It is evident that God does not make his existence or being the end of the creation ; nor can he be supposed to do so without great absurdity. His being and existence cannot be conceived of but as prior to any of God's acts or designs ; they must be presupposed as the ground of them. Therefore it cannot be in this way that God makes himself the end

E^B IN CREATION. ^S

©f his creating the world. He cannot create the world to the end that he may have existence ; or may have such attributes and perfections, and such an essence. Nor do the scriptures give the least intimation of any such thing. Therefore, what divine effect, or what is it in relation to God, that is the thing which the scripture teacheth us to be the end he aimed at in his works of creation, in designing of which, he makes himself his end ?

In order to a right understanding of the scripture doctrine, and drawing just inferences from what v/e iwid said in the word of God relative to this matter ; so to open the way to a true and definitive answer to the above inquiry, I would lay doM'n the following positions.

Position 1. That which appears to be spoken of as God's ultimate end in his works of providence in general, we may

justly suppose to be his last end in the work of creation

This appears from what was observed before (under the fifth particular of the introduction) which I need not now repeat-.

Position 2. When any thing appears by the scripture to be the last end of some of the works of God, which thing appears in fact, to be the result, not only of this work, but of God's works in general; and although it be not mentioned as the end of those works, but only of some of them, yet being actually the result of other works as well as that, and nothing appears peculiar, in the nature of the case, that renders it a fit, and beautiful and valuable result of those particular works, more than of the rest; but it appears with equal reason desirable and valuable in the case of all works, of which it is spoken in the word of God as (and seen in fact to be) the effect ; we may jui.tly infer, that thing to be the last end of those other works also. For we must suppose it to be on account of the valuableness of the effect, that it is made the end of those works which it is expressly spoken of as the end ; and this effect, by the supposition, being equally, and in like manner the result of the work, and of the same value, it is but reasonable to suppose, that it is the end of the work, of which it is naturally the consequence, in one case as well as in another.

Position- 5. The ultimate end of God's creating th6 world, being also (as was before observed) the last end of all God's works of providence, and that in the hi^^hesi sense, and being above all other things important, we may well presume that this end will be chieily insisted on in the word of God, in the account it gives of God's designs and ends in his works of providence....and therefore, if there be any particular thing, that we find more frequently mentioned in scripture as God's ultimate aim in his works of providence, than any thing else, this is a presumption that this is the supreme and ultimate end of God's works in general, and so the end of the work of creation.

Position 4. That which appears from the word of God to be his last end with respect to the moral world, or God's last end in the creation and disposal of the intelligent part of the system, and in the moral government of the world, that is God's last end in the work of creation in general. Because it is evident, from the constitution of the world itself, as well as from the word of God, that the moral part is the end of all the rest of the creation. The inanimate unintelligent part is made for the rational as much as a house is prepared for the inhabitant- And it is evident also from reason and the word of God, that it is with regard to what is moral in them, or for the sake of some moral good in them, that moral ai;ent3 arc made and the world made for them. But it is further evident that whatsoever is the last end of that part of creation that is the €in\ of all the rest, and for which all the rest of the world was made, must be the last end of the whole. If all the other parts of a watch are made for the hand of the watch, to move that aright, and for a due and proper regulation of that, tlien it will follow, that the last end of the hand, is the last end of the whole machine.

Position 5. That, which appears from the scripture to be God's last end in the chief work or works of his providence, we may well determine is God's last end in creating the world. For as was observed, we may justly infer the end of a thing from the use of it. We may justly infer the end of a clock, a chariot, a ship, or water engine from the main use

to which it is applied. But God's providence is his use of ihe world he has made. And if there be any work or works of providence that are evidently God's main work or works, herein appears and consists the main use that God makes of the creation....From these two last positions we may infer the next, viz.

Position 6. Whatever appears by the scriptures to be God's last end in his main work or works of providence towards the moral world, that we justly infer to be the last end of the creation of tlie world. Because as was just now observed, the moral world is the chief part of the creation and the end of the rest ; and God's last end in creating Ihat part of the world, must be his last end in the creation of the whole. And it appears by the last position, that the end of God's main work or works of providence towards them, or the main use he puts them to, shews the last end for which he has made them ; and consequently the main end for which he has made the whole world.

Position 7. That which divine revelation shews to be God's last end with respect to that part of the moral world which are good, or which are according to his mind, or such as he would have them be ; I say that which is God's last end with respect to these (i. e. his last end in their being, and in their being good) this we must suppose to be the last end of God's creating the world. For it has been already shewn that God's last end in the moral part of creation must be the end of the whole. But his end in that part of the moral world that are good, must be the last end for which he has made the moral world in general. For therein consists the good-nebs of a thing, viz. in its fitness to answer its end : Or at least this must be goodness in the eyes of the author of that thing. For goodness in his eyes is its agreeableness to his mind. But an agreeableness to his mind in what he makes for some end or use, must be an agreeableness or fitness to that end. For his end in this case is his mind. That which he chiefly aims at in that thing, is chiefly his mind with respect to that thing. And therefore they are good moral agents, who are fitted for the end for which God has made moral agents : As Vol, Vr. T

they are good iTiachines, instruments and utensils that are lit* led to the end they are desipined for. And consequently that which is the cnief end to which in being good they are fiued that is the chief end of utensils, bo that which is the chief end to which good created moral agents in being good are fitted, this is the chief end of moral agents, or the moral part of :he creation ; and consequently of the creation in general.

Position 8. That, which the word of God requires the intelligent and moral part of the world to seek as their main end, or to have respect to in that they do, and regulate all their conduct by, as their ultimate and highest end, that we have reason to suppose is the last end for which God has made them ; and consequently, by position fourth, the last end for which he has made the whole world. A main difference be-tAveen the intelligent and moral parts, and the rest of the world, lies in this, that the former are capable of knowing their creator, and the end for which he made them, and capable of actively complying with his design in their creation and promoting it; while other creatures cannot promote the design of their creation, only passively and eventually. And seeing they arc capable of knowing the end for which their author has made them, it is doubtless their duty to fall in with it. Their wills ought to comply with the will of the creator in this resi-pect, in mainly seeking the same as their last end which God mainly seeks as their last end. This must be the law of nature and reason with respect to them. And we must suppose that God's revealed law, and the law of nature agree ; and that his will, as a lawgiver, must agree with his will as a creator. Therefore we justly infer, that the same thing which God's revealed law requires intelligent creatures to seek as their last and greatest end, that God their creator has made their last end, and so the end of the creation of the world.

Position 9. We may well suppose that what seems in holy scripture from time to lime to be spoken of as the main end of the goodness of the good part of the moral world, so that the respect and relation their virtue or goodness has to that end, is what chit-fiy makes it valuable and desirable ; I say, we may well suppose that to be the thing which is God's

last end in the creation of the moral world ;. and so by position fourth, of the whole world. For the end of the goodness of a thing, is the end of the thing. Herein, it was observed before, must consist the goodness or vuluableness of any thing in the eyes of him that made it for his use, viz. its being good for that use, or good with respect to the end for which he made it.

Position 10. That which persons Avho arc described in scripture as approved saints, and set forth as examples of piety, sought as their last and highest end in the things which they did, and which are mentioned as parts of their holy conversation, or insiances of their good and approved behavior ; that we must suppose, was what they ought to seek as their last end ; and consequently by the preceding position was the same with God''- last end in the creation of the world.

Position 11. That which appears by the word of Gud to be that end or event, in the desire of which, the souls of the good parts of the moral world, especially of the best, and in their best frames, do most naturally and diieclly exercise their goodness in, and in expressing of their desire of this event or end they do oiost properly and directly express their respect to God ; we may, I say, well suppose, that event or end to be the chief and ultimate end of a spirit of piety and goodness, and God's chief end in making the moral world, and so the whole world. For doubtless the most direct and natural desire and tendency of a spirit of true goodness in the good and best part of the moral world is to the chief end of goodness, and so the chief end of the creation of the mural world. And in what else can the spirit of true respect and friendship to God be expressed by way of desire, than desires of the same end, which God himself chiefly and ultimately desires and seeks in making them and all other things.

Position 12. Since the holy scriptures teach us that Jesus Christ is the head of the moral world, and especially of all the good part of it; the chief of God's servants, appointed to be the head of his saints and angels, and set forth as the chief and most perfect pattern and example of goodness ; we may well suppose by the foregoing positions, that what he sought as his last end, was God's last end in the creation of the world.

SECTION III.

Particular texts of Scripture, that shew that God's glory is an iiltimate End of the Creation.

WHAT God says in Isa xlviii. 11, naturally leads us to suppose, that the way in which (iod makes himself his end in his work or works which he does for his own sake, is in making his ^lory his end. " For my own sake, even for my own sake will I do it. For how should my name be polluted ; and I will not give ray glory to another." Which is as much as to say, I will obtain my end, I Avill not forego my glory : Another shall not take this prize from me. It is pretty evident here, that God's name and his glory, which seems to intend the same thing (as shall be observed more particularly afterwards) are spoken of as his last end in the great Avork mentioned, not as an inferior, subordinate end, subservient to the interest of others. The words are emphatical. The emphasis and repetition constrain us to understand that ■what God does, is ultimately for his own sake: " For my own sake, even for my own sake will I do it."

So the words of the apostle, in Rom. xi. 36, naturally lead us to suppose that the way in which all thmgs are to God, is in being for his glory. " For of him, and through him, and to him arc all things ; to whom be glory forever and ever. Amen." In the preceding context, the apostle observes the marvellous disposals of divine wisdom, for causing all things to be to him in their final issue and result, as they are from him at first, and governed by him. His discourse shews how God coi.trived and brought this to pass in his disposition of things, \^ by setting up the kingdom of Christ in the world ; leaving the Jews, and calling the Gentiles ; and in what he would hereafter do in bringing in the Jews with the fulness of the Gentiles ; with the circumstances of these wonderful works, so as gi eatly to shew his jus-♦ice and his goodness, magnify his grace, and manifest the

sovereignty and freeness of it, and the absolute dependence of all on him....and then in the four last verses, breaks out into a most pathetic, rapturous exclamation, expressing his great admiration of the depth of divine wisdom in the steps he takes for the attaining his end, and causing all things to be to him ; and finally, he expresses a joyful consent to God's excellent design in all to glorify himself, in saying, " to him be glory forever ;" as much as to say, as all things are so wonderfully ordered for his glory, so let him have the glory of all, forevermore.

2. The gloiy of God is spoken of in holy scripture as the last end for which that part of the moral world that are good were made. Thus in Isaiah xliii. 6, 7. " I will say to the North, give up, and to the South, keep not back....Bring my sons from far, and my daughters from the ends ot the earth, even every one that is called by my name ; for I have created him for my glory, I have formed him, yea, I have made him." Isaiah Ix. 21. "Thy people also shall be all righteous. They shall inherit the land forever ; the branch of my planting, the work of my hand, that I may be glorified." Chap. Ixi. 3. " That they may be called trees of righteousness, the planting of the Lord, that he might be glorified.'"

In these places we see that the glory of God is spoken of as the end of God's saints, the end for which he makes them, i. e, either gives them being, or gives them a being as saints, or both. It is said that God has made and formed them to be his sons and daughters, for his oiv?i glory ; that they are trees of his planting, the work of his hands, as trees of righteousness, that he might be glorified. And if we consider the words, especially as taken with the context in each of the places, it will appear quite unnatural to suppose that God's glory is here spoken of only as an end inferior and subordinate to the happiness of God's people ; or as a prediction that God would create, form and plant them that he might be glorified, that so God's people might be happy. On the contrary, if we take the places with the context, they will appear rather as promises of

making God's people happy, that God therein might be glorified. So is that in chapter xliii. as we shall see plainly, if wc lake the whole that is said from the beginning of the chapter. It is wholly a promise of a future, great, and wonderful work of God's power and grace, delivering his people from all misery, and making them exceeding happy ; and then the end of all, or the sum of God's design in all, is declared to be God's own glory. " I have redeemed thee, I have called thee by thy name, thou art mine. 1 will be with thee. When thou walkest through the fire, thou shall not be burnt, nor the flame kindle upon thee....thou art precious and honorable in my sight. I will give men for thee, and people for thy life. Fear not, I am with thee. 1 will bring my sons from far, and my daughters from the ends of the earth ; every one that is called by my name,ybr I have created him for my glory."

Soil plainly is, chapter Ix. 21. The whole chapter is made up of nothing but promises of future, exceeding happiness to God's church. But for brevity's sake, let us take only the two preceding verses. " The sun shall be no more thy light by day, neither for brightness shall tlie moon give light unto thee ; but the Lord shall be unto ihee an everlasting light, and thy God thy glory. Thy sun shall no more go down, neither shall thy moon withdraw itself; for the Lord shall be thine everlasting light; and the days of thy mourning shall be ended. Thy people also shall be all righteous ; they shall inherit the land forever, the branch of my planting, the work of my hands," and then the end of all is added, " that I might be glorified." All the preceding promises are plainly mentioned as so many parts or consiilucnts of the great and exceeding happiness of God's people ; and God's glory is mentioned rather as God's end, or the sum of his design in this happiness, than this happiness as the end of this glory. Just in like manner is the promise in the third verse of the next chapter. » To appoint to them that mourn in Zion, to give to them beauty for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning, the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness, that they might be called trees of

END IN CREATION. fl

righteousness, the planting of the Lord, that he might be glori' jSed." The work of God promised to be effected, is plainly an accomplishment of the joy, gladness and happiness of God's people, instead of their mourning and sorrow ; and thei end in which the work issues, or that in which God's design in this work is obtained and summed up, is his glory. This proves by the seventh position, that God's glory is the end of the creation.

The same thing may be argued from Jer, xiii. 11. <' For as a girdle cleaveth to the loins of a man, so have I caused t« cleave unto me the whole house of Israel, and the whole house of Judah, saith the Lord ; that they might be unto me for a people, and for a name, and for a praise, and for a glorij^ but they would not hear." That is, God sought to make them to be his own holy people ; or, as the apostle expresses it, his peculiar people, zealous of good works ; that so they might be a glory to him, as girdles were used in those days for ornament and beauty, and as badges of dignity and honor.* Which is agreeable to the places observed before, that speak of the church as the glory of Christ.

Now when God speaks of himself, as seeking a peculiar and holy people for himself, to be for his glory and honor, as a man that seeks an ornament and badge of honor for his glory, it is not natural to understand it merely of a subordinate end, as though God had no respect to himself in it, but only the good of others. If so, the comparison would not be natural ; for men are commonly wont to seek their own glory and honor in adorning themselves, and dignifying themselves with badges of honor, out of respect to themselves.

The same doctrine seems to be taught, Eph. xliv. 25. " Havmg predestinated us to the adoption of cliildren, by Jesus Christ, unto himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, to the praise of the glory of his grace."

The same may be argued from Isaiah xliv. 23, " For the Lord hath redeemed Jacob, he hath glorified himself in Israel." And chapter xlix. 3. " Thou art my servant Jacob,

* See verse g, and also Isaiah lit. 24, .xxii, 2J, and xxiii. 10. 2 Sam. xviii. II, Exod. xxviii. 8,

in whom I will be glorified." John xvii. 10. "And all mine are thine, and thine are mine, and I am glorified in them.' 2 Thess. i. 10. <' When he shall come to be glorified in his saints." Verse xi. 12. «' Wherefore also we pray always for you, that our God would count you worthy of his calling, and fulfil all the good pleasure of his goodness, and the work of fai'h with power ; that the name of our Lord Jesus may be glorified in you, and yc in him, according to the grace of God and our Lord Jesus Christ."

3. The scripture speaks from lime to time, of God's glory, as though it were his ultimate end of the goodness of the •moral part of the creation ; and that end, in a respect and relation to which chitfly it is, that the value or worth of their virtue consists. As in Phil. i. 10, 11. " That ye may approve things that are excellent, that ye may be sincere, and without offence till the day of Christ : Being filled with the fruits of righteousness, which are by Jesus Christ, unto the glory and praise of God." Here the apostle shews how the fruits of righteousness in them are valuable and how they answer their end, viz. in being " by Jesus Christ to the praise and glory of God." John xv. 8. " Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit." Signifying that by this mea-.is it is, that the great end of religion is to be answered. And in 1 Peter iv 11, the apostle directs the Christians to regulate all their religious performances, with reference to that one end. " If any m.an speak, let him speak as the oracles of God. If any man minister, let him do it as of the ability which God giv-eth, that God in ail things may be glorified ; to whom be praise and dominion forever and ever. Amen." And from time to time, embracing and practising true religion, and re-pcntinp- of sin, and turning to holiness, is expressed by glorifying God, as though that were the sum and end of the whole mutter. Rev. xi. 13. " And in the earthquake were slain of men seven thousand ; and the remnant were aff"right-ed, and gave jrlory to the God of heaven." So, Rev. xiv. 6, 7. " And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach to them that dwell on the earth ;....saying, with a loud voice, fear God, and give

glory to him." As thoucjh this were the sum and end of that virtue and religion, which was the grand design of preaching the gospel every where through the world. Rev. xvi. 9. "And repented not, to give him glory." Which is as much as to say, they did not forsake their sins and turn to true religion, that God might receive that which is the great end he seeks, in the religion he requires of men. See to the same purpose, Psalm xxii. 21....23, Isa. Ixvi. 19,xxiv. 15,xxv. 3j Jer. xiii. 15, 16, Dan. v. 23, Rom. xv. 5, 6.

And as the exercise of true religion and virtue in Christians is summarily expressed by tl.eir glorifying God ; so when the good influence of this on others, as bringing them by the example to turn to the ways and practice of true goodness, is spoken of, it is expressed in the same manner. Matth. V. 16. " Let your light so shine before men, that others seeing your good works, may glorify your Father which is in heaven." 1 Pet. ii. 12. " Having your conversation honest among the Gentiles, that whereas they speak evil against you as evil doers, they may by your good works which they behold, gloiify God in the day of visitation."

That the ultimate end of moral goodness, or righteousness is answered in God's glory being attained, is supposed in the objection which the apostle makes, or supposes tome will make, in Rom. iii. 7. " For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory, why am I judged as a sinner ?" i. e. Seeing the great end of righteousness is answered by my sin, in God's being glorified, why is my sin condemned and punished ; and why is not my vice equivalent to virtue ?

And the glory of God is spoken of as that wherein consists the value and end of pariicular graces ; as of faith, Rom. iv. 20. " He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief, but was strong in faith, giving glory to God." Phil, ii. 11. »' That every tongue should confess that Jesus is the Lord, to the glory of God the Father." Of repentance. Josh, vi. 19. " Give, I pray thee, glory to the Lord God of Israel, and make confession unto him." Of charily, 2 Cor. viii. 19 •^ With this grace, which is administered by us, to the glorf Voi.VL K.

of the same Lord, and declaration of your ready mind." Thanksgiving and praise, Luke vii. 18. "There are not found that returned to give glory to God, save this stranger." Psalm 1. 23. « Whoso offereth praise glorifieth me. and to him that ordereth his conversation aright, will I shew the salvation of God." Concerning which last place it may be observed, God here feems to say this to such as abounded in their sacrifices and outward ceremonies of religion, as taking it for granted, and as what they knew already, and supposed in their religious performances, that the end of all religion Avas to glorify God. They supposed they did this in the best rnanner, in offering a multitude of sacrifices (see the preceding part of the p?ialm.) But here God corrects this mistake, and informs that this grand end of religion is not attained this way, but in offering the more spiritual sacrifices of praise anJ a holy conversation.

In fine, the words of the apostle in 1 Cor. vi. 20, are worthy of particular notice. " Yc are not your own, for ye are bought with a price ; therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are his." Here not only is glorifying God spoken of, as what summarily comprehends the end of that religion and service of God, which is the end of Christ's redeeming us ; but here I would further remark this, that the apostle in this place urges, that inasmuch as we are not our own, but bought for God, that we might be his ; therefore we ought not to act as if we were our own, but as God's ; and should not use the members of our bodies, or faculties of our souls for ourselves, as making ourselves our end, but for God, as making him our end. And he expresses the way in which wc are to make God our e«d, viz. in making his glory our end. <' Therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are his." Here it cannot be pretended, that though Christians are indeed required to make God's glory their end ; yet it is but as a subordinate end, as subservient to their own happiness, as a higher end ; for then in acting chiefly and ultimately for their own selves, they would use themselves more as their own, than as God's ; which is directly contrary to the design of the apostle's exhortation,

END IN CREATION. -To

and the argument he is upon ; which is, that we should gii'e ourselves, as it were, away from ourselves to God, and use ourselves as his, and not our own, acting for his sake, and not our own sakes. Thus it is evident by Position 9, tliat the glory of Ciod is the last end for which he created the world.

4. There are some things in the word of God, that lead us to suppose that it requires of men, that they should desire and seek (iod's trlory, as their highest and last end in what they do. As particularly the passage last mentioned. This appears from what has been just now observed upon it. The same may be argued from 1 Cor. x. 30. " Whether therefore ye eat or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God." And 1 Pet. iv. 11. " That God in all things may be glorified ;" which was mentioned before. And it may be argued that Chiist requires his followers should desire and seek God's glory in the first place, and above all things else, from that prayer which he gave his disciples, as the pattern and rule for the direction of his followers in their prayers. The first petition of which is, " Hallowed be thy name." "Which in scripture language is the same with " glorified be thy name ;" as is manifest from Lev. x. 3, Ezek. xxviii. 22, and many other places. Now our last and highest end is doub'less what should be first in our desires, and consequently first in our prayers ; and therefore we may argue, that since Christ directs that God's glory should be first in our prayers, therefore this is our last end. This is further confirmed by the conclusion of the Lord's prayer, " For thine is the kingdom, the power and glory." Which, as it stands in connexion with the rest of the prayer, implies that we desire and ask all these things, which are mentioned in each petition, with a subordination, and in subservience to the dominion and glory of God ; in which all our desires ultimately terminate, as their last end. God's glory and dominion are the two first things mentioned in the prayer, and are the subject of the first half of the prayer ; and they are the two last things mentioned in the same prayer, in its conclusion : And Cod's glory is the alpha and omega in the prayer. Frdna

these things we may argue, according to Position 8, that God*i> glory is the last end of the creation.

5. The gloiy of God appears, by the account given in the word of God, to be that end or event, in the earnest desires of which, and in their delight in which, the best part of the moral world, and when in their best frames, do most naturally express the direct tendency of the spirit of true goodness, and give vent to the virtuous and pious affections of their heart, and do most properly and directly testify their supreme respect to their Creator. This is the way in which the holy apostles, from time to time, gave vent to the ardent exercises of their piety, and expressed and breathed forth their regard to the Supreme Being. Rom.xi. 36. " To whom be glory forever and ever. Amen." Chap. xvi. 27. "To God only wise, be glory, through Jesus Christ, forever. Amen." Gal. i. 4, 5. " Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our father, to whom be glory forever and ever. Amen." 2 Tim. iv. 18. " And the Lord shall deliver me from every evil work, and will preserve me to his heavenly kingdom ; to whom be glory forever and ever. Amen." Eph. iii. 21. " Unto him be glory in the church, by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end." Heb. xiii. 21. " Through Jesus Christ, to whom be glory forever and ever. Amen." Phil. iv. 20. " Now unto God and our Father, be glory forever and ever. Amen." 2 Pet. iii. 18." To him be glory both now and forever. Amen." Jude 25. «To the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen." Rev. i. 5, 6. " Unto him that loved us &c....to him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen." It was in this way that holy David, the sweet Psalmist of Israel, vented the ardent tendencies and desires of his pious heart. 1 Chron. xvi. 28, 29. " Give unto the Lord ye kindreds of the people, give unto the Lord glory and strength ; give unto the Lord the glory due unto his name." We have much the same expressions again, Psal. xxix. 1, 2, and Ixix. 7,8. See also, Psal. Ivii. 5, Ixxii. 18, 19, cxv. 1. So the whole church of God. through all parts of the earth. Isa. xUi.

i0....12. In like manner the saints and angels in heaven express the piety of their hearts. Rev. iv. 9, 11, and v. 11.... 14, and vii. 12. This is the event that the hearts of the seraphim especially exult in, as appears by Isa. vi. 2, 3. " Above it stood the seraphim. And one cried unto anotlier and said, Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts, the whole earth is full of his glory." So at the birth of Christ, Luke ii. 14. " Glory to God in the highest," &c.

It is manifest that these holy persons in earth and heaven, in thus expressing their desires of the glory of God, have respect to it, not merely as a subordinate end, or merely for the sake of something else ; but as that v.'hich they look upon in itself valuable, and in the highest degree so. It would be absurd to say, that in these ardent exclamations, they are only giving vent to their vehement benevolence to their fellow-creatures, and expressing their earnest desires that God might be glorified, that so his subjects may be made happy by the means. It is evident it is not so much love, cither to themselves, or fellow creatures, which they express, as their exalted and supreme regard to the mo^t high and infinitely glorious Being. When the church says, " Not unto us, not unto us, O Jehovah, but to thy name give glory," it would be absurd to say, that she only desires that God may have glory, as a necessary or convenient means of their own advancement and felicity. From these things it appears, by the eleventh position, that God's glory is the end of the creation.

6. The scripture leads us to suppose, that Christ sought God's glory, as his highest and last end. John vii. 18. " He that speaketh of himself, seeketh his own glory ; but he that seeketh his glory that sent him, the same is true, and no unrighteousness is in him." When Christ says, he did not seek his own glory, we cannot reasonably understand him, that he had no regard to his own glory, even the glory of the human nature; for the glory of that nature was part of the reward promised him, and of the joy set before him. But we must understand him, that this was not his ultimate aim ; it w^as not the end that chiefly governed his conduct; and therefore when, in opposition to this, in the latter part of the sen-

tence, he says, " But he that seeketli his glory that sent him, the same is true," &c. it is natural from the antithesis to understand him, that this was liis ultimate aim, his supreme governing end. John xii. 27, 28. " Now is my soul troubled, and what shall I say ? Father, save me from this hour : But for this cause came I unto this hour. Father, glorify thy name." Christ was now going to Jerusalem, and expected in a few days there to be crucified ; and the prospect of his last sufferings, in this near approach, was very terrible to him. Under this distress of mind, in so terrible a view, he supports himself with a prospect of what would be the consequence of his sufferings, viz. God's glory. Now, it is the end that supports the agent in any difficult work that he undertakes, and above all others, his ultimate and supreme end. For this is above all others valuable in his eyes ; and so, sufficient to countervail the difficulty of the means. That is the end, which is in itself agreeable and sweet to him, which ultimately terminates his desires, is the centre of rest and support; and so must be the fountain and sum of all the delight and comfort he has in his prospects, with respect to his work. Now Christ has his soul straitened and distressed with a view of that which was infinitely the most difficult part of his work, which was just at hand. Now certainly if his mind seeks support in the conflict from a view of his end, it must most naturally repair to the highest end, which is the proper fountain of all support in this case. We may well suppose, that v/hen his soul conflicts with the appearance of the most extreme diflkuliies, it would resort for support to the idea of his supreme and ultimate end, the fountain of all the support and comfort he has in the means, or the work. The same thing, viz. Christ's seeking the glory of God as his ultimate end, is manifest by what Christ says, when he comes yet; nearer to the hour of his last sufferings, in that remarkable prayer, the last he ever made wiih his disciples, on the evening before his crucifixion ; wherein he expresses the sum of his aims and desires. His first words are, " Father, the hour is come, glorify thy son, that thy son also may glorify thee." As this is his first request, we may suppose it to be his sur

preme request and desire, and what he ulumately aimed at in all. If we consider what follows to the tnd, all the rest that is said in the prayer, seems to be but an amplification of this great request.

On the whole, I think it is pretty manifest, that Jesus Christ sought the glory of God as his highest and last end j and that therefore, by position twelfth, this was God's last end in the creation of the world.

7. It is manifest from scripture, that God's glory is the last end of that great work of providence, the work of redemption by Jesus Christ. This is manifest ftom what is just now observed, of its being the end uitimately sought by Jesus Christ the Redeemer. And if we further consider the texts mentioned in the proof of that, and take notice of the context, it will be very evident, that it was what Christ sought as his last end, in that great work which he came into the world upon, viz. to procure redemption for his people. It is manifest that Christ professes in John vii. 18, that he did not seek his own glory in what he did, but the glory of him that sent him. He means that he did not seek his own glory, but the glory of him that sent him, in the work of his ministry ; the work he performed, and wliich he came into the world to perform, and Avhich his Father sent him to work out, which is the work of redemption. And with respect to that text, John xii. 27, 28, it has been already observed, that Christ comforted himself in the view of the extreme difficulty of his work, which was the work of redemption, in the prospect of that which he had respect to, and rejoiced in, as the highest, ultimate and most valuable excellent end of that work, which he set his heart most upon, and delighted most in. And in the answer that the Father made him from heaven at that time, in the latter part of the same verse, " I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again," the meaning plainly is, that God had glorified his name in what Christ had done, in 'he work he sent him upon, and would glorify it again, and to a greater degree, in what he should further do, and in the success thereof. Christ shews that he understood it thus, in what he says upon it, when the people took notice of it, wondering at

the voice ; some saying, that it thundered,, others, that an angel spake to him. Christ says, " This voice came not because of me, but for your sakes." And then he says, (exulting in the prospect of tliis glorious end and success) " Now is the judgment of this world ; now is the prince of this world cast out, and I, if I be lift up from the earth, will draw all men unto me." In the success of the same work of redemption, he places his own glory, as was observed before, in these words in the 23d. and 24th. verses of the same chapter. " The hour is come, that the Son of Man should be glorified. Verily, verily I say unto you, except a corn of wheat fall into the ground, it abideth alone ; but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit."

So it is manifest that when he seeks his own and his father's glory, in that prayer, John xvii. (which, it has been observed, he then seeks as his last end) he seeks it as'the end of that great work he came into the world upon, which he is now about to finish in his death. What follows through the • whole prayer, plainly shews this ; and particularly the 4th and 5lh verses. *' I have glorified thee on the earth : I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do. And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self." Here it is pretty plain that declaring to his Father, that he had glorified him on earth, and finished the work God gave him to do, meant that he had finished the work which God gave him to do for this end, viz. that he might be glorified. He had now finished that foundation that he came into the world to lay for his glory. He had laid a foundation for his Father's obtaining his will, and the utmost that he designed. By which it is manifest, that God's glory was the utmost of his design, or his ultimate end in this great work.

And it is manifest by John xiii. 31, 32, that the glory of the Father, and his own glory, are what Christ exuhed in, in the prospect of his approaching sufferings, when Judas was " gone out to betray him, as the end his heart was mainly set upon, and supremely delighted in. " Therefore when he was gone out, Jesus said. Now is the Son of Man glorified, and God is glorified in him. If God be glorified in him, God

shall also glorify him in himself, and shall straightway glorify him."

That the glory of God is the highest and last end of the work of redemption, is confirmed by the song of the angels at Christ's birth. Luke ii. 14. " Glory to God in the highest, and on earth, peace and good will towards men." It must be supposed that they knew what was God's last end in sending Christ into the woild : And that in their rejoi> ing on the occasion of his incarna'.ion, their minds would be most taken up with, and would most rejoice in that which was most valuable and glorious in it ; which must consist in its relation to that which was its chief and ultimate end. And we may further suppose, that the thing which chiefly engaged their minds, as what was most glorious and joyful in the affair, is what would be first expressed in that song which was to express the sentiments of their minds, and exultation of their hearts.

The glory of the Father and the Son is spoken of as the end of the work of redemption, in Phil. ii. 6....11, very much in the same manner as in John xii. 23, 28, and xiii. 31, 32, and xvii. 1,4,5. "Who, being in the form of God, made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men ; and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross : Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a nam?, Sec. that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, and every tongue confess, that Jesus is the Lord, To the glory of God the Father." So God's glory, or the praise of his glory, is spoken of as the end of tlie work of redemption, in P^ph. i. 3, &c. " Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us whh all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ : According as he hath chosen us in him....Having predestinated us to the adoption of children.... to the praise of the glory of his grace." And in the continuance of the same discourse concerning the redemption of Christ, in what follows in the same chapter, God's glory is once and again mentioned as the great end of all. Several things belonging to that great redemption are mentioned in

Vol. VI. L

the following verses ; such as God's ^reat wisdom in it, versc 8. The clearness of light granted through Christ, verse 9. God's gathering together in one, all things in heaven and earth in Christ, verse 10. God's giving the Christians that were first converted to the Christian faith from among the Jews, an interest in this great redemption, verse 11. Then the great end is added, verse 12. " That we should be to the firaise of his glorij^ who first trusted in Christ." And then is mentioned the bestowing of the same great salvation on the Gentiles, in its beginning or first fruits in the world, and in the completing it in another world, in the two next \'^rses. And then the same great end is added again. " In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation ; in whom also, after that ye believed, ye were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, which is the earnest of our inheritance, until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the firaise of his gioj-y." The same thing is expressed much in the same manner, in 2 Cor. iv. 14, 15. " He which raised up the Lord Jesus, shall raise up us also by Jesus, and shall present us with you. For all things are for your ?akes, that the abundance of grace might through the thanksgiving of many, redound to the glory of God."

The same is spoken of as the end of the work of redemption in the Old Testament. Psal. Ixxix. 9. <' Help us, O God of our salvation, for the glory of thy name ; deliver us and purge away our sins, for thy name's sake." So in the prophecies of the redemption of Jesus Christ. Isa. xliv. 23. " Sing, O ye heavens; for the Lord hath done it : Shout, yc loAvcv parts of the earth : Break forth into singing, ye mountains, O forest, and every tree therein: For the Lord hath redeemed Jacob, and glorified himself in Israel." Thus the works of creation are callt;d upon to rejoice at the attaining of the same end, by the redemption of God's people, that the angels rejoiced at, when Christ was born. See also chap, xlviii. 1ft, 11, and xlix. 3.

Thus it is evident that the glory of God is the ultimate end of the work of redemption....Which is the chief work of providence towards the moral world, as i^abundantly manifest:

from scripture : The whole universe being put in subjection to Jesus Christ ; all heaven and earth, angels and men being subject to him, as execuiing this office ; and put under him to that end, that all things may be ordered by iiim, in subservience to the great designs of his redemption ; all power, as he says, being given to him, in heaven and in earth, that he may give eternal life to as many as tlie Father lias given him ; and he, being esalted far above all principality and power, and might and dominion, and made head over all things to the church. The angels being put in subjection to him> that he may employ them all as ministering spirits, for the good of them that shall he the heirs of his salvation ; and all things being so governed by their Redeemer for them that all things are theirs, whether things present or things to come ; and all God's works of providence in the moral government of the world, which we have an account of in scripture history, or that are foretold in scripture prophecy, being evidently subordinate to the great purposes and ends of this great work. And besides, the work of redemption is that v/ork, by which good men are, as it were, created, or brought into being, as good men, or as restored to holiness and happiness. The work of redemption is a new creation, according to scripture representation, whereby men are brought into a new existence, or are made new creatures.

From these things it follows, according to the 5th, 6th and 7th positions, that the glory of God is the last end of the creation of the world.

8. The scripture leads us to suppose, that God's glory is his last end in his moral government of the world in general. This has been already shewn concerning several things that belong to God's moral government of the world. As particu-Jarly, in the work of redemption, the chief of all his dispensations, in his moral government of the world. And I have also observed it, with respect to the duty which God requires of the subjects of his moral government, in requii ing them to seek his glory as their last end. And this is actually the last end of the moral goodness required of them ; the end which gives their n?^ral goodness its chief value, .iud also,

U END IN CREATION.

that it is what that person which God has set at the head ot the moral world, as its chief governor, even Jesus Christ, seeks as his chief end. And it has been shewn, that it is the-chief end for which that part of the moral world which are good, are made, or have their existence as good. I now further observe, that this is the end of the establishment of the public worship and ordinances of God among mankind. Hag. i. 8. " Go up to the mountain, and bring wood, and build the house ; and I will take pleasure in it, and I will be glorified, saith the Lord." This is spoken of as the end of God's promises of rewards, and of their fulfilment. 2 Cor. i. 20. « For all the promises of God in him are yea, and in him amen, to the glory of God by us." And this is spoken of as the end of the execution of God's threatenings, in the punishment of sin. Num. xiv. 20....23. "And the Lord said, I have pardoned according to thy word. But as truly as I live? all the earth shall be filled with the glory of Jehovah. Because all these men, Sec...Surely they shall not see the land." The glory of Jehovah is evidently here spoken of, as that which he had regard to, as his highest and ultimate end ; which therefcre he could not fail of ; but must take place every where, and in every case, through all parts of his dominion, whatever became of men. And whatever abatements might 'be made, as to judgments deserved ; and whatever changes iTjight be made in the course of God's proceedings, from compassion to sinners ; yet the attaining of God's glory was an end, which being ultimate and supreme, must in no case whatsoever give place. This is spoken of as the end of God's execMiing judgments on his enemies in this world. Exod.xiv. 17, 18. "And I will get me honor (JUiabhedha,Iw'iW be glorified) upon Pharoah, and upon all his host," 8cc. Ezek. xxviii. 22. " Thus saith the Lord God, Behold I am against thee O Zion, and I will be glorified in the midst of thee : And they shall know that I am the Lord, when I shall have executed judgments in her, and shall be sanctified in her." So Ezek. xxxix. 13. " Vea, al! the people of the land shall bury them ; and it shall be to ihera a renown, the day that I shall be glori-fi''d^ saitii the Lord God."

END IN CREATION. 'ts

And this is spoken of as the end, both of the executions of wrath, and in the glorious exercises of mercy, in the misery and happiness of another world. Rom. ix. 22, 23. » What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and make his power known, endured with much long suffering, the vessels of wrath lilted to destruction ; and that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory." And this is spoken of as the end of the day of judgment, which is the time appointed for the highest exercises of God's authority as moral governor of the world ; and is, as it were, the day of the consummation of God's moral government, with respect to all his subjects in heaven, earth and hell. 2 Thess. i. 9, 10. " Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glorij of his power ; when he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe." Then his glory shall be obtained, with respect both to saints and sinners.

From these things it is manifest by the fourth position, that God's glory is the ultimate end of the creation of the world.

9. It appears from what has been already observed,that the glory of God is spoken of in scripture as the last end of many of God's works ; and it is plain that this thing is in fact the issue and result of the works of God's common providence, and of the creation of the world. Let us take God's glory in what sense soever, consistent with its being something brought to pass, or a good attained by any work of God, certainly it is the consequence of these works ; and besides it is expressly so spoken of in scripture. This is implied in Psalm viii. 1, wherein are celebrated the works of creation ; the heavens being the work of God's fingers ; the moon and the stars being ordained by God, and God's making man a little lower than the angels, &;c. The first verse is, " O Lord, our Lord, how excellent is thy name in all the earth ! Who hast set thy glory above the heavens," or upon the heavens. By name and ^-/ory, very much the same thing is intended here as in many other places, as shall be particularly shewn afterwards. So

U END IN CREATION.

the Psulm concludes as it bcf^an. " O Lord, our Lord, how excellent is thy name in all the earth !" Su in Psalm cxlviii. after a particular mention of the works of creation, enumerating them in order, the Psalmist says, verse 13, " Let them praise the name of the Lord, for his name alone is excellent, liis glory is above the earth and the heaven." And in Psalm civ. 3!, after a very particular, orderly, and maprniScent rep-resentatio!» of God's works of creation and common providence, it is said, " The glory of the Lord shall endure forever ; the Lord shall rejoice in his works." Here Gad's glory is spoken of as the ^^rand result and blessed consequence of all these works, \vi.i;:h God values, and on account of which he rejoices in these works. And this is one thing doubtless implied in the song of the seraphim, Isaiah vi. 3. «' Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of Hosts ! The whole earth is lull of liis glory "

The glory of God, in being the result and consequence of those works of providence that have been mentioned, :s in fact the consequence of the creation. The good attained in the use of a thing made for use, is the result of the making of that thing, as the signifying the time of day, when actually attained by the use of a watch, is the consequence of the making of t!ie watch. So that it is apparent that the glory of God is a thing that is actually the result and consequence of the creation of the world. And from what has been already ob-?:eived, it appears, that it is what God seeks as good, valuable and excellent in itself. And I presume, none will pretend that there is any thing peculiar in the nature of the case, ren. dering it a thing valuable in some of the instances wherein it takes place, and not in others ; or that the glory of God, thougli indeed an effect of all God's works, is an exceeding desirable effect of some of them ; but of others, a worthless and insignificant effect. God's glory therefore, must be a de-sirailc, valuable consequence of the work of creation. Yea, ii is expressly spoken of in Psalm civ. 3, (as was observed) as an effect, on account of which, Ciod rejoices and takes pleasure in the works of creation.

Therefore it is inanifest by Positioti 3d, that the glory of Gcd is an uliimale end in the creation of the world.

END IN CREATION. $7

SECTION IV.

'Places of Scripture that lead us to sufifiosey that God created the World for his JVanie, to make Ms /iciftcdons known^ and thai he made it for his Praise.

HERE I shall first take notice of some passages of scriptiH'C; that speak of God's name as being made God's end. or the object of his regard, and the regard of his virtuous and holy, intelligent creatures, much in the same manner as has been obsen ed of God's glory.

As particularly, God's name is in like manner spoken of, as the end of his acts of goodness towards the good part of the moral world, and of his works of mercy and salvation tov/ardi> his people. As 1 Sam. xii. 22, •« The Lord will not forsake his people,ybr his great name's sake." Psalm xxiii. 3. " He restore! h my soul, he leadeth me in the paths of righteousness, for his nar.ie's sake." Psalm xxxi. 3. " For thy name's sake, lead me and guide me." Psalm cix. 21. "But do thou for me for thy name's sake." The forgiveness of sin in particular, is often spoken of as being for God's naiiie's sake. 1 John ii. 12. "I write unto you, little children, because your sins are forgiven you/oJ' his name's sake." Psalm xxv. II, " For thy name's sake, O Lord, pardon mine iniquity, for it is great." Psalm Ixxix. 9. « Help us, O God of our sJvation, for the glory of thy name., and deliver us, r.nJ purge away our sins,/o7- thy na?ne's sake." Jer, xiv. 7. " O Lord, though our iniquities testify against us, do thou kfor thy name's sake."

These things seem to shew, that the salvation of Christ is for God's name's sake. Leading and guiding in the way of safety and happiness, restoring the soul, the forgiveness of sin, and that help, deliverance and salvation, that is consequent thereon, hfor God's name. And hers; it is observable, that those two great temporal salvations of God's people, the rcelemption from Egyp":, and that from Eabylon, that are often

S8 END IN CREATION.

represented as figures and similitudes of the redemption of Christ, are frequently spoken of as being wrought for God's name's sake. So is that great work of God, in delivering his people from Egypt, carrying them through the wilderness to thtir rest in Canaan. 2 Sam. vii. 23. " And what one nation in the earth is like thy people, even like Israel, whom God •went to redeem for a people to himself, and to make him a name.'' Psalm cvi. 8. " Nevertheless he saved them/or his vame's sake." Isaiah Ixiii. 12, "That led them by the right hand of Moses, with his glorious arm, dividing the waters before them, to make himself an everlasting name." In Ezek. xx. God, rehearsing the various parts of this wonderful work, adds from time to time, " / wrought for my name's sake, that it should not be polluted before the heathen," as in ver, 9, 14, 22. See also Josh. vit. 8, 9. Dan. ix. 15. So is the redemption from the Babylonish captivity. Isaiah xlviii. 9, IG. « For my nam.e's sake, will I defer mine anger. For mine own sake, even for mine own sake will I do it, for how should my name be polluted ?" In Ezek. xxxvi. 21, 22, 23, the reason is given for God's mercy in restoring Israel. " But I

had pity for my holy name Thus saith the Lord, I do not

thi?; for your sakes, () house of Israel, but for my holy name's sake ; and I will sanctify my great name, which was profaned among the heathen." And chap, xxxix. 25. " Therefore thus saith the Lord God, now will I bring again the captivity of Jacob, and have mercy upon the whole house of Israel, and ivill be jealous for my holy name." Daniel prays that God would forgive his people, and shew them mercy/o?- his own sake, Dan. ix. 19.

When God from time to time speaks of shewing mercy, and exercising goodness, and promoting his people's happiness for his ?iame's sake, we cannot understand it as of a merely subordinate end. How absurd would it be to say, that he promotes their happiness for his name's sake, in subordination to their good ; and that his name may be exalted only for their sakes, as a means of promoting their happiness ; especially when such expressions as these are used : " For mine own sake, even for mine own sake will I do it, for how

should my name be polluted ?" and " Not for your sakes do

1 this, but for my holy name's sake."

Again, it is represented as though God's people had their existence, at least as God's people, for God's name's sake. God's redeeming «r purchasing them, that they might be his people, for his Jiaine, implies this. As in that passage mentioned before, 2 Sam. vii. 23. " Thy people Israel, whom God went to redeem for a people to himself, and to make him a iiamt." So God's making them a people for his name, is implied in Jer. xiii. 11. '• For as the girdle cleaveth to the loins of a man, so have I caused to cleave unto me the whole

house of Israel, Sec. that they may be unto me for a

people, and for a name" Acts xv. 14. " Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a peopleybr his name"

This also is spoken of as the end of the virtue and religion, and holy behavior of the saints. Rom. i. 5. " By whom we have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations/or/«s rzcwf." Matth. xix. 29. "Every one that forsaketh houses or brethren, Sec. for my

name^s sake, shall receive an hundred fold, and shall inherit everlasting life." 3 John 7. " Because that for his name's sake they went forth, taking nothing of the Gentiles." Rev. ii. 3. " And hast borne, ^nd hast patience, andybr my name's sake hast labored, and hast not fainted.**

And we find that holy persons express their desire of this, and their joy in it, in the same manner as in the glory of God.

2 Sam. vii. 26. " Let thy name be magnified forever." Psalm Ixxvi. 1. "In Judah is God known : His name is great in Israel." Psalm cxlviii. 13. « Let them praise the name of the Lord ; for his name alone is excellent I His glory is above the earth and heaven." Psalm cxxxv. 13. "Thy name, O Lord, endureth forever, and thy memorial throughout all generations." Isaiah xii. 4. " Declare his doings among the people, make mention that his name is exalted."

The judgments God executes on the wicked, are spoken of as being/or the sake of his name, in like manner as for his glory. Exod.-ix.-16. "And in very deed for this causa hav^ Vol. VT. M

I raised thee up, for to shew in thee my power, ^nd that'irfff name may be declared throughout all the earth." Neh. ix. 10. « And shewedst signs and wonders upon Pharaoh, and on all his servants, and on all the people of his land ; for thou knew-edst that they dealt proudly against them ; so didst thou get thee a name as at this day."

And this is spoken of as a consequence of the works ol creation, in like manner as God's glory. Psalm viii. 1. " O Lord, how excellent is thy name in all the earth ! Who hast set thy glory above the heavens." And then at the conclusion of the observations on the works of creation, the Psalm ends thus, verse 9. " O Lord, our Lord, hoiv excellent is thy name in all the earth !" So Psalm cxlviii. 13, after a particular mention of the various works of creation, " Let them praise the name of the Lord, for his name alone is excellent in all the earth, his glory is above the earth and the heaven."

So we find manifestation, or making known God's/iej/ec-tions^ his greatness and excellency^ is spoken of very much in the same manner as God's glory.

There are several scriptures which would lead us to suppose this to be the great thing that God sought of the moral •world, and the end aimed at in the moral agents, which he had created, wherein they are to be active in answering their end. This seems implied in that argument God's people, sometimes made use of, in deprecating a state of death and des-truciion ; that in such a state, they cannot know or make known the glorious excellency of God. Psalm Ixxxviii. 18,. 19. «' Shall thy loving kindness be declared in the grave, or thy faithfulness in destruction ? Shall thy wonders be known in the dark, an3 thy righteousness in the land of forgetful-ncss ?" So Psalm xxx. 9, Isaiah xxxviii. 18, 19. The argument seems to be this : Why should we perish ? And how shall thine end, for which thou hast made us, be obtained in a state of desUuction, in which thy glory cannot be known or declared ?

This is spoken of as the end of the good part of the moral world, or the end of God's people in the sam* manner as the glory of God. Isaiah xliii. 21. « This people have I form-

ed for myself, they shall shew forth my praise." 1 Peter ii. 9. " But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people, that ye should shew forth the praises ofhi?7i, who hath called you out of darkness into marvellous light."

And this seems to be represented as the thing wherein the value and proper fruit and end of their virtue appear. Isaiah Ix. 6. Speaking of the conversion of the Gentile nations to true religion. " They shall come and shew forth

the praises of the Lord." Isaiah Ixvi. 19. "I will send——

vinto the nations and to the isles afar off, that have not

heard my fame, neither have seen my glory ; and they shall declare my glory among the Gentiles.

And this seems by scripture representations to be the end, in the desires of which, and delight in Avhich appear the proper tendency and rest of true virtue, and holy dispositions, much in the same manner as the glory of God. 1 Chron. xvi. 8. " Make known his deeds among the people." Ver. 23, 24. " Shew forth from day to day thy salvation. Declare his glory among the heathen." See also. Psalm ix. 1,11, 14, and xix. 1, and xxvi. 7, and Ixxi. 18, and Ixxv. 9, and Ixxvi. 1, and Ixxix. 13, and xcvi. 2, 3, and ci. 1, and cvii. 22, and cxviii, 17, and cxlv. 6, 11, 12. Isaiah xlii. 12, and Ixiv. 1, 2. Jer, 1. 10.

This seems to be spoken of as a great end of the acts of God's moral government; particularly the great judgments he executes for sin. Exod. ix. 16. "And in very deed for this cause have I raised thee up, to shew in thee my power, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth." Dan. iv. 17. " This matter is by the decree of the watchers,

Sec to the intent that the living may know that the Most

High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will ; and setteth up over it the basest of men." But places to this purpose are too numerous to be particularly recited.

This is also spoken of as a great end of God's works of favor and mercy to his people. 2 Kings xix. 19. "Now, therefore, O Lord, our God, I beseech thee, save thou us out

of his hand, that nil the kingdoms of the earth may knovJ ih<U thou art the Lord God., even thou only." 1 Kings viii. 59, 60.

« that he maintain the cause of his servant, and the cause

of his people Israel at all times as the matter shall require, that all the people of the earth may know that the Lord is God, and that there is none else."

This is spoken of as the end of the eternal damnation of the wicked, and also the eternal happiness of the righteous. Rom. ix. 22, 23. " What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and make his power known, endured with much long suffering, the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction ; and that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy which he hath alore prepared unto glory ?'*

This is spoken of from lime to time, as a great end of the

miracles which God wrought. See Exod. vii. 17, and viii. 10,

and X. 2. Deut. x:;ix. 5, 6. Ezek. xxivv 27. --

•-4 This is spoken of as a great end of ordinances. Exod.;

xxix. 44, 45, 46. " And I will sanctify the tabernacle of the

congregcilion ; I will sanctify also both Aaron and his sons, to

minister to me in the priest^s office. And I will dwell among

the children of Israel, and will be their God. And they shall

know that I am the Lord their God, 8cc." Chap. xxxi. 13.

•' Verily my Sabbaths shall ye keep ; for it is a sign between

me and vou, throughout your generations; that ye may

know that I am the Loul that doth sanctify you." We have

again almost the same words, Ezek. xx. 12, 20

This is spoken of as a great end of the redemption out of

Egypt. Psalm cvi. 8. " Nevertheless he saved them for his

name's sake that/^e might make his mighty jioiver to be knoiun."

See also Exod. vii. 5, and Deut. iv. 34, 35. And also of the

redemption from the Babylonish captivity. Ezek. xx. 34....

38. " And I will bring you out from the people, and will

gather you cut of ti)e countries wiiilher ye are scattered

And I will bring you into the \\iUierness of the people ; and

there I will plead with you as 1 pleaded with your fathers in

the wilderness lif the land of Egypt.. And I will bring you

into the bond of the covenant. And I will purge out the

vf^bcls——ffwrf vp shall kncKV that I am the Lord." ^'ersc 42.

" ^nd ye shall knotv that lam the Lord, when I shall bring you into the land of Israel." Verse 44'. " Jnd ye shall knoit) thcif I am the Lord, when I have wrought with you/or 7ny vajns'f; sake." See also chap, xxviii. 25, 26, and x:sxvi. 11, and xxxvii. 6, 13.

This is also spoken of as a great end of the work of re-demption of Jesus Christ: Both of the purchase of rederrip-tion by Christ, and the application of redemption. Rom. iii. 95, 26. " Whom God hath set forth to be a propiliation

through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness <To

declare I say, at this time his righteousness ; that he might be just, and the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus." Eph. ii. 4....7. " But God who is rich in mercy, &:c. That fie might shew the exceeding riches of his grace, in his kindness towards us through Jesus Christ." Chap. iii. 8.... 10. « To preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ, and to make all men see, what is the fellowship of the mystery which, from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who ci'eated all things by Jesus Christ : To the intent. that nonu unto theprincifmlities and powers in heavenly places, might be known by the church the 7nanifold wisdom of God." Psal. xxii. 21, 22. « Save me from the lion's mouth. I will declare thy name unto my brethren : In the midst of the congregation will I praise thee," compared with Heb. ii. f2, and John xvii. 26. Isa. Ixiv. 4. « O that thou wouldest rent the heavens, to make thy name known to thine adversaries."

And it is spoken of as the end of that great actual salvation, which should follow Christ's purchase of salvation, both among Jews and Gentiles. Isa. xlix. 22, 23 <' I will lift up

my hand to the Gentiles and they shall bring thy sons in

their arms and kings shall be thy nursing fathers. and

thou shalt know that I am the Lord." See also, Ezck. xvi. 62. and xxix. 21, and xxxiv. 27, and xxxvi. 38, and xsxix. 28, 29. Joeliii. 17.

This is spoken of as the end of God's common providence. Job xxxvii. 6, 7. " For he saith to the snow, Be thou on the tjirth. Likewise to the small rain, and to the great rain of

his strength. He scaleth up the hand of every man, that all men may know his work."

It is spoken of as th^ end of the day of judp:ment, that grand consummation of God's moral government of ihe world, and the day for the bringing all things to their designed ultimate issue. It is called " The day of the revelation of the righteous judgment of God," Rom. ii. 5.

And the declaration, or openly manifesting God's excellency is spoken of as the actual, happy consequence and effect of the work of creation. Psal. xix. at the beginning. •' The heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament sheweth his handy work. Day unto day uttereth speech, night unto Tiight sheweth knowledge. In them hath he placed a tabernacle for the sun, which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run his race, &c."

In like manner, there are many scriptures that speak of God's praise, in many of the forementioned respects, just in the same manner as of his name and glory.

This is spoken of as the end of the being of God's people, in the same manner. Jer. xiii. 11. " For as the girdle tleavcth to the loins of a man, so have I caused to cleave unto me the whole house of Israel, and the whole house of Ju-dah, saith the Lord ; that they might be unto me for a name, mid for a firaise, and for a glory."

It is spoken of as the end of the moral world. Matth. xxi. 16. " Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings hast thou perfected firaise." That is, so hast thou in thy sovereignty and wisdom ordered it, that thou shouldest obtain the great end for which intelligent creatures are made, more especially from some of them that are in themselves weak, or inferior and more insufficient. Compare Psal. viii. 1, 2.

And the same thing that was observed before concerning the making known God's excellency, may also be observed concerning God'-s praise. Tliat it is made use of as an argument in deprecating a state of destruction, that in such a state this end cannot be answered ; in such a manner as seems to imply its being an ultimate end, that God had made man for.

Psal. txxxvir. 10. "Shall the dead arise and f^raise t/iee ? Shall thy lovinjj; kindness be declared in the grave ? Shall thy-•wonders be kiiowii in the dark ? Psal. xxx. 9. " What profit is there io my blood ? When I yo down to the pit, shall the dust firaise thee ? Shall it declare thy truth ?" Psul. cxv.

17, .8. '* The dead yira!/s(" «o; Me iorrf, neither any tha<^^ go down into hilence ; but v/e will hless the Xorrf, from this time forth and forevermore. Praise ye the Lord." Isa. xxxviii.

18, 19. " For the grave cannot praise /Aer.ideath cannot celebrate thee ; they that go d(jwn into the pit cannot hope for thy trnth. The livin*^, the livir.g, he shallfiraise thee?"

It is spoken of as the end of the virtue of God's p-op!", in like manner as is God's glory. Phi!, i. 11. « Being filled with the fruits of righteo'.i-.ness, which are by Jesus Christ t9 the firaise and glory of God"

It is spoken of as the end of the woik of redemption. Ir» the first chapter of Eph. where that work in the various parts of it is particularly insisted on, and set forth in its exceeding glory, this is men'.ioned from time to time as the great end of all, that it should be " to the firaise of his glory. (As in verse 6, 12, 14.) By which we may doubtless understand much the same thing, with that which in Pl.il. i. 11', is expressed, <' /«? praise and glory." Agreeable to this, Jacob's fourth son, from whom the Pvlessiah the great Redeemer was to proceed, by the spirit of prophecy, or the special direction of God's providence, was called firaise^ with reference to this happy consequence, and glorious end of that great redemption, this Messiah, one of his posterity, was to work out.

This in the Old Testament is !^poken of as the end of the forgiveness of the sin of God's people, and their salvation, in the same manner as is God's name and glory. Isa. xlviii. 9, 10, II. " For my name's sake will I defer mine anger, and for my praise will I refrain for thee, that I cut thee not off. Behold I have refined thee, for mine own sake, even for mine own sake will I do it ; for how should my name be polluted ? And my glory will I not give to another." Jer. xxxiii. 8, 9. '' And I will cleapse them from all their iniquity -and I

>6 . END IN CREATION.

will pardon all their iniquities. And it shall be to me »

name of joy, a firaise, and an honor."

And that the holj' part of the moral world, do express desires of this, and delight in it, as the end which holy principles in them tend to, reach after, and rest in, in their highest exercises, just in the same manner as the glory of God, is abundantly manifest. It Avould be endless to enumerate particular places wherein this appears ; Avherein the saints declare this, by expressing their earnest desires of God's praise ; calling on all nations, and all beings in heaven and earth to praise him ; in a rapturous manner calling on one another, crying Hallelujah, praise ye the Lord, praise hira forever." Expressing their resolutions to praise him as long as they live, through all generations, and forever ; declaring how good, how pleasant and comely the praise of God is, &c.

And it is manifest that God's firaise is the desirable and glorious consequence and effect of all the works of creation, by such places as these. Psalm cxlv. 5,...10, and cxlviii. throughout, and ciii. 19....22.

SECTION V.

Places of Scrifiture from •whence it niay be argued, that com-- munication of good to the Creature, was one thing nvhich God had in view, as an Ultimate End of the Creation of the ", World,

1. ACCORDING to the scripture, communicating gpod to the creatures, is what is in itself pleasing to God ; and that this is not merely subordinately agreeable, and esteemed valuable on account of its relation to a further end, as it is in executing justice in punishing the sins of men ; which God is inclined to as fit and necessary in certain cases, and nn the account of good ends attained by it; but what God is

inclined to on its own account, and what he delights in simply and uhiinately. For though God is sometimes in scripture spoken of as taking pleasure in punishing men's sins, Deut. xxviii. 63. '' The Lord will rejoice over you, to destroy you." Ezek. v. 13. " Then shall mine anger be accomplished, and I will cause my fury to rest upon them, and I IviH be comforted." Yet God is often spoken of as exercising goodness and shewing mercy, with delight, in a manner quite different, and opposite to that of his executing wrath. For the latter is spoken of as what God proceeds to with backwardness and reluctance ; the misery of the creature being not agreeable to him on its own account. Neh. ix. 17. « That thou art a God ready to pardon, gracious and merciful, slow to anger, and of great loving kindness." Psal. ciii. 8. <' The Lord is merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and plenteous in mercy." Psal. cxlv. 8. " The Lord is gvacious and full of compassion, slow to anger, and of great mercy." We have again almost the same words, Jonah iv. 2. Mic. ▼ii. 10. " Who is a God like thee, that pardoneth miquity, he He retaineth not his anger forever, because he delight-eth in mercy." Ezek. xviii. 32. " I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, saith the Lord God ; wherefore turn yourselves, and live ye." Lam. iii. 33. " He doth not afflict willingly, nor grieve the children of men." Ezek. xxxiii. 11. ♦' As I live, saith the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way {^d live : Turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways, for why will ye die, O house of Israel" 2 Pet. iii. 9. " Not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."

2, The work of redemption wrought out by Jesus Christ, is spoken of in such a manner as being from the grace and love of God to men, that does not well consist with his seeking a communication of good to them, only subordinately, i. e. not at all from any inclination to their i^ood directly, or delight in giving happiness to them, simply and ultimately considered ; but only indirectly, and wholly from a regard to something entirely diverse, vvnich it is a means of. buch expressions as that in John iii. 16, carry another idea. « God so

Vol. VI. N

m END IN CREATION.

loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that who*-soever believeth in him, should not perish, but have everlast--ing life." And 1 John iv. 9, 10. " In this was manifested the love of God towards us, because that God sent his only begotten son into the world, that we might live through him. Herein is love ; not that we lovtd God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be a propitiation for our sins." So Eplu ii. 4. " But God, who is rich in meivvi for his great lov©" wherewith he loved us, &c." But if indeed this was only from' love to something else, and a regard to a further end, entirely diverse from our good ; then all the love i^ truly terminated' in that, its ultimate object ! And God's love consists in regard^ towards that; and therein is God's love, and therein is his love manifested, strictly and properly speaking, and not in' that he loved us, or exercised such high regard towards us." For if our good be not at all regarded uliima'.ely, but only^-subordinatcly, then our good or interest is in itself considered*; nothing in God's regard or love : God's respect is all termi*-nated upon, and swallowed up in something diverse, which is the end, and not in the means.

So the scripture every where represents concerning Christ, as though the great things that he did and suffered, were ia the most direct and proper sense, from exceeding love to us ; and not as one may shew kindness to a person, to whose interest, simply and in itself considered, he is iniirely indifferent, only as it may be a means of promoting the interest of another (that is indeed directly regarded) which is connected ■with it. Thus the Apostle Paul represents the matter, Gal, ii. 20. " Who loved me, and gave himself for me." Eph. v. 25. " Hubbands love your wives, even as Christ loved the church, and gave himself for it." And Christ himself, John xvii. 19. '^ For their sakes I sanctify myself." And the scripture represents Christ as resting in the salvation and glory of his people, when obtained, as in what he ultimately sought, as having therein reached the goal at the end of his race ; obtained the prize he aimed at ; enjoying the travail of his soul, in which he is satisfied, as the recompense ol his labors and extreme agonies. Isa. liii. 10,11. "When thou*

shaltmake his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolons; his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand. He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied ; by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many, for he shall bear tlieir iniquities." He sees the travail of his soul, in seeing his seed, the children brought forth in the issue of his travail. This implies liiat Christ has his delight, most truly and properly, in obtaining the salvation of his church, not niere'y as a means conducing to the thing which lerminaies his delighl and joy ; but as what he rejoices and is satisfied in, most directly and properly ; as do those scriptures, wiiich represent him as rejoicing in his obtaining thih> fruit of hjs labor and purchase, as the bridegroom, when he obtains his bride. Isa. Ixii, 5. '' As the bridegroom rejoices over the bride, so shall thy God rejoice oyer thee" And how emphatical and strong to the purpose, are the expiessions in Zeph. iii. 17. " The Lord thy God in the midst of tliee is mighty ; he will save, he will rejoice over ihee with joy ; he will rest in his love, he will rejoice ever thee with singing." The same thing may be argued fuom Prov. viii.30,^ XI. "Then was I by him, as one brought up with him ; and 1 was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him ; rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth, and my delights were with the sons of men." And from those places that speak of the saints as God's portion, his jewels and peculiar treasure. These things are abundantly confirm-^ efl by what is related, John xii. 2S——.32. But the particular consideration of what may be observed to the present purpose, m that passage of scripluie, may be referred to the next section.

3. The communications of divine goodness, particularly forgiveness of sin, and salvation, are spoken of from time to time, as being for God's goodness sake, and for his mercy's sake, just in the same manner as they are spoken of, as being for God's name's sake, in places observed before. Psal. xxv. 7. " Remember not the sins of my youth, nor my transgressions : According to thy mercy remember thou me, for thy goodness' sake, O Lord." In the 11th verse the Psalniiot says.

too ENt5 IN CREATION.

« For thy name's sake, O Lord pardon mint Iftlquily." Nfeh, ix. 31. " Nevertheless for thy great niercy^s sake, thou hast not utterly consumed them, nor forsaken them ; for thou art a gracious and a merciful God.'* Psal. vi. 4. " Returrt,0 Lord, deliver my soul: O save me for thy mercy's sake." Psal. xxxi. 16. " Make thy face to shine upon thy servant: Save me for thy mercy's sake.*' Psal. xliv. 26. « Arise for our help ; redeem us for thy mercy's sake." And here it may be observed, after what a remarkable tnanner God speaks of his love to the children of Israel in the wilderness, as though his love were for love's sake, and his goodness were its own end and motive. Deut. vii. 7, 8. « The Lord did not set his love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more in number than any people, for ye were the fewest of all people ; dut because the Lord loved you."

4. That the government of the world in all parts of it, is for the good of such as are to be th© eternal subjects of God's goodness, is implied in what the scripture teaches us of Christ's being set at God's right hand, made king of angels afid men ; set at the head of the universe, having all power given him in heaven and earth, to that end that he may pro-tnote their happiness ; being made head over all things tathe church, and having the government of the whole creation for their good.* Christ mentions it (Mark xxviii 29) as the reason why the Son of Man is made Lord of the sabbath, that « the iabbath was made for man." And if so, we may in like tnanner argue, that all things were made for imarivthat the Son of Mar) is t-nade Lord of all things. ' iv .• ,-s

5. That God uses the whole creation, in his whole government of it, for the good of hib people, is most elegantly represented in Deut. xxxiii. 26. " There is none like the God of Jeshurun, who rideth on the htavens in thine help» and in his excellency on the sky." The whole universe'is U machine, which God hath made for his own use, to be his

' Chafi'Ot'fbr hlfift to ride in ; as is represented in Ezekiel'S vis-

* Epb. i. 20....23. johnxvii. 2. Matth. x\. 27, and xxviii, iS, jO John iii. 35.

END IN CREATION. . ioi

,,.ion. In this chariot, God's seat or throne, is heaven, where wjic sits, who uses, and governs, and rides in this chariot, Ezek, i. 22, 26, 27", 28. The inferior part of the creation, this visi«. J)le universe, subject to such continual changes and revolutions, are the wheels of the chariot, under the place of the seat of him who rides in this chariot. God's providence in the it.constant I'evolutions, and alterations, and successive eventsj Y.-is represented by the motion of the wheels of the chariot, by the spirit of him who sits in his throne on the heavens, or above the firmament. Moses tells us for whose sake it is Eji/.'that God moves the wheels of this chariot, or rides in it sit-'e|j|ting in his heavenly seat; and to what end he is making his «lf.progress, or goes his appointed journey in it, viz. the salvation of his people.

6. God's judgments on the wicked in this world, and also

their eternal damnation in the world to come, are spoken of

lo jks being for the happiness of God's people. So are his judg-

^o anents on them in this world. Isaiah xliii. 3, 4. « For I am

tils the Lord thy God, the Holy One of Israel, thy Saviour. I

- gave Egypt for thy ransom, Ethiopia and Seba for thee.

Since thou hast been precious in my sight, thou hast been

. honorable, and I have loved thee ; therefore will I give men

it*} for thee, and people for thy life." So the works of God's

ifislfindictive justice and wrath, are spoken of as works of mercy

?fif(to his people, Psalm cxxxvi. 10, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20. And so

isiiis their eternal damnation in another world. Rom. ix. 22, 23.

fioc*' What if God, willing to shew his wrath and make his power

known, endured with much longsuffering, the vessels of wrath

fitted to destruction ; and that he might make known the

riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had

afore prepared unto glory." Here it is evident the last verse

comes in, in connexion with the foregoing, as giving another

reason of the destruction of the wicked, viz. the shewing the

riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy ; in higher degrees

of their glory and happiness, in an advancement of their relish

of their own enjoyments and greater sense of their value, and

of God's free grace in the bestowment,

c^-

■ 7. It seems to arj^ue that God's goodness to them whci ai^e to be the eternal su'ojccts of his goodness, is the end of the creation, that the whole creation, in all parts of it, and, ail God's disposals of it, is spoken of as theiu's. I Cor. iii. 22,23. » All things are yours : Whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come, all are yours." The terms are very universal ; and both works of creation and providence are mentioned ; and it is manifestly the design of the apostle to be understood of evejy Avork of God whatsoever. Now, how can we understand this any otherwise, than that all things are for their benefit ; and that God made and uses all for their good ?

8. All God's works, both his works of creation and providence, are represented as works of goodness or mercy to his people in Psal. cxxxvi. His wonderful works in general, verse 4. " To him who alone doth great wonders ; for his mercy cndureth forever." The avoi ks of creation in all parts of it. Verses 5,...9. " To him that by wisdom made the heavens, for his mercy endureth forever. To him that stretched out the earth above the waters, for his mercy endureth forever. To him that made great lights, for his mercy endureth forever. The sun to rule by day, for his mercy endureth forever. The moon and stars to rule by night, for his mercy endureth forever." And God's works of prQyidejic^^i^^,tli^_^jfc4r lowing part of the Psalm. } ,.„,l, :^a f-^nirn i\fi ni

0. That expression in the blessed sentence pronounced on the righteous at the day of judgment, " Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world," seems to hold forili as much, as that the eternal expressions and fruits of God's goodness to them, was God's end in creating the world, and in his providential disposals ever since tho creation : That God, in all his works, in laying the foundation of the world, and ever since the foundation of it, had been preparing this kingdom and glory for them.

10. Agreeable to this, the good of men is spoken of as an ultimate end of the virtue of the moral world. Rom. xiii. 8, 0, 10. *• He tliat lovelh another hath fulfilled the law. For

this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill,

&c— And if there be any other commandment, it is briefly

comprehended in this saying, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. Love workelh no ill to his neighbor j therefore^ love is the fuljilling of the law." Gal. v. 14. « All the law, is fulfilled in one word, even in this, Thou shalt love thy neigh-, bor as thyself." James ii. 8. " If ye fulfil the royal law, according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbor us thy-' self....thou shalt do well."

If the good of the creature be one end of God in all things he does ; and so be one end of all things that he requires moral agents to do ; and an end they should have respect to in all that they do, and which they should regulate all parts of their conduct by ; these things may be easily explained ; but otherwise it seems difficult to be accounted for, that the Holy Gijost should thus express himself from time to ti!\:e. The scrip-, ture represents it to be the spirit of all true saints, to prefer the welfare of God's people to their chief joy. And this was the spirit of Moses and the prophets of old ; and the good of God's church was an end they reguhited all their conduct by.,, And so it was with the apostles. 2 Cor. iv. 15. '• For all-I things are for your sakes." 2 Tim. ii. 10. « I endure all, things for the elect's sake, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus, with eternal glory." And! the scriptures represent as though every Christian shouitr. in all things he does be employed for the good of God's church, as each particular member of the body, is in all things employed, for the good of the body. Rom. xii. 4, 5, £^c. Eph! '^ iv. 15, 16. 1 Cor. xii. 12, 25, to the end ; together with tlie"'' whole of the next chapter. To this end the sc ripturc teaches us the angels are continually empioyed, Heb,-i. 14.

■ft ije ai ,boO JerlT : noiico;? (;:;,.(,■ Mjutv' ' '=73 hnn ffiilo'//arfilo floi.v

insik loi : i^nii Auii gniisqaiq naad

,3 .iiix .mofl . i ^dt io bna.aiBmillj.

SECTION VI.

Wherein it is considered tvhat is meant by the Glory of God, and the naytrc of God vi Hcrifiturcy nvhen sfioken of as God's end in his nvorks.

HAVING thus considered what things are spoken of in the holy scriptures, as the ends of God's works ; and in such a manner as justly to lead us to suppose, they were the ends which God had ultimately in view, in the creation of the world : I now proceed particularly to inquire concernirvg some of these things, what they are, and how the terms are to be understood.

I begin first, with the glory of god.

And here I might observe, that the phrase, the glory of God, is soiTietimes manifestly used to signify the second person in the Trinity. But it is not necessary at this time to consider that matter, or stand to prove it from particular passages of scripture. Omitting this, therefore, I proceed to observe concerning the Hebrew word Cabhodh, which is the word most commonly ui^ed in the Old Testament where we have the word gloi'^ in the English Bible. The root which it comes from is either the verb Cabhadh, which signifies to be heavy, or make heavy, or from the adjective Cabhedhy which signifies heavy or weighty. These, as seems pretty manifest, are the primary significations of these words,-though they have also other meanings, which seem to be derivative. The noun Cobhedh signifies gravity, heaviness, greatness, and abundance. Of very many places it will be sufficient to name a few. Prov. xxvii. 3. 2 Sam. xiv. 26. 1 Kings xii. 11. Psalm xxxviii. 4. Isaiah xxx. 27. And as the weight of bodies arises from two things, viz. solidity or density, or specific gravity, as it is called, and their magnitude ; so we find the word Cabhedh used to signify dense, as in Exod. xix. 16. ■Gnanatz Cobhedh^ a dense cloud. And it is very often used

ror great. Isaiah xxxii. 2. Gen. v. 9. 1 Kings x. 2. 2 Kings vi. 14, and xviii. 17. Isai.ih xxxvi. 2, and other places.

The word Cabhodk, which is commonly translated glorify is used in such a manner as might be expecied from this signification of the words from whence it comes. Sometimes it is used to signify what is interna!, what is within the being or person, inherent in the i^ubject, or what is in the possession of the person; and sometimes for emanation, exhibition or communication of this internal glory ; and sometimes for the knowledge or sense, or effect of these, in those who behold it, to whom the exhibition or communication is made ; or an expression of this knowledge, or sense, •r effect. And here I would note, that agreeable to the use ©f the word Cabhodh^ in the Old Testament, is that of the ■word Doxa in the new. For, as the word Cabhodh is generally translated by Doxa in the Septuagint ; so it is apparent, that this word is designed to be used to signify the same thing in the New Testament, with Cabhodh in the Old. This mi:,ht be abundantly proved by comparing particular places of the Old Testament ; but probably it will not be denied.

I therefore proceed particularly to consider these words, with regard to their use in scripture, in each of the foremen-iioned ways.

1. As to internal glory. When the word is used to signify what is within, inherent, or in the possession of the subject, it very commonly signifies excellency, or great \a!uableness, dignity, or worthiness, or regard. This, according to the Hebrew idiom, is, as it were, the weight of a thing, as that by which it is heavy ; as to be lightf is to be worthless, without value, contemptible. Numb. xxi. 5. " This light bread." 1 Sam. xviii. 23. " Seemeth it a light thing." Judges ix. 4. '' Light persons," i. e. worthless, vain, vile persons. Sd Zeph-iii. 4. To set light is to despise, 2 Sam. xix. 43. Belshaz-zar's vilencss in the s'gbt of God, is represented by hit. being Tf/v'7, v/eighed in the balances and found light, Dan. v. 27. And as the weight of a thi.->g arises from these two things, its *tttagnitude,.gT>d its specific gra\iiy conjunctly, so the word

Vol. VI. O

glory is very commonly used to sij^nify the excellency of 3 person or thing, as consisting: either in grea'ness, or in beauty, or as it were, preciousness, or in both conjunctly ; as will ^bunclanily appear by Exod. xvi. 7, and xxviii. 2, 40, and iii. 8, and many other places.

Sometimes that internal, great, and excellent good, which is called glory, is rather in possession than inherent. Anyone may be called heavv^ that possesses an abundance ; and he that is empty and destitute, may be cdWe^light. Thus we find riches is sometimes tailed glory. Gen. xxxi. 1. " And of that which was our fathers, hath he gofen all this glory." Esth. V. 11. " Haman told them of the glory of his riches." Psal. xlix. 16, 17. «« Be not afraid, when one is made rich, when the glory of his house is increased. For when he dielh, he shall carry nothing away, his glory shall not descend after him." Nah. ii. 9. " Take ye the spoil of silver, take the spoil of gold ; for there is none end of the store and glory out of the pleasant furniture.

And it is often put for a great height of happiness and prosperity and fulness of good in general. Gen. xlv. 13. " You shall tell my father of all my glory in Egypt." Job xix. 9. "He hath stript me of my glory." Isaiah x 3. « Where will you leave your glory." Verse 10. " Therefore shall the Lord of Hosts send among his fat ones leanness, and under his glory shall he kindle a burning, like the burning of a fire." Isaiah xvii. 3, 4. " The kingdom shall cease from Damascus, and the remnant of Syria ; they shall he a^ the glory of the children of Israel. And in that day it shall coTTiC to pass, that the glory of Jacob shall be made thin, and the fiuncss of his flesh shall be made lean." Isaiah xxi. 16. " And all the glory of Kedar shall fail." Isaiah Ixi. 6. " Ye shall eat the riches of the Gentiles, and in their glory shall ye boast yourselves." Chap. Ixvi. 11, 12, "That ye may-milk out and be delighted with the abundance of her glory, I will extend peace to her like a river, and the glory of the Gentiles like a flowing stream." Hos, ix. 11. " As for Ephraim, their glory shall fly away as a bird " Matth, iv. 8. " Sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glor^r

of them." Luke xxiv. 26. « Oui^ht not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory ?" John xvii. 27. " And the glory which thou gavest me, have I given them." Rom. v. 2. " And rejoice in hope of the' glory oi God." Chap. viii. 18. ''The sufFerings of this present time arc not worthy t« be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us." See also chap. ii. 7, 10, and iii. 23, and ix. 23. 1 Cor. ii. 7. " The hidden wisdom which God ordained before the world unto our glory." 2 Cor. iv. 17.

" Worketh out for us a far more exceeding and eternal

weight of glory." Eph. i. 18. " And what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints." 1 Pet. iv. 13. " But rejoice inasmuch as ye are made partakers of Christ's sufferings ; that when his glory shall be revealed, ye may be glad also with exceeding joy." Chap. i. 8. " Ye rejoice with joy vmspeakable and full of glory." See also Colos. i. *7, and iii, 4, and many other places.

2. The word glory is used in scripture often to express the exhibition, emanation, or communication of the internal glory. Hence it often signifies a visible exliilntion of glory ; as in an effulgence or shining brightness, by an emanation of beams of light. Thus the brightness of the sun, and moon, and stars is called their glory in 1 Cor. xv. 41. But in particular, the word is very often thus used, when applied to God and Christ. As in Ezek. i. 28. "As the appearance of the bow that is in the cloud in the day of rain, so was the appearance of the brightness round about. This was the appearance of the likeness of ths glory of the Lord." And chap. X. 4, « Then the glory of the Lord went up from the cherub, and stood over the threshold of the house, and the house was filled with the cloud, and the court was full of the brightness W the Lord's glory." Isaiah vi. 1, 2, 3. "I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple. Above it stood the seraphim.——And one cried to another and said. Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of Hosts, the whole earth is full of his glory." Compared with John xii. 4. " These things said Esaias, when he saw his glory and spake of him." Ezek. xliii. 2. " And behold the glory

lOS END IN CREATION.

of tlie God of Israel came from the way of the east/-

and ihe earth i/imerf whh his glory." Isaiah xxiv. 2:J»

« Then the moon sliall be confounded, and the sun ashamed, when the Lord of Hosts shall reign in Mount Zion, and in Jerusalem, and before his ancienls gloriously " Isaiah Ix. 1, 2. " Arise, shine, for thy light is come, and the glory of the Lord is risen upon thcc. For behold, the clarkness shall covf er the earth, and gross darkness the people ; but the Lord shall arise upon thee, and his glory shall be seen upon thee." Together with verse 19. " The sun shall be no more thy light by day, neither for brightness shall the moon give light unto thee ; but the Lord shall be unto thee an everlasting-light, and thy God thy glory." Luke ii. 9. " The glory of the Lord shone round about them." Acts xxii. 11. "And when I could not see, for the glory of that light.** In 2 Cor. iii. T, the shining of Moses's face is called ihe glory of his counte-i:a7ice. And to this Christ's glory is compared, verse 18. '■ But we all with open face, beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into tho same image, from glory to glory." And so chap. iv. 4. " Lest the light of the glorious gospel of Chiist, who is the image of God, should shine unto them." Verse 6. " For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shincd in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ." Heb, i. 3. " Who is the brightness of his glory." The Apostle Peter, speaking of that emana ion of exceeding brightness, from the bright cloud that overshadowed the disciples in the mount of transfiguration, and of the shining of Christ's face at that time, says, 2 Pet. i. \7. '- For he received from God the Father, honor and glory, when there came such a voice to him fiom the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." Rev. xviii. 1. " Another angel came down from heaven, having great power, and the earth nvas lightened with his glory." Rev. xxi. 11. " Having the glory of God, and her light was like unto a stone most precious, like a jasper stone, clear as crystal.'' Verse 23. " And the city had no need of the sun, nor of the moon to shine in it ; for the glory of God did lighten .It."

So tbe ^<rovd for a visible effulgence or emanation of light in the places to be seen in Exod. xvi. 1 2, and xxiv. 16, 17, 23, and xl. 34, 35, and many other places.

The word glorij, as applied to God or Christ, sometimes evidently signifies the communications of God's fulness and means much the same thing, with God's abundant and exceeding goodness and grace. So Eph. ii. 16. « That he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened with might, by his spirit in the inner man.'' The expression, " According to the riches of l-.is glory," is apparently equivalent to that in the same epistle, chap. i. 7. " According to the riches of his grace." And chap. ii. 7. " The exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness lowarde us, through Christ Jesus." in like manner is the word ij'crv used in Phil. iv. 19. " But my God shall supply all you< need, according to his riches in glory, by Christ Jesus." And Rom. ix. 23. « And that he might make known the riches of his glory, on the vessels of mercy." In this, and the foregO' iag verse, the apostle speaks of God's making known two things, his great wrath, and his rich grace. The former, on the vessels of wrath, verse 22. The latter, which he calls the riches of his ghrtj, on the vessels of mercy, verse 23. So when Moses says, " I beseech thee shew me thy glori/;" God, granting his request, makes answer, " I will make all my goodness to pass before thee." Exod. xxxiii. 18, 19.*

* Dr. Goodwin observes (Vol I. of his works. Part ad page i66)that riches of grace are called riches of glory in scripture. " The scripture," says be, " speaks of riches of glory in Eph. iii. i6. ' That he would grant you according to the riches of his glory;' yet eminently mercy is thcic intended : For it is that which God bestows, and which the zpostle there prayeth for. And he calls his mercy there his glory, as elsewhere he doth, as being the most eminent excellency in God. That in Rom. ix. 22, 23, compared, is observable. In the 22d verse where the apostle speaks of God's making-known the power of bis wrath, saiih he, ' God willing to shew his wrath, and make his power known.' But in verse 23d wlien he comes to speak of mercy, he saiih, 'That he might make known the riches of his glory, on the vessels of nacrcy."

What we find in John xii. 23 32, is worthy of particular noiice in this place. The words and behavior of Christ, \vhich we have an account of here, ars^ue two ti)ings.

1. Tliat the happiness and salvation of men, was an end that Christ ultimately aimed at in the labors and sufferings he went through, for our redemption (and consequently, by what has been before observed,-an ultimate end of the work of creation.) The vcrv same things which were observed before in this passage (Chapter 2(1, Scctzon 3'1) concerning God's glory, are equally, and in the same manner observable, concerning the salvation of men. As it was there observed, that Christ in the great conflict of his soul, in the view of the near approach of the most extreme diffit -ilties which attended his undertaking, comforts himself m a certain prospect of obtaining the end he had chiefly in view. It was observed that the glory of Cod is therefore mentioned and dwelt upon by him, as what his soul supported itself and resred in, as this great end. And at the same time, and exactly in the same manner, is the salvation of men mentioned and insisted on, as the end of these great labors and sufferings, which satisfied his soul, in the prospect of undergoing them. Compare the 23d and 24th verses ; and also the 28ih and 29th verses ^ verse 31, and 32, And,

2. The glory of God, and the emanations and fruits of his j^race in man's salvation, are so spoken of by Christ on this occasion in just the same manner, that it would be quite unnatural, to understand him as speaking of two distinct things. Such IS tne cotmcxion, that what he says of the latter, must rnost naturally be understood as exegetical of the former. He first speaks of his own glory and the glory of his Father, as the great end that should be obtained by what he is about to suffer ; and then explains and amplifies what he says on tliis in what he expresses of the salvation of men that shall be obtained by it. Thus in the 23d. verse he says, " The hour is come that the Son of Man should be glorified." And in what next follows, he evidently shews how he was to be glorified, or wherein his glory consisted: "Verily, verily I say unto you, except a corn ofv.hcat fall into the ground, and die,

END IN CREATION. liJ

it abideth alone ; but if it die, it bringeih forth rnucli fruit." As much fiuit is the s^lory of the seed, so is the multitude of redeemed ones, which should spring from his death, his glory.* So concerning the trlory of his Father, in the 27lh, and following verses. " Now is Tny soul troubled, and what shall I say ? Father, save me from this hour. But for this cause came I unto this hour. Father, glorify thy name. Then came there a voice from heaven, saying, I have bolh gloriiied. it, and will glorify it again." In an assurance of this, which this voice declared, Christ was greatly comforted, and his soul even exulted under the view of his approaching sufferings. And what this glory was, in which Christ's soul was so comforted on this occasion, his own wordj which he then spake, plainly shew. When the people said it thundered ; and others said, an angel spake to him ; then Christ explains the. matter to them, and tells them what this voice meant. Verse, ^0——T3. " Jesus answered and said, This voice came, not because of me, but for your sakes. Now is the judgment; of this world ; now shall the prince of this world be cast.out. And I, if 1 be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men un-. to me." By this behavior, and these speeches of our re-, deemer, it appears that the expressions of divine grace, in., the sanctification and happiness of the redeemed, arc especially tliat glory of his, and his Father, which was the joy that was set belbie him, for which he endured the cross, and despised the shame ; and that this glory especially, was the end., of the travail of his soul, in obtaining which end he was satisfied, agreeable to Isa. liii. 10, 11.

This is ai;!eeable to -what has been just observed, of God's glory l)ting so often represented by an effulgence, or emanation, or communication of light, from a luminary or fountain of light. What can be thought of, that so naturally and aptly represents the emanation of the internal glory of God ; or the flowing forth, and abundant communicaiion of that infinite fulness of siood that is in God ? Light is very often in scrip-

* Here mrv Hi» remembered what was bfjfore ob'ierved oF trie church's bein^ so ofteo spokea of as the glory and fu"lne:s of Christ.

ture put for comfort, joy, happiness, and for good in general,*

Again, the word :;hry, as applied to God in scripture, inf-plies the view or knowledge of God's excellency. The exhibition of glory, is to the view of beholders. The manifestation of glory, the emanation or eifulgence of brightness, has relation to the eye. Light or brightness is a quality that has relation to the sense of seeing: We see the luminary by its light. And knowledge is often expressed in scripture by Hccht. The word !;tory very often in scripture signifies or implies ho7ioi\ as any one may soon see by casting liis eye on a concordance.t But honor implies the knowledge of the dignity and excellency of him who hath the honor. And this is often more especially signified by the word glory^ when applied to God. Num. xiv. 21. " But as truly as I live, all the earth shall be filled with the glory of the Lord." i. e. All the earth shall see the manifestations I will make of my perfect holiness and hatred of sin, and so of ray infinite excellence.

This appears by the context. So Ezck. xxxix. 21 2.".

" And I will set my glory among the heathen, and all the heathen shall see my judgment that I have executed, and my hand that I have laid upon them. So the house of Israel shall knoiv that I am the Lord their God. And the heathen shall know, that the house of Israel went into captivity for their iniquity." And it is manifest in many places, where we read of God's glorifying himself, or of his being glorified, ihat one thing directly intended, is a manifesting or making known his divine greatness and excellency.

* Isa. vi. 3. «' Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of Hosts, the whole cartL is full of his gliry." In the original, " His glory is the fulness of the whole earth:" Which signifies much more than the words of the translation. God's glory, consisting especially.in his holiness, is that, in the sight or communications of which, man's filness, i. c. his holines sand happiness, consists. By God's glory here, there seems to be respect to that train, or those effulgent beams that filled the temple : These beams signifying God's glorv shin-in'- forth, and commuaicated. This effulgence or communication is tJi* fulness of all intelligent creatures, who haveno fulness of their own.

+ See particularly Heb. iii. 3.

Again, glorij^ as the word is used in scripture, often signi-£es or implies/p-c/se. This appears from what was ohserved before, that glory very often signifies honor, which is much the same thing with praise, viz, hitjh esteem and respect of heart, and the expression and testimony of it in words and actions. And it is manifest that the words glory and praise^ are often used as equivalent expressions in scripture. Psal. 1. 23. » Whoso ofFereth praise, glorifieth me." Psal. xxii. 23. «"* Ye that fear the Lord, praise him ; all ye seed of Israel, glorify him." Isa. xlii. 8. " My glory I will not give unto another, nor my praise to graven images." Verse 12. « Let them give glory unto the Lord, and declare his praise in the

islands." Isa. xlviii-9 11. "For my name's sake will

I defer mine anger ; for my praise will I refrain for thee.... For mine own sake will I do it; for, I will not give my glory unto another." Jer. xiii. 11. " That they might be unto me for a people, and for a name, and for a praise, and for a glory." £^h. i. 6. " To the praise of the glory of his grace." Verse 12. «To the praise of his glory." So verse 14. The phrase is apparently equivalent to that, Phil. i. 11. " Which are by Jesus Christ unto the praise and glory of God." 2 Cor. iv. 15. " That the abundant grace might, through the thanksgiving of many, redound to the glory of God."

It is manifest the praise of God, as the phrase is used in. scripture, implies the high esteem and love of the heart, exalting thoughts of God, and complacence in his excellence and perfection. This must be so manifest to every one acquainted with the scripture, that there seems to be no aeed to refer to particular places.

It also implies joy in God, or rejoicing in his perfections, as is manifest by Psal. xxxiii. 2. " Rejoice in the Lord, O ye righteous {ov firaise is comely for the upright." How often dp we read of singing praise ? But singing is commonly an expression of joy. It is called, making a joyful noise. Ps il. Ixvi. 1, 2, and xcvi. 4, 5. And as it is often used, it iu.plics gratitude or love to God for his benefits to us. Psal. xxx, 13, and ma-i ny other places.

Vol. VI. P

Having thus considered what is implied in the phrase, the glory of God, as we find it used in scripture ; I proceed to inquire what is meant by the name of God.

And I observe that it is manifest that God's name and his glory, at least very often, signify the same thing in scripture. As it has been observed concerning the glory of God, thai it sometimes signifies the second person in the trinity ; the same might be shewn of the name of God, if it were needful in this place. But that the name and glory of God are often equipollent expressions, is manifest by Exod. xxxiii. 18, 19. When Moses says, " I beseech thee, shew me thy glory :" And God grants his request, he says, " I will proclaim the name of the Lord before thee." Psal. viii. K " O Lord, how excellent is thy name in all the earth ! Who hast set thy glory above the heavens." Psal. Ixxix. 9. « Help us, O God of our salvation, for the glory of thy name ; and deliver us, and purge away our sins, for thy name's sake." Psal. cii. 15. " So the heathen shall fear the name of the Lord ; and all the kings of the earth, thy glory.** Psal. cxlviii. 13 " His Jiamc alone is excellent, and his glorij is above the earth and heaven." Isa. xlviii 9. " For my -name's sake will I defer mine anger, and for my Jiraise will I refrain for thee." Verse 1 i. " For mine own sake, even for mine own sake will I do it ; for how should my name be polluted ? And I will not give my glory unio another. Isa. xlix. 19. '' They shall fear the name of the Lord from the west, and his glonj from the ris-inc^ of the sun." Jcr. xiii. 11. " That they might be unt« me for a 72amf, and for a//rnzV. and for a glorij." As glory often implies the manifestation, publication and knowledge of excellency, and the honor that any one has in the world ; so it is evident does name. Gen. xi. 4. "Let us make us a name.'* Deut. xxvi. 19. " And to make thee high above all nations, in praise, in nanne, and in honor." See 2 Sam. vii. 9, and many other places.

So it is evident that hy name is sometimes meant much the same thing as praise, by several places which have been just mentioned, as Isa. xlviii. 9. Jer. xiii. 11. Deut. xxvi. l-9» and also by Jer. xxxiii. 9. « And it shall be unto me for a

END IN CREATION. lis

Aame^ dk praise and an honor, before all ihe nations of the earth, which shall hear of all the good 1 do unto them/' Zeph. iii. 20. " I will make you a name and a praise among all people of the earth."

And it seems that the expression or exhibition of God's goodness is especially called his name, in Exod. xxxiii. 19. *' I will make all my goodness * pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the Lord before thee." And chap.

xxxiv. 5 7. " And the Lord descended in the cloud, and

stood with him there, and proclaimed the na7ne of the Lord. And the Lord passed by before him, and proclaimed, the Lord, the Lord God, gracious and merciful, longsuffering and abundant in goodness and truth ; keeping mercy for thousands." Sec

And the same illustrious brightness and effulgence in the pillar of cloud, that appeared in the wilderness, and dwelt above the mercy seat in the tabernacle and temple (or rather the spiritual divine brightness and effulgence represented by it) which is so often called the glory of the Lord, is also often called the name of the Lord. Because God's glory was to dwell in the tabernacle, therefore he promises, Exod. xxix. 4.'^. " There will I meet with the children of Israel, and the tabernacle shall be sanctified by my glory." And the temple was called the house of God's glory, Isa. Ix. 7. In like manner, the 7ia7ne of God is said to dwell in the sanctuary^ Thus we often read of the place that God chose, to put his 7iame there £• or (as it is in the Hebrew) to cause his nam.e to inhabit there. So it is sometimes rendered by our tvanslatorso As Deut. xii. H. " Then there shall be a place which the Lord your God shall chuse to cause bis 7iame to dwell there " And the temple is often spoken of as built for God's name. And in Psal. Ixxiv. 7, the temple is called the dwel&ig place ofGod'^j name. The mercy seat in the temple was called the throne of God's name or glory, Jer. xiv. 21. "Bo not abhor us, Xor thy name's sake, do not disgrace the throne of thy glory." Here God's name and hi% glory, seem to be spoken of iisthe same.

SECTION VII.

Shewing that the Ultimate End of the Creation of the Worlds is but one, and what that one End is.

FROM what has been observed in the last section, it appears, that however the last end of the creation is spoken of in scripture under varioos denominations ; yet if the whole of what is said relating to this affair, be duly weighed, and one part compared with another, we shall have reason to think, that the design of the vSpirit of God does not seem to be to represent God's ultimate end as manifold, but as one. For though it be signified by various names, yet they appear not to be names of different things, but various names involving each other in their meaning ; either different names of the same thing, or names of several parts of one whole, or of the same whole viewed in various lights, or in its different respects and relations. For it appears that all that is ever spoken of in the scripture as an uhimate end of God's works, is included in that one phrase, the glory of God ; which is the name by which the last end of God's works is most commonly called in scripture ; and seems to be the nanf'e which most aptly signifies the thing.

The thing signified by that name, the glory of God, when spoken of as the supreme and uhimate end of tlie work of creation, and of all God's works, is the emanation and true external expression of God's internal glory and fulness; • meaning by his fulness, what has already been explained.. Or, \\i other words, God's internal glory extant, in a true and just exhibuion, or external existence of it. It is confessed that there is a degree of obscurity in these definitions ; but i perhaps an obscurity which is unavoidable, through the ira-petfcction of language, and vfotds being less fitted to expiess things of so sublime a nature. And therefore the thing may

END IN CREATICTn/' \\Y

possibly be better understood, by using many words and a variety of expressions, by a particular consideration of it, as it were by parts, than by any short definition.

There is included in this, the exercise of God's perfections to produce a proper effect, in opposition to theii lying eternally dormant and ineffectual ; as his power being eter-r nally without any act or fruit of that power ; his wisdom eternally ineffectual in any wise production, or prudent disposal of any thing, Sec. The manifestation of his internal glory to created understandings. The communication of the infinite fulness of God to the creature. The creature's high esteem of-God, love to God, and complacence and joy in God, and the proper exercises and expressions of these.

These at first view may appear to be entirely distinct things : But if we more closely consider the matter, thcr will all appear to be one thing, in a variety of views and relations. They are all but the emanation of God's glory ; ov the excellent brightness and fulness of the Divinity diffused, overflowing, and as it were, enlarged ; or, in one word, existing ad extra. God's exercising his perfection to produce a proper effect, is not distinct from the emanation or communication of his fulness ; for this is the effect, viz. his fulness communicated, and the producing this effect is the communication of his fulness ; and there is nothing in this effectual exerting of God's perfection, but the emanation of God's internal glory. The emanation or communication is of the internal glory or fulness of God as it is. Now God's internal glory, as it is in God, is either in his understanding or will. The glory or fulness of his understanding, is his linowledge. The internal glory and fulness of God, vvliich we must conceive of as having its special seat in his will, is his holiness and happiness. The whole of God's internal good or glory, is in these three things, viz. his infinite knowledge ; his infinite virtue or holiness, and his infinite joy and happiness. Indeed there are a great many attributes in G(jd; according to our way of conceiving or talking of them ; but all may be reduced to these, or to the degree, circumstances and relations of these. We have no conception of Gc I's power, different

from the degree qf these things, with a certain relation of them to elTtcts. God's infinity is not so properly n distinct kind of 5>ood in God, but only expresses the degree of the good there is in him. So God's eternity is not a distinct good ; but is the duration of good. Ilis immutability is still the same good, with a negalion of change. So, that, as I said, 5hc fulness of the Godhead is the fulness of his understanding, consisting in his knowledge, and the fulness of his will, consisting in his virtue and happiness. And therefore the external glory of God consists in the communication of these. The communication of his knowledge is chiefly in giving the knowiedge of himself ; for this is the knowledge in which the fulness of God's understanding chiefly consists. And thus we see how the manifestation of God's glory to created understanding's, and their seeing and knowing it, is not distinct from an emanation or communication ef God's fulness, but clearly implied in it. Again, the communication of God's virtue or holiness is principally in communicating the love of himself (which appears by what has before been observed.) And thus we see how, not only the creature's seeing and knowing God's exceiience, but also supremely esteeming and kvins him, belongs to the communication of God's fulness. And the communication of God's joy and happiness, consists chiefly in communicating to the creature, that happiness and py, which consists in rejoicing in God, and in his glorious ©scellency ; for in such joy God's own happiness does principally consist. And in these things, viz. in knowing God's excellency, loving God for it, and rejoicing in it ; and in the exercise and expression of these, consists God's honor and praise ; so that these are clearly implied in that glory of God, which consists in the emanation ot his internal glory. And though we suppose all these things, which seem to bq so various, are signified by that glortj, which the scripture speaks of as the last end of all God's works ; yet it is manifest there is no greater, and no other variety in it, than in the internal iind essential glory of God itself. God's internal glory is partly iii his understanding, and panly in his will. And this internal glory, as seated in the will of God, implies both his

holiness and his happiness ; both are evidently God's glory> according to the use of the phrase. So that as God's external glory is only the emanation of his internal glory, this variety necessarily fol!ov/s. And again, it hence appears that here is no other variety or distinction, but what necessarily arises from the distinct faculties of the creature, to which the com-municaiion is made, as created in the image of God; even as having these two faculties of understanding and will. God communicates himself to the understanding of the creature, in giving him the knowledge of his glory ; and to the will of the creature, in giving him holiness, consisting primarily in the love of God ; and in giving the creature happiness, chiefly consisting in joy in God. Tliese are the sum of that emanation of divine fulness called in scripture, the glory of God. The first part of this glory is called truths the latter, grace. John i, 14. « We beheld \\\% glorv, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full oigrace and truth."

Thus we see that the great and last end of God's works which is so variously expressed in scripture, is indeed bui: one ; and this one end is most properly and comprehensively called, THE GLORY OF GoD ; by which name it is most commonly called in scripiure : And is fitly compared to an effulgence or cmanaion of light from a luminary, by which this glory of God is abundantly represented in scripture. Light is the external expression, exhibition and manifestatio!! of the excellency of the luminary, of the sun for instance : It is the abundant, extensive emanation and conamunication of the fulness of the sun to innumerable beings that partake of it. It is by this that the son itself is seen, and his glory beheld, and all other things are discovered ; it is by a participation of this communication from the sun, that surroimding objects receive all their lustre, beauty and brightness. It is by this that all nature is quickened and receivts life, comfort and joy. Light is abundantly used in scripiure to represent and signify these three things, knowledge, holiness and happiness. It is used to signify knowledge, or that manifestation and evidence by which knov.'ledgc is received. Psalm, xix. 8, and cxix. 103, 130. Prov- vi. 23. Isaiah viii. 20, and ix. ?-

wo END IN CREATION.

and xxix. 18. Dan. v. 11. Eph. v. 13. "But all things

that are reproved are made manifest by the light ; for %vhatsoever doth make manifest, is light." And in otlier places of the New Testament innumerable.

It is used to signify virtue or moral good, Job xxv. 5, and other places. And it is abundantly used to signify comfort, joy and happiness, Esth. viii. 16, Job xviii. 18, and many other places.

What has been said may be sufficient to shew how those things v.'hich are spoken of in scripture as ultimate ends of God's works, though they may seem at first view to be distinct, are all plainly to be reduced to this one thing, viz. God's internal glory or fulness extant externally, or existing in its emanation. And though God in seeking this end, seeks the creature's good ; yet therein appears his supreme regard to himself.

The emanation or communication of the divine fulness^, consisting in the knowledge of God, love to God, and joy in God, has relation indeed both to God, and the creature ; but it has relation to God as its fountain, as it is an emanation from God ; and as the communication itself, or thing com-Tnunicated, is something divine, something of God, something of his internal fulness, as the water in the stream is something of the fountain, and as the beams of the sun, are something of the sun. And again, they have relation to God, as they have respect to him as their object ; for the knowledge communicated is the knowledge of God ; and so God is the object of the knowledge, and the love communicated is the love of God ; so God is the object of that love, and the happiness communicated is joy in God ; and so he is the object of the joy communicated. In the creature's knowing, esteeming, loving, rejoicing in, and praising God, the glory of God is both exhibited and acknowledged ; his fulness is received and returned. Here is both an emanation and remano' tion. The refulgence shines upon and into the creature, and is reflected back to the luminary. The beams of glory come from God, and are something of God, and are refunded back again to their original. So that the whole is ofQod, and in

END IN CREATION. nt

God, and to God, and God is the beginning, middle and end in this affair.

And though it be true that God has respect to the creature in these things ; yet his respect to himself and to the creature in this matter, are not properly to be looked upon, as a double and divided respect of God's heart. What has been said in chap. I. sect. 3,4, may be sufficient to shew this. Nevertheless, it may not be amiss here briefly to say a few things ; though they are mostly implied in what has been said already.

When God was about to create the world, he had respect to that emanation of his glory, which is actually the consequence of the creation, just as it is with regard to all that belongs to it, both with regard to its relation to himself, and the creature. He had regard to it, as an emanation from himself, and a communication of himself, and as tlie thing communicated, in its nature returned to himself, as its final term. And he had regard to it also, as the emanation was to the creature, and as ihe thing communicated was in the creature, as its subject. And God had regard to it in this manner, as he had a supreme regard to himself and value for his own infinite, internal glory. It was this value for himself that eaused him to value and seek that his internal glory should flow frth from himself. It was from his value for his glorious perfections of wisdom and righteousness, &c. that he valued the proper exercise and effect of these perfections, in wise and righteous acts and ciTects. It was from his infinite val-tic for his internal glory and fulness, that he valued the thing itself, which is cominunicatcd, which is something of the same, extant in the creature. Thus, because he infinitely Viikies his own glory, consisting in the knowledge of himself, love to himself, and complacence and joy in himself; he therefore valued the image, communication or participation of these, in the creature. And it is because he values himself, that he delights in the knowledge, and love, and joy of the creature ; as being himself the object of this knowledge, love and complacence. For it is the necessary consequence of the true esteem and love of any person or being (suppose

Vol VT. Q * -

a son or friend) that we should approve and value others* esteem of the same object, and disapprove and dislike the contrary. For the same reason is it the consequence of a bein<r's esteem and love of himself, that he should approve of others* esteem and love of himself

Thus it is easy to conceive, how God should seek the good of the creature, consisting in the creature's knowledge and holiness, and even his happiness, from a supreme regard to himself; as his happiness arises from that which is an image and participation of God's own beauty ; and consists in the creature's exercising a supreme regard to God, and complacence in him ; in beholding God's glory, in esteeming and loving it, and rejoicing in it, and in his exercising and testifying love and supreme respect to God ; which is the same thing with the creature's exalting God as his chief good, and making him his supreme end.

And though the emanation of God's fulness which God intended in the creation, and which actually is the consequence of it, is to the creature as its object, and the creaiure is the subject of the fulness communicated, and is the creature's good ; and was also regarded as such, when God sought it as the end of his works ; yet it does not necessarily follow, that even in so doing, he did not make himself his end. It comes to the sjme thing. God's respect to the creature's good, and his respect to himself, is not a divided respect; but both are united in one, as the happiness of the creature aimed at, is happiness in union with himself The creature is no further happy with this happiness which God makes his ultimate end, than he becomes one with God. The more happiness the greater union : When the happiness is perfect, the union is perfect. And as the happiness will be increasing to eternity, 'he union will become more and more strict and perfect ; nearer and more like to that between God the Father, and the Son ; who are so united, that their interest is perfectly one. If the happiness of the creature be considered as it will be, in the whole of the creature's eternal duration, with all the infinity of its progress, and infinite increase of nearness and union to God ; in this view the crea-

ture must be looked upon as united to God in an infinite strictness.

If God has respect to something in the creature, which he views as of everlastir.g duration, and as rising higher and higher through that infinite duration, and that not -svith constantly diminishing (but perhaps an increasing) celeriLy ; then he has respect to it, as in the whole, of infinite height, though there never will be any particular time, whe'n it can be said already to have come to such an height.

Let the most perfect union with God be represented by something at an infinite height above us ; and the eternally increasing union of the saints with God, by something that is ascending constantly towards that infinite height, moving upwards with a given velocity, and that is to continue thus to move to all eternity. God, who views the whole of this eternally increasing height, views it as an infinite height. And if he has respect to it, and makes it his end, as in the whole ot it, he has respect to it as an infinite height, though the time will never come when it can be said it has already arrived at this infinite height.

God rtims at that which the motion or progression which he causes, aims at, or tends to. If there be many things supposed to be so made and appointed, that by a constant and e-ternal motion, they all tend to a certain centre ; then it appears that he who made them, and is the cause of their mo-lion, aimed at that centre, that term of their motion, to which they eternally tend, and are eternally, as it were, striving after. And if God be this centre, then God aimed at himself. And herein it appears, that as he is the first author of their being and motion, so he is the last end, the final term, to which is their ultimate tendency and aim.

We may judge of the end that the Creator aimed at, in the being, nature and tendency he gives the creature, by the mark or term which they constantly aim at in their tendency and eternal progress ; though the time will never come, when it can be said it is attained to, in the most absolutely perfect manner.

But if strictness of union to God be viewed as thus infinitely exalted, then the creature n)U";t be regarded as infinite-

!y, nearly, and closely united lo God. And viewed thus| their interest must be viewed as one with God's interest, and so is not regarded properly with a disjunct and separate, but an undivided respect. And as to any difficulty of reconciling God's not making the creature his uhimaie end, with a res« pect properly distinct from a respect to himself, with his benevolence and free grace, and the creature's obligation t© gratitude, the reader must be referred lo Chap. I. Sect. 4, Object. 4, where this objection has been considered and an-swered at large.

If by reason of the strictness of the union of a man and his family, their interest may be looked upon as one, how much more one is the interest of Christ and his churchy (whose first union in heaven is unspeakably more perfect and exalted than that of an earthly father and his family) if they be considered with regard to their eternal and increasing union I Doubtless it may justly be esteemed as so much one, that it may be supposed to be aimed at and sought, not with a distinct and separate, but an undivided respect.

It is certain that what God aimed at in the creation of the world, was the good that would be the consequence of the creation, in the whole continuance of the thing created.

It is no solid objection against God's aiming at an infinitely perfect union of the creature with himself, that the particular time will never come when it can be said, the union is now infinitely perfect. God aims at satisfying justice in the eternal damnation of sinners ; which will be satisfied by their daninalion, considered no otherwise than with regard to its eternal duration. 13ul yet there never will come that particular moment, when it can be said, that now justice is satisfied. But if this does not satibfy our modern free thinkers, who do not like the talk about satisfying justice with an infinite punishment ; I suppose it will not be denied by any, that God, in glorifying the saints in heaven with eternal felicity, aims to satisfy his infinite grace or benevolence, by the bestov/ment of a good infinitely valuable, becauJie eternal ; and yet there never will corne the moment, when it can be said, that now this infinitely valuable gccd has been ivclually beet owed.

THE

CREAT CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE

OF

ORIGINAL SIN

DEFENDED;

EVIDENCES OF ITS TRUTH PRODUCED,

AND

ARGUMENTS TO THE CONTRARY ANSWERED.

CONTAINING IN PARTICULAR,

h. REPLY TO THE OBJ ECTIONS AND ARGUINGS OF DR. JOHN

TAYLOR, IN HIS BOOK, INTITLED, "■ THE SCRIPTURE

DOCTRINE OF ORIGINAL SIN PROPOSED TO FREE

AND CANDID EXAMINATION, &C."

Matth. ix. 12. "They that be vhole, need not a Physician; but they that

are sick." Et haec non tantum ad Peccatores referenda est ; quia in omnibus Maledic-tionibus primi Hominis, omnes ejus Generationcs conveniunt....

R. Sal. Jarchi. Propter Concupiscentiam, innatam Cordi humano, dicitur, In Iniquitate geni-tus sum ; atqueSensus est, quod a Nativitate inaplantatum sit Cordi humano J'f^zfr A«ra«^ Figmentum malum.... Aben Ezxa. ....Ad Mores Natura recurrit Pamnatos, fixa et rautari nescia..,.

....Dociles, imitandis Turpibus et pravis omnes sumus..., Jf ^'.

AUTHOR'S PREFACE.

1 HE folloiuing Discourse is intended^ not merely as an answer to any particular Book written against the Doctrine q/" Original Sin, but as a general Defence of that great rmfiort-ant Doctrine. J^tevertheless^ I ha-ve in this D fence taken no-tice of the wain things said against this Doctrine, by such of the more noted ofifiosers of ity as I have had opfiortunity to read ; fiarticularly those two late Writers, Dr. Turnbull and Dr. \ Taylor of Norwich ; but esfieciaUy the latter, in what he has published in those two Books of his, the first intitled, The Scripture Doctrine of Original Sin proposed to free and candid Examination ; the other, his Key to the Apostolic WritingSi with a Paraphrase and Notes on the Epistle to the Romans. I have closely atte?ided to Dr. Taylor's Piece on Original Sirs, in all its Parts, and have endeavored that no one thing there said, of any consequence in this Controversy, should pass unnoticed, or that any thing which has the appearance of an .Argument, in opfiosition to this Doctrine, should be Ift unanswered. I look on the Doctrine us of great Impoitance ; which every Body will doubtless own it is, if it be true. For, if the case be such indeed, that all Mankind are by Nature in a State o/"total Ruin, both with respect to the moral Evil they are the subjects of, and the afflictive Evil they are exposed tOj the one as the consequence and punishment of the other, then doubtless the great SaXvation by Cnnisr sta7ids in direct Relatio?i to this Ruin, as the remedy to the disease; and the whole Gospel, or Doctrine of Salvation, must suppose it; and all real belief, or true notion of that Gospel, must be built upon it. Therefore, as J think the Doctrine is most certainly both true and importaiit, I hope, my attempting a Vindication of it, will be candidly interpreted;

and that what I have done tonvards its defence-t ivill be impartial' ly considered., by all that will give themselves the trouble to read the ensuing Discourse ; in which it is designed to examine every thing material throughout the Doctor's whole Book, and many things in that other Book of Dr. Taylor's, containing his Key arid exfiosition on Romans ; as also many things written in opposition to this Doctrine by some other modern Authors. And moreover, my discourse being not only inteiidedfor an Answer to Dr. Taylor, and other opposers of the Doctrine of Original Siit^ but (as was observed above J for a general defence of that Doctrine i producing the evidence of the truth of the Doctrine, as well as answeri7jg objections made against it....considering these things, I say, I hope this attempt of mine will not be thought needless, nor be altogether useless, 7iotwithstanding other publications on this subject.

I would also hope, that the extensiveness of the plan of the following treatise will excuse the length of it. And that when, it is co?isidered, how much was absolutely requisite to the full executing of a design formed on such a plan ; how much has been written against the Doctrine of Original Sin, and with what plausibility ; and how strong the prejudices of many are in favor of what is said iii opposition to this Doctrine ; and that it camiot be expected, any thing short of a full consideration of almost every argument advanced by the ?nain opposers, especially by this late and specious Writer, Dr. Taylor, will satisfy many readers ; and also, how much must unavoidably be said in order to a full handling of the argu?ne7its in defence of the Doctrine ; ajid how important the Doctrine must be, if true ; I say, when such circumstances as these are considered, I trust, the length of the following discourse will not be thought to exceed what the case really required. However, this must be left to the Judgment of the intelligent and candid Reader.

Stockbridge, May- 26, 1757.

DOCTRINE

OF

ORIGINAL SIN

DEFENDED.

Wherein are considered some Evidences of Original Sin from Facts and Events, as found by Observation and Experience, together with Representations and Testimonies of Holy Scripture, and the Confossion and Assertions of Opposers.

CHAPTER I.

The Evidence of Original Sin frovi what appears in Fact of the Sinfulness of Mankind.

SECTION I-

Jll Mankind do constantly^ in all jlges^ without Fail in any one Instance, run into that moral EviU which is, in Effect, their own utter and eternal Perdition, in a total Privation of God's Favor, and Suffering of his Vengeance and V/rath.

JlSy Original Sin, as the phrase has been most commonly used by divines, is meant the innate, sinful depravity of the heart. But yet, when the doctrine of Original Sin is spoken of, it is vulgarly understood in that latitude, as to include Vol. VI. R

not only the defirarity of nature^ but the imfiutation of .idani's first Sin ; or in othet- words, the liableness or exposedness of Adam's posterity, in the divine judgnnent, to partake of the punishment of that Sin. So far as I know, most of those who have h^lc} pne of ihese, have maintained the other ; and most of those who have opposed one, have opposed the other ; boh are opposed by the author chiefly attended to in the following discourse, in his book against Original Sin : And it may perhaps appear in our future consideration of the subject, that they are closely connected, and that the arguments which prove the one, establish the other, and that there are no more difficulties attending the allowing of one than the other.

I shall, in the first place, consider this doctrines more especially with regard to the corruption of nature ; and as we treat of this, the other will naturally come into consideration, in the prosecution of the discourse, as connected with it.

As all moral qualities, all principles either of virtue or vice, lie in the disposition of the heart, I shall consider whether we have any evidence, that the heart of man is naturally of a corrupt and evil disposition. Tliis is strenuously denied by many late waiters, who are enemies to the doctrine of Original Sin ; and particularly by Dr. Taylor.

The way we come by the idea of any such thing as disposition or tendency, is by observing what is constant or general in event; especially under a great variety of circumstances ; and above all, when the effect or event continues the same through great and various opposition, much and manifold force and mtruns used to the contrary not prevailing to hinder the effect. I (3o not knov.^, that such a prevalence of effects is deniecj. tp be an evidence of prevailing tendency ii;i causes and agerit,s ; or that it is expressly denied by the op-posers of the doctrine of Original Sin, that if, in the course of events, it universally or generally proves that m^inkinti arc actually corrupt, this would be an evidence of a prior, corrupt propensity in the world of mankind; whatever ^iiay be said by some, which, if taken \yith its plain consequences, yamy sqem to imply a denial of this ; >vhich may be considered afterwards....But by many the fact is denied.; that is, it is denied,

that corruption and moral evil are commonly prevalent in thfe world : On the contrary, it is insisted on, that good preponderates, and that virtue has the ascendant.

To this purpose Dr. Turnbull says,t " With rei^ard to the prevalence of vice in the world, men are apt to let their imagination run out upon all the robberies, pyracies, murders, perjuries, frauds, massacres, assassinations they have either heard of, or read in history ; thence concluding all mankind t(j be very wicked. As if a court of justice v/as a proper ptdce to make an estimate of the morals of mankind, or an hfclspitai bf the healihfulness of a climate. But ought they not to consider, that the number of honest citizens and farmers far surpasses that of all sorts of criminals in any state, and that the innocent and kind actions of even criminals them-s^#fes surpass their crimes in numbers ; that it is the rarity of primes, in comparison of innocent or good actions, which engages our attention to them, and makes them to be recordset in history ; while honest, generous, domestic actions are overlooked, only because they are so common ? As one great dagger, or one month's sickness shall become a frequently repeated story during a long life of heahh and safety....Let not the vices of mankind' be multiplied or magnified. Let us rt'ake a fair estimate of human life, and set over against the shbcking, the astonishhig instances of barbarity dnd wicksd-n'^^s that have been perpetrated in any age, not only the exceeding generous and brave actior^s with ¥,hich history shines, biif the prevailing innocency, good nature, industry, felicity, ahfl cheerfulness of the greater part of mankind at ail limes ; and we shall not find reason to cry out, as objectors against p'rov'idente do oh this occasion, that all men are vastly corrupt, and that there is hardly any such thing as'virtue in the world. Upon a fair computation, the fact does indeed come out, that very great villanies have been very uncommon in all ages, ancl looked upon as monstrous ; so general is the sense and esteem bf virtue." It seems to be with a like view that Dr. Taylor says, '• We must not take the measure of our health

t Moral Philosophy, p, 289, 290.

las ORIGINAL SIN.

and enjoyments from a lazar house, nor of our understanding from bedlam, nor of our morals from a gaol."

With respect to the propriety and pertinence of such a representation of things, and its force as to the consequence designed, I hope we shall be better able to judge, and in some measure to determine, whether the natural disposition of the hearts of mankind be corrupt or not, when the things which follow have been considered.

But for the greater clearness, it may be proper here to premise one consideration, that is of great importance in this controversy, and is very much overlooked by the opposers of the doctrine of Original Sin in their disputing against it; which is this—.

That is to be looked upon as the true tendency of the natural or innate disposition of man's heart, which appears 4o be its tendency, when we consider things as they are in themselves, or in their own nature, without the interposition of divine grace. Thus, that state of man's nature, that disposition of the mind, is to be looked upon as evil and pernicious, which, as it is in itself, tends to extremely penicious consequences, and would certainly end therein, were it not that the free mercy and kindness of God interposes to prevent that issue. It would be very strange if any should argue, that there is no evil tendency in the case, because the mere favor and compassion of the Most High may step in and oppose the tendency, and prevent the sad effect tended to. Particularly, if there be any thing in the nature of man, whereby he has an universal, unfailing tendency to that moral evil, which, according to the real nature and true demerit of things, as they are in themsclvc;-, implies his utter ruin, that must be looked upon as an evil tendency or propensity ; however divine grace n\ay interpose, to save him from deserved ruin, and to overrule things to an issue contrary to that which they tend to of themselves. Grace is a sovereign thing, exercised according to the good pleasure of God, bringing good out of evil. The effect of it belongs not to the nature of things themselves, that otherwise have an ill tendency, any more than the remedy belongs to the disease ; but is something altogether inde-

pendent on it, introduced to oppose the natural tendency, and reverse the course of things. But the event that thin!::s tend to, according to their own demerit, and accordinpj to divine justice, that is the event which they tend to in their own nature, as Dr.Taylor's own words fully imply. " God alone,(says he) can declare wliether he will pardon or punish the ungodliness and uniighteousness of mankhid, which is in its orjn nature punishahle." Nothing is miore precisely accord'.ni; to the truth of things, than divine justice : It weighs things in an even balance : It views and estimates things'no otherwise than they are truly in their own nature. Therefore undoubtedly that which implies a tendency to ruin, according to the estimate of divine ^'z^s^/cf, docs indeed imply such a tendency in its cnim nature.

And then it must be reraembered that it is a Tnoral depravity wc are speaking of; and therefore when we arc considering whether such depravity do not appear by a tendency to a bad effect or issue, it is a moral tendency to such an issue. that is the thing to be taken into the account. A moral tendency or influence is by desert. Then may it be said, man's nature or state is attended with a pernicious or destructive tendency, in a mora/sense, when it tends to that which c?e-serves misery and destruction. And therefore it equally shews the moral depravity ol'the nature of mankinJ in their present state, whether tb.at nature be universally attended ■with an effectual tendency to destructive vengeance actually executed, or to their deserving misery and ruin, or their just exposedness to destruction, ho\vever that fatal consequence may be prevented by grace, or whatever the actual event be. One thing more is to be observed here, viz. that the topic mainly insisted on by the opposers cf the doctrine of Original Sin, is the justice of God ; both in their objections aganist the imputation of Adam's sin, and also against its being so ordered, that men should come into the world v/ith a corrupt and ruined nature, without having merited the displeasure of their Creator by any personal fault. But the latter is not repugnant to God's justice, if men can be, and actually are, born into the world with a tendency to sin, and to miserv and

ruin for their sin, which actiially will I)e the consequence, unless mere grace steps in and prevents it. If this be allowed, the argument fiom justice is given up ; for it is to suppose that their liableness to nusery and ruin comes in a Avuy of justice ; otherwise there would be no need of the interposition of divine grace to save them. Justice alone would be suffxient security, if exercised, without grace. It is all one in this dispute about what is just and righteous, whether men arc born in a miserable state, by a tendency to ruin, which actually foUoiva, and \.\i^t justly ; or Whether they are born in such a state as tends to a desert of ruih, which 7iT7gIit justig follow, and ivould actually foilotv^ did no't grace prevent. For the controversy is hot, what grace will do, but what justice might do.

I have been the more particular on this head, because it enervates many of the reasonings and conclusions by which Dr. Taylor makes out his sciierae ; in which he airgucs from that state which mankind are in by divine grace, ye<x, which he himself supposes to be by divine grace, and yet not making any allowance for this, he from hence drav.s conclusions against what others suppose of the deplorable and ruined state mankind are in by the fall. He often speaks of death and affliction as coming on Adam's posterity in consequence of his sin ; and in pages 20, 21, and many other places, he supposes that these things come in consequence of his sin, not as a punishment or a calarhi'y, btit as a benefit. Bui in page 23, he supposes these things \vould be a great calamity and misery, if it were hot for th6 resurrection ; which resurrection he there, aT>d in the fo'lowihg pages, arid in many other places, iir.eaks of as being by Chriat ; ahd oftenf s^6aks of it as bfeing by the grace of God in Christ.

In pages 63, 64, speaking of our being gubjecftd to sorrow, labor and death, ia consequence of Adam's sih, he represents these ab evils that arc reversed and turned into advaii-tdges, dnd that we are delivered from through grace in Christ. And in pages 65....67, he speaks of God's thus turning deatllf into an advantage through grace in Clirisl, as what vindicat^k' ■the justice of God in bringing death by Adam-

ORIGINAL SIN. J35

in pages 152, 156, it is one thing which he alleges against tbjs proposition of the assembly of divines, that wc are by nature bondslaves to Satan ; That God hath been providing, frorn, (he beginning of the ivorhl to this day-, -various means and dis*, fiensations, to /irese7Tie and rescue jnankind/rofn the devil.

In pages 168....170, one thing alleged in answer to that objection against his doctrine, that we are in worse circumstances than Adam, is, the happy circumstances we are under by the provision and means furnished through free grace in Christ.

In page 228, atnong other things which he says, in answering that argument against his doctrine, and brought to shew men have corruption by nature, viz. that there is a law in our members....bringing us into captivity to the law of sin and death, spoken of in Rom. vii. he allows that the case of those who are under a law threatening death for every sin (which law he elsewhere says, shews us the natural and firojiej; demerit of sin, and is perfectly consonant to everlasting truth and righteousness) tnust be rjuite deplorable, if they have no relief from the mercy of the lawgiver.

In pages 90....93, S. ip opposition to what is supposed o? the miserable state mankind are brought into by Adam's siu, one thing he alleges, i§, The noble designs oflo-ce, manifested-by advancing a new and happy dispensation, founded on the obe-dieiice and rig/^tcousness of the Son of God ; and that aKhough by Adam we are subjected to death, yet in this dispensation a resurrection is provided ; and that Adam's posterity are under a mild dispensation oigrace, &c.

In page 112, S. he vindicates God's dealings with Adam,in placing bin? at fir§t under the rigor of la^, tr^nsgrcs^and die, (\yhich, as he expresses it, was putting his happiness on. afoot, extremely dangerous) by saying, that as God had before de-termmed in /\is Qwn breast, so he immediately established fiis covenant upon a quite different bottom, namely, upon grace.

In pagei^ 122, 12Sj 5. against >yhat R. R. says, lha,t Go4 for^opk man \yUe.n he fell, and that mankind after Adam's si^v were born without the divine favor, 8cc. he alleges among other things, Christ's cQ?ning io he the propitiation for the sins cf

the ivholc world. And tke riches of God's mercy in giving the promise of a Redeemer to destroij the Kvorks of the devil. That he caught his sinning^ falling creature in the arms of his grace.

In his note on Rom. v. 20, p. 297, 298, he says as follows : " The law, 1 conceive, is nol a dispensation suitable to the infirmity of the human nature in our present state ; or it doth not seem cont^iuous to the i^oodncss of God, to afford us no other way of salvation but by law, which, if we once transgress, we are ruined forever. For who then from the beginning of the world could be saved ? And therefore it seems to me that the law was not absolutely intended to be a rule for obtaining life, even to Adam in Paradise. Grace was the dispensation God intended mankind should be under ; and therefore Christ was foreordained before the foundation of the world."

There are various other passages in this author's writings of the like kind. Some of his arguments and conclusions to this effect, in order to be made good, must depend on such a supposition as this : That God's dispensations of grace are reciifications or amendments of his foregoing constitutions and proceedings, which were merely legal ; as though the dispensations of grace, which succeed those of mere law, implied an acV;nowledgment, that the preceding, legal constitution would be imjust, if left as it was, or at least, very hard dealing with mankind ; and that the other were of the nature of a satisfaction to his creatures, for former injuries or hard treatment ; so that put together, the injury with the satisfaction, the legal and injurious dispensation, taken with the following good dispensation, which our author calls grace, and the unfairness or improper severity of the former, amended by the goodness of the latter, both together made up one righteous dispensation.

The reader is desired to bear in mind that which I have said concerning the interposition of divine grace, its not altering the nature of things, as they are in themselves ; and accordingly, when 1 speak of such and such an evil tendency of things, belonging to the present nature and state of mankind, understand me to mean their tendency as they are in the?n^

selves, abstracted from any consideration of that remedy the sovereign and infinite grace of God has provided.

Having premised these things, I now proceed to say,

That mankind are all naturally in such a state, as is attended, without fail, with this consequence or issue ; that they universally run themselves into that which is, in effect, their own utter, eternal perdition, as being finally accursed of God, and the subjects of his remediless wrath through sin.

From which I infer that the natural state of the mind of man, is attended with a propensity of nature, which is prevalent and effectual, to such an issue ; and that therefore their nature is corrupt and depraved with h moral depravity, that amounts to and implies their utter undoing.

Here I would first consider the truth of the proposition ; and then would shew the certainly of the consequences which I infer from it. If both can be clearly and certainly proved, then, 1 trust, none will deny but that the doctrine of original depravity is evident, and so the falseness of Dr. Taylor's scheme demonstrated ; the greatest part of whose book, called T'he Scri/iture Doctrine of Original &'w, See. is against the doctrine of invMte de^iravity. In page 107, S, he speaks of the conveyance of a corrupt and sinful nature to Adam's posterity as ^/i<? ^mn(//i«?2i to be proved by the maintaiuers of the doctrine of Original Sin.

In order to demonstrate what is asserted in the proposition laid down, there is need only that the=;e two things should be made manifest : 07ic is this fact, that all mankind come into the world in such a state, as without fail comes to this issue, namely, the universal commission of sin ; or that every one who comes to act in the world as a moral agent, is, in a greater or less degree, guilty of sin. The other is, that all sin deserves and exposes to utter and eternal destruction, under God's wrath and curse ; and v.'ould end in it, were it not for the interposition of divine grace to prevent the effect. Both which can be abundantly demonstrated to be agreeable to the word of God, and to Dr. Taylor's own doctrine.

That every one of mankind, at least of them that are ca? pable of acting as moral agents, are guilty of sin (not now

VoL.YI. S

taking it for g-ranted that they come guilty into the world) is a thin* most clearly and abundantly evident from the holy scriptures. 1 Kings viii. 46. " If any man sin against ihee ; for there is no man that sinneth not." Eccl. vii. 20. « There is not a just man upon earth that doeth good, and sinneth not." Job ix. 2, 3. " I know it is so of a. truth, (i. e. as Bildad had just before said, that God ivoidd not cast aivaxj a perfect man^ is'c.J but how should man be just with God ? If he will contend with him, he cannot answer him one of a thousand." To the like purpose. Psalm cxliii. 2. " Enter not into judgment with thy servant; for in thy sight shall no man living be justified." So the words of the apostle (in which he has apparent reference to those of the Psalmist) Rom. iii. 19, 20. " That every mouth may be stopped, and all the world become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight; for by the lavr is the knowledge of sin." So Gal. ii. 16, and 1 John i. 7.... 10. « If we walk in the light, the blood of Christ cleanseth us from all sin. If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from a'l unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us." As in this place, so in innumerable other places, confession and repentance of fiin are spoken of, as duties proper for all ; as also prayer to God for pardon of sin ; and forgiveness of those that injure us, from that motive, that we hope to be forgiven of God. Universal guilt of sin might also be demonstrated from the appointment, and the declared use and end of the ancient saciifices ; and also from the ransom, which every one that was numbered in Israel, was directed to pay, to make atonement for his soul, Exod. xxx. 11....16. All are represented, not only as being sinful, but as having great and manifold iniquity, Job ix. 2, .'i, James iii. 1, 3.

Tliere are many scriptures which both declare the universal sinfulness of mankind, and also that all sin deserves and justly expo as to everlasting destruction, under the wrath and curse of God ; and so demonstrate both parts of the

proposition I have laid down. To which purpose that in Gal. iii. 10, is exceeding full. "For as many as are of llie works of the law are under the curse ; for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all thinc;s which are written in the book of the law, to do them." How manifestly is it implied in the apostle's meaning here, that there is no man but what fails in some instances of doing all things that are written in the book of the law, and therefore as many as have their dependence on their fulfilling the law, are under that curse which is pronounced on them that do fail of it I And hence the apostle infers in the next verse, t/ml no nia?i is justified by the law in the sight of God ; as he had said before in the preceding chapter, verse 16, " By the works of the law shall no fesh be justified" The apostle shews us that he understands, that by this place which he cites from Deuter-bhomy, the scripture hath concluded, or shut up, all under sin, as in chap. iii. 22. So that here we are plainly taught, both that every one of mankind is a sinner, and that every sinner is under the curse of God.

To the like purpose is that, Rom. iv. 14, and also 2 Cor. iii. 6, r, 9, where the law is called the letter that kills, the ministration of deaths and the ministration of condemnation. The wrath, condemnation and death, which is threatened in the law to all its transgressors, is final perdition, the second death, eternal ruin, as is very plain, and is confessed. And this punishment which the law threatens for every sin, is a just punishment, being what every sin truly deserves ; God's law being a righteous law, and the sentence of it a righteous sentence.

All these things are what Dr. Taylor himself confesses and asserts. He says that the law of God requires perfect obedience. (Note on Rom. vii. 6, p. 308.) " God can never require imperfect obedience, or by his holy law allow us to be guilty of any one sin, how small soever. And if the law, as a rule of duty, were in any respect abolished, then we might in some respects transgress the law, and yet not be guilty of sin. The moral law, or law of nature, is the truth, everlasting, unchangeable, and therefore, as such, can never.

t4(? ORIGINAL SIN.

be abrogated. On the contrary, our Lord Jesus Christ has promulgated it anew under the gospel, fuller and clearer than it was in the Mcsaical constitution, or any where else ; having added to its precepts the sanction of his own divine authority." And many things which he says, imply that all mankind do in some degree tiansgress the law. In page 228, speaking of what may be gathered from Rom. vii. and viii, he says, « We are very apt, in a world full of temptation, to be deceived, and drawn into sin by bodily appetites, &:c. And the case of those who are under a law threatening death to every sin, must be quite deplorable, if they have no relief from the mercy of the lawgiver."

But this is very fully declared in what he says in his note on Rom. v. 20, page 297. His words are as follows : " Indeed, as a rule of action prescribing our duty, it (the law) always was, and always must be a rule ordained for obtaining life ; but not as a rule of justification, not as it subjects to death for every transgression. For if it could in its utmost vigor have given us life, then, as the apostle argues, it would have been against the promises of God. For if there had been a law, in the strict and rigorous sense of law, nuhick could have made us live, verily justification should have been by the lav. But he supposes, no such law was ever given ; and therefore there is need and room enough for the promises of grace ; or as he argues, Gal. ii. 21, it would have frustrated, or rendered useless the grace of God. For if justification cmr e by the law, then truly Christ is dead in vain, then iie died to accomplish what was, or mig/it have beencffect-ed by law itself without his death. Certainly the law was not brought in among the Jews to be a rule of justification, or to recover them out of a state of death, and to procure life by their sinless obedience to it; for in this, as well as in another respect, it was ivcak, not in itself, but through the weakness of our flesh, Rom, viii. 3, The law, I conceive, is not a dispensation sz/zVoWr ^o the injirmity of the human nature in our pre^^ent state ; or it doih not seem congruous to the goodness of God to afford us no other way of salvation, but by law, which, ifvjc 071CC transgrcs-j, ive are ruined forever. For ivha

ORIGINAL SIN. ^Ui

then^ from the beginning of the world, could be saved ?".... How clear and express are these things, that no one of mankind, from the besjjinning of the world, can ever be justified by law, because every one transgresses it ?*

And here also we see, Dr. Taylor declares, that by the law, rr en are sentenced to everlastiJig ruin for one transgression. To the like purpose he often expresses himself. So p. 207. " The law requireth the most extensive obedience, discovering sin in all its branches. It gives sin a deadly force, subjecting every transgression to the penalty of death ; and yet supplieth neither help nor hope to the sinner, but leaveth him under the power of sin and sentence of death." In p. 213, he speaks of the law as " extending to lust and irregular desires, and lo every branch and principle of sin ; and even to its latent principles, and minutest branches." Again (Note on Rom. vii. 6. p. 308) " to every sin, how small soever." And when he speaks of the law subjecting every transgression to the penalty of death, he means eternal death, as he from time to time explains the matter. In p. 212, he speaks of the law " in the condemning power of it, as binding us in everlasting chains." In p. 120. S. he says, " that death which is the wages of sin, is the second death ;" and this p. 78, he explains of final perdition," In his Key^ p. 107, § 296, he says, « The curse of the law subjected men for every transgression to eternal death." So in J^ote on Rom. V. 20, p. 291. « The law oi Moses subjected those who were under it to death, meaning by death eternal death." These are his words.

He also supposes, that this sentence of the law, thus subjecting men for every, even the least sin, and every minutest branch and latent firincifile of sin, to so dreadful a punishment, is just and righteous, agreeable to truth and the nature of things, or to the natural and proper demerits of sin. This he is very

' * I am sensible, these things are quite inconsistent with what he says else. Wlieie, of '• sufficient power in all mankind constantly to do the whole duty which God requires of them," without a necessity of breaking God's law in any degree, (p. 63....68. S.) But, I hope, the reader will not think me accountable for his inconsistences.

full in. Thus in p. 186. P. " It was sin (says he) which subjected us to death by the law, justly threatening sin with death. Which law was given us, that sin might appear ; itiight be set forth in its proper colors ; when we saw it svihjected us to death by a law pcrfecthj holy^ juat and good; that sin by the commandment, by the law, miijht be represented ivhat it really is, an exceeding great and deadly evil." So in note on Rom. v. 20, p. 299. " Tiie law or ministration of dealh, as it subjects to death for every transgression, is still of use to shew the naiural and proper demerit of an." Ibid. p. 292. « The language of the law, dying thou shalt die, is to be understood of the demerit of the transgression, that which it desei-ves." Ibid. p. 298. "The law was added, saith Mr. Locke, on the place, because the Israelitesy the posterity of Abraham, were transgressors as well as other men, to shew them their sins, and the punishment and death, which in strict justice they incurred by them. And this appears to be a true comment on Rom. vii. 13....Sin, by virtue of the law, subjected you to death for this end, that sin, working death in us, by that which is holy, Just, and good^ perfectly consonant to everlasting truth and righteousness....Con-sequently every sin is in strict justice deserving of wrath and punishment ; and the law in its rigor was given to the Jews, to set home this awful truth upon their consciences, to shew them the evil and pernicious nature of sin ; and that, being conscious they had broke the law of God, this might convince them of the great need they had of the ycvor of the lawgiver, and oblige them, by faith in \ii% goodness, to fly to his mercy, for pardon and salvation."

If the law be holy, just, and good, a constitution perfectly agreeable to God's holiness, justice, and goodness ; then he might have put it exactly in execution, agreeably to all these his perfections. Our author himself says, p. 133. S. <' How that constitution, which establishes a law, the making of which is inconsistent with the justice and goodness of God, and the executing of it inconsistent with his holiness, can be a righteous constitution, I confess, is quite beyond my comprehension."

ORIGINAL SIN. US

Now the reader is left to judge, whetlicr it be not most plainly and fully agreeable to Dr. Taylor's own doctrine, that there never was any one person from the beginning of the world, who came to act in the world as a moral agent, and that it is not to be hoped there ever will be any, but what is a sinner or transgressor of the law of God ; and that therefore this proves to be the issue and event of things, with respect to all mankind in all ages, that, by the natural and proper demerit of their own sinfulness, and in the judgment of the law of God, which is perfectly consonant to truth, and exhibits things in their true colors, they are ^he proper subjects of the curse of God, eternal death, and everlasting ruin; which must be the actual consequence, unless the grace or favor of the lawgiver interpose, and mercy prevail for their pardon and salvation. The reader has seen also how agreeable this is to the doctrine of the holy scripture.

And if so, and what has been observed concerning the interposition of divine grace be remembered, namely, that this alters not the nature of things as they are in themselves, and that it does not in the least affect the state of the controversy we are upon, concerning the true nature and tendency of the state that mankind come into the world in, whether grace prevents the fatal effect or no ; I say, if these things are considered, I trust, none will deny, that the proposition that v/as laid down, is fully proved, as agreeable to the word of God, and Dr. Taylor's own words ; viz. that mankind are all naturally in such a state, as is attended, without fail, with this consequence or issue, that they universally are the subjects of that guilt and sinfulness, which is, in effect, their utter and eternal ruin, being cast wholly out of the favor oTGod. arid subjected to his everlasting wrath and curse.

(44 ORIGINAL SIN.

SECTION II-

It foUo'iOs from the Profiosition jiroved in the foregoing Sec-iio7i, that all Maiikind are under the influence of a prevail-, ing effectual Tendecy in their Nature, to that Sin and Wickedness^ which imfiUes their utter and eternal ruin.

THE proposiuon laid down bein<^ proved, the consequence of it remains to be made out, viz. that the mind of man has a natural tendency or propensity to that event, which has been shewn universally and infallibly to take place (if this be not sufficiently evident of itself, without proof) and that this is a corrupt or depraved propensity.

I shall here consider the former part of this consequence, jiamely, whether such an universal, constant, in fallible event is truly a proof of the being of any tendency or propensity to that event; leaving the evil and corrupt nature of such a propensity to be considered afterwards.

If any should say, they do not think that its being a thing universal and infallible in event, that mankind commit some sin, is a proof of a prevailing tendency to sin ; because they do not only sin, but also do good, and perhaps more good than evil ; let them remember, that the quesiion at present is not, how much sin there is a tendency to; but, whether there be a prevailing propensity to that issue, which it i>' allowed all men do actually come to, that all fail of keeping th«? law perfectly ; whether there be not a tendency to such imperfection of obedience, as always without fail comes to pass ; to that degree of sinfulness, at least, which all fall into ; and so to that utter ruin, which that sinfulness implies and infers. Whether an effectual propensity to this be worth the name of depravity, because of the good that may be supposed to balance it, shall be considered by and by. If it were so, that all mankind, in all nations and ages, were at least one day in their lives deprived of the use of their reason, and run raving mad ; or tha,t allj even eyery individual person, once cut their own

ORIGINAL Sm. jl45

throats, or put out their own eyes ; it might be an evidence of some tendency in the nature or natural state of mankind to such an event; though they might exercise reason many more days than they were distracted, and were kind to, and tender of themselves oftener than they mortally and cruelly wounded themselves.

To determine whether the unfailing constancy of the above named event be an evidence of tendency, let it be considered, what can be meant by tendency^ but a prevailing liableness or exposedness to such or such an event. Wherein consists the notion of any such thing, but some stated prevalence or pre-ponderation in the nature or state of causes or occasions, that is followed by., and so proves to be effectual i^o, a stated prevalence or commonness of any particular kind of effect ? Or, something in the permanent state of things, concerned in bringing a certain sort of event to pass, which is a foundation for the constancy, or strongly prevailing probability of such an event I If we mean this by tendency (as I know not what ^e can be meant by ir, but this, or something like this) then it is manifest, that where we see a stated prevalence of any kind of effect or event, there is a tendency to that effect in the nature and state of its causes. A common and steady effect shews, that there is somewhere a preponderation, a prevailing exposedness or liableness in the state of things, to what comes so steadily to pass. The natural dictate of reason shews, that where there is an effect, there is a cause, and a cause sufficient for the effect; because, if it were not sufficient: it would not be effectual ; and that therefore, where there is a stated prevalence of the effect, there is a stated prevalence in the cause : A steady effect argues a steady X:ause. We obtain a notion of such a thing as tendency, no other way than by observation ; and we can observe nothing but events ; and it is the commonness or constancy of events that gives us a notion of tendency in all cases. Thus' we judge of tendencies in the natural world. Thus we judge &1" ttfe tendencies or propensities of nature in minerals, vegetables, animals, rational and irrational creatures. A notion 6f a atated tendency, or fixed propensity, is not-obtained by obserV'

Vol.. VI. T

we ORIGINAL SIN.

ing only a single event. A stated preponderation in the cause or occasion, is argued only by a stated prevalence of the effect.. If a die be once thrown, and it falls on a particular side, we do not argue from hence, that that side is the heaviest; but if it be thrown without skill or care, many thousands or millions of limes going, and constantly falls on the same side, we have no' the least doubt in our minds, but that there is something of propensity in the case, by superior weight of that side, or in some oJier respect. How ridiculous would he make himself, who should earnestly dispute against any tendency in the state of things to cold in the winter, or heat in the summer ; or should stand to it, tliat although it often happened that water quenched fire, yet there was no tendency in it to such aa effect.

In the case we are upon, the human nature, as existing ia sue h an immense diversity of persons and circumstances, and never failing in any one instance, of coming to that issue, viz. that sinfulness, which implies extreme misery and eternal ruin, is as the die often cast. For it alters not the case in the least, as to the evidence of tendency, whether the subject of the constant event be an individual, or a nature and kind. Thus, if there be a succession of trees of the same sort, proceeding one from another, from the beginning of the world, growing in all cour;tries, soils, and climates, and otherwise ia (as it were) an infiniie variety of circumstances, all bearing ill fruit; it as much proves tlie nature and tendency of the hnd^ as if it were only one individual tree, that had remained from the beginning of the world, had often been transplanted into different soils, Sec. and had continued to bear only bad fruit. So, if there were a particular family, which, from generation to generation, and through every remove to innumerable different countries, and places of abode, all died of a consumption, or all run distracted, or all murdered themselves, it would be as much an evidence of the tendency of something in ilic nature or constitution of that race, as it would be of the tendency of something in the nature or state of an individual, if some one person had lived all that time, and some remarkable event had often appeared in him, which he had been the

ORIGINAL SIN. Hfr

ag-ent or subject of from year to year, and from Ggclorge,

continually and without foil.

Here may be observed the weakness of that objection, made ac^ainst the validity of the argument for a fixed propensity to sin, from the constancy and universality of the event, that Adam sinned in one instance, without a fixed propensity, without doubt a single event is an evidence, that there was some cause or occasion of that event ; but the thing we are speaking cf, is ^ fixed cause. Propensity is a stated., continued thing. We justly argue, that a stated effect must have :i ttated cause } and truly observe, that we obtain the notion of tendency, or stated Jireponderation in causes, no other way than by observing a stated prevalence of a particular kind of effect. But who ever argues a fixed propensity from a single event ? And is i. not strange arguing, that because an event which once comes o pass, does not prove any stated tendency, therefore the unfailing constancy of an event is an evidence of no such thir g ? But because Dr. Taylor makes so much of this objection, from Adam's sinning without a propensity, I shall hcicafter consider it more particularly, in the beginning of the 9th Section of this Chapter ; v.'here will also be consider' cd what is objected from the fall of the angels.

Thus a propensity, attending the present nature or natural state of mankind, eternally to ruin themselves by sin, may certainly be inferred from apparent and acknowledged fact. And I would now observe further, that not only does this follow from facts that are acknowledged by Dr. Taylor but the things he asserts, the expressions and words which he uses, do plainly imply that all mankind have such a propensity ; yea, one of the highest kind, a propensity that is invincible, or a tendency which really amounts to a fixed, constant, unfailing necessity. There is a plain confession of a propensity or jironeness to sin, p. 14S. "Man, who drinketh in iniquity like water, who is attended with so many sensual appetites, and so c/2^ to indulge them." And again, p. 228, "we are very afit, in a world full of temptation, to be deceived, and drawn into sin by bodily appetites." If we are very apt or prone to be drawn into sin by bodily appetites, and sivfuUy ti:

t4b ORIGINAL SIN.

indulge thfr.-'j and very apt or prone to tjield to temptation io mu, ^•^hen we are firone to sin; for to yield to temptation to sin is mnful. In the same page he represents, that on this account, and on account of the consequences of this, the case of those V)ho are under a law, threatening death for every sin, must be quite deplorable, if they have no relief from the mercy of the lawgiver. Which implies, that their case is hopeless, as to an escape from death, the punishment of .sin, by any other means than God's mercy. And that implies, that there is such an aptness to yield to temptation to sin, that il is hope* less that any of^roankirid should wholly avoid it. But he speaks of it elsewhere, over and over, as truly impossible, or ^hat cannot be ; as in the words Which were cited in the last Section, from his note on Rom. v. 20, where he repeatedly speaks of the law, which subjects us to death for every trans.-gression, as what cannot give life ; and represents that if God offered us no other way of salvation, no man from the beginning of the world coidd be saved." In the same place he, with approbation, cites Mr. Locke's words, in which, speaking of the Israelites, he says, " All endeavors after right' cousness were lost labor, since any one slip forfeited life, and It was impossible for them to expect ought but death." Our author speaks of it as impossible for the law requiring sinless obedience, to give life, not that the lanu was weak in itself, but through the nveakncss 6f our flesh. Therefore he says, he conceives the Law not to be a dispensation suitable to the infirmity of the human nature in its present state. These things amount to a full confession, that the proneness in men to sin, and to a demerit of, and just exposedness to eternal ruin by sin, is universally invincible, or, which is the same thing, amounts to absolute, invincible necessity ; which surely is the highest kind of tendency or propensity ; and that not the less for his laying this propensity to our infirmity or weakness, which may seem to intimate some defect, rather than any thing positive : And it is agreeable to the sentiments of the best divines, that all sin originally comes from a defective or privative cause But sin does not cease to be sin, or a thing not justly exposing to eternal ruin (as implied in Dr. Taylor's own

OftlGINAL SIN, ,U9

^ords) for arising from infamity or defect ; nor does any invincible propensity to sin, cease to be a propensity to such demerit of eternal ruin, because the proneness arises from such a cause.

It is manifest, that this tendency which has been proved, does not consist in any particular external circumstances, that some or many are in, peculiarly tempting or influencing their minds ; but is inherent^ and is sealed in that nature which is common to all mankind, which they carry with them wherever they go, and still remains the same, however circumstances may diifer. For it is implied in what has been proved, and shewn to be confessed, that the same event comes to pass in all circumstances, that any of mankind ever are, or can be under in the vvorld. In God's sight no man living can be justi-fied i but all are sinners, and exposed to condemnation. This is true of persons of all constitutions, capacities, conditions, manners, opinions and educations ; in all countries, climates, nations and ages ; and through all the mighty changes and revolutions, which have come to pass in the habitable world. We have the same evidence, that the propensity in this ease lies in the nature of the subject, and does not arise from any particular circumstances, as we have in any case whatsoever ; which is only by the eflFects appearing to be the same in all changes of time and place, and under all varieties of circumstances. It is in this way only we judge, that any propensities, which we observe in mankind, are such as are seated in their nature, in all other cases. It is thus we judge of the mutual propensity betwixt the sexes, or of the disposi- " tions which are exercised in any of the natural passions or appetites, that they truly belong to the nature of man j because they are observed in mankind in general, through all countries, nations, and ages, and in all conditions.

If any should say, though it be evident that there is a tendency in the state of things to this general event, that all mankind should fail of perfect obedience, and should sin, and incur a demerit of eternal ruin ; and also that this tendency does not lie in any distinguishing circumstances of any particular people, person, or age ; yet it may not lie in man's

nature, bnt in the general constitution and frame of this world, into which men are born ; though the nature of man may bfe good, without any evil propensity inherent in it ; yet the nature and universal state of this eartldy world may be such as to be full of so many and strong temptations every where, and of such a powerful influence on such a creature as man, dwelling in so infirm a body, 8cc. that the lesult of the whole may be a strong and infallible tendency in such a state of things, to the sin and eternal ruin of every one of mankind.

To this I would reply, that such an evasion will not at all avail to the purpose of those whom I oppose in this controversy. It alters not the case as to this question, whether man is not a creature that in his present state is depraved and ruined by propensities to sin. If any creature be of such a nature that it proves evil in its proper place, or in the situa* tion which God has assigned it in the universe, it is of an evil nature. That part of the system is not good, which is not good in its place in the system ; and those inherent qualities of that part of the system, wiiich arc not good, but corrupt, in that place, are justly looked upon as evil inherent qualities. That propensity is truly esteemed to belong lo the nature of any being, or to be inherent in it, that is the necessary consequence of its nature, considered together with its proper situation in the universal system of existence, whether that propensity be good or bad. It is the nature of a stone to be heavy ; but yet, if it were placed, as it might be, at a distance from this world, it would have no such quality. But seeing a stone is of such a nature, that it will have this quality or tendency, in its proper place, here in this world, where God has made it, it is properly looked upon as a propensity belonging to its nature : And if it be a good propensity here in its proper place, then it is a good quality of its nature ; but if it be contrariwise, it is an evil natural quality. So, if mankind are of such a nature, that they have an universal, effectual tendency to sin and ruin in this world, where God has made and placed them, this is to be looked upon as a pernicious tendency belonging to their nature. I'here is, perhaps, scarce any such thjng in beings not independent and selfcxistent, as any pow-

€r or tendency, but what has some dependence on other be* ings, which they stand in some connexion with, in the univer-: sal system of existence : Propensities are no propensities, any-otherwise, than as taken with tiieir objects. Thus it is with the tendencies observed in natural bodies, such as gravity,; magnetism, electricity, &c. And thus it is with the propen» sities observed m the various kinds of animals ; and thus it is with most of the propensities in created spirits.

It may further be observed, that it is exactly the sarao thing, as to the controversy concerning an agreeableness with God's moral perfections of such a disposal of things, that man should come into the world in a depraved, ruined stale, by a propensity to sin and ruin ; whether God has so ordered it, that this propensity should lie in his nature considered alone, or with relation to its situation in the universe, and its connexion with other parts of the system to which the Creator has united it; which is as much of God's ordering, as man's nature itself, most simply considered.

Dr.Taylor, (p. 188, iSy) speaking of the attempt of some to solve, the difficulty of God's being the author of our nature, and yet that our nature is polluted, by supposing that God makes the soul pure, but unites it to a polluted body, (or a body so made, as tends to pollute the soul) he cries out of it as weak and insufficient, and too gross to be admitted. » For, (says he) who infused the soul into the body ? And if it is polluted by being infused into the body, who is the authdr and cause of its pollution \ And who created the body," &c. But is not the casp just the same, as to those who suppose that God made the soul pure, and places it in a polluted world, or a world tending by its natural state in which it is made, to pollute the soul, or to have such an influence upon it, that it shall without fail be polluted with sin, and eternally ruined ? Here, may not I also cry out, on as good grounds as Dr. Taylor, who placed the soul here in this world ? And if the world be polluted, or so constituted as naturally and infallibly to pollute the soil with sin, who is the cause ol ^is pollution ? And v/ho created the world ?

Though in the place now cited, Dr. Taylor so insists upon it, that God must be answerable for the pollution of thft soul, if he has infused or put the soul into a body that tends to pollute it ; yet this is the very thing which he himself supposes to be fact, with respect to the soul's being created by God, in such a body as it is, and in such a world as it is ; in a place which I ha% e already had occasion to observe, where he says, " We are afit^ in a world full of temptation, to be drawn into sin by bodily appetites.** And if so, according to his way of reason, God must be the author and cause of this aptness to be drawn into sin. Again, page 143, we have these words, " Who drinketh in inquity like water ? Who is attended with so many sensual appetites, and so apt to indulge them ?" In these vt'ords our author in effect says the individual thing that he cries out of as so gross, viz. the tendency of the body, as God has made it, to pollute the soul which he has infused into it. These sensual appetites, which incline the soul, or make it a/i( to a sinful indulgence, are cither from the body which God hath made, or otherwise a proneness to sinful indulgence is immediately and originally seated in the soul itself, which will not mend the matter for Dr. Taylor.

I would here lastly observe, that our author insists upon it, page 42, <S. that this lower world where we dwell, in its present state, « is as it was, when, upon a review, God pronounced it, and all its furniture, very good. And that the present form and furniture of the earth is full of God's riches, mercy, and goodness, and of the most evident tokens of his love and bounty to the inhabitants." If so, there can be no room for such an evasion of the evidences fiom fact, of the universal, infallible tendency of man's nature to sin and eternal perdition, as that the tendency there is to this issue, does not lie in man's nature, but in the general constitution and frame of this earthly world, which God hath raade to be the habitation of mankind.

v*?t.'c „ SECTION III.

Xh.at,jProfiensiiy^ Kvhich has been proved to be in the nature oj all 7iiankind^jnust be a very evil, depraved and pernicious Propensity ; making it mamfest^ that the soul ofman^ as it is by nature^ is in a corrupt, fallen, and ruined state ; ivbich is the other part of the consequence, draivn from th^ proposition laid dozvn in the frst Section.

;^-.j',THE question to be considered, in order to determine whether man's nature is not depraved and ruined^ is not, .whether he is not inclined to perform as many good deeds as b(td ones ; but which of these two he preponderates to, in the i^iaipe of his heart, and state of his nature, a state of innocence ,a}}d righteousness, and favor ivith God ; or a state of sin, guilt' iness, and abhorrence i7i the sight of God. Persevering sinless lighteousness, or else the guilt of sin, is the alternative, on the decision of which depends, (as is confessed) according to the nature and truth of things, as they are in themselves, and according to the rule of right, and of perfect justice, man's bgjng appr<oved and accepted of his Maker, and eternallv i.blessed as good; or his being rejected, thrown away, and cursed as bad. And therefore the determination of the tendency of man's heart and nature, with respect to these terms, is that which is to be looked at, in order to determine whether his nature is good or evil, pure or corrupt, sound or ruined. If such be man's nature, and state of his heart, that he has an infallibly effectual propensity to the latter of those terms ; then it is wholly impertinent to talk of the innocent and kind actions, even of criminals themseto^s, surpassing their crimes in nmnbers, a7id of the prevailing innocence, good nature, industry, felicity, and cheerfidness of the greater part of mankind. Let never so many thousands or millions of acts of honesty, good nature, Sec. be supposed ; yet, by the supposition, there is an unfailing propensity to such moral evil, as in its dreadful Vol. VI. U

consequences infinitely outweighs all effects or consequences of any supposed p:ooc1. Surely that tendency, whicli, in effect, is an infallible tendency to eternal destruction, is an infinitely dreadful and pernicious tendency ; and that nature and frame of mind, ^vhich implies such a tendency, must be an infiniely dreadful and pernicious frame of mind. It would be much more absurd to suppose that such a state of nature is good, or not bad, under a notion of men's doing more honest and kind things than evil ones ; than to say, the state of that ship is good to cross the Atlantic Ocean in, that is such as cannot hold together through the voyage, but will infallibly founder and sink by the way ; under a noiion that it may probably go great part of the way before it sinks, or that it will proceed and sail above water more hours than it will be in sinking : Or to pronounce that road a good road to go to such a place, the greater part of which is plain and safe^ though some parts of it are dangerous, and certainly fatal to them that travel in it; or to call that a good propensity, which is an inflexible inclijiation to travel in such a way.

A propensity to that sin which brings God's eternal wrath and curse (which has been proved to belong to the nature of man) is evil, not only as it is cala7nitous and sorrowfuU ending in great natural e-viU but as it is odious and detestable : For by the supposition, it tends to that moral evil, by which the subject becomes odious in the sight of God, and liable, as such, to be condemned, and utterly rejected, and cursed by him. This also makes it evident, that the state which it has been proved mankind are in, is a corrupt state in a7}ioral sense,. that it is inconsistent with the fulfilment of the law of God, ■which is the rule of moral rectitude and goodness. That tendency which is opposite to that which the moral law requires and insists upon, and prone to that which the moral law utterly foibids, and eternally condemns the subject for, is doubtless a corrupt tendency, in a moral sense.

So that this depravity is both odious, and also fier7iicioiis, fatal and destructive, in the highest sense, as inevitably tending to that which implies man's eternal ruin ; it shev^s that man, as he is by nature, is in a deplorable and undone state.

in the highest sense. And this proves that men do not come into the world perfectly innocent in the sight of God, and without any just exposedness to his displeasure. For the being by nature in a lost and ruined state, in the highest sense, is not consistent with being by nature in a state of favor with God.

But if any should still insist on a notion of men's good deeds exceeding their bad ones, and that, seeing the good that is in men is more than countervails the evil, they cannot be properly denominated evil ; all persons and things beinp^-most properly denominated from that which prevails, and luv:. the ascendant in them, I would say further, that,

I presume it will be allowed, that if there is in man's nature a tendency to guilt and ill desert, in a vast overbalance to virtue and merit ; or a propensity to that sin, the evil and demerit of which is so great, that the value and merit that is in him, or in all the virtuous acts that ever he performs, are as nothing to it; then truly the nature of man may be said to be corrupt and evil.

That this is the true case, may be demonstrated by v.hat is evident of the infinite heinousness of sin against God, from the nature of things. The heinousness of this must rise in some proportion to the obligation we are under to regard the Divine Being; and that must be in some proportion to his worlhiness of regard ; which doubtless is infinitely beyond the worthiness of any of our fellow creatures. But the merit of our respect or obedience to God is not infinite. The merit of respect to any being does not increas<?,but is rather diminished, in proportion to the obligations we are under in strict justice to pay him that respect. There is no great merit in paying a debt we owe, and by the highest possible obligations in strict justice are obliged to pay, but there is great demerit in refusing to pay it. Thai on such accounts as these there is an infinite demerit in all sin against God, which must therefore immensely outweigh all the merit which can be supposed to be in our virtue, 1 think, is capable of full demonstration ; and that the futility of the objections which some have made against the argument, might most plainly be demon-

stratcd. But I shall omit a particular consideration of ihe evidence of this matter IVom the nature of things, as I study brevit}', and lest any should cry out, Mctafihysics I as the manner of some is, when any argument is handled against any tenet they are fond of, wi(h a close and exact consideration of the nature of things. And this is not so necessary in the present case, inasmuch as the point asserted, namely, that he who commits any ©ne sin, has guilt and ill desert, which is so great, that the value and merit of all the good which it is possible he should do in his whole life, is as nothing to it ; I say this point is not only evident by meCafihysics, but is plainly demonstrated by what has been shewn to be fact, with respect to God's own constitutions and dispensations towards mankind ; as particularly by this, that whatever acts of virtue and obedience a man performs, yet if he trespasses in one point, is guilty of any the least sin, he, according to the law of God, and so according to the exact truth of things, and the proper demerit of sin, is exposed to be wholly cast out of favor with God, and subjected to his curse, to be utterly and eternally destroyed. This has been proved, and shewn to be the doctrine which Dr. Taylor abundantly teaches. But how can it be agreeable to the nature of things, and exactly consio-nant to everlasting truth and righteousness, thus to deal with a creature for the least sinful act, though he should perform ever so many thousands of honest and virtuous acts, to countervail the evil of that sin ? Or how can it be agreeable to the exact truth and real demerit of things, thus wholly to cast off the deficient creature, without any regard to the merit of all his good deeds, unless that be in truth the case, that the value and merit of all those good actions, bear no proportion to the heinousness of the least sin ? If it were not so, one would think, that however the offending person might have some proper punishment, yet, seeing theic is so much virtue to lay in the balance against the guilt, it would be agreeable to the nature of things, that he should find some favor, and not be altogether rejected, and made the subject of perfect and eternal destruction ; and thus no account at all be made of all his virtuc< so iiiuch as to procure him the

least relief or hope.- How can such a constitution refiresent ain in its proper colors., and according to its true nature and dc-serty (as Dr. Taylor says it does) unless this be its true nature, that it is so bad, that even in the least instance it perfectly swallows up all the value of the sinner's supposed good deeds, let them be ever so many. So that this mailer is not left to our metaphysics or philosophy ; the great Lawgiver, and infallible Judge of the universe, has clearly decided it, in the revelation he has made of what is agreeable to exact truth, justice, and the nature of things, in his revealed law, or rule of righteousness. '

He that in any respect or degree is a transgressor of God's law, is a wicked man, yea, wholly wicked in the eye of the law ; all his goodness being esteemed nothing, having no account made of it, when taken together with his wickedness. And therefore, without any regard to his righteousness, he is, by the sentence of the law, and so by the voice of truth and justice, to be treated as worthy to be rejected, abhorred, and cursed for ever ; and must be so, unless grace interposes, to cover his transgression. But men are really, in themselves, what they are in the eye of the law, and by the voice of strict equity and justice ; however they may be looked upon, and treated by infinite and unmerited mercy.

So that, on the whole, it appears, all mankind have an infallibly effectual propensity to that moral evil, which infinitely outweighs the value of all the good that can be in them; and have such a disposition of heart, that the certain consequence of it is, their being, in the eye of perfect truth and righteousness, wicked men. And I leave all to judge, whether such a disposition be not in the eye of truth a depraved disposition ?

Agreeably to these things, the scripture represents all mankind, not only as having guilt, but immense guilt, Avhich they can have no merit or worthiness to countervail. Such is the representation we have in Matth. xviii. 21, to the end. There, on Peter's inquiring, How often /lin brother should tres' pass against hi/n, and he forgive Iiim, whether until seven times ; Christ replies, I say ?iof jintn thee, until seven times, but until.

seventy times seven ; apparently meaninij, that lie should es-teem no num!)cr of ofTences too many, and no degree of injury it is possible our neighbor should be guilty of towards us, too great to be forgiven. For which this reason is given in the parable there following, that if ever we obtain forgiveness and favor with God, he must pardon that guilt and injury towards his majesty, which is immensely greater than the greatest injuries that ever men are guilty of one towards another, yea, than the sum of all their injuries put together, let them be ever so many, and ever so great; so that the latter would be but as an hundred pence to ten thousand talents, which immense debt we owe to God, and have nothing to pay ; which implies, that we have no merit to countervail any part of our guilt. And this must be, because if all that may be called virtue in us, be compared with our ill desert, it is in the sight of God as nothing to it. The parable is not to represent Peter's case in particular, but that of all who then were, or ever should be, Christ's disciples. It appears by the conclusion of the discourse. So likewise shall my heavenly Father do, if ye, from your hearts-, forgive not every one his brother their trespasses.

Therefore how absurd must it be for Christians to object against the depravity of man's nature, a greater number of innocent and kind actions, than of crimes; and to talk of a prevailing innocency, good nature, industry and cheerfulness of the greater part of mankind ? Infinitely more absurd, than it would be to insist, that the domestic of a prince was not a bad servant, because though sometimes he contemned and affronted his master to a great degree, yet he did not spit in his master's face so often as he performed acts of service ; or, than it \yould be to affirm, that his spouse was a good wife to him, because, although she committed adultery, and that with the slaves and scoundrels sometimes, yet she did not do this ?o often as she did the duties of a wife. These notions would be absurd, because the crimes are too heinous to be atoned for, by many honest actions of the servant or spouse of the prince ; there being a vast disproportion between the merit of the one, and the ill desert of the other ; but in no measure

so great, nay infinitely less, than that between the demerit of our offences against God, and the value of our acts of obedience.

Thus I have s;ox\e through v/ith my first argument; having shewn the evidence of the truth of the proposition I laid down at first, and proved its consequence. But there are many other things, that manifest a very corrupt tendency or disposition in man's nature, in his present state, which I shall take notice of in the following Sections.

SECTION IV.

The depravity of JVature appears by a propensity in all to Sin immediately, as soon as they are capable of it, and to Sin continually and progressively ; and also by the remains of Sin i?i the best of Men.

THE great depravity of man's nature appears, not only in that they universally commit sin, who spend any |ong time in the world, but in that men are naturally so prone to sin, that none ever fail of ?m?n(?(:/?a?f/j/transgressing God's law, and so of bringing infinite guilt on themselves, and exposing themselves to eternal perdition, as soon as they are capable of it.

The scriptures are so very express in it, that all mankind, all fleshi all the world, every man living, are guilty of sin ; that it must at least be understood, every one that is come to be capable of being active in duty to God, or sin against him, is guilty of sin. There are multitudes in tl.e^orld who have but very lately begun to exert their faculties, as moral agents ; and so are but just entered on their state of trial, as flcling for themselves. There are many thousands constantly in the world, who have, not lived one month, or week, or day since they have arrived to any period that can be assigned from their birth to twenty years of age. And if there be not a

U(J ORIGIXAL Slis'.

strong; propensity in man's nature to sin, that should, as it were, hurry them on to speedy transgression, and they have no guilt previous to their personal sinning, what should hinder but that there might always be a 52;reat number of such ;»s act for themselves on the stage of the world, and are answerable for themselves to God, who have hitherto kept themselves free from sin, and have perfectly obeyed God's law, and so are righteous in God's sight, with the righteousness of the law ; and if they should he called out of the world without any longer trial (as great numbers die at all periods of life) would be justified by the deeds of the law ? And how then can it be true, that in God's sight no 7nan liviitg can be justified, that no vmn can be just nvith God., and that by the deeds of the laiv no fiesh can be justified, because by the law is the knonvledge of Sin }-' And what should hinder but that there may always be many in the world, who are capable subjects of instruction and counsel, and of prayer to God, for whom the calls of God's word to repentance, and to seek pardon through the blood of Christ, and to forgive others their injuries, because they need that God should forgive them, would not be proper ; and for whom the Lord's prayer is not suitable, wherein Christ directs all his followers to pray, that God would forgive their sins, as they forgive those that trespass against them ?

If there are any in the world, though but lately become capable of acting for themselves, as subjects of the law of God, who are perfectly free from sin, such are most likely to be found among the children of Christian parents, who give them the most pious education, and set them the best examples ; and therefore such would never be so likely to be found in any part or age of the world, as in the primitive Christian church, in the first age of Christianity, (the age of the churches greatest purity) so long after Christianity had been established, that there had been time for great numbers of children to be born, and educated by those primitive Christians. It was in that age, and in such a part of that age, that the Apostle John wrote his first epistle to the Christians that then were. But if there was then a number of them come to understanding, who were perfectly free from sin, M'hy does he

write as he does? 1 John i. 8 10. « If we say that we

have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and the truth is not in us."

If any should object, that this is an overstraining of things ; and that it supposes a greater niceness and exactness than is observed in scripture representations and expressions, to infer from these expressions, that all men sin immediately as soon as ever they are capable of it. To this I would say, that I think the arguments used are truly solid, and do really and justly conclude, either that men are born guilty, and so are chargeable with sin before they come to act for themselves, or else commit sin immediately, without the least time intervening, after they are capable of understanding their obligation tQ God, and reflecting on themselves ; and that the scripture clearly determines, there is not one such person in the world, free from sin. But whether this be a straining things up to too great an exactness, or not ; yet I suppose, none that do not entirely set aside the sense of such scriptures as have been mentioned, and deny those propositions which Dr. Taylor himself allows to be contained in some of them, will deny they prove, that no considerable time passes after men are capable of acting for themselves, as the subjects of God's law, before they are guilty of sin ; because if the time were considerable, it would be great enough to deserve to be taken notice of, as an exception to such universal propositions, as. In thy sight shall no man living be justified, &c. And if this be allowed, that men are so prone to sin, that in fact all mankind do sin, as it we?-^immediately, after they come to be capable of it, or fail not to sin so soon, that no considerable time passes before they rim into transgression against God ; it does not much alter the case, as to the present argument. If the time of freedom from sin be so small, as not to be worthy of notice in the forementioned universal propositions of scripture, it Is also so small, as not to be worthy of notice in the present argument.

Vol. VI. W

A?fain, the reality and greatness of the depravity of man's nature appears in this, that he has a prevailing propensity to be continually sinning against God. What has been observed above, "will clearly prove this. That same disposition of nature, which is an effectual propensity to immediate sin, amounts to a propensity to continual sin. For a being prone to continual sinning, is nothing but a proneness to immediate sin continued. Such appears to be the tendency of nature to sin, that as soon as ever man is capable, it causes him immediately to sin, without suffering any considerable time to pass without sin. And therefore, if the same propensity be con-tin iicri ndimnished, there will be an equal tendency to immediate sinning again, without any considerable time passing. And so the same will always be a disposition still immediately to sin, with as little time passing without sin afterwards, as at first. The only reason that can be given why sinning must be immediate at first, is that the disposition is so great, that it will not suffer any considerable time to pass without sin ; and therefore, the same disposition being continued in equal degree, without some new restraint, or contrary tendency, it will still equally tend to the same effect. And though it is true, the propensity may be diminished, or have restraints laid upon it, by gracious disposals of providence, or merciful influences of God's spirit ; yet this is not owing to nature. That strong propensity of nature, by which men are so prone to immediate sinning at first, has no tendency in itself to a diminution ; but rather to an increase ; as the continued exercise of an evil disposition, in repeated actual sins, tends to strengthen it more and more ; agreeable to that observation of Dr. Taylor's, p. 228. " We are apt to be drawn into sin by bodily appetites, and when once we are under the government of these appetites, it is at least exceeding difficult, if not impracticable, to recover ourselves, by the mere force of reason." The increase of strength of disposition in such a case, is as in a falling body, the strength of its tendency to descend is continually increased, so long as its motion is continued. Not only a constant commission of sin, but a constant increase in the habits and practice of wickedness, is the true

tendency of man's depraved nature, if unrestrained by divine grace ; as the true tendency of the nature of an heavy body, if obstacles are removed, is not only to fall with a continued motion, but with a constantly increasing motion. And we see, that increasing iniquity is actually the consequence of natural depravity, in most men, notwithstanding all the restraints they have. Dispositions to evil are commonly much stronger in adult persons, than in children, when they first begin to act in the world as rational creatures.

If bin be such a thing as Dr. Taylor himself represents it, f. 69. " A thing of an odious and destructive nature, the corruption and ruin of our nature, and infinitely hateful to God ;" then such a propensity to continual and increasing sin, must be a very evil disposition. And if we may judge of the perniciousness of an inclination of nature, by the evil of the effect it naturally tends to, the propensity of man's nature must be evil indeed ; for the soul being immortal. Dr. Taylor acknowledges, p. 94. 5. it will follow from what has been observed above, that man has a natural disposition to one of these two things ; either to an increase of wickedness without end, or till wickedness comes to be so great, that the capacity of his nature will not allow it to be greater. This being what his wickedness will come to by its natural tendency, if divine grace does not prevent, it may as truly be said to be the effect which man's natural corruption tends to, as that an acorn in a pi-oper soil, truly tends by its nature to become a great tree.

Again, that sin which is remaining in the hearts of the best men on earth, makes it evident, that man's nature is corrupt, as he comes into the world. A remaining depravity of heart in the greatest saints, may be argued IVom the sins of most of those who are set forth in scripture as the most eminent instances and examples of virtue and piety ; and is also manifest from this, That the scripture represents all God's children as standing in need of chastisement. Heb. xii. 6....8. " For whom the Lord loveth, he chasteneth ; and scourgeth every Son whom he receiveth. What Son is he, whom the Father chasteneth not ? If ye re without chastisement, thefs

are ye bastards, and not sons." But this is directly and fully asserted in some places ; as in that forementioned, Eccles. vii. 20.«' There is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not." Which is as much as to say, there is no man on earth, that is so just, as to have attained to such a degree of ris^hteousness, as not to commit any sin. Yea, the Apos» tie James speaks of all Christians as often sinning, or committing many sins ; even in that primitive age of the Christian church, an age distinguished from all others by eminent attainments in holiness ; James iii. 2, " In many things we all offend." And that there is pollution in the hearts of ally as the remainder of moral filth that was there antecedent to all attempts or m»ans for purification, is very plainly declared, in Prov. xx. 9. " Who can say, I have made my heart clean, I am pure from my sin ?"

According to Dr. Taylor men come into the world wholly free from sinful propensities. And if so, it appears from what has been already said, there would be nothing to hinder, but that many, without being better than they are by nature, might perfectly avoid the commission of sin. But much more might this be the case with men after they had, by care, diligence, and good practice, attained those positive habits of virtue, whereby they are at a much greater distance from sin, than they were naturally ; which this writer supposes to be the case with many good men. But since the scripture teaches us, that the best men in the world do often commit sin, and have remaining pollution of heart, this makes it abundantly evident, that men, when they are no otherwise than they were by nature, without any of those virtuous attainments, have a sinful depravity ; yea, must have great corruption of nature.

ORIGINAL SIN. US

SECTION V.

T/ie defrravity of Nature appears-, in that the general Co7ise-quence of the State and Tendency of Man^s Nature is a much greater Degree of Sin^ than Righteousness ; not only with respect to Value and Dement, but Matter and Quantity.

I HAVE before shewn, that there is a propensity in man's nature to that sin, which in heinousness and ill desert immensely outweighs all the value and merit of any supposed good, that may be in him, or that he can do. I now proceed to say further, that such is man's nature, in his present state, that it tends to this lamentable effect ; that there should at all times, through the course of his life, be at least much more sin than righteousness, not only as to weight and value, but as to matter and measure ; more disagreement of heart and practice from the law of God, and from the law of nature and reason, than agreement and conformity.

The law of God is the rule of right, as Dr. Taylor often calls it: It is the measure of virtue and sin : So much agreement as there is with this rule, so much is there of rectitude, righteousness, or true virtue, and no more ; and so much disagreement as there is with this rule, so much sin is there.

Having premised this, the following things may be here observed.

I. The degree of disagreement from this rule of right is to be determined, not only by the degree of distance from it in excess, but also in defect ; or in other words, not only in positive transgression, or doing what \s forbidden, but also in withholding what is required. The Divine Lawgiver does as much prohibit the one as the other, and does as much charge the latter as a sinful breach of his law, exposing to his eternal wrath and curse, as the former. Thus at the day of judgment, as described Matth. xxv. The wicked are condemned

;«5 ORIGINAL SIN.

as cursed to everlasting Jlre, for their sin in defect and omission : / ii'as an hungred^ and ye gave me no meat^ £cc. And the case is thus, not only when the defect is in word or behavior, but in the inward temper and exercise of the mind. 1 Cor. xvi. 22, " If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Maranatha." Dr. Taylor, speaking of the sentence and punishment of the wicked, (Matth. xxv. 41, 46) says, p. 159, " It was manifestly for want of benevolence, love, and compassion to their fellow creatures, that they were condemned." And elsewhere, as was observed before, he says, that the law of God extends to the latent firindples of sin \o forbid them, and to condemn to eternal destruction for them. And if so, it doubtless also extends to the inward principles of holiness, to require them, and in like manner to condemn for the want of them.

II. The sum of our duty to God, required in his law, is love to God ; taking love in a large sense, for the true regard of our hearts to God, implying esteem, honor, benevolence, gratitude, complacence. Sec. This is not onlyVfery plain by the scripture, but it is evident in itself. The sum of what the law of God requires, is doubtless obedience to that law : No law can require more than that it be obeyed. But it is manifest, that obedience to God is nothing, any otherwise than as a testimony of the respect of our hearts to God : Without the heart, man's external acts are no more than the motions of the limbs of a wooden image, have no more of the nature of either sin or righteousness. It must therefore needs be so, that love to God, or the respect of the heart, must be the sum of the duty required towards God in his law.

III. It therefore appears from the premises, that whosoever withholds more of that love or respect of heart from God, which his law requires, than he affords, has more sin than righteousness. Not only he that has less divine love, than passions and affections which are opposite ; but ilso he that does not love God half so much as he ought, or has reason to do, has justly more wrong than right imputed to him, according to the law of God, and the law of reason, he has

ORIGINAL SIN. ler

more irre8:ularity than rectitude, with regard to the law of ♦ love. The sinful disrespect or unrespectfulness of his heart to God, is greater than his respect to him.

But what considerate person is there, even among the more virtuous part of mankind, but what would be ashamed to say, and profess before God or men, that he loves God half so much as he ought to do ; or that he exercises one half of that esteem, honor and gratitude towards God, which would be altogether becoming him ; considering what God is, and what great manifestations he has made of his transcendent excellency and goodness, and what benefits he receives from him ? And if few or none of the best of men can with reason and truth make even such a profession, how far from it must the generality of mankind be ?

The chief and most fundamental of all the commands of the moral law, requires xis " to love the Lord our God tvith all our hearts^ and tvilh all our souls, with all 07ir strength^ and all our mind ;" that is plainly, with all that is within us, or to the utmost capacity of our nature ; all that belongs to, or is comprehended tvithin the utmost extent or capacity of our heart and soul, and mind and strength, is required. God is in hirnself worthy of infinitely greater love, than any creature can exercise towards him : He is worthy of love equal to his perfections, which are infinite : God loves himself witli no greater love than he is worthy of, when he loves himself infinitely ; but we can give God no more than we have. Therefore, if we give him so much, if we love him to the utmost extent of the faculties of our nature, we are excused ; but when what is proposed, is only that we should love him as much as our capacity will allow, this excuse of want of capacity ceases, and obligation takes hold of us ; and we are. doubtless obliged to love God to the utmost of what is possible for us, with such faculties, and such opportunities and advantages to know God, as we have. And it is evidently implied in this great commandment of the law, that our love to God should be so great, as to have the most absolute possession of all the soul, and the perfect government of all thr principles and springs of action that are in our nature.

Though it is not easy, precisely to fix the limits of maa*s capacity, as to love to God ; yet in general we raay determine, that his capacity of love is coextended with his capacity of knowledge ; the exercise of the understanding opens the way for the exercise of the other faculty. Now, though we cannot have any proper positive undersanding of God's infinite excellency ; yet the capacity of the human understanding is very great, and may be extended far. It is needless to dispute, how far man's knowledge may be said to be strictly comprehensive of things that are very great, as of the extent of the expanse of the heavens, or of the dimensions of the globe of the earth, and of such a great number, as of the naany millions of its inhabitants. The word comprehensive seems to be ambiguous. But doubtless we are capable of some proper positive understanding of the greatness of these things, in comparison of other things that we know, as unspeakably exceeding them. We are capable of some clear understanding of the greatness or considerableness of a whole nation ; or of the whole world of mankind, as vastly exceeding that of a particular person or family. We can positively understand that the whole globe of the earth is vastly greater than a particular hill or mountain. And can have some good positive apprehension of the starry heavens, as so greatly exceeding the globe of the earth, than the latter is as it were nothing to it. So the human faculties are capable of a real and clear understanding of the greatness, glory and goodness of God, and of our dependence upon him, from the manifestations which God has made of himself to mankind, as being beyond all expression above that of the most excellent human friend, or earthly object. And so we are capable of an esteem and love to God, which shall be proportionable, and as much exceeding that which we have to any creature.

These things may help us to form some judgment, how vastly the generality of mankind fall below their duty, with respect to love to God ; yea, how far they are from commg halfway to that height of love, which is agreeable to the rule of right. Surely if our esteem of God, desires after him, and delight in him, were such as become us, considering the

•ihings forementioncd, they would exceed our regard to oth« er things as the heavens are high above the earth, and would swallow up all other afFections like a deluge. But how far, how exceeding far, are the generality of the world from any appearance of being influenced and governed by such a degree of divine love as this !

If we consider the love of God, with respect to that one kind of exercise of it, namely, gratitude, how far indeed do the generality of mankind come short of the rule of right and reason in this ! If we consider how various, innumerable, and vast the benefits are we receive from God, and how infinitely great and wonderful that grace of his is, which is revealed and offered to them that live under the gospel, in that eternal salvation which is procured by God's giving his only begotten Son to die for sinners ; and also how unworthy we are all, deserving (as Dr. Taylor co ifesses) eternal perdition tinder God's wrath and curse ; how great is the gratitude that would become us, who are the subjects of so many and great benefits, and have such grace towards poor, sinful, lost mankind set before us in so affecting a manner, as in the extreme sufferings of the Son of God, being caiiifd through lliose pains by a love stronger than death, a love that conquered those mighty agonies, a love whose length, and breadth, and depth, and height, passes knowledge ? But oh ! What poor returns I How little the gratitude ! How low, hov?" •fjld and inconstant the affection in the best, compared with the obligation ! And what then shall be said of the gratitude of the generality ? Or rather, who can express the ingratitude ?

If it were so, that the greater part of them that are called €hristiLUis, were no enemies to Christ in heart and practice, were not governed by principles opposite to him and his gospel, but had some real love and gratitude ; yet if their love falls vastly short of the obUt;aiion or occasion given, they are guilty of shameful and odious ingratitude. As when a man has been the subject of some instance of transcendent generosity whereby he has been relieved from the most extreme calamity, and brought into very opulent, honorable, and hap-

VoL. VI. X

py circuTYistances, by a benefactor of excellent cljawcter j and yet expresses no more gratuude on such an occasion than would be requisite for some kindness comparatively infinitely small, he may justly fall under the imputation of vile un» thankfulness, and of much more ingratitude than gratitude ; thous^h be may have no ill will to his benefactor, or no positive affecMon of mind contrary to thankfulness and benevolence. What is odious in him is hia defect, whereby he falls so vastly below his duty-

Dr. Turnbull abund.tntly insists, that the forces of the affections naturally in man are well proportioned ; and oftem puts a question to this purpose :....How man's nature could have been better constituted in this respect ? How the affec-tic ns of his heart could have been better proportioned I I will now mention one instance, out of many that might be mentioned :

Man, if his heart were not depraved, might have had a disposition to gratitude to God for his goodness, in proportion t» his disposition to anger towards men for their injuries. When I say in proportion, I mean considering the greatness and number of favors and injuries, and the degree in which the one and the other are unmerited, and the benefit received by the former, and the damage sustained by the latter. Is there not an apparent and vast difference and inequality in the dispositions to these two kinds of affection, in the generality of brth old and young, adult persons and little children ? How ready is resentment for injuries received from men ? An4 how easily js it raised in most, at least to an equality with the desert ? And is it so with respect to gratitude for benefits received from God, in any degree of comparison ? Dr. Turn-bull pleads for the natural disposition to anger for injuries, as being good and useful; but surely gratitude to God, if we were inclined to it, would be at least as good and useful as the oiher.

How far the generality of mankind are from their duty with respect to love to God, will further appear, if wc consider that we are obliged not only to love him with a love of gratitude for benefits received ; but true love t* God primari-

Sy consists in a supreme regard to him for what he is in himself. The tendency of true virtue is to treat every thing as it is, and according to its nature. And if we regard the Most High according to the infinite dignity and glory of his nature, we shall esteem and love him with all our heart and Soul, and to the utmost of the capacity of our nature, on this account; and not primarily because he has promoted our interest. If God be infinitely excellent in himself, then he ic infinitely lovely on that account, or in other words, infinitely ■worthy to be loved. And doubtless, if he be worthy to be loved for this, then he ought to be loved for this. And it is manifest there can be no true love to him, if he be not lo*'ed for what he is in himself. For if we love him not for his own sake, but for something else, then our love is not terminated on him, but on something else, as its ultimate object. That is no true value for infinite worth, which implies no value lor that worthiness in itself considered, but only on the account of something foreign. Our esteem of God is fundamentally defective, if it be not primarily for the excellency of his nature, which is the foundation of all that is valuable in him in any respect. If we love not God because he is what he is, but only because he is profitable to us, in truth we love him not at all; if we seem to love him, our love is not to him, but to something else.

And now I must leave it to every one to judge for himself, from his own opportunities of observation and information concerning mankind, hov/ little there is of this disinterested love to God, this pure divine afi'ection, in the world. How very little indeed in comparison of other aifections altogether diverse, which perpetually urge, actuate and govern mankind, and keep the world, through all nations and ages, in a continual agitation and commotion ! This is an evidence of an horrid contempt of God, reigning in the world of mankind. It would justly be esteemed a great instance of disrespect and contempt of a prince, if one of his subjects, when he came into his house, should set him below his meanest slave. But in setting the Infinite Jehovah below earthly ob" jects and enjoyments, men degrade him below those things^

between which and him there is an infinitely greater distance, than between the highest earthly potentate, and the most abject of mortals. Such a conduct as the generality of men are guihy of towards God, continually and through all ages, in innumerable respects, v/ould be accounted the most vile, contemptuous treatment of a fellow creature of distinguished dignity. Particularly men's treatment of the offers God snakes of himself to them as their Friend, their Father, their God, and everlasting portion ; their treatment of the exhibitions he has made of his unmeasurable love, and the boundless riches of his grace in Christ, attended with earnest repealed calls, counsels, expostulations and mtrealies, as also of the most dreadful threatenings of his eternal displeasure and vengeance.

Before I finish this Section, it may be proper to say something in reply to an objection, some may be ready to make against the force of that argument, which has been used to prove that men in general have more sin than righteousness, namely, thqt they do not come halfway io that degree of love to God, which becomes them, and is their duty.

The objection is this : That ihe argument seems to prove too much, in that it will prove, that even good men themselves have more sin than holiness, which also has been supposed. But if this were true, it would follow that sin is the prevalent principle even in good men,and that it is the principle which has the predominancy in the heart and practice of the truly pious, which is plainly contrary to the word of God.

I answer, if it be indeed so, that there is more sin, consisting in defect of required holiness, than there is of holiness in good men in this woild ; yet it will not follow that sin has the chief government of their heart and practice, for two reasons.

1. They may love God more than other things, and yet there may not be so much love, as there is want of due love ; er in other words, they may love God more than the world, and therefore the love of God may be predominant, and yet may not love God near half so much as they ought to do. This need not be esteemed a paradox : A person may love R

father, mr smme f^real friend and benefactor, of a very excellent character, more than some other object, a thousand limes less worthy of his esteem and affection, and yet love him ten times less than he ought; and so be chargeable, all things considered, with a deficiency in respect and gratitude, that is very unbecoming and hateful. If love to God prevails above the love of other things, then virtue will prevail above evil affections, or positive principles of sin ; by which principles St is, that sin has a positive power and influence. For evil affections radically consist in inordinate love to other things besides God ; and therefore, virtue prevailing beyond these, •will have the governing influence. The predominance of the love of God in the hearts of good men, is more from the nature of the object loved, and the nature of the principle of true love, than the degree of the principle. The object is one of supreme loveliness ; immensely above all other objects in worthiness of regard ; and it is by such a transcendent excellency, that he is God, and worthy to be regarded and adored as God ; and he that truly loves God, loves him as God : True love acknowledges him to be God, or to be divinely and supremely excellent; and must arise from some knowledge, sense, and conviction of his worthiness of supreme respect; and though the sense and view of it may be very imperfect, and the love that arises from it in like manner imperfect; yet if there be any realising view of such divine excellency, it must cause the heart to respect God above all.

2. Another reason, why a principle of holiness maintains the dominion in the hearts of good men, is tiie nature of the covenant of grace, and the promises of that covenant, on ■which true Christian virtue relies, and which engage God's strength and assistance to be on its side, and to help it against enemy, that it may not be overcome. The just live by faith. Holiness in the Christian, or his spiritual life, is maintained, as it has respect by faith to its author and finisher ; and de-Tives strength and efficacy from the divine fountain, and by this means overcomes. For, as the apostle says, T/iis is the ■victory that overcomes the world., even our faith. It is our f^ithin him who has promised, never to leave nor forsake his

people, and not to forsake the work of his own hands, nor suf* fer his people to be tempted above their ability, and that his grace shall be sufficient for them, and that his strength shall be made perfect in weakness, and that where he has begun t jood work he will carry it on to the day of Christ.

SECTION VL

The Corrufttion of Man's Kature afifiears by its Tendency^ in its present State^ to an extreme degree of Folly and Stupidity in Matters of Religion.

IT appears, that tnan*s nature is greatly depraved, by an apparent proneness to an exceeding stufiidity and soitish-ness in those things wherein his duty and main interest are chiefly concerned.

I shall instance in two things, viz. men's proneness to idolatry ; and so general and great a disregard of eternal things, as appears in them that live under the light of the gospel.

It is manifest, that man's nature in its present state is attended with a great propensity to forsake the acknowledg-» ment and worship of the trne Cod, and to fall into the most stupid idolatry. This has been sufficiently proved by known fact, on abundant trial: Inasmuch as the world of mankind in general (excepting one small people, miraculously deliver-* cd and persevered) through all naMons, in all pans of thd ■world, ages after ages, continued without the knowledge and worship of the true God, and overwhelmed in gross idolatry, without the least appearance or prospect of its recovering itself from so great blindness, or returning from its brutish principles and customs, till delivered by divine grace.

ORIGINAL SIN. lf$

in order to the most just arguing from fact, concerning^ <he tendency of man's nature, as that is in itself, it should Ije inquired what the event has been, where nature has been left to itself, to operate according to its own tendency, with least opposition made to it by any thing supernatural ; rather than in exempt places, where the infinite power and grace ol God have interposed, and extraordinary means have been used to stem the current, and bring men to true religion and virtue. As to he means by which God's people of old, in the line of Abraham, were delivered and preserved from idolatry, thef were miraculous, and of mere grace : Nolwithstandmg which, they were often relapsing into the notions and ways of the heathen ; and when they had backslidden, never were recovered, but by divine gracious interposition. And as to the means by vyhich many Gentile nations have been delivered since the days of the gospel, they are such as have been wholy owing to most wonderful, miraculous, and infinite grace. God was under no obligation to bestow on the heathen world greater advantages than they had in the ages of their gross darkness ; as appears by the fact, that God actually did not, for so long a time, bestow greater advantages.

Dr. Taylor himself observes, (Key.^ p. 1.) " That in about four hundred years after the flood, the generality of mankind were fallen into idolatry." And thus it was every where through the world, excepting among that people that was saved and preserved by a constant series of miracles, through, a variety of countries, nations, and climates, g-rea( enough ; and through successive changes, revolutions, and ages, numc' rous enough^ to be a sufficient trial of what nsankind are prone to, if there be any such thing as a sufficient trial.

That men should forsake the true God for idols, is an evidence of the most astonishing folly and stupidity, by God's awn testimony, Jer. ii. 12, IS. " Be astonished, O ye heavens, at this, and be ye horribly afraid, be ye very desolate, saith the Lord : For my people have committed two evils ; ihcy have forsaken me, the fountain of living waters, and iiave hewed out to themselves cisterns, broken cisterns, that «n hold no water.** And that mankind in general did thus.

so soon after the flood, was from the evil propensity of their hearts, and because they did not like to retain God in their knonvkdge ; as is evident by Rom. i- 28. And the universality of the effect shews that the cause was universal, and not any thing belonging to the particular circumstances of one, or only some nations or ages, but something belonging to that nature that is common to all nations, and that remains the same through all ages. And what other cause could this great effect possibly arise from, but a depraved disposition, natural to all mankind ? It could not arise from want of a sufficient capacity or means of knowledge. This is in effect confessed on all hands. Dr. Turnbull (Christian Philosophy, p. 21.) says as follows : " The existence of one infinitely powerful, wise, and good mind, the author, creator, upholder, and governor of all things, is a truth that lies plain and obvious to all that will but think." And (ibid, p. 245.) " Moral knowledge, which is the most important of all knowledge, may easily be acquired by all r.ien." And again, (ibid, p. 292.) " Every man by himself, if he would duly employ his mind in the contemplation of the works of God abnut him, or in the examination of his own frame might make very great progress in the knowledge of the wisdom and goodness of God. This all men, generally speaking, might do, with very little assistance ; for they have all sufficient abilities for thus employing theirminds, and have all sufficient time for it." Mr. Locke says (Hu7nan Understanding, p. iv. Chap. iv. p. 242, Edit. 11.) " Our own existence, and the sensible parts of the universe, offer the proofs of a deity so clearly and cogently to our thoughts, that I deem it impossible for a considerate man to withstand them. For I judge it as certain and clear a truth, as can any where be delivered, that the invisible things of God are clearly seen from the creation of the world, being understood by tbc things that are made, even his eternal power and godhead." And Dr. Taylor him' elf, (in p. 78) says, «< The light given to all ages and nations of the world, is sufficient for the knowledge and practice of their duty." And in p. Ill, 112, citing those words of the apostle, Rom. ii. 14, 15, says, " This clearly supposes that the Gentiles, who were

then in the world, might have done the things contained in the law by nature, or their natural power." And in one of the

next sentences, he says, "The apostle, in Rom. i. 19 21,

affirms that the Gentiles had light sufficient to have seen God's eternal power and godhead, in the works of creation ; and that the reason why they did not glorify him as God, wis because they became vain in their imaginations, and had darkened their foolish heart ; so that they were without excuse." And in his paraphrase on those verses in the 1st of Romans he speaks of the " very heathens, that were without a written yevelation, as having tliat clear and evident discovery of God's being and perfections, that they are inexcusable in not glorifying him suitably to his excellent nature, and as the author of their being and enjoyments." And in p. 146, 5, he says, " God affords every man sufficient light to know his duty." If all ages and nations of the world have sufficient light for the knowledge of God, and their duty to him, then even such nations and ages, in which the most brutish ignorance and barbarity prevailed, had sufficient light, if they had had but a disposition to improve it; and then much more those of the heathen, which were more knowing and polished, and in ages wherein arts and learning had made greatest advances. But even in such nations and ages, th^^re was no advance made towards true religion ; as Dr. Winder observes (History of KnoivledgCy Vol. ii. p. 336) in the following words: "The Pagan religion degenerated into greater absurdity, the further it proceeded ; and it prevailed in all its height of absurdity, when the Pagan nations were polished to the height. Though they set out with the talents of reason, and had solid foundations of information to build upon, it in fact proved, that with all their strengthened faculties, and growing powers of reason, the edifice of religion rose in the most absurd deformities and dispositions, and gradually went on in the most irrational, dis-proportioned, incongruous systems, of which the most easy-dictates of reason would have demonstrated the absurdity. They were contrary to all just calculations in moral mathematics." He observes, " That their grossest abominations first began in Egypt, where was an ostentation of the greatest Vol. VI, Y

prop-ress in learning and science ; and they never renounced clearly any of their abominations, or openly returned to the worship of the one tree God, the Creator of all things, and to the original, genuine sentinnents of the highest and most venerable aniquity. The Pagan religion continued in this deep stale ofcorriipticn to the last. The Pagan Philosophers, and inquisitive men, made great improvements in many sciences, and even in morality itself; yet the inveterate absurdities of Pagan idolatiy remained without remedy. Every temple smoked with increase to the sun and moon, and other inanimate material luminaries, and earthly elements, to Jupiter, Juno, Mars and Venus, Sec the patrons and examples of almost every vice. Hecatombs bled on the altars of a thousand gods ; as mad superstitions inspired. And this was not the disgrace of our ignorant, untaught northern countries only ; but even at Jihens itself, the infamy reigned, and circulated through all Greece; and finally prevailed, amidst all their learning and politeness, under the Ptolejnys in Egyfit, and the Cesars at Rome. Now if the knowledge of the Pagan world, in religion, proceeded no further than this ; if they retained all their deities, even the most absurd of them their deified beasts, and deified men, even to the last breath of Pagan power ; wc may justly ascribe the great improvements in the world, on the subject of religion, to divine revelation, either vouchsafed in the beginning when this kno\vledp:e was competently clear and copious ; or at the death of Paganism, when this light slione forth in its consummate lustre at the coming of Christ."

Dr. Taylor often speaks of the idolatry of the heathen world, as great vj/ckechiess, in which they were wholly inexcusable ; and yet often speaks of their case as remediless, and of them as being dead in sin, and unable to recover themselves. And if so, and yet, according to his own doctrine; every age, and every nation, and every man, had sufficient light afforded, to know God, and to know and do their whole duty to him ; then their inability to deliver themselves must be a moral inalMlity, consisting in a desperate depravity, anft most evil disposition of heart.

And if there had not been sufficient trial of the propensity of the hearts of mankind, throuG:h all those ages that passed from Abraham to Christ, the trial has been continued down to this day, in all those vast regions of the face of the earth, that have remained without any efiects of the light of the gospel ; and the dismal effect continues every where unvaried. How was it with that multitude of nations inhabiting south and north America ? What appearance was there, wheil the Europeans first came hither, of their being recovered, or recovering, in any degree, from the grossest ignorance, delu.« sions, and most stupid Paganism ? And how is it at this day> in those parts of Africa and Asia, into \yhich the light of the gospel has not penetrated ?

This strong and universally prevalei^t disposition of mankind to idolatry, of which there has been such great trial, and so notorious a^d vast proof, in fact, is a most glaring evidence of the exceeding depravity of the human nature; as it is a propensity, in the utmost degree, contrary to the highest end, the main business, and chief happiness of mankind, consisting in the knowledge, service, and enjoyment of the living God, the Creator and Governor of the world ; in the highest degree contrary to that for which mainly God gave mankind more understanding than the beasts of the earth, and made them wiser than the fowls of heaven ; which was, that they might be capable ©f the knowledge of God ; and in the highest degree contrary to the first and greatest commandment of the moral law, that ive should have no other gods before Jehovah, and that we should love and adore him with all our heart, soul, mind, and strength. The scriptures are abundant in representing the idolatry of the heathen world, as their exceeding wickedness, and their most bru'ish stupidity. They worship and trust in idols, are said to be like the lifeless statues they worship, like mere senseless stocks and stones.

Psalm cxv. 4 8, and cxxxv. 15 18.

A second instance of the natural stufiidity of the minds of mankind, that I shall observe, is, that great disregard of their own eternal interest^ which appears so remarkably, so generally among them that live under the gospel.

As Mr. Locke observes (Human Understanding, Vol. I. p. 207.) " Were the will delermhied by the views of good, as it appears in contemplation, greater or less to the understanding, it could never get loose from the infinite, eternal joys of heaven, once propo'oed, and considered as possible ; the eternal condition of a future state infinitely outweighing the expectation of riches or honor, or any other worldly pleasure, which we can propose to ourselves ; though we should grant these the more probable to be obtained." Again (p. 228, 229^ " He that will not be so far a rational creature, as to reflect seriously upon infinite happiness and misery, must needs condemn himself, as not making that use of his understanding he should. The rewards and punishments of another life, %vhich the almighty has established, as the enforcements of his laws, are of weight enough to determine the choice, against whatsoever pleasure or pain this life can shew. When the eternal state is considered but in its bare possibility, which nobody can make any doubt of, he that will allow exquisite and endless happiness to be but the possible consequence of a good life here, and the contrary state the possible reward of a bad one, must own himself to judge very much amiss, if he does not conclude that a viriuous life, with the certain expect-ntion of everlasting bli-^s, which may come, is to be preferred To a vicious one, with the fear of that dreadful state of misery, which it is very possible may overtake the guilty, or at least the terrible, uncertain hope of annihilation. This is evidently so ; though the virtuous life heie had nothing but pain, and the vicious continual pleasure ; which yet is for the most part quite otherwise, and wicked men have not much the odds to brag of, even in their present possession : Nay, all things rightly considered, have I think even the worst part here. Bat when infiaiie happiness is put in one scale, against infinite misery in the other; if the worst that comes to the pious man, if he raistahes, be the best that the wicked man can attain to, if he be in the right ; who can, without madness, run the venture ? Who in his wits would choose to come within a possibility of infinite misery ? Wuich if he miss, there is yet nothing to b.' go": by tint hazi-d : Whereas, on the'

other side, the sober man ventures nothing, ac^ainst infinite happiness to be got, if his expectation comes to pass.

That disposition of mind which is a propensity to act contrary to reason, is a depraved disposition. It is not because the facuhy of reason, which God has given to inankind, is not sufficient fully to discover to them, that forty, sixty, or an hundred years, is as nothing in comparisQn of eternity, infinitely less than a second of time to an hundred years, that the greatest worldly prosperity and pleasure is not treated with most perfect disregard, in all cases where there is any degree of competition of earthly things, with salvation from exquisite, eternal misery, and the enjoyment of everlasting glory and felicity ; as certainly it would be, if men acted according to reason. But is it a matter of doubt or controversy, whether men in general do not shew a strong disposition to act far otherwise, from their infancy, till death is in a sensible approach ? In things that concern men's temporal interest, they easily discern the difference between things of a long and short continuance. It is no hard matter to convince men of the difference between a being admitted to the accommodations and entertainments of a convenient, beautiful, well furnished habitation, and to partake of the provisions and produce of a plentiful estate for a day or a night, and having all given to them, and settled upon them as their own, to possess as long as they live, and to be their's, and their heirs forever. There would be no need of men's preaching sermons, and spending their strength and life, to convince men of the difference. Men know how to adjust things in their dealings and contracts one with another, according to the length of time in which any thing agreed for is to be used or enjoyed. In temporal affairs, men arc sensible that it concerns them to provide for future lime, as well as for the present. Thus common prudence teaches them to take care in summer to lay up for winter ; yea, to provide a fund, and get a solid estate, whence they may be supplied for a long time to come. And not only so, but they are willing and forward to spend and be spent, to provide that which will stand their children in stead, after they are dead ; though it be

quite Tincertairif who shall use and enjoy what they lay up, after ihey have left the world ; and if their children should have the comfort of it, as they desire, they will not partake ■with them in that comfort, or have any more a portion in any thing under the sun. In things wliich relate to men's temporal interest, they seem very sensible of the uncertainty of life, especially of the lives of others ; and to make answerable provision for the secuiity of their worldly interest, that no con&i-ierablc part of it may vest only on so uncertain a foundation, as the life of a neighbor or friend. Common discretion leads men to take good care tliat their outward possessions be well secured by a good and firm title. In worldly concerns men are discerning of iheir opportunities, and careful to injprove them before they are past. The husbandman is careful to plow his ground and sow his seed in the proper season, otherwise he knows he cannot expect a crop ; and when the harvest is come, he will not sleep avray the time ; for he knows, if he docs so, the crop will soon be lost. How careful end eagle eyed is the merchant to observe and improve his opportunities and advantages to enrich himself ? How apt are men to be al rmed at the appearance of danger to their worldly estate, or any thing that remarkably threatens great loss or damage to their outward interest ? And how will they bestir themselves in such a case, if possible to avoid the threatened calamity ? In things purely secular, and not of a moral or spiritual nature, men easily receive conviction by past experience, when any thing, on repeated trial, proves unprofitable or prejudicial, and are ready to take warning by what they have found themselves, and also by the experience of their neighbors and forefathers.

But if we consider how men generally conduct themselves in things on v/hich their well being does infinitely more depend, how vast is the diversity ? in these things how cold, lifeless and dilatory ? With what difficulty are a few of multitudes excited to any tolerable degree of care and diligence, by the innumerable means used with men to make them wise for themselves ? And when some vigilance and activity is excited, how apt is it to die away, like a mere force against

a natural tendency ? What need of a constant repetition of admonitions and counsels, to keep the heart from falling asleep ? How many objections are made ? And how are difficulties inagnified ? And how soon is the mind discouraged ? How many arguments, and often renewed, and variously and elaborately enforced, do men stand in need of, to convince them of things that are selfevidert ? As that things which are eternal, are infinitely more important than things temporal, and the like. And after all, how very few are convinced effectually, or in such a manner as to induce to a practical preference of eternal things ? How senseless are men of the necessity of improving their time to provide for futurity, as to their spiritual interest, and their welfare in another world ! Though it be an endless futurity, and though it be their own personal, infinitely important good, after they are dead, that is to be cared for, and not the good of their children, which they shall have no share in. Though men are so sensible of the uncertainty of their neighbors' lives, when any considerable part of their estates depends on the continuance of them ; how stupidly senseless do they seem to be of the uncertainty of their own lives, when their preservation from immensely great, remediless, and endless misery, is risqued by a present delay, through a dependence on future opportunity ? What a dreadful venture will men carelessly and boldly run, and repeat and multiply, with regard to their eternal salvation, who are very careful to have every thing in a deed or bond firm, and without a flaw ? How negligent are they of their special advantages and opportunities for their soul's good ? How hardly awakened by the most evident and imminent dangers, threatening eternal destruction, yea, though put in mind of them, and much pains taken to point th.em forth, shew them plainly, and fully to represent them, if possible to engage their attention to them ? How are they like the horse, that boldly rushes into the battle ? How hardly are men convinced by their own frequent and abundant experience, of the unsatisfactory nature of earthly things, and the instability of their own hearts in their good frames and intentions ? And how hardly convinced by their ov/n ob;:ervatioti.

and Ihe experience of all past generations, of tiie uncertainty of life, and its enjoyments ? Psalm xlix. U, Sec. "Their inward thouijht is, that their houses shall continue forever. ....Nevertheless, man being in honor, abideth not : He is like the beasts that perish. This their way is their folly, yet their posterity approve their sayings. Like sheep are they laid in the grave."

In these things, men that are prudent for their temporal interest, act as if they were bereft of reason : « They have eyes, and see not ; ears, and hear not ; neither do they understand : They are like the horse and mule, that have no xmderstanding." Jer. viii. 7. " The stork in the heaven knoweth her appointed times; and the turtle, and the crane, and the swallow, observe the time of their coming i but my people know not the judgment of the Lord."

These things are often mentioned in scripture, as evidences of extreme folly and stupidity, wherein men act the part of enemies to themselves, as though they loved their own ruin ; Prov. viii. 36. « Laying wait for their own blood." Prov. i. 18. And how can these things be accounted for, but by supposing a most wretched depravity of nature ? Why otherwise should not men be as wise for themselves in spiritual and eternal things, as in temporal ? All Christians will confess that man's faculty of reason was given him chiefly to enable him to understand the former, wherein his main interest, and true happiness consists. This faculty would therefore undoubtedly be every way as fit for the understanding of them, as the latter, if net depraved. The reason why these are understood, and not the other, is not that such things as have been mentioned, belonging to men's spiritual eternal in-tere-it, are more obscure and abstruse in their own nature-For instance, the difference between long and short, the need of providing for futurity, the importance of improving proper opportunities, and of having good security, and a sure foundation, in affairs wherein our interest is greatly concerned, &c. these things are as plain in themselves in religious matters, as in other matters. And we have far greater means to assist us to be wise for ourselves in eternal, than in temporal

things. We have the abundant instruction of perfect and infinite wisdom itself, to lead and conduct us in the paths of righteousness, so that we may not err. And the reasons of things are most clearly, variously, and abundantly set before us in the word of God ; which is adapted to the faculties of mankind, tending greatly to enlighten and convince the mind : Whereas we have no such excellent and perfect rules to instruct and direct us in things pertaining to our temporal interest, nor any thing to be compared to it.

If any should say, it is true, if men gave full credit to what they are told concerning eternal things, and these appeared to thetm as real and certain things, it would be an evidence of a sort of madness in them, that they shew no greater regard to them in practice ; but there is reason to think, this is not the case, the things of another world being unseen things, appear to men as things of a very doubtful nature, and attended with great uncertainty. In answer, I would observe, agreeably to what has been cited from Mr. Locke, though eternal things were considered in their bare possibility, if men acted rationally, they would infinitely outvvei>;(h all temporal things in their influence on their hearts. And I would also observe, that the supposing eternal things not to be fully believed, at least by them who enjoy the light of the gospel, does not weaken, but rather strengthen the argument ior the depravity of nature. For the eternal world being what God had chiefly in view in the creation of men, and the things of this world being made to be wholly subordinate to the otlier, man's state here being only a state of probation, preparation, and progression, with respect to the fuiure state, and so eternal things being in effect men's all, their whole concern ; to understand and know vi'hich, it chiefly viras, that they had understanding given them ; and it concerning them infinitely more to know the truth of eternal things than any other, as all that are not infidels will own ; therefore we may undoubtedly conclude, that if men have not respect to them as real and certain things, it cannot be for want of sufficient evidence of their truth, to induce them so to regard them ; especially as to them that live under that light, which God

Vol. VI. Z

has appointed as the most proper exhibition of the nature and evidence of these things ; but it must be from a dreadful stupidity of mind, occasioning a sottish insensibiUty of their truth and importance, Avhen manifested by the clearest evidence.

SECTION VII.

That Man's nature is corrufit, afifiears in that vastly the greater part of mankind.) in all ages, have been wicked Men.

THE depravity of man's nature appears, not only in its propensity to sin in sowze degree, which renders a man an evil or wicked man in the eye of the law, and strict justice, as was before shewn ; but it is so corrupt, that its depravity either shews that men ai-e, or tends to make them to be, of such an evil character, as shall denominate them wicked men, according to the tenor of the covenant of grace.

This may be argued from several things which have been already observed ; as from a tendency to continual sin, a tendency to much greater degrees of sin than righteousness, and from the general extreme stupidity of mankind. But yet the present state of man's nature, as implying or tending to a wicked character, may be worthy to be more particularly-considered, and directly proved. And in general, this appears in that there have been so very few in the world, from age to age, ever since the world has stood, that have been of any other character.

It is abundantly evident in scripture, and is what I suppose none that call themselves Christians will deny, that the whole world is divided into good and bad, and tliat all mankind at the day of judgment will either be approved as righteous, or condemned as wicked ; either glorified as children of the kingdorn, or cast into a furnace of fire, as children of the imked

I need not stand to shew what things belong to the character of such as shall hereafter be accepted as righteous, according to the word of God- It may be sufficient for my present purpose, to observe what Dr. Taylor himself speaks of. as belonging essentially to the character of such. In p. 20:5, he says, " This is infallibly the character of true Christians, and what is essential to such, that tliey have really mor-tifiefl the flesh with its lusis ; they are dead to sin, and live no longer therein ; the old man is crucified, and the body of sin destroyed ; they yield themselves to God, as those that arc alive from the dead, and their members as instruments of righteousness to God, and as servants of righteousness to holiness." There is more to the like purpose in the two next ptiges. In p. 228, he says, " Whatsoever is evil and corrupt in us, we ought to condemn ; not so, as it shall still remain in us, that we may always be condemning it, but that Ave may speedily reform, and be efiectuaily delivered from it ; otherwise certainly we do not come up to the character of the true disciples of Christ."

In page 248, he says, " Unless God's favor be preferred before all other enjoyments whatsoever, unless there be a delight in the worship of God, and in converse with him, unless every appetite be brought into subjection to reason and truth, and unless there be a kind and benevolent disposition towards our fellow creatures, how can the mind be fit to dwell with God, in his house and family, to do him service in his kingdom, and to promote the happiness of any part of his creation." And in his Key, §286, page 101, 102, &c. shewing there, ivhat it is to be a true C/iristia?!, he says among other things, " That he is one who has such a sense and persuasion of the love of God in Christ, that he devotes his life to the honor and service of God, in hope of eternal glory. And that to the character of a true Christian, it is absolutely necessary that he diligently study the things that are fieely given him of God, viz. his election, regeneration, 8cc. that he may gain a just knowledge of those inestimable privileges, may taste that the Lord is gracious, and rejoice in the gospel salvation, as his greatest happiness and glory. It is necessary

that he work these blessings on his heart, till they become a vital principle, producing in him the love of God, engaging him to all cheerful obedience to his will, giving him a proper dignity and elevation of soul, raising him above the best and worst of this world, carrying his heart into heaven, and fixing his affections and regards upon his everlasting inheritance} and the crown of glory laid up for him there. Thus he is armed against all the temptations and trials resulting from any pleasure or pain, hopes or fears, gain or loss, in the present world. None of these things move him from a faithful discharge of any part of his duty, or from a firm attachment to truth and righteousness ; neither counts he his very life dear to him, that he may do the will of God, and finish his course with joy. In a sense of the love of God in Christ, he maintains daily communion with God, by reading and meditating on his word. In a sense of his own infirmity, and the readiness of the divine favor to succor him, he daily addresses the throne of grace, for the renewal of spiritual strength, in assurance of obtaining it, through the one Mediator Christ Jesus. Enlightened and directed by the heavenly doctrine of the gospel," Sec*

Now 1 leave it to be judged by every one that has any degree of impartiality, whether there be not sufficient grounds to think, from what appears every where, that it is but a very small part indeed, of the many myriads and millions which overspread this globe, who are of a character that in any wise answers these descriptions. However, Dr. Taylor insists that all nations, and every man on the face of the earth, have light and means sufficient to do the whole will of God, even they that live in the grossest darkness of paganism.

Dr. Taylor in answer to arguments of this kind, very impertinently from time to lime objects, that we are no judges of the viciousness of men's characters, nor are able to decide in what degree they are virtuous or vicious. As though we

» What Dr. TurnbuU says ot the character of a good man, is also worthy to be observed, ihiistian Philosophy p. 86,258, 259, 2881 375, 376, 409, 410.

could have no good grounds to judge, that any thing appertaining to the qualities or properties of the mind, which is invisible, is general or prevailing among a multitude or collective body, unless we can determine how it is with each individual. I think I have sufficient reason, from what I know and have heard of the American Indians, to judf^e, that there are not many good philosophers among them ; though the thoughts of their hearts, and the ideas and knowledge they have in their minds, are things invisible ; and though I have never seen so much as a thousandth part of the Indians ; and with respect to most of them, should not be able to pronounce peremptorily concerning any one, that he was not very knowing in the nature of things, if all should singly pass before me. And Dr. Taylor himself seems to be sensible of the falseness of his own conclusions, that he so often urges against others ; if we may judge by his practice, and the liberties he takes, in judging of a multitude himself. He, it seems, is sensible that a man may have good grounds to judge, that wickedness of character is general in a collective body ; because he openly does it himself. (JK^ey, p. 102.) After declaring the things which belong to the character of a true Christian, he judges of the generality of Christians, that they have cast off these things, that they are a fieofile that do err in their hearts, and have not knotvn God's ways. P. 259, he judges that the generality of Christians are the jnost wicked of all mankind ; when he thinks it will throw some disgrace on the opinion of such as he opposes. The like we have from time to time in other places, as p. 168, p. 258. Key, p. J27, 128.

But if men are not sufficient judges, whether there are few of the world of mankind but what are wicked, yet doubtless God is sufficient, and his judgment, often declared in his word, determines the matter. Matth. vii. 13, 14. " Enter ye in at the strait gate ; for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there be that go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way that leadeth to life, and few there be that find it." It is manifest, that here Christ is not only describing the state of things, as it was at that day, and does not mention \\\q comparative

smallness of the number of them that are saved, as a consequence of the peculiar perverseness of that people, and of that generation ; but as a consequence of the general citcum-stances of the way to life, and the way to destruction, the broadness of the one, and tlie narrowness of the other. In the straitness of the gate. Sec. I suppose none will deny, that Christ has respect to the strictness of those rules, which he had insisted on in the preceding sermon, and which render the way to life very difncult to mankind. But certainly these amiable rules would no; be difficult, Mere they not contrary to the natural inclinations of men's hearts ; and they would not be contrary to those inclinations, were these not depraved. Consequently the wideness of the gate, and broadness of the T,vay, that leads to destruction, in consequence of which many go in thereat, must imply the agrceableness of this way to inen's natural inclinations. The like reason is given by-Christ, why few arc saved. Luke xiii. 23, 24. " Then said one unto him, Lord, are there few savfed ? And he said unto them, strive to enter in at the strait gate : For many I say unto you, shall seek to enter in, and shall not be able.'"' That there are generally but few good men in the world, even among them that have those most distinguishing and glorious advantages for it, which they are favored v/ith, that live under the gospel, is evident by that saying of our Lord, from time to time in his mouth, 7nany are called, but Jew are chosen. And if there are but few among these, how few, how very few indeed, must persons of this character be, compared with the whole world of mankind ? The exceeding smallness of the number of trne saints, compared with the whole world, appears by the representations often made of them as distinguished from the world ; in which they are spoken of as called and chosen out of the world, redeemed from the earth, redeemed from among men ; as being those that are of God, while the whole world lielh in wickedness, and the like. And if we look into the Old Testament, we shall find the same testimony given. Prov. xx. 6. " Most men will proclaim every man his own goodness : But a faithful man who can find ?" By a faithful man, as the phrase is used in scripture,.

is intended much the same as a sincere, upright, or truly-good man ; as in Psal. xii. 1, and xxxi. 23, and ci. 6, and other places. Again, Eccl. vii. 25....29. " I applied mine heart to know, and to search, and to find out wisdom, and the reason of things, and to know the wickedness of folly, even of foolishness and madness : And I find more bitter than death, the woman whose heart is snares, Sec...Behold, this have I found, sailh the preacher, counting one by one, to find out the account, which yet my soul seeketh, but I find not: One man among a thousand have I found ; but a woman among all these have I not found. Lo, this only have I found, that God made man upright ; but they have sought out many inventions." Solomon here signifies, that when he set himself diligently to find out the account or proportion of true wisdom, or thorough uprightness among men, the result was, that he found it to be but as one to a thousand, &c. Dr. Taylor on this place, p. 184, says, " The v/ise man in the context, is inquiring into the corruption and depravity of mankind, of the men and women, that lived iij. his time." As though what he said represented nothing of the state of things in the world in general, but only in his time. But does Dr. Taylor or any body else, suppose this only to be the design of that book, to represent the vanity and evil of the v.'orld in that time, and to shew that all was vanity and vexation of spirit in Solomon's day ? (Which day truly we have reason to think, was a day of the greatest smiles of heaven on that nation, that ever had been on any nation from the foundation of tiie world.) Not only does the subject and argument of the whole book shew it to be otherwise ; but also the declared design of the book in the first chapter; where the world is represented as very much the same, as to the vanity and evil it is full of, from age to age, making little or no progress, after all its revolutions and restless motions, labors and pursuits, like the sea, that has all the rivers constantly emptying themselves into it, from age to age, and yet is never the fuller. As to that place, Prov. XX. 6. « A faithful man, who can find ?" There is no more reason to suppose that the wise man has respect only to his time, in thesewords, than in those immediately preceding,

counsel in the heart of a man is like decji waters ; but a man of jmderstanding -will draw it out. Or in the words next following, The just man noalketh in his integrity : His children are blessed after him. Or in any other Proverb in the whole book. And if it were so, that Solomon in these things meant only to describe is own times, it would not at all weaken the argument. For, if we observe the history of the Old Testament, there is reason to think there never was any time from Joshua to the captivity, wherein wickedness was more restrained, and virtue and religion more encouraged and promoted, than in David's and Sclomon's times. And if there was so little true piety in that nation that was the only people of God under heaven, even in their very best times, what may we suppose concerning the world in general, take one time with another ?

Notwithstanding what some authors advance concerning the prevalence of virtue, honesty, good neighborhood, cheerfulness, 8cc. in the world ; Solomon, whom we may justly esteem as wise and just an observer of human nature, and the state of the world of mankind, as most in these days (besides, Christians ought to remember, that he wrote by divine inspiratioT ) judged the world to be so full of wickedness, that it was better never to be born, than to be born to live only in such a world. Eccles iv. at the beginning. « So I returned and considered ail the oppressions that are done under the sun; and behold, the tears of such as were oppressed, and they had no comforter : And on the side of their oppressors there was power ; but they had no comforter. Wherefore, I praised the dead, which were already dead, more than the living, which are yet alive. Yea, better is he than both they, which hath not yet been ; who hath not seen the evil work 'that is done imder the sun." Surely it will not be said that Solomon has only respect to his times here too, when he speaks of the opprc-sions of them that were in power : since he himself, and others appohited by him, and wholly under bis control, were the men that weie in power in that land, and in almost all the neighboring countries.

The same inspired writer say*?? Eccles. ix. 3. " The heart of the sons of men is full of evil; and madness is in their heart while they live ; and after that they go to the dead." If these general expressions are to be understood only of some, and those the less part, when in general, truth, honesty, good nature, &c. govern the world, why are such general expressions from time to time used ? Why does not this wise and noble, and great soul'd Prince express himself in a more generous and benevolent strain, as well as more agreeable to truth, and say. Wisdom is in the hearts of the sons of Ken ivhile they live, Sec..instead of leaving in his writings so many sly, illnatured suggestions, which pour such contempt on the human nature, and tend so much to excite mutual jealousy and malevolence, to taint the minds of mankind through all generations after him ?

If we consider the various successive parts and periods of the duration of the world, it will, if possible, be yet more evident, that vastly the greater part of mankind have, in all ages, been of a wicked character. The short accounts we have of Adam and his family are such as lead us to suppose, that far the greatest part of his posterity in his life time, yea, in the former part of his life were wicked. It appears, that his eldest son, Cain, was a very wicked man, who slew his righteous brother Abel. And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years before Seth was born ; and by that time, we may suppose, his posterity began to be considerably numerous: When he was born, his mother called his name Seth ; for God, said she, hath appointed jne another seed instead of Abel. Which naturally suggests this to our thoughts ; that of all her seed then existing, none were of any such note for religion and vii'tue, as that their parents could have any great comfort in them, or expectation from them on that acrount. And by the brief hisiory we have, it looks as if (however there might be some intervals of a revival of religion, yet) in the general, mankind grew more and more corrupt till the flood. It is Signified, that tohsji men began to multiply 07i the face of the earthy wickedness prevailed exceedingly. Gen. vi. at the be» ginning. And that before God appeared to Noah, ro com^

Vol, VI a A

mand him to build the Ark, one hundred and twenty years before the flood, the world had long continued obstinate in great and general wickedness, and the disease was become inveterate. The expressions we have in the 3, 5, and 6 verses of that chapter suggest as much : " And the Lord said, my Spirit shall not always strive with man ; and God saw, that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every imagination of the thought of his heart was evil, only evil continually; and it repented the Lord, that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart." And by that Unie, all Jlesh hod corrufUed his ivay nfion the ear(h, v. 12. And as Dr. Taylor himself observes, p. 122. « Mankind were universally debauched into lust, sensuality, rapine, and injustice."

And with respect to the period after the flood, to the calling of Abraham ; Dr. Taylor says, as has been already observed, that in about four hundred years after the flood, the ffetaerality of mankind were fallen into idolatry ; which was ^'efore the passing away of one generation ; or before all they were dead, that came out of the Ark. And it cannot be thought, the world sunk into that so general and extreme degree of corruption, all at once ; but that they had been gradually growing more and more corrupt; though it is true, it tnust be by very swift degrees, (however soon we may suppose they began) to get to that pass in one age.

And as to the period from the calling of Abraham to the cbining of Christ, Dr. Taylor justly observes as follows : fKey^ p. 133.) " If we reckon from the call of Abraham to the coming of Christ, the Jewish dispensation continued one thousand nine hundred and twentyonc years ; during which period, the other families and nations of the earth, not only lay out 01 God's peculiar kingdom, but also lived in idolatry, great ignorance, and wickedness." And with regard to that one only exempt family or nation of the Israelites, it is evident that wickedness was the generally prevailing character among them, from age to age. If we consider how it was with Jacob's family, the behavior of Reuben with his father's concubine, the bel>avior of Judah with Tamar, the conduct of

Jocob's sons in general (though Simeon and Levi were leading) towards the Shechemites, the behavior of Joseph's ten brethren in their cruel treatment of him ; we cannot think,, that the character of true piety belonged to many of them, ac-according to Dr. Taylor's own notion of such a character ; though it be true, they might afterwards repent. And with respect to the time the children of Israel were in Egypt ; the scripture, speaking of them in general, or as a collective body, often represents them as complying with the abominable idolatries of the country.* And as to that generation which went out of Egypt, and wandered in the wilderness, they are abundantly represented as extremely and alniobt universally wicked, perverse, and children of divine wrath. And after Joshua's death, the scripture is very express, that wickedness was the prevailing character in the nation, from age to age. So it was till Samuel's time. 1 Sum. viii. 7, 8. " They have rejected me, that I should not reign over them ; according to all their works which they have done, since the day that I brought them out of Egypt, unto this day." Yea, so it was till Jeremiah and Ezekiel's time. Jer. xxxii. 30, 31, " For the children of Israel, and the children of Jiulah, have only done evil before me from their youth ; for the children of Israel have only provoked me to anger v.ith the work of their hands, saith the Lord : For this city hath been to me a provocation of mine anger, and of my fury, from the day they built it, even unto this day." (Compare chap. v. 21, 23, and chap. vii. 25....27.) So Ezek. ii. 3, 4, " I send thee to the children of Israel, to a rebellious nation, that hath rebelled against me, they and their fathers have transgressed against me, even unto this very day : For they are impudent children, and stiffhearted." And it appears by the discourse of Stephen (Acts vii.) that this was generally the case with that nation, from their first rise, even to the days of the apostles. After his summary rehearsal of the instances of their perverse-ness from the very time of their selling Joseph into Egypt, he concludes (Verse 51....53.) " Ye stiffnecked, and uncir-

* Levit. xvii. 7. Josh, v, 9, and xxiv, 14. Ezek. xx, 7, 8, and xxiii. 3.

cumcised in heart and cars, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost. As your Fathers did, so do ye. Which of the Prophets have not your Fathers persecuted ? And they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of that just one, of ■whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers : Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it."

Thus it appears, that v.'ickedness was the generally prevailing character in all the nations of mankind, till Christ came. And so also it appears to have been since his coming to this day. So in the age of the apostles ; though then, among those that were converted to Christianity, were great numbers of persons eminent for piety ; yet this was not the case with the greater part of the world, or the greater part of any one nation in it. There was a great number of persons of a truly pious character in the latter part of the apostolic age, when multitudes of converts had been made, and Christianity Avas as yet in its primitive purity. But what says the Apostle John of the church of God at that time, as compared with the rest of the world ? 1 John v. 19. " W^e know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness." And after Christianity came to prevail, to that degree, that Christians had the upper hand in nations and civil communities, still the greater part of mankind remained in their old heathen state ; which Dr. Taylor speaks of as a state of great ignorance and ivickedness. And besides, this is noted in all ecclesiastical history, that as the Christians gained in power and secular advantages, true piety declined, and corruption and wickedness prevailed among them. And as to the state of the Christian world, since Christianity began to be established by human laws, wickedness for the most part has greatly prevailed ; as is very notorious, and is implied in what Dr. Taylor himself says : He, in giving an account how the doctrine of Oriij,inal Sin came to prevail among Christians, says, p. 167. 5. '^ That the Christian religion was very early and grievously corrupted, by dreaming, ignorant, superstitious monks." In p. 259, he says, '' The generality of Christ-'::ins have embraced this persuasion concerning Original Siu ;

and the consequence has been, that the generality of Christians have been the most wicked, lewd, bloody, and treacherous of all mankind."

Thus, a view of the several successive periods of the past duration of the world, from the beginning to this day, shews, that wickedness has ever been exceeding prevalent, and has had vastly the superiority in the world. And Dr.Taylor himself in effect owns that it has been so ever since Adam first turned into the way of transgression, p. 168. » It is certain f says he) the moral circumstances of mankind, since the lime Adam first turned into the way of transgression, have been very different from a state of innocence. So far as we can judge from history, or what we know at present, the greatest part of mankind have been, and still are very corrupt, though not equally so in every age and place." And lower in the same page, he speaks of Adam^s jiosterity^ as having sunk t/ierjtselves into the most lamentable degrees of ignorance, sii/ierstition, idolatri/j injustice, debauchery, Sec.

These things clearly determine the point, concerning the tendency of man's nature to wickedness, if we may be allowed to proceed according to such rules and methods of reasoning, as are universally made use of, and never denied, or doubted to be good and sure, in experimental philosophy ;* or may reason from experience and facts, in that manner which comnion sense leads all mankind to in other cases. If experience and trial will evince any thing at all concerning the natural disposition of the hearts of mankind, one would think the experience of so many ages, as have elapsed since the beginning of the world, and the trial as it were made by hundreds of different nations together, for so long a time, should be sufficient to convince all, that wickedness is agreeable to the nature of mankind in its present state.

* Dr. Turnbull, though so great an enemy to the Joctrine of the Depravi-Uy of Nature, yet greatly insists upon it, that the experimental method of reasoning ought to be gone into in moral matters, and things pertaining to the human nature, and should chiefly bq relied upon, in moral, as well as ratijral philosophy. See Mrod. to Mar. Phil.

'-^^ ORIGINAL SIK.

Here, to strengthen the argument, if there were any need of it, I might observe some further evidences than those ■which have been already mentioned, not only of the ex^en? and generality of the prevalence of wickedness in the world, but of the height to which it has risen, and the degree in which it has reigned. Among innumerable things which shew this, I shall now only observe this, viz. the degree in ■which mankind have from age to age been hurtful one to another. Many kinds of brute animals are esteemed very noxious and destructive, many of them very fierce, voracious, and many very poisonous, and the destroying of them has al--vvays been looked upon as a public benefit ; but have not mankind been a thousand times as hurtful and destructive as any one of them, yea, as all the noxious beasts, birds, fishes, and reptiles in the earth, air, and water, put together, at least of all kinds of animals that are visible ? And no creature can be found any where so destructive of its own kind as mankind are. All others for the most part are harmless and peaceable, with regard to their own species. Where one wolf is destroyed by another wolf, one viper by another, probably a thousand of mankind are destroyed by those of their own species. Well, therefore, might our blessed Lord say, when sending forth his disciples into the world, 3Iatth. x. 16, 17, Be-hold, I send xjou forth as sheefi in the midst qfivolves ;....but BEWAiiE OF MEx. As much as to say, I send you forth as slieep among wolves. But why do I say, wolves ? I send you forth into the wide world of 7?u?i,that are fur more hurtful and pernicious, and that you had much more need to beware of, than wolves.

It would be strange indeed, that this should be the state of the world of mankind, the chief of the lov>'er creation, distinguished above all by reason, to that end that they might be capable of religion, Avhich summarily consists in love, if men, as they come into the woild, are in their nature innocent and harmless, undepraved, and perfectly free from all evil propensities.

SECTION VIII.

7he native Depravity of Mankind afi/iears, in that there haa been so little good effect of so manifold and great means used to promote Virtue in the World.

THE evidence of the native corruption of mankind, appears much more glaring, when it is considered that the world has been so generally, so constantly, and so exceedingly corrupt, notwithstanding the various, great and continual means, that have been used to restrain men from sin, and promote virtue and true religion among them.

Dr. Taylor supposes all that sorrow an^ death, which came on mankind,in consequence of Adam's sin, was brought on them by God, in great favor to them ; as a benevolent Father, exercising an wholesome disci/iline towards his children, to restrain thetn from sin, by increasing the vanity of all earthly things, to abate their force to tempt and delude ; to induce them to be moderate in gratifying the appetites of the body ; to mortify pride and ambition; and that men might always have before their eyes a striking demonstration^ that sin is ivfnitely hateful to God, by a sight of that, than loMch nothing is more proper to give them the utmost abhorrence of iniquity, and to fix in their minds u2 sense of the dreadful consequences of sin. Sec. &c. And ill general, that they do not come as.punishments, but purely as means to keep men from vice, and to make them better. If it be so, surely they are great means indeed. Here is a mighty alteration : Mankind, once so easy and happy, healthful, vigorous and beautiful, rich in all the pleasant and abundant blessings of Paradise, now turned out, destitute, weak, and decaying, into a wide, barren world, yitlding biias's and thorns, instead of the delightful growth and sweet fruit of the garden of Eden, to wear out life in sorrow and toil, on the

ground cursed for his sake ; and at last, either through long languislinient and lingering decay, or severe pain and acute disease, to expire and turn to putrefaction and dust. If these are only used as medicines, to prevent and to cure the diseases of the mind, they are sharp medicines indeed, especially death ; which, to use Hczekiah's representation, is, as it were, breaking' all his bonea : And one would think, should be very efieciual, if the subject had no depravity, no evil and contrary bias, to resist and hinder a proper effect ; especially in the old world, when the thiiig which was the first occasion of this terrible alteration, this severity of means, was fresh in memory, Adam continuing alive near two thirds of the time that passed before the flood ; so that a very great part of those that were alive till the flood, might have opportunity of seeing and conversing with him, and hearing from his mouth, not only an account of his fall, and the introduction of the awful consequences of it, but also of his first finding himself in existence in the new created world, and of the creation of Eve, and the things which passed between him and his Creator in Paradise.

But what was the success of these great means, to restrain men from sin, and to induce them to virtue ? Did they prove sufficient ? Instead of this, the world soon grew exceeding corrupt, till it came to that, to use our author's own words, that manki7id were universally debauched into lust, sensualitijy rapine, and injustice.

Then God used further means : He sent A''oah, a preacher of righteousness, to warn the world of the universal destruction which would come upon them by a flood of waters, if they went on in sin. Which warning he delivered with these circumstances, tending to strike their minds, and command their attention ; that he immediately went about ouild-ing that vast structure of the ark, in which he must employ a great number of hands, and probably spent all he had in the world, to save himself and his family. And under these uncommon means God wailed upon them one hundred and twenty years ; but all to no effect. The whole world, for ought appears, continued obstinate, and absolutely incorrigi-

hie ; so that nothing remained to be done with them, but utterly to destroy the inhabitants of the earth, and to begin a new world from that single family who had distinguished themselves by their \irtue, that from ihem might be propagated a new and purer race. Accordingly this was done ; and the inhabitants of this new world, of Noah's posterity, had these new and extraordinary means to restrain sin, and excite to virtue, in addition to the toil, sorrow, and common mortality, which the world had been subjected to before, in consequence of Adam's sin, viz. that God had newly testified his dreadful displeasure for sin, in destroying the many millions of mankind, all at one blow, old and young, men, women and children, without pity on any for all the dismal shrieks and cries which the world was filled with ; when they themselves, the remaining family, were so wonderfully distinguished by God's preserving goodness, that they might be a holy seed, being delivered from the corrupting examples of the old world, and being all the offspring of a living parent, whose pious instructions and counsels they had, to enforce these things upon them, to prevent sin, and engage them to their duty. And these inhabitants of tl-.e new earih, must for a long time, have before their eyes many <.vidciit, and as it were, fresh and striking effects a!id sit.us of that universal destruction, to be a continual, uffccung admonition to them. And besides all this, God now shortened the life of man, to about one half of what it used to be. The shortening man's life. Dr. Taylor says, page 68, " was,that the wild range of ambi'ion and lust might be brought into narrower bounds, and have less opportunity of doing mischief ; and that death, being still nearer to our view, might be a more powerful tnotive to regard less the things of a transitory world, and to attend more to the rules v">f truth and wisdom."

And now let us observe the consequence. These new and extraordinary meacs, in addition to the former, were so far from provnig sufficient, that the new world degenerated, and became corrupt by such swift degrees^that, as Dr. Taylor observes, mankind in general were sunk into idolatry in about

Vol. VI. 2 B

four hundred years after the flood, and so in about fifty ycatB after Noah's death. They became so wicked and bruiish, as to forsake the true God, and turn to the worship of inanimate creatures.

When things were come to this dreadful pass, God was pleased, for a remedy, to introduce a new and wonderful dispensation ; separating a particular family and people from all the rest of the world, by a series of most astonishing miracles, done in the open view of the world, and fixing their dwelling, as it were in the rnidst of the earth, between Asia, Europe and Africa, and in the midst of those nations which were most considerable and famous for power, knowledge, and arts, that God might, in an extraordinary manner, dwell among that people, in visible tokens of his presence, manifesting himself there, and from thence to the world, by a course of great and miraculous operations and effects for many ages ; that that people might be holy to God, and as a kingdom of priests, and might stand as a city on an hill, to be a light to the world ; withal, gradually shortening man's life, till it was brought to be but about one twelfth part of what it used to be before the flood ; and so, according to Dr. Taylor, vastly cutting off and diminishing his temptations to sin, and increasing his excitements to holiness. And now let us consider what the success of these means was, both as to the Gentile world, and the nation of Israel.

Dr. Taylor justly observes, (Key^ p. 24, § 75) " The Jewish dispensation had respect to the nations of the ■world, to spread the knowledge and obedience of God in the earth ; and was established for the benefit of all mankind." But how unsuccessful were these means, and all oiher means used with the heathen nations, so long as this dispensation lasted ? Abraham was a person noted in all the principal nations that were then in the world ; as in Egypt, and the eastern monarchies : God made his name famous, by his wonderful, distinguishing dispensations towards him, particularly by so miraculously subduing before him and his trained servants, those armies of the four eastern kings. This great work of the most high God, Possesser of heaven

ORIGINAL SIN. SOS

and earth, was greatly taken notice of by Melchizedeck, and •ne would think, should have been sufficient to have awakened the attention and consideration of all the nations in that part of the world, and to have led them to the knowledge and worship of the only true God; especially if considered in conjunction with that miraculous and most terrible destruction ef Sodom, and all the cities of the plain, for their wickedness, -with Lot's miraculous deliverance, which doubtless were facts, that ill their day were much famed abroad in the world. But there is not the least appearance, in any accounts we have, of any considerable good effect. On the contrary, those nations •which were most in the way of observing and being affected W\^h these things, even the nations of Canaan, grew worse and worse, till their iniquity came to the full, in Joshua's time. And the posterity ot Lot, that saint so wonderfully distinguished, soon became some of the most gross idolaters; as rhey appear to have been in Moses' time. See Numb. xxv. Yea, and the far greater part even of Abraham's posterity, the children of Ishmael, Ziman, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak and Shuah, and Esau, soon forgot the true God, and fell off to Heathenism,

Great things were done in the sight of the nations of the ■world, tending to awaken them, and lead them to the knowledge and obedience of the true God, in Jacob's and Joseph's time ; in that God did miraculously, by the hand of Joseph, preserve from perishing by famine, as it were the whole world, as appears by Gen. xli. 56, 57. Agreeably to which, the name that Pharaoh gave to Joseph, Zafinath Paaneah, as is said, in the Egyptian language, signifies Saviour of the World. But there does not appear to have been any good abiding effect of this ; no, not so much as in the nation of the Egyptians, (which seems to have been the chief of all the heathen nations at that day) who had these great works of Jehovah in their most immediate view ; on the contrary, they grew worse and worse, and seem to be far more gross in their idolatries and ignorance of the true God, and every way more wicked, and ripe for rwm, when Moses was sent to Pharaoh, than they were in Josejih*s time.

After this, in Moses' and Joshua's time, the great God ■was pleased to manifest himself in a series of the most astonishing^ miracles, for about fifty years togetlier, wrought in the inost public manner, in Egypt, in the wilderness, and in Canaan, in the view, as it were, of the whole world ; miracles by which the world was shaken, the whole frame of the visible creation, earth, seas and rivers, the atmosphere, the clouds, sun, moon and stars were affected ; miracles, greatly tending to convince the rations of the world, of the vanity of their false gods, shewing Jehovah to be infinitely above them, in the thing wherein they dealt most proudly, and exhibiting God's awful displeasure at the wickedness of the Heathen world. And these things are expressly spoken of as one end of these great miracles, in Exod. ix. 14, Numb. xiv. 21, Josh, iv. 23, 24, and other places. However, no reformation followed tliese things ; but, by the scripture account, the nations which had them most in view, were dreadfully hardened, stupidly refusing all conviction and reformation, and obstinately went on m an opposition to the living God, to their own destruction,

Afjcr this, God did from time to time very publicly manifest himself to the nations of the world, by wonderful works, wrought in the time of the Judges, of a like tendency with those already mentioned. Particularly in so miraculously destroying, by the hand of Gideon, almost the whole of that vast army of the Midianites, Ama'ekites, and all the Children oftheEast^ consisting of about 133,000 men, Judges vii. 12, and viii. 10. But no reformation followed this, or the other great works of God, wrought in the times of Deborah and Barak, Jephtha and Sampson.

After these things, God used new, and in some respects much greater means with the heathen world, to bring them to the knowledge and service of the true God, in the days of David and Solomon. He raised up David, a man after his own heart, a most fervent worshipper of the true God, and zealous hater of idols, and subdued before him almost all the rations between Egypt and Euphrates; often miraculously assisting him in his battles with his eneruies ; and he con-

firmed Solomon, his son, in the full and quiet possession of that great empire, for about forty years ; and made him the wisest, richest, most magnificent, and every way the greatest monarch that ever had been in the world ; and by far the most famous, and of greatest name among the nations; especially for his wisdonii and things concerni-ng the name of his God ; particularly the temple he built, which was exceeding magnificent^ that it might be of fame and glory throughout all lands; 1 Chron. xxii. 5. And we are told, that there came of al! people to hear the wisdom of Snlomon, from all kings of the earth ; 1 Kings iv. 34, and x. 24. And the scripture informs us, that these great things were done, that the " Nations in far countries might hear of God's great name, and of his outstretched arm ; that all the people of the earth might fear him, as well as his people Israel: And that all die people of the earth might know, that the Lord was God. and that mere was none else." 1 Kings viii. 41....43, 60. But still there is no appearance of any considerable abiding effect, with regard to any one heathen nation.

After this, before the captivity in Babylon, many great things were done in the sight of the Gentile nations, very much tending to enlighten, affect, and persuade them : As, God's desti'oying the army of the Ethlofiians of a thousand thousand, before Asa ; Elijah's and Elisiui's miracles ; especially Elijah's miraculously confounding B ud'a prophets and worshippers; Eiisha's healing Naamun, tiie king of Syria's prime minister, and the miraculous victories obtained through Eiisha's prayers, over the Syriai.s, Moabites and Edomites ; the miraculous destruction of ti,'; vast uni.ed army of the children of Moab, Amon and Eriom, at Jehoaha-phal's prayer. (2 Chron. xx.) Jonah's preaciiiiig at Nmeveh, together with the miracle of his deliverance from the whale's belly; which was published and well attested, as a sign to confirm his preaching ; but more especially that gieat work of God, in destroying Sennacherib's arvny by an angel, for his contempt of the God of Israel, as if he had been no more than the gods of the heathen.

:.>06 ORIGINAL SIN.

When all these thinj^s prcv(?d ineffectual, God took a new method with the heathen world, and used, in some respects, much greater me.ns to convince and reclai>n them, than ever before. In the first place, his people the Jews were removed to Babylon, the head and heart of the heathen world (Chaldea having been very much the four;taln of idolatry) to carry thither the revelations which God had made of himself, contained in the sacred writings ; and there to bear their testimony against idolatry ; as some of them, particularly Daniel, Shadrach, Meshack and Abednego, did, in a very open manner before the king and the greatest men of the empire, ■with such circumstances as made their testimony very famous in the world ; God confirming it with great miracles, which •were published through tlie empire, by order of its monarch, as the mighty works of the God of Israel, shewing him to be above all gods : Daniel, that great prophet, at the same time being exalted to be governor of all the wise men of Babylon, and one of the chief officers of Nebuchadnezzar's court.

After this, God raised up Cyrus to destroy Babylon, for its obstinate contempt of the true God, and injuriousness towards his people ; according to the prophecies of Isaiah, speaking of him by name, instructing him concerning the nature and dominion of the true God. (Isa. xlv.) which prophecies were probably shewn to him, whereby he was induced to publish his testimony concerning the God of Israel, as the God. (Ezra i. 2, 3.) Daniel, about the same time, being advanced to be prime minister of state in the new empire, erected under Darius, did in that place appear openly as a worshipper of the God of Israel, and him alone ; God confirming his testimony for him, before the king and all the grandees of his kingdom, by preserving him in the den of lions ; whereby Darius was induced to publish to all people, nations and languages, that dwelt in all the earth, his testimony, that the God of Israel was the living God, and steadfast for tver^ &c.

When, after the destruction of Babylon, some of the Jews returned to their own land, multitudes never returned, but were dispersed abroad through many parts of tlie vast Persian empire ; as appears by the book of Esther. And many of

4hem afterwards, as good histories inform, were removed into the more western parts of the world ; and so were dispersed as it were all over the heathen world, having the Holy Scriptures with them, and Synagogues every where, for the worship of the true God. And so it continued to be, to the days of Christ and his apostles ; as appears by the acts of the apostles. Thus that light, which God had given them, was in the providence of God carried abroad into all parts of the world : So that now they had far greater advantages, to come to the knowledge of the truth, in matters of religion, if they had been disposed to improve their advantages.

And besides all these things, from about Cyrus's time, learning and philosophy increased, and was carried to a great height. God raised up a number of men of prodigious genius, to instruct others, and improve their reason and understanding in the nature of things ; and philosophic knowledge, having gone on lo increase for several ages, seemed to be got to its height before Christ came, or about that time.

And now let it be considered vvhat was the effect of all these things ; instead of a reformation, or any appearance op prospect of it, the heathen world in general rather grew worse. As Dr. Winder observes, " The inveterate absurdities of Pagan idolatry continued without remedy, and increased, as arts and learnmg increased ; and paganism prevailed in all its height of absurdity, when Pagan nations.were polished to the height, and in the most polite cities and countries ; and thus continued to the last breath of Pagan power." And 50 it was with respect to wickedness in general, as well as idolatry ; as appears by what the Apostle Paul observes in Rom. i. Dr. Taylor, speaking of the time when the gospel scheme was introduced, (Key,^ 289.) says, " The moral and religious state of the heathen was very deplorable, being generally sunk into great ignorance, gross idolatry, and abominable vice." Abominable vices prevailed, not only among the common people, but even among their philosophers themselves, yea, some of the chief of them, and of greatest genius ; 90 Dr. Taylor himself observes, as to that detestable vice of

Sodomy, which they commonly and openly allowed and practised without shame. See Dr. Taylor's note on Rom. i. 27.

Having thus considered the state of the heathen world, with regard to the effect of means used for its reformation, during the Jewish dispensation, from the first foundation of it in Abraham's time ; let us now consider how it was with that peoi)le themselves, that were distinguished with the peculiar t<tivileges of that dispensation. The means used with the he.ithen nations were great ; but they were small, if compared with those used with the Israelites. The advantages by which that people were distinj^uished, are represented in scripture as vastly above all parallel, in passages which Dr. Taylor takes notice of. (Key^ % 54.) And he reckons these privileges among those which he calls antecedent blessings^ consisting in motives to virtue and obedience ; and says, (Key^ § 66.) " That this was the very end and design of the dispensation of Cod's extraordinary favors to the Jews, viz. to engage them to duty and obedience, or that it was a scheme for promoting virtue, is clear beyond dispute, from every part of the Old Testament." Nevertheless, as has been already shewn, the generality of that people, through all the successive periods of that dispensation, were men of a wicked character. But it will be more abundantly manifest, how strong the natural bias to iniquity appeared to be among that people, by considering more particularly how things were with them from time to time.

Notwithstanding the great things God had done in the times of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, to separate them and their posterity from the idolatrous world, that they might be a holy people to himself; yet in about two hundred years after Jacob's death, and in less than one hundred and fifty years after the death of Joseph, and while some were alive that had seen Joseph, the people had in a great measure lost the true religion, and were apace conforming to the heathen world : When, for a remedy, and the more effectually to alienate thtm from idols, and engage them to the God of their fathers, God appeared to bring them out from among the Egyptians, and separate them from the heathen world, and to reveal him-

self in his glory and majesty, in so affecting and astonishing a manner, as tended most deeply and durably to impress their minds ; that they mie;ht never forsake him more. But so perverse were they, that they murmured even in the midst of the miracles that God wrought for them in Egypt, and murmured at the red sea, in a few days after God had brought them out with such a mighty hand. When he had led them through the sea, theij sang his firaise, but soon forgat bis works. Before they got to mount Sinai, they openly manifested their perverseness from time to time ; so that God says of them, Exod. xvi. 28. " How long refuse ye to keep my commandments, and my laws i"' Afterwards they murmured again at Rephidim.

In about two months after they came out of Egypt, they came to Mount Sinai, where God entered into a most solemn covenant with the people, that they should be an holy people unto him, with such astonishing manifestations of his power, majesty and holiness, as were altogether unparalleled ; as God puts the people in mind, Deut. iv. 32....34. " For ask now of the days that are past, which were before thee, since the day that God created man upon the earth ; and ask from one side of heaven unto the other, whether there has been any such thing as this great thing is, or hath been heard like it. Did ever people hear the voice of God, speaking out of the midst of the fire, as thou hast heard, and live ? Or hath God assayed to take him a nation from the midst of another nation," &c. And these great things were to that end, to impress their minds with such a conviction and sense of divine truth, and their obligations to their duty, that they might never forget them ; As God says, Exod. xix. 9. " Lo, I come unto thee in a thick cloud, that the people may hear when I speak with :hee, and believe thee for ever." But what wa.s the effect of all ? Why, it was not more than two or three months, before that people, there, under that very mountain, returned to their old Egyptian idolatry, and were singing and dancine: before a golden calf, which they had set up to worship. And after such awful manifestations as there were of God's displeasure for that sin, and so much done to bring

Vol. VI. 2C

them to repentance, and confirm them in obedience, it was but a few months before they came to that violence of spirit, in open rebellion ai^ainst God, that with the utmost vehemence they declared their resolution to follow God no longer, but to make them a captain to return into Egypt. And thus they went on in ways of perverse opposition to the most high, from time to time, repeating their open acts of rebellion, in the midst of continued, astonisliing miracles till that generation was destroyed. And though the following generation seems to have been the best that ever was in Israel, yet, notwithstanding their good example, and notwithstanding all the wonders of God's power and love to that people in Joshua's time, hoAV soon did that people degenerate, and begin to forsake God, and join Avith the heathen in their idolatries, till God, by severe means, and by sending prophets and judges, extraordinarily influenced from above, reclaimed them ? But when they were brought to some reformation by such means, they soon fell away again into the practice of idolatry ; and so from time to time, from one age to another ; and nothing proved effectual for any abiding reformation. After things had gone on thus for several hundred years, God used new methods with his people, in two respects j First, He raised up a great prophet, under whom a number of young men were trained up in schools, that from among them there might be a constant succession of great prophets in Israel, of such as God should choose ; which seems to have been continued for more than five hundred years. Seco7idly, God raised up a great king, David, one eminent for wisdom, piety, and fortitude, to suIkIuc all their heathen neighbors, who used to be such a snare to them ; and to confirm, adorn and perfect the institutions of his public worship; and by him to make a more full revelation of the great salvation, and future glorious kingdom of the Messiah. And after him, raised up his son, Solomon, the wisest and greatest prince that ever was on earth, more fully to settle and establish those things which his father David had begun, concerning the public worship of (iod in Israel, and to build a glorious temple for the honor of Jehovah, and the institutions of his wor-

ship, and to instruct the neighbor nations in true wisdom and religion. But as to the success of these new and extraordinary means ; if ve take Dr. Taylor for our expositor of scripture, the nation must be extremely corrupt in David's time; for he supposes, he has respect to his own times, in those words, Psal. xiv, 2, 3. " The Lord looked down from heav-t>n, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God ; they aie ail gone aside ; they are together become filthy ; there is none that doeth good ; no, not one." But whether Dr. Taylor be in the right in this, or not, yet if we consider what appeared in Israel, in Absalom's and Sheba's rebellion, we shall not see cause to think, that the greater part of the nation at that day were men of true wisdom and piety. As to Solomon's time, Dr. Taylor supposes, as has been already observed, that Solomon speaks of his own limes, when he says, he had found but one in a thousand that was a thoroughly upright man. However, it appears, that all those great mearis used to promote and establish virtue and true rel'gion, in Samuel's, David's and Solomon's times, were so far from having any general, abiding good eflect in Israel, that Solomon himself, with all his wisdom, and notwithstanding the unparalleled favors of God to him, had his mind corrupted, so as openly to tolerate idolatry in the land, and greatly to provoke God against him. And as soon as he was dead, ten tribes of the tw^elve forsook the true worship of God, and instead of it, openly established the like idolatry, that the people fell into at mount Sinai, when they made the golden calf; and continued finally obstinate in this apostasy, notwithstanding all means that could be used with them by the prophets, whom God sent, one after another, to reprove, counsel and warn them, for about two hundred and fifty years ; especially those two great prophets, Elijah and Elisha. Of all the kings that reigned over them, there was not so much as one but what was of a wicked character. And at last it came to that, that their case seemed utterly desperate ; so that nothing remained to be done with them, but to remove them out of God's sight. Thus the scripture represents the matterj 2 Kings xvii.

And as to the other two tribes ; though their kings were always of the family of David, and they were favored in many respects far beyond their brethren, yet they were generally very corrupt; their kings were most of them wicked men, and their other magistrates, and priests and people, were generally agreed in the corruption. Thus the matter is represented in the scripture history, and the books of the prophets. And when they had seen how God had cast off the ten tribes, instead of taking warning, they made themselves vastly more vile than ever the others had done ; as appears by 2 Kings xvii. 18, 19. Ezek. xvi. 46,47,51. God indeed waited longer upon them, for his servant David's sake, and for Jerusalem's sake, that he had chosen ; and used more extraordinary means with them ; especially by those great prophets, Isaiah and Jeremiah, but to no effect: So that at last it came to this, as the prophets represent the matter, that they were like a body universally and desperately diseased and corrupted, that would admit of no cure, the whole head sick, and the whole heart faint, &c.

Things being come to that pass, God took this method with them : He utterly destroyed their city and land, and the temple which he had among them, made thorough work in purging the land of them ; as when a man empties a dish, wipes it, and turns it ufiside down ; or nvhen a -vessel is cast into a fierce fire, till its filthiness is thoroughly burnt out, 2 Kings xxi. 13. Ezek. Chap. xxiv. They were carried into captivity, and there left till that wicked generation was dead, and • those old rebels were purged out ; that afterwards the land might be resettled with a more pure generation.

After the return from the captivity, and God had built the Jewish church again in their own land, by a series of wonderful providences ; yet they corrupted themselves again, to so great a degree, that the transgressors were come to the full again in the days of Antiochus Epiphanes ; as the matter is represented in the prophecy of Daniel, Dan. viii. 23. And then God made them the the subjects of a dispensation, little, if any thing, less terrible than that v.hich had been in Nebuchadnezzar's days. And after God had again delivered

them, and restored the state of religion among them, by the instrumentality of the Maccabees, they degenerated again ; so that when Christ came, they were arrived to that extreme degree of corruption, which is represented in the accounts given by the evangelists.

It may be observed here in general, that the Jews, though so vastly distinguished with advantages, means and motives to holiness, yet are represented as coming, from time to time, to that degree of corruption and guilt, that they were more •wicked in the sight of God, than the very worst of the Heathen. As, of old, God sware by his life, that the wickedness of Sodom was small, compared with that of the Jevvs. Ezek. xvi. 47, 48, &c. also chap. v. 5.... 10. So Christ, speaking of the Jews in his time, represents them as having much greater guilt than the inhabitants of Tyre and Sidon, or even Sodom and Gomorrah.

But we are now come to the time when the grandest scene was displayed, that ever was opened on earth. After all other schemes had been so long and so thoroughly tried, and had so greatly failed of success, both among Jews and Gentiles ; that wonderful dispensation was at length introduced, which was the greatest sclieine for the suppressing and restraining iniquity among mankind, that ever infinite wisdom and mercy contrived, even the glorious gospel of Jesus Christ. " A new dispensation of grace was erected (to use Dr. Taylor's own words, p. 239, 240) for the more certain and effectual sanctification of mankind, into the image of God ; the delivering them from the sin and wickedness, into which they might fall, or were already fallen ; to redeem them from all iniquity, and bring them to the knowledge and obedience of God." In whatever high and exalted terms the scripture speaks of the means and motives which the Jews enjoyed of old ; yet their privileges are represented as having no glory, in comparison of the advantages of the gospel. Dr. Taylor's words in p..g33, are worthy to be here repeated. " Even the Heathen (says he) knew God, and might have glorified him as God ; but under the glorious light of the gospel, we have very clear ideas of the divine perfections.

and particularly of the love of God ss our Father, ami as the God and Father of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ. We see our duty in the utmost extent, and the most cogent reasons to perform it : We have eternity opened to us, even an endless state of honor and felicity, the reward of virtuous actions, and the Spirit of God promised for our direction and assistance. And all this may and ought to be applied to the purifying our minds, and the perfecting of holiness. And to those happy advantages we are born, for which we are bound for ever to praise and magnify the rich grace of God in the Redeemer." And be elsewhere says,* » The gospel consli-ttition is a scheme the most perfect and effectual for restoring true religion, and promoting virtue and happiness, that ever the world has yet seen." Andf admirably ada/Ucd to enlight' en our minds^ and sanctify our hearts ;. And\ never were motives so divine and poiverfvl proposed^ to induce us to the Jirac-(he of all virtue and goodness.

And yet even these means have been ineffectual upon the far greater part of them with whom they have been used ;. of; the many that have been called^fenv have been chosen.

As to the Jews, God's ancient people, with whom they were used in the first place, and used long by Chiist and his apostles, the generality of them rejected Christ and his gjcwj pel, with extreme pertinaciousness of spirit. They not only/^ ■went on still in that career of corruption which had been ia-r creasing from the time of the Maccabees ; but Christ's coming, and his doctrine and miracles, and the preaching of his. followers, and the glorious things that attended the samef. were the occasion, through their perverse mit^improvementr^ 6f an infinite increase of their wickedness. They crucified the Lord of Glory with the utmost malice and cruelty, and, persecuted his followers ; they pleased not God, and were contrary to all men ; and went on to grow worse and worse, till they filled up the measure of their sin, and wrath came upon them to the utlci^iaost ; and they were destroyed, and

■» Key, ^ 167. + Note on Rom. i. i6. % Pre/, to Par, on Rom. pages 145. 47.

cast out of God's sight, with unspeakably greater tokens of the divine abhorrence and indignation, than in the days of Nebuchadnezzar. The bigger part of the whole nation were slain, and the rest were scattered abroad through the earth, in the most abject and forlorn circumstances. And in the same spirit of unbelief and malice against Christ and the gospel, and in their miserable, dispersed circumstances, do they remain to this day.

And as to the Gentile nations, though there was a glorious success of the gospel amongst them in the apostles' days, yet probably not one in ten of those that had the gospel preached to them, embraced it. The powers of the world were set against it, and persecuted it with insatiable malignity. And among the professors of Christianity, there presently appeared in many a disposition to corruption, and to abuse the gospel unto the service of pride and licentiousness. And the apostles, in their days, foretold a grand apostasy of the Christian world, which should continue many ages, and observed that there appeared a disposition to such an apostasy, among professing Christians, even in that day, 2 Thess. ii. 7. And the greater part of the ages which have now elapsed, have been spent in the duration of that grand and general apostasy, under which the Christian world, as it is called, has been transformed into that which has been vastly more deformed, more dishonorable and hateful to God, and repugnant to true virtue, than the state of the Heathen world before ; which is agreeable to the prophetical descriptions given of it by the Holy Spirit.

In these latter ages of the Christian church, God has raised up a great number of great and good men, to bear testimony against the corruptions of the church of Rom.e, and by their means introduced that light into the world, by which, in a short time, at least one third part of Europe was delivered from the more gross enormities of Antichrist ; which was attended at first with a great reformation as to vital and practical religion. But how is the gold st>on become dim ! To what a pass are things come in Protestant countries at this day, and in our nation in particular I To

what a prodigious height has a dchige of infidelity, profane-nessjuxury, debauchery and wickedness of every kind, arisen I The poor savage Americans are mere babes and fools, (if I may so speak) as to proficiency in v/ickedness,in comparison of multitudes that tiie Christian world throngs with. Dr. Taylor himself, as was before observed, represents that the gerie-rality of ChriRtians have been the most vjicked, leivd, bloody^ and treacherous of all mankind; and says, ('^q/, § 288) "The wickedness of the Christian world renders it so much like the Heathen, that the good effects of our change to Christianity are but little seen."

And with respect to the dreadful corruption of the present day, it is to be considered, besides the advantages already mentioned, that great advances in learning and philosophic knowledge have been made in the present and past century, giving great advantage for a proper and enlarged exercise of our rational powers, and foi our seeing the bright manifestation of God's pf^rfections in his works. And it is to be observed, that the means and inducements to virtue, which this age enjoys, are in addition to most of those which were mentioned before as given of old, and among other things,in addition to the shortening of man's life to seventy or eighty years, from near a thousand. And with reg: rd to this, I would observe, that as the case now is in Christendom, take one with another of them that ever come to years of discretion, their life is not more than forty or fortyfive years; which is but about the twentieth part of what it once was ; and not so much in great cities, places where profaneness, sensuality and debauchery commonly prevail to the greatest degree.

Dr. Taylor, (Key^ § 1) truly observes, that God has, from the beginning, exercised wonderful and infinite wisdom, in the methods he has, frorn age to age, made use of to oppose vice, cure corruption, and promote virtue in the world, and introduced several schemes to that end. It is indeed remarkable, how many schemes and methods were tried of old, both before and after the flood ; how many were used in the times of the Old Testament, both with Jews and Heathens, and how inelTectual all these ancient methods proved for four hundred

years together, till God introduced that grand dispensation for the redeeming men from all iniquity, and purifying them to himself, a people zealous of good works, which the scripture represents as the subject of the admiration of angels. But even this has now so long proved ineffectual with respect to the generality, that Dr. Taylor thinks there is need of a nciv dispensation i the Jiresent light of the gosfiel being i?isufficiene for the full reformation of the Christian world, by reason of its corruptions ; (Note on Rom. i. 27J and yet all these things, according to him, without any natural bias to the contrary ; no stream of natural inclination or propensity at all, to oppose inducements to goodness ; no native opposition of heart, to withstand those gracious means, which God has ever used with mankind, from the beginning of the world to this day, any more than there was in the heart of Adam, the moment God created him in perfect innocence.

Surely Dr. Taylor's scheme is attended with strange paradoxes I And that his mysterious tenets may appear in a true light, it must be observed, at the same time while he supposes these means, even the very greatest and best of them, to have proved so ineffectual, that help from them, as to any general reformation, is to be despaired of; yet he maintains that all mankind, even the Heathen in all parts of the world, yea, every single person in it (which must include every Indian in America, before the Europeans came hitier ; and every inhabitant of the unknown parts of Africa and TVr-ra Australis) has ability, light and means sufficient to do their whole duty ; yea, (as many passages in his writings plainly suppose) to perform perfect obedience to God's law, without the least degree of vice or iniquity.*

But I must not omit to observe....Dr. Taylor supposes that the reason why the gospel dispensation has been so ineffectual, is, that it has been greatly misunderstood and perverted. In Key^ § 389, he says, " Wrong representations of the scheme of the gospel have greatly obscured the glory of divine grace, and contributed much to the corruption of its pro-

*Seep.259, 63, 64, 72,.?. Vol. VI. 2D

«ia origi;nal sin.

lessors. Such doctrines have been almost universaliy tan|^ and received, as quite subvert it. Mistaken notions about nature, grace, election and reprobation, jusiificalion, regeneration, redemptioD, calling, adoption, 8cc. have quite taken avray the very ground of the Christiaa life "

But how came the gospel to be so universally and exceed-in?:Iy misunderstood ? Is it because it is in itself so very dark and unintelligible, and not adapted to the apprehension of the human faculties ? If so, how is the posses'^ion of such an obscure and unintelligible thing, so unspeakable and glorious an advantage ? Or is it because of the native blindness, corruption and superstition of mankind ? But this is giving up the thing in question, and allowing a great depravity of nature. And Dr. Taylor speaks of the gospel as far otherwise than dark and unintelligible ; he represents it as exhibiting the clearest and most glorious light, to deliver the world from darkness, and bring them into marvellous light. He speaks of the light which the Jews had, under the Mosaic dispensation, as vastly exceeding the light of nature, which the Heathen enjoyed : And > et he supposes that even the latter wss so clear as to be sufficient to lead men to the knowledge of God, and their whole duty to him. And he speaks of the light of the gospel as vastly exceeding the light of the Old Testarpent. He says of the Apostle Paul in particular, "That he wfote with great perspicuity ; that he takes great care to explain eve'-y pari of his subject; that he has left no part of it unexplained and unguaixled, and that never was an author toore exact and cautious in this."* Is it not strange, therefore, that the Christian world, without any native depravity to prejudice and darken their minds, should be so blind in the midst of such glaring light, as to be all, or the generality, agreed*, from age to age, so essentially to tnisuTiderstand that which is made so very plain ?

Dr. Taylor says, p. 167, 5. « It is my persuasion that the Christian religion was very early and grievously corrupted;

by dreaming", ignorant, strperstitious monies^ too conceited to be satisfied with plaid gospel, and has long remained in that deplorable state.** But how came the whole Cbristian world, without any blinding depravity, to hearken to these i^ norant, foolish men, rather than unto wiser and better teachers ? Especially^ when the latter had plain gospel on their side, and the doctrines of the other were (as oor author sop-poshes) so very contrary, not only to the plain gospel, bsit to men's reason and common sense I Or were all the teachers of the Christian church nothing but a parcel of zgnorwit dream' rrs ? If so, this is very strange Indeed, unless mankind naturally hve darknes.^ rather than light, seeing in aill parts of the Christian world there was so great a multitude of those in the work of the ministry, who had the gospel in their hands, and whose whole business it was to study and teach it, and therefore had infinitely greater advantages to become truly ■wise, than the Heathen philosophers. But if it did happen so, by some strange and inconceivable means, that notv/iih-standing all these glorious advantages, all the teachers of the Christian church through the world, without any native evil propensity, very early became silly dreamers., and also in their dreammg, generally stumbled on the same individual, monstrous opinions, and so the world might be blinded for a while ; yet why did they not hearken to that wise and great man, Pelagius, and others like him, when he plainly held forth the truth to the Christian world ! Especially seeing his instructions were so agreeable to the plain doctrines, and the bright and clear light of the gospel of Christ, and also so agreeable to the plainest dictates of the common sense and understanding of all mankind ; but the other so repugnant to it, that (according to our author) if they were true, it would prove understanding to be no miderstanding., and the JVord of God to be no rule of truth., nor at all to be relied upon, and God to be a Being -worthy of no regard I

And besides, if the ineffectualnessof the gospel to restrain sin and promote virtue, be owing to the general prevalence of these doctrines, which are supposed to be so absurd and contrary to the gospel, here is this further to be accounted

for, namely, why, since there has been so great an increase of li^ht in religious matters (as must be supposed on Dr. Taylor's scheme) in this and the last age, and these monstrous doctrines of Original Sin, Election, Reprobation, Justification, Regeneration, 8cc. have been so much exploded, especially in our nation, there has been no reformation attending this great advancement of light and truth ; but on the contrary, vice, and every thing that is opposite to practical Christiainity, has gone on to increase, with such a prodigious celerity, as to become like an overflowing deluge, threatening, unless God mercifully interpose, speedily to swallow up all that is left of what is virtuous und praiseworthy.

Many other things might have been mentioned under this head, ol the ?neans wliich mankind have had to restrain vice, and promote virtue ; such as wickedness being many ways contrary to men's temporal interest and comfort in this world, and their having continually before their eyes so many instances of persons made miserable by their vices ; the restraints of human laws, wiihout which men cannot live in society ; the judgments of God brought on men for their wickedness, with which history abounds, and the providential rewards of virtue, and innumerable particular means that God has used from age to age to curb the wickedness of mankind, which I have omitted. But there would be no end of a particular enumeration of such things. Enough has been said. They that will not be convinced by the instances which have been mentioned, probably Avould not convinced, it the world had stood a thousand times so long, and we had the most authentic and certain accounts of means having been used from the beginning, in a thousand times greater variety, and new dispensations had been introduced, after others had been tried in vain, ever so often, and still to little effect. He that will not be convinced by a thousand good witnesses, it is not likely that he would be convinced by a thousand thousand. The proofs that have been extant in the world, from trial and fact, of the depravity of man's nature, are inexpressible, and as it were infinite, beyond the representation of all comparison and similitude. If there were a piece of ground, which

abounded with briars and tliorns, or some poisonous plant, and all mankind had used their endeavors, for a thousand years together, to suppress that evil growth, and to bring that ground by manure and cultivation, planting and sowing, to produce better fruit, but all in vain, it would still be overrun with the same noxious growth ; it would not be a proof, that such a produce was agreeable to the nature of that soil, in any wise to be compared to that which is given in divine providence, that wickedness is a produce agreeable to the nature of the field of the world of mankind ; which has had means used with it, that have been so various, great and wonderful, contrived by the unsearchable and boundless wisdom of God ; medicines procured with infinite expence, exhibited with so vast an apparatus ; so marvellous a succession of dispensations, introduced one after another, displaying an incomprehensible length and breadth, depth and height, of divine wisdom, love, and power, and every perfection of the godhead, to the eternal admiration of the principalities and powers in heavenly places.

SECTION IX.

Several Evasions of the Arguments for the Depravity of Na-ture, from trial and events, considered.

Evasion 1. DR. TAYLOR says, p. 231, 232. Adam's nature, it is allowed, was very far from being sinful; yet he sinned. And therefore, the common doctrine of Original Sin, is no more necessary to account for the sin that has been, or is in the world, than it is to account for Adam's sin." Again, p. 52...,54. 5. &c. «' If we allow mankind to be as wicked as R. R. has represented them to be ; and suppose that there is not one upon earth that is truly righteous, and Avithout sin, and that some are very enormous sinners, yet it

SZ!? OKrCINAL SfK

trill not thence follow, that th-ey are natarally iismvjrt. For, ff sinful action infer55 a natnre orif^Hially corrupt, then, where* a» A'^iam (accordinj^ to them that hold the doctrine of OrKi,ii>-fi-1 Sin) committed the mobl he'nous and a^Rravated sin. that •verwas committed in the world ; for, accwding to them, he Rati greater light than any other man in the world, to know iis duty, and {greater power than any other man to fulfil it), anxi was under greater obligations than any other man to obedience ; he sinned, when he knew he was the representative ©£millions, and 'hat the hnppy or miserable state of all mankind, depended on his conduct; which never was^ nor can bC) the case of any other man in the world : Then, I say, it will follow, that his nature was originally coruipt, &c. Thus their argument from the wickedness of mankind, to prove a sinful and corrupt nature, must inevitably and irrecoverably fall to the ground ; which will appear more abundantly, if we take In the case of the angels, wha in numbers sinned^ and kept not their first estate, though created with a nature superior to Adam's." Again, p. 145. 5. " When it is inquired, how it comes to pass that our appetites and passions are now so irregular and r.trong, as that not one person has resisted them, «o as to keep himself pure and innocent ? If this be the case, if such as make the inquiry will tell the world, how it came to pass that Adam's appetites and passions v/cre so irregular and strong, that he did not resist them, so as to keep himself pure and innocent, when, upon their principles, he was far ttiore able to have resisted them ; I also will tell them how it comes to pass, that his posterity does not resist them. Sin doth not alter its nature, by its being general; and therefore fcow far soever it spreads, it must come upon all just as it earoe upon Adam."

These things are delivered with much assurance. But is there any reason in such a way of talking ? One thing implied in it, and the main thing, if any thing at all to the purpose, is, that because an effect's being general, does not alter the nature of the effect, therefore nothing more can be argued concerning the cause, from its happening ronstatnly, and in the moat steady raai^ner,, than from its happening but once.

B«t how contrary is this to I'eason ? If sncli a«ase shoulS happen, thai a person, through the deceitful pei^suasions «f;« pretended friend, once lakes an unwholesome and poisonous draught, of a liquor he had no inclination to before; but after he has once taken of it, he be observed to act as -one that has an insatiable, incurable thirst after more of the satnei, in his constant practice, and acts often repeated, and obstinately continued* in as long as he lives, against all possible argu-itjents and endeavors used to dissuade him from it; and we should from hence argue a fixed inclination, and begin to suspect that this is the nature and operation of the poison, to produce such an inclination, or that this strong propensity is some way the consequence of the first draught in such a casoj could it be Sdid with good reason, that a fixed propensity can no more be argued from his consequtnt constant practice* than from his first draught ? Or, if we suppose a young man, no otherwise than soberly inclined, and enticed by v/icked companions, should drink to excess, until he had got a habit of excessive drinking, and should come under the power of a greedy appetite after strong d'-ink, so that drunkenness should become a common and constant practice with him ; and some observer, arguing from this his general practice, should say, " It must needs be that this young man has a fixed inclinatioa to that sin ; otherwise, how should it come to pass that he should make such a trade of it ?" And another, ridiculing the weakness of his arguing, should reply, " Do you tell me how it came to pass, that he was guilty of that sin the first time, without a fixed inclination, and I will tell you how he is guilty of it so generally without a fixed inclination. Sin does not alter its nature by being general ; and tlierefore, how common soever it becomes, ii must come at all times by the same means that it came at first.'' I leave it to every one to judge, who would be chargeable with weak arguing in such a case. It is true, as was observed before, there is no effect without some cause, occasion, ground or reason of that effect, and some cause answerable to the effect. But certainly it will not follow from thence, that a transient effect requires a permanent cause, or a fixed influence or propensity. An ef-

feet's happening once, though the effect may be great, yea, though it may come to pass on the same occasion in many subjects at the same time, will not prove any fixed propensity, or permanent influence. It is true, it proves an influence great and extensive, answerable to the effect, once exerted, or once effectual ; but it proves nothing in the cause fixed or constant. If a particular tree, or a great number of trees standing together, have blasted fruit on tlicir branches at a particular season, yea, if the fruit be very much blasted, and entirely spoiled, it is evident that something was the occasion of such an effect at that time ; but this alone does not prove the nature of the tree to be bad. But if it be observed, that those trees, and all other trees of the kind, wherever planted, and in all soils, countries, climates and seasons, and however cultivated and managed, still bear ill fruii, from year to year, and in all ages, it is a good evidence of the evil nature of the tree ; and if the fruit, at all these times, and in all these cases, be very bad, it proves the nature of the tree to be very bad ; and if we argue in like manner from what appears among men, it is easy to determine, whetiier the universal sinfulness of mankind, and iheir all sinning immediately, as soon as capable of it, and all sinning continually, and generally being of a wicked character, at all times, in all ages, and all places, and under all possible circumstances, against means and motives inexpressibly manifold and great, and in the utmost conceivable variety, be from a permanent, internal, great cause.

If the voice of common sense were attended lo, and heard, there would be no occasion for labor in multiplying arguments and instances to shew, that one act does not prove a fixed inclination ; but that constant practice and pursuit do. We see that it is in fact agreeable to the reason of all man-kmd, to argue fixed principles, tempers, and prevailing inclinations, from repeated and continued actions, though the actions are voluntary, and performed of choice; and thus to judge of the tempers and inclinations of persons, ages, sexes, tribes and nations. But is ii the manner of men to conclude, that whatever they see others once do, they have a fixed, abiding inclination to do ? Yea, there may be several acts seen,

and yet they not taken as good evidence of an established propensity ; nay, though attended with that circumstance, that one act, or tho'-e several acts, are followed with such constant practice, as afterwards evidences fixed disposition. As for example, there may be several instances of a man's drinking some spirituous liquor, and they be no sign of a fixed inclination to that liquor ; but these acts may be introductory to a settled habit or propensiiy, which may be made very manifest afterwards by constant practice.

From these things it is plain, that what is alleged concerning the first sin of Adam, and of the angels, without a previous, fixed disposition to sin, cannot in the least injure or weaken the arguments, which have been brought to prove a fixed propensity to sin in mankind in their present state. The thing which the permanence of the cause has been argued from, is the permanence of the effect. And that the permanent cause consists in an internal, fixed propensity, and not any particular, external circumstances, has been argued from the effects being the same, through a vast variety and change of circumstances. Which things do not take place with respect to the first act of sin that Adam or the angels were guilty of ; which first acts, considered in themselves, were no permanent, continued effects. And though a great number of the angels sinned, and the effect on that account was the greater, and more extensive ; yet this extent of the effect is a very different thing from that }iermanence^ or settled continuance of the effect, which is supposed to shew a permanent cause, or fixed influence or propensity. Neither was there any trial of a vast variety of circumstances attending a permanent effect, to shew the fixed cause to be internal, consisting in a settled disposition of nature, in the instances objected. And however great the sin of Adam, or of the angels was, and however great means, motives, and obligations they sinned against ; whatever may be thence argued concerning the transient cause, occasion, or temptation, as being very subtle, remarkably tending to deceive and seduce, or otherwise great; yet it argues nothing of any settled disposition, ovfxed cause at all, either great or small; the effect both in the angels and

Vol, VT, 2E '•

our first parents, being in itself transient, and for ought appears, happening in each of them under one system or coincidence of influential circumstances.

Tiic general, continued wickedness of mankind, against such means and motives, proves each of these things, viz. that the cause is Jixed^ and that the fixed cause is internal, in man's nature, and also that it is very fiowerfuL It proves the 7?r?/, namely, that the cause is fixed, because the effect is so abiding, through so many changes. It proves the second, that is, that the fixed cause is internal, because the circumstances are so various: The variety of means and motives is one thing that is to be referred to the head of variety of circumstances ; and they are that kind of circumstances, which above all others proves this ; for they are such circumstances as cannot possibly cause the effect, being most opposite to the effect in their tendency. And it proves the third, viz. the greatness of the internal cause, or the powerfulness of the propensity ; because the means which have opposed its influence, have been so great, and yet have been statedly overcome.

But here I may observe by the way, that with regard to the motives and obligations which our first father sinned a-gainst, it is not reasonably alleged, that he sinned \vben he knew his sin would have destructive consequences to all hi» posterity, and mighty in firocess of time, fiaoe the whole globe tvith shdla. 5cc. Seeing it is so evident, by the plain account the scripture gives us of the temptation which prevailed with our first parents to commit that sin, that it was so contrived by Jhe subtilty of the tempter, as first to blind and deceive theni as to that matter, and to make them believe that their disobedience should be followed with no destruction or calamitu at allijo theTri:-.elves (and therefore not to their posterity) but o» the contrary, with a great increase and advancement of dignity and happiness.

SivAsxov 2. Let the wickedness of the world be ever so ^jeneral and great, there is no necessity of supposing any depravity of nature to be the cause : Man's own/rrr w/// is cause suiBcient- l^X mankind 1>& more or less corrupt, they makr

\hemselves corrupt by their own free choice. This, Dr. Taylor abundantly ini-ists upon, in many parts of his book.*

But I would ask, how it comes to pass that mankind so universally agree in this evil exercise of their freewill? If their wills are in the first place as free to good as evil, what is it to be ascribed to, that the world of mankind, consisting of so many millions, in so many successive generations, without cousuUalion, all agree to exercise their freedom in favor of evil ? If there be no natural tendency or preponderalion in the case, then there is as good a chance for the will's being determined to good as evil. If the cause is indifferent, why is not the effect in some measure indifferent ? If the balance be no heavier at one end than the oilier, why does it perpetually, and, as it were, infinitely, preponderate one way ? How comes it to pass, that the free will of mankind has been determined to evil, in like manner before the flood, and after the flood ; under the law, and under the gospel; among both Jews and Gentiles, under the Old Testament ; and since that, among Christians^ Jews, Mahometans; among Papists and Protestants ; in those nations where civility-, politeness, arts, and learning most prevail, and among the Ne';^roes and Hottentots in Africa, the Tartars in Asia, and Indians in America, towards both the poles, and on every side of the globe ; in greatest cities and obscurest villages ; in palaces and in huts, wigwams and cells under ground ? Is it enough to reply, it happens so, that men every where, and ati^U times, choose thus to determine their own wills, and so to make themselves sinful, as soon as ever they are capable of it, and to sin constantly as long as they live, and universally to choose never to come up half way to their duly ?

As has been often observed, a steady effect requires a steady cause ; but free will, without any previous propensity to influence its determinaiions, is no permanent cause ; nothing can be conceived of, further from it : For the very notion of freedom of will, consisting in selfdeterminiag power, implies contingence : And if the will is free in that seiise.,

• Page 257, 258, 52, 53, 5. and many other places.

that it is perfectly free from any government of previous inclination, its freedom must imply the most absolute and fier-feet contingence ; and surely nothing can be conceived of, more unfixed than that. The notion of liberty of will, in this sense, implies perfect freedom from every thing that should previously fix, bind or determine it ; that it may be left to be fixed and determined wholly by itself: Therefore its determinations must be previously altogether unfixed. And can that which is so unfixed, so contingent, be a cause sufficient to account for an effect, in such a manner, and to such a degree, permanent, fixed and constant ?

When men see only one particular person, going on in a certain course with gre'at constancy, against all manner of means to dissuade him, do they judge this to be no argument of any fixed disposition of mind, because he, being free, may determine to do so, if he will, without any such disposition ? Or if they see a nation or people that differ greatly from other nations, in such and such instances of their constant conduct, as though their tempers and inclinations were very diverse, and any should deny it to be from any such cause, and should say, we cannot judge at all of the temper or disposition of any nation or people, by any thing observable in their constant practice or behavior, because they have all free will, and therefore may all choose to act so, if they please, without any thing in their temper or inclination to bias them ; would such an account of such effects be satisfying to the reason of mankind ? But infinitely further would it be from satisfying a considerate mind, to account for the constant and universal sinfulness of mankind, by saying, that the will of all mankind is free, and therefore all mankind may, if they please, make themselves wicked : They are free when they first begin to act as moral agents, and therefore all may, if they please, bep;in to sin as soon as they begin to act : They are free as long as they continue to act in the world, and therefore they may all commit sin continually, if they will: Men of all nations are free, and therefore all nations may act alike in these respects, if they please (though some do not know how other nations do act.) Men of high and low condi-

tlon, learned and ignorant, are free, and therefore they may agree in actins^ wickcJly, if they please (though they do not consult together.) Men in all ages are free, and therefore men ui one age may all agree with men in every other age iu wickedness, if they please, (though they do not know how men in other ages have acted) Sec. he. Let every one judge whether such an accoun' of things can satisfy reason.

Evasion 3. Ii is said by many of the opposers of the doctrine of Original Sin, that the corruption of the world of mankind may be owing, not to a depraved nature, but to bad example. And I think we must understand Dr. Taylor as having respect to the powerful influence of bad instruction and example, when he says, p. 118. " The Gentiles, in their heathen state, when incorporated into the body of the Gentile world, were without strength, unable to help or recover themselves." And in several other places to the like purpose. If there was no depravity of nature, what else could there be but bad instruction and example, to hinder the heathen world, as a collective body, (for as such Dr. Taylor speaks of them, as may be seen p. 117, 118) from emerging out of their corruption, on the rise of each new generation ? As to their bad instruction, our author insists upon it, that the heathen, notwithstanding all their disadvantages, had sufficient light to know God, and do their whole duty to him, as we have observed from time to time. Therefore it must be chiefly bad example, that we must suppose, according to him, rendered their case helpless.

Now concerning this way of accounting for the corruption of the world, by the influence of bad example, I would observe the following things :

1. It is accounting for the thing by tl.e thing itself. It is accounting for the corruption of the m orld by the corruption of the world. For, that bad examples are general all over the world to be followed by others, and have been so from the beginning, is only an instance, or rather a description of that corruption of the world which is to be accounted for. If mankind are naturally no more inclined to evil than good, then how comes there to be so many more bad exam-

pies than i^ood ones', in all ajjes ? And if there arc not, how-come the had examples tliat are sel, to he so much more fol* lowed than the good ? If the propensity of man's nature he not to evil, how comes the curi-ent of c;et\cral example, every where, and at all times, to he so much to evil ? And when opposition has heen made hy p^ood examples, how comes it to pass that it has had so little effect to stem the stream of general wicked practice ?

I think from the brief account the scripture gives xis of the behavior of the first parents of mankind, the expressions of their faith and hope in God's mercy revtaled to them, we have reason to suppose, that before ever they had any children, they repented, and were pardoned, and became truly pious. So that God planted the world at first with a noble vine i and at the beginning of the generations ef mankind, he set the stream of example the right way. And we see, that children are more apt to follow the example of their parents, than of any others ; especially in early youth, their forming time, when those habits are generally contracted, whicli abide by them all their days. And besides, Adam's children hatl no ether examples to follow, but those of their parents. How therefore came the stream so soon to turn, and to proceed the contrary way, with so violent a current ? Then, when mankind became so universally and desperately corrupt, as not to Ijc fit to live on earth any longer, and the world was every where full of bad examples, God destroyed them all at once, but only righteous Noah, and his family, to remove those bad examples, and that the world of mankind might be planted a-gain with good example, and the stream again turned the right way : Hov/ therefore came it to pass, that Noah's posterity did not follow his good example, especially when they had sucl: extraordinary things to enforce his example, but so generally, even in his life time, became so exceeding corrupt i One would think, the first generations at least, while all lived together as one family, under Noah, their venerable Father, might have followed his good example ; and if they had done so, then, when the earth came to be divided in Peleg's time, 'he hea-ds of the several families would have set out their par-

ORIGINAL SIN. n\

ticular colonies with good examples, and the stream -w-ould iiave been turned the right way in all the various divisions, colonies, and nations of the world. But we see verily the fact was, that in about fifty years after Noah's death, the world in general was overrun with dreadful corruption ; so that all virtue and goodness were like soon to perish from among mankind, unless something extraordinary should be done to prevent it.

Then, for a remedy, God separated Abraham and Hs family from all the rest of the world, that they might be delivered from the influence of bad example, that, in his posterity, he might have an holy seed. Thus God again planted a nob^e vine ; Abraham, Isaac and Jacob being eminently pious. But how soon did their posterity degenerate, till true religion was like to he swallowed up ? We sec how desperately, and almost universally corrupt they were, when God brought tiiem out of Egypt, and led them in the wilderness.

Then God was pleased, before he planted his people in Canaan, to destroy that perverse generation in tiie wilderness, that he might plant them there a noble vine, ^vhollij a right seedy and set them out with good example, in the land where they were to have their settled abode. Jer. ii. 21, It is evident, that the generation which came with Joshua into Canaan, was an .excellent generation, by innumerable tiling;; said of them.* But how soon did that people, nevertheless, become the degenerate filant of a strange vine ?

And when the nation had a long time proved themselves desperately and incurably corrupt, God destroyed them, and sent them into captivity, till the old rebels were dead and purged out, to deliver their children from their evil example ; and when the folloAving generation were purified as in a furnace, God planted them again, in the land of Israe', a noble, vifi-e, and set them out with good example ; which yet was not followed by their posterity.

*See Jer. ii. 2, 3. Psal. Ixviii 14, Josh, xxll 2, and xxiii. 8. Deut, iv. 3, 4, Hos. xi. 1, and IX. 10. Judges ii. 7, 17, 21, and many othf ojaces.

When again the corniption was become inveterate and desperate, the Christian church was planted by a glorious outpouring of the Spirit of God, causing true virtue and piety to be exemplified in the first age of the church of Christ, lar beyond whatever had been on earth before ; and the Chriit-ian church was planted a noble vme. But that primitive good example has not prevailed, to cause virtue to be generally and steadfastly maintained in the Christian world : To how great a degree it has been otherwise, has already been observed.

After many ages of general and dreadful aj-ostasy, God was pleased to erect tlve Protestant church, as separated from the more corrupt part of Christendom ; and true pieiy flourished very much in it at first; God planted it a yioble vine : But, notwithstanding the good examples of the first reformers, what a melancholy pass is the Protestant world come to at this day ?

When England grew very corrupt, God brought over a number of pious persons, and planted them in NewengJand, and this land was planltd with a noble vine. But how is the gold become dim ! How greatly have we forsaken the pious examples of our fathers I

So prone have mankind always proved themselves to degeneracy, and bent to backsliding. Which shews plainly their natural propensity ; and that when good has revived, and been promoted among men, it has been by some divine interposition, to oppose the natural current; the fruit of some extraordinary means, the efficacy of which has soon been overcome by constant, natural bias, and the effect of good example presently lost, and evil has regained and maintained the dominion : Like an heavy body, which may by some great power be caused to ascend, iigainst its nature, a little while, but soon goes back again towards the centre, to which it naturally and constastly tends.

So that evil example will in no wise account for the corruption of mankind, without supposing a natural proneness to sin. The tendency of example alone will not account for general wicked practice, as consequent on good example. And if the influence of bad example is a reason of some of

t'le wickedness that is in the world, that alone will not account for men's becoming worse than the example set, and degenerating more and more, and growing worse and worse, which has been the manner of mankind.

2. There has been given to the world an example of virtue, which, were it not for a dreadful depravity of nature, would have influence on them that live under the gospel, far beyond all other examples; and that is, the example of Jesus Christ.

God, who knov/ the human nature, and how apt men are to be influenced by example, has made answerable provision. His infinite wisdom has contrived that we s'loukl have set before us the most amiable and perfect example, in such circumstances, as should have the greatest tendency to influence all the principles of man's nature, but his corruption. Men are apt to be moved by the example of others like themselves., or in their own nature ; thereibre this example was given in our nature. Men are ready to follow the example of the great and honorable ; and this example, though it was of one in our nature, yet it was of one infinitely higher and more honorable than kings or angels. A people are apt to follow the example of their prince : This is the example of that glorious person, who stands in a peculiar relation to Christians, as their Lord and King, the Supreme Head of the church ; and not only so, but the King of kings, Supreme Head of the Universe, and head over all things to the church. Children are apt to follow the example of their parents : This is the example of the Author of our Being, and one who is in a peculiar and extraordinary manner our Father, as he is the Author of our Holy and happy Being; besides his being the Creator of the world, and everlasting Father of the Universe. Men are very apt to follow the example of their friends : The example of Christ is of one that is infinitely our greatest friend, standing, in the most endearing relations of our Brother, Redeemer, Spiritual Head and Husband ; whose grace and love expressed to us, transcends all other love and friendship, as much as heaven is higher than the earth. And then the virtues and acts of his example were exhibited to us in the most

Vol. VI 2F

cndearin.^■ and engaging circumstances that can possibly be conceived of : His obedience and submission to God, his humility, meekness, patience, charity, selfdenial, 8cc. being exercised and expressed in a work of infinite grace, love, condescension, and beneficence to us ; and had all their highest expressions in his laying down his life for us, and meekly, patiently, and cheerfully undergoing such extreme and unutterable suffering, for our eternal salvation. Men are pecuUar-ly apt to follow the example of such as they have great benefits from : But it is utterly impossible to conceive of greater benefits, that we could have by the virtues of any person, than we have by the virtuous acts of Christ ; who depend upon being thereby saved from eternal destruction, and brought to-inconceivable, immortal glory at God's right hand. Surely if it were not for an extreme corruption of the heart of men, such an example would have that strong influence on the heart, that would as it were swallow up the power of all the evil and hateful examples of a generation of vipers.

3. The influence of bad example, vvithont corruption of nature, will not account for children's universally committing sin as soon as capable of it; which, I think, is a fact that has been made evident by the scripture. It will not account for this, in the children of eminently pious parents ; the first examples that are set in their view, being very good ; which, as has been observed, was especially the case of many children jn Christian families in the apostles' days, when the Apostle John supposes that every individual person had sin to repent of, and confess to God.

4. What Dr. Taylor supposes to have been fact, with respect to a sjreat part of mankind, cannot consistently be accounted for from the influence of bad example, viz. the state of the heathen world, which he supposes, considered as a col-Jcctive body, was helpless, dead in sin, and unable to recover-itself. Not evil example alone, no, nor as united with evil instruction, can be supposed a sufficient reason why every new generation that arose among them, should not be able to emerge from the idolatry and wickedness of iheir ancestors, in any consistence with his scheme. The ill example of an-

cestors could have no power to oblige them to sin, any other way than as a strong temptation. But Dr. Taylor himself says, p. 72. 5. " To suppose men's temptations to be supe-Tioi' to their powers, will impeach the goodness and justice of God, who appoints every man's trial." And as to bad instructions, as was observed before, he supposes that they all, yea every individual person, had light sufficient to know God, and do their whole duty. And if each one could do this for himself, then surely they might all be agreed in it through the power of free will, as well as the whole world be agreed in corruption by the same power.

Evasion 4. Some modern opposers of the doctrine of Original Sin, do thus account for the general prevalence of wickedness, viz. that in a course of nature our senses grow up first, and the animal passions get the start of reason. So Dr. Turnbull says,* " Sensitive objects first affect us, and inasmuch as reason is a principle, which, in the nature of things, must be advanced to strength and vigor, by gradual cultivation, and these objects are continually assailing and soliciting us; so,unless a very happy education prevents, our sensitive appetites must have become very strong, before reason can have force enough to call them to an account, and assume an-thority over them." From hence Dr. Turnbull supposes it comes to pass,t " That though some few may, through the influence of virtuous example, be said to be sanctified from the womb, so liberal, so generous, so virtuous, so truly noble is their cast of mind ; yet, generally speaking, the whole world lieth in such wickedness, that, with respect to the far greater part of mankind, the study of virtue is beginning to reform, and is a severe struggle against bad habits, early contracted, and deeply rooted ; it is therefore putting off" an old, inveterate, corrupt nature, and putting on a new form and temper; it is moulding ourselves anew; it is a being born again, and becoming as children. And how few are there in the world who escape its pollutions, so as not to be early in that class, or to be among the righteous that need no repentance ?"

* See Moral Philosophy, p. 279, and Christian Philosophy, p. 87^, + Christian Philosophy, p, ^gz, 283,

Dr. Taylor, though he is not so explicit, seems to hint at the same thing, p. 192. <' It is by slow degree'^: (says he) that children come »o the use of understanding ; the animal passions being for some years the governing part of their constitution. And therefore, though they may be frovvard and apt to displease us, yei how far this is sin in them, we are not capable of judging. But it may sufiice to say, that it is the will of God that children should have appetites and passions to regulate and restrain, that he hath given parents instructions and commands to discipline and inform their minds, that if parents first learned true wisdom for themselves, and then endeavored to bring up their children in the way of virtue, there would be less wickedness in the world."

Concerning these things I would observe, that such a scheme is attended with the very same difficulties, which they that advance it would avoid ; liable to the same objections, which they make against God's ordering it so that men should be brought into being with a prevailing propensity to sin. For this scheme supposes, the author of lature has so ordered things, that men should come into being as moral agents, that is, should first have existence in a state and capacity of moral agency, under a prevailing propensity to sin. For that strength, which sensitive appetites and animal passions come to by their habitual exercise, before persons come to the exercise of their rational powers, amounts to a strong propensity to sin, when they first come to the exercise of those rational, powers, by the supposition ; because this is given as a reason why the scale is turned for sin among mankind, and why, generally n/ieaking, the ivhole ivorld lies in wickedness, and the study of -virtue is a severe struggle against bad habits, early contracted, and deeply rooted. These deeply-rooted habits must imply a tendency to sin ; otherwise they could not account for that which they are brought to account for, namely, prevailing wickedness in the world; for that cause cannot account for an effect, which is supposed to have" no tendency to that effect. And this tendency which is supposed, is altogether equivalent to a natural tendency : It is as necessary to the subject. For it is supposed to be brought on the person who is the subject of it,

when he has no power to withstand or oppose it: The habit, as Dr. Turnbull says, becoming very btroni.;, before reason can have force enough to call the passions to account, or assume authority over them. And it is supposed, that this necessity, by which men become subject to this propensity to sin, is from the ordering and disposal of the author of nature ; and therefore must be as much from his hand, and as much without the hand bf the person himself, as if he were first brought into being with such a propensity. Moreover, it is supposed that the effect, which the tendency is to^ is truly wickedness. For it is alleged as a cause or reason why the whole world lies in wickedness, and why all but a very few are first in the class of the wicked, and not among the righteous, that need no repentance. If they need repentance, what they are guilty of is truly and properly wickedness, or moral evil ; for certainly men need no repentance for that which is no sin, or blamable evil. If it be so, that, as a consequence of this propensity, the world lies in wickedness, and the far greater part are of a wicked character, without doubt, the far greater part go to eternal perdition ; for death does not pick and choose for men of a righteous character only. And certainly that is an evil, corrupt state of things, which naturally tends to, and issues in that consequence, that as it were the whole world lies and lives in wickedness, and dies in wickedness, and perishes eternally. And this, by the supposition, is a state of things, wholly of the ordering of the author of nature, before mankind are capable of having any hand in the affair. And is this any relief to the difficulties, which these writers object against the doctrine of natural depravity ?

And I might here also observe; that this w^ay of accounting for the wickedness of the world, amounts to just the same thing with that solution of man's depravity, which was mentioned before, that Or. Taylor cries out of as loo gross to be admitted (p. 188, 189.) viz. God's creating the soul pure, and putting it into such a body, as naturally tends to pollute it. For this scheme supposes, that God creates the soul pure, and puts it into a body, and into such a state in that body, tiiat the iiatural consequence is a strong propensity to sin, as soon as the soul is capable of sinning.

Dr. Turnbiill seems to suppose, that the mutter could no'. have been ordered otherwise, consistent with the nature of things, than that animal passions should be so aforehand with reason, as that the consequence should be that Avhich has been mentioned ; because reason is a faculty ef such a nature, that it,can have strenp;lh and vigor no otherwise than by exercise and culture.* But can there be any force in this ? is there any thing in nature, to make it impossible, but that the superior principles of man's nature should be so proportioned to the inferior, as to prevent such a dreadful consequence, as the moral and natural ruin, and eternal perdition of the far greater part of mankind ? Could not those superior principles be in vastly greater strength at first, and yet be capable of endless improvement ? And what should hinder its being so ordered by the Creator, that they should impiove by vastly swifter degrees than they do ? If we are Christians we must be forced to allow it to be possible in the nature of things, that the principles of human nature should be so balanced, that the consequence should be no propensity to sin, in the first beginning of a capacity of moral agency ; because we must own, that it was so in fact in Adam, when first created, and also in the man Christ Jesus ; though the faculties of the ktter were such as grew by culture and improvement, so that be increased in wisdom as he grev/ in stature.

Evasion 5. Seeing men in this v/orld are in a state of trial, it is fit that their virtue should meet with trials, and consequently that it should have opposition and temptation to overcome ; not only from without, but from within, in the animal passions and appetites we have to struggle with ; that by the conflict and victory our virtue may be refined and established. Agreealily to this, Dr. Taylor (p. 253.) says, "Without aright use and application of our powers, were they naturally ever so perfect, we could not be judged fit to enter into the kingdom of God. 'I his gives a good reason why we arc now in a state of trial and temptation, viz. to prove and disciplinsi our minds, to season our virtue, and to fit u»

* Mor, Phil. p. 311.

for the kingdom of God ; for which, in the judgment of infinite wisdom, -we cannot be qualified, but by overcoming our present temptations." And in p. 78. S. he says, " We are upon trial, and it is the will of our Father that our constitution should be attended with various passions and appetites, as well as our outward condition with various temptations." He says the like in several other places. To the same purpose very often Dr. Turnbull, panicularly Christian Philosophy^ p. 310. " What merit (says he) except from combat? What virtue without the encounter of such enemies, such temptations as arise both from within and from abroad ? To be virtuous, is to prefer the pleasures of virtue, to those which come into competition with it, and vice holds forth to tempt ns ; and to dare to adhere to truth and goodness, whatever pains and hardships it may cost. There m.ust therefore, in order to the formation and trial, in order to the very being of virtue, be pleasures of a certain kind to make temptations to 7ice."

In reply to these things I would say, either the slate of temptation, which is supposed to be ordered for men's trial, amounts on the whole to a prevailing tendency to that state of general wickedness and ruin, which has been proved to take place, or it does not. If it does not amount to a tendency to such an effect, then how does it account for it ? When it is inquired, by what cause such an effect should come to pass, is it not absurd to allege a cause, which is owned at the same lime to have no tendency to such an effect ? Which is as much as to confess, that it will not account for it. I think it has hcan demonstrated, that this effect must be owing to some prevailing tendency. If the other part of the dilemma be taken, and il be said, that this state of things does imply a prevailing tendency to that effect, whicli has been proved, viz. that all mankind, without the exception of su much as one, sin against God, to their own deserved and just, eternal ruin ; and not only so, but sin thub immediately, as soon as capable of it, and sin continually, and huve more sin than virtue, and have guilt that in{ini>eiy outweighs the value of all the goodness any ever have, and that the generality of the world in

all ages are extremely stupid and foolish, and of a wiekcd character, and actually perish for ever ; I say, if the state of temptation implies a natural tendency to such an effect as this, it is a very evil, corrupt, and dreadful state of things, as has been already largely shewn.

Besides, such a state has a tendency to defeat its own supposed end, which is to refine, ripen, and perfect virtue in mankind, and so to fit men for the greater eternal happiness and glory : Whereas, the effect it tends to, is the reverse of this, viz. general, eternal infamy and ruin, in all generations. It is supposed, that men's virtue must have passions and appetites to struggle with, in order to have the glory and reward of victory ; but the consequence is, a prevailing, continual and generally effectual tendency, not to men's victory over evil appetites and passions, and the glorious reward of that victory, but to the victory of evil appetites and lusts over men, and utterly and eternally destroying them. If a trial of virtue be requisite, yet the question is, whence comes so general a failing in the trial, if there be no depravity of nature ? If conflict and war be necessary, yet surely there is no necessity that there should be more cowards than good soldiers ; unless it be necessary that men should be overcome and destroyed : Especially it is not necessary that the whole world as it were should lie in wickedness, and so lie and die in cowardice.

I might also here observe, that Dr. Turnbull is not very consistent, in supposing, that combat with temptation is requisite to the very being of virtue. For I think it clearly follows from his own notion of virtue, that virtue must have a being prior to any virtuous or praiseworthy combat with temptation. For, by his principles, all virtue lies in good affection, and no actions can be virtuous, but what proceed from good affection.* Therefore, surely the combat itself can have no virtue in it, unless it proceeds from virtuous affection ; and therefore virtue must have an existence before the combat, and be the cause of it.

^ * Christian Pkilssophy, p. 113 115.

CHAPTER II.

Universal Mertality proves Original Sin; par-^ ticularly the Death of Infants^ with its various circumstances.

THE universal reign of death, over persons of all ages indiscriminately, with the awful circumstances and attendants of death, proves that men come sinful into the world.

It is needless here particularly to inquire, whether God has not a sovereign risiht to set bounds to the lives of his own creatures, be they Sinful or not; and as he gives life, so to take it av/ay when he pleases ? Or how far God has a right to bring extreme suffering and calamity on an innocent moral agent ? Yov death, wiih the pains and agonies with which it is usually brought on, is not merely a limiting of existence, but is a most terrible calamity ; and to such a creature as man, capable of conceiving of immortality, and made with so earnest a desire after it, and capable of foresight and of reflection on approaching death, and that has such an extreme dread of it, is a calamity above all others terrible, to such as are able to refleci upon it. I say, it is needless, elaborately to consider, whether God may not, consistent with his perfections, by absolute sovereignty, bring so great a calamity on mankind when perfectly innocent. It is sufficient, if we have good evidence from scripture, that it is not agreeable to God*s manner of dealing with mankmd so to do.

It is manifest, that mankind were not originally subjected to I his calamity : God brought it on them afterwards, on occasion of man's sin, at a time of the manifestation of God's great displeasure for sin, and by a denunciation and sentence pronounced by him, as acting the part of a judge, as Dr. Tay-VoL. VI. 2 G

lor often totilesses. Sin entered into the world, and death by sin, as the apostle says. Which certainly leads us to suppose, that this affair was ordered of God, not merely by the sovereignty of a Creator, hut by the righteousness of a judge. And the sciiplure every where speaks of all great afflictions and calannilies, which God in his providence brings on mankind, as testimonies of his displeasure for sin, in the subject of those calamities ; excepting those sufferings which are to atone for the sins of others. He ever taught his people to look on such calamities as his rod, the rod of his anger, his Jrowns, the hidings of his face in displeasure. Hence such calamities are in scripture so often called by the name of jiidgmtntsy being what God brings on men as a judge, executing a riglueous sentence for transgression : Yea, they are often called by the name of wrath, especially calamities consisting or issuing in death.* And hence also is that which Dr. Taylor would have us take so much notice of, that some-limes, in the scripture, calamity and sutTering is called by fciich names as sin, iniquity, being guiltij, Sec. which is evidently by a roetonytny of the cause for the effect. It is not likely, that in the language in use of old among God's people, calamity or suffering would have been called even by the names of sin and guilt, if it had been so far from having any connexion with sin, that even death itself, which is always spoken of as the most terrible of calamities, is not so much as any sign of the sinfulness of the subject, or any testiu.ony of God's displeasure for any guilt of his, as Dr. Taylor supposes.

Death is spoken of in scripture as the chief of cal.-^miiies, the most extreme and terrible of all those natural evils, which come on mankind in this world. Deadly destruction is spoken of as the most terrible destruction. 1 Sam. v. 11. Bead-ly sorrow, as the most extreme sorrow. Isa. xvii. 11. Malth. xxvi. 38, and deadly enemies, as the most bilter and terrible

* See Lcvit. x. 6. Numb. i. 53, and xviii, 5. Josh, ix. 20. aChroo. xxiv. 18, and xix. 2, 10, and xxviii. 13, and xxxii. 25. Ezra vii. ffg. Neh. xiii. i8. Zech. vii, 12, and many other places.

enemies. Psal. xvii. 9. The extremity of Christ's sufferings is represented by his suffering -1171(0 death. Philip, ii. 8, and other places. Hence the greatest testimonies of God's anger for the sins of men in this world, have been by inflicting death : As on the sinners of the old world, on the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomo rah, on Onan, Pharaoh, and the Egyptians, Nadab and Abihu, Korah and his company, and the rest of the rebels in the wilderness, on the wicked inhabitants of Canaan, on Hophni and Phinehas, Ananias and Sap-phira, the unbelieving Jews, upon whom wrath came to the uttermost, in the time of the last destruction of Jerusalem. This calamity is often spoken of as in a peculiar manner the fruit of the guilt of sin. Exod. xxviii. 43. " That they bear not iniquity and die." Levit. xxii. 9. " Lest they bear sin for it and die." So Numb, xviii. 22, compared with Levit. x. 1, 2. The very light of nature, or tradition from ancient revelation, led the heathen to conceive of death as in a peculiar manner an evidence of divine vengeance. Thus we have an account, Acts xxviii. 4. That tvhen the Barbarians .saw the •venoinous beast hang on Paul's handt they said among them.' selves^ no doubt this man is a murderer, ivhom^ though he hath tscaped the seas, yet vengeance suffereth not to live.

Calamities that are very small in comparison of the universal, temporal destruction of the whole world of mankind by death, are spoken of as manifest indications of God's great displeasure for the sinfulness of the subject; such as the destruction of particular cities, countries, or numbers of men, by war or pestilence. Deut. xxix. 24. " All nations shall say, wherefore hath the Lord done thus unto this land ? What meaneth the heat of this great anger ?" Here compare Deut. xxxii, 30. 1 Kings ix. 8, and Jer. xxii. 8, 9. These calamities, thus spoken of as plain testimonies of God's great anger, consisted only in hastening on that de:ith, wtiich otherwise, by God's disposal, would most certainly have come in a short time. Now the taking off of thirty or forty years from seventy or eighty, (if we should suppose it to be so muchj one with another, in the time of these extraordinary judgments) is but a small matter, in comparison of (icd's first

making man mortal, cutting off his hoped for immortality, subjecting him to inevitable death, which his nature so exceedingly dreads ; and afterwards shortening his life further, "by cutting off more than eight hundred years of it ; so bringing it to be less than a twelfth part of what it was in the first ages of the world. Besides that innumerable multitudes in the common course of things, without any extraordinary judgment, die in youth, in childhood, and infancy. Therefore how inconsiderable a thing is the additional or hastened destruction, that is sometimes brought on a particular city or country by war, compared with that universal havoc which death makes of the whole race of mankind, from generation to generation, without distinction of sex, age, quality, or condition, with all the infinitely various, dismal circumstances, torments, and agonies, which attend the death of old and young, adult persons and little infants ? If those particular and comparatively trivial calamities, extending perhaps not to more than the thousandth part of the men of one generation, are clear evidences of God's great anger ; certainly this universal, vast destruction, by which the whole world in all generations is swallowed up, as by a flood, that nothing can resist, must be a most glaring manifestation of God's anger for the sinfulness of mankind. Yea, the scripture is express in it, that it is so. Psal. xc. 3, &c, " Thou turnest man to destruction, and sayest, return, ye children of men....Thou earliest them away as with a flood : They are as a sleep : In the morning they are like grass, which groweth up ; in the morning it flourisheth and groweth up; in the evening it is cut down and withereth. For we are consumed by thine anger, and by thy wrath are we troubled. Thou hast set our iniquities before thee, our secret sins in the light of thy countenance. For all our days are passed away in thy wrath : We spend our years as a tale that is told. The days of our years are threescore years and ten ; and if by reason of strength they be fourscore years, yet is their strength labor and sorrow ; for it is soon cut off, and we fly away. Who knoweth the power of thine anger ? According to thy fear, so is thy wrath. So teach us to number our days that we may apply

oui'hearts unto wisdom." How plain and full is this testimony, that the general mortality of mankind is an evidence of God's anger for the sin of those who are the subjects of such a dispensation ? ■■

Abimelech speaks of it as a thing which he had reason to conclude from God's nature and perfection, that he ivould not slay a righteous nation. Gen. xx. 4. By righteous evidently meaning innocent. And if so, much less will God slay a right' eons world, (consisting of so many nations....repealing the great slaughter in every generation) or subject the whole world of mankind to death, when they are considered as innocent, as Dr. Taylor supposes. We have from tinae to time in scripture such phrases as worthy of death, and guilty of death ; but certainly the righteous Judge of all the earth will not bring death on thousands of millions, not only that are not worthy of death, but are worthy of no punishment.

Dr. Taylor from time to time speaks of affliction and death as a great benefit, as they increase the vanity of all earthly things, and tend to excite sober reflections, and to induce us to be moderate in gratifying the appetites of the body, and to mortify pride and ambition, &c.* To this I would say,

1. It is not denied but God may see it needful for mankind in their present state, that they should be mortal, and subject to outward afflictions, to restrain their lusts, and mortify their pride and ambition, Sco. But then is it not an evidence of man's depravity, that it is so ? Is it not an evidence of distemper of mind, yea, strong disease, when man stands in need of such sharp medicines, such severe and terrible means to restrain his lusts, keep down his pride, and make him willing to be obedient to God ? It must be because of a corrupt and ungrateful heart, if the riches of God's bounty, in bestowing life and prosperity, and things comfortable and pleasant, will not engage the heart to God, and to virtue, and childlike love and obedience, but thiit he must always have the rod held over him, and be often chastised, and held under

* Pages ai, 67, and other places.

the apprehen'j'rens of death, to keep him from ri^nnin}* wild in pride, contempt and rebellion, xingratefully using the blessings dealt forth from God's hand, in sinning against him, and serving his enennes. If man has no natural di^ingenuity of heart, it must be a mysterious thing indeed, that the sweet blessings of God's bounty have not as powerful an influence to restrain him from sinning against God, as terrible afflictions. If any thing can be a proof of a perverse and vile disposition, this must be a proof of it, that men should be most apt to forget and despise God, when his providence is most kind ; and that they should need to have God chastise them with great severity, and even to kill them, to keep them in order. If wc were as much disposed to gratitude to God for his benefits, as we are to anger at our fellow creatures for injuries, as we must be (so far as 1 can see) if we are not of a depraved heart, ihe sweetness of the divine bounty, if continued in life, and the height of every enjoyment that is pleasaYit to innocent human nature, would be as powerful incentives to a proper regard to God, tending as much to promote religion and virtue, as to have the world filled with calamity, and to have God (to use the language of Hczekiah, Isaiah xxxviii. 13, describing death and its agonies) as a lion, breaking alt our bones, and from day even to niglit, making an end of us.

Dr. Taylor himself, p. 252, says, " That our first parents before the fall were placed in a condition proper to engage their gratitude, love and obedience." Which is as much as to say, proper to engage them to the exercise and practice of all religion. And if the paradisaical state was proper to engage to all religion and duty, and men still come into the world with hearts as good as the two first of the species, why is it not proper to engage them to it still ? What need of so vastly changing man's state, depriving him of all those blessings, and instead of them allotting to him a world full of briars and thorns, afliiction, calamity and death, to engage him to it ? The taking away of life, and all those pleasant enjoyments man hod at first, by a permanent constitution, would be no stated benefit to mankind, unless thcie was a sta'cd disposition in ihem to abuse such blessings. The tak-

ir!g them away is supposed to be a benefit under the notion of their bcin;^- things that tend to lead men to sin ; but they would have no such tendency, at least in a stated manner, unless there was in men a fixed tendency to make that unreasonable misimprovemcnt of them. Such a temper of mind as amounts to a disposition to make such a mibimprovemcnt of blessings of that kind, is often spoken of in scripture, as most astonishingly vile and perverse. So concerning Isracrs abusing the blessings of Canaan, that land flowing with milk and honey ; iheir ingratitude in it is spoken of by the prophets, as enough to astonish ail lieaven and eartli, and as more than brutish stupidity and vileness. Jer. ii. 7. '• I brought them into a plentiful country, to eat the fruit thereof, and the goodness thereof. But when ye entered, ye defiled my land," £cc. See the following verses, especially verse 12. '^ Be astonished, O ye heavens, at this." So Isaiah i. 2....4. " Kcar, t) heavens, and give ear, O earth ; I have nourished and brought wp children, and they have rebelled against rne. The ox knoweth liis owner, and the ass his master's crib, but my people doth not know, Israel doth not consider. Ah, sinful nation ! A people laden with iniquity, a seed of evil doers, children that arc corruptors." Compare Deut. xxxii. 6,...l9. If it shewed so great depravity, to be disposed thus to abuse the blessings of so fruitful and pleasant a land as Canaan, surely it would be an evidence of a no less astonisliing corruption, to be inclined to abuse the blessings of Eden, and the garden of God there.

2. If death be brought on mankind only as a benefi', ar,d in that manner which Dr. Taylor mentions, viz. to moi-lify or moderate their carnal appetites and afl'ections, wean them from the world, excite them to sober reflections, and lead them to the fear and obedience of God, Sec. is it not strange that it should fall so heavy on infants, who arc not capable of making any such improvement of it ; so that many more of mankind suffer death in infancy, than in any other equal part of the age of man ? Our author sometimes hints, that the death of infants may be for the good of parents, and those that are adult, and m.ay be for the correction and pii?/ishmcnt of

the sins of parents : But hath God any need of such methods to add to parents' afflictions ? Are there not ways enout^h that he might increase their trouble, without destroying the lives of such multitudes of (hose that are perfectly innocent, and have in no respect any sin belonging to them; on whom death comes at an age, when not only the subjects are not capable of any reflection or making any improvement of it, either in the suffering or expectation of it ; but also at an age, when parents and friends, who alone can make a good improvement, and whom Dr. Taylor supposes alone to be punished by it, suffer least by being bereaved of them ; though the infants themselves sometimes suffer to great extremity ?

3. To suppose, as Dr. Taylor does, that death is brought on mankind in consequence of Adam's sin, not at all as a calamity, but only as a favor and benefit, is contrary to the doctrine of the gospel, which teaches that when Christ, as the second Adam, comes to remove and destroy that death which came by the first Adam, he finds it not as a friend, but an enemy. 1 Cor. xv. 22, " For as in Adam all die, so in Christ shall all be made ahve ;" with verses 25 and 26, " Tor he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed, is death."

Dr. Taylor urges that the afilictions which mankind are subjected to, and particularly their common mortality, are represented in scripture as the chastisements of our heavenly Father ; and therefore are designed for our spiritual good, and consequently are not of the nature of punishments. So in p. 68, 69, 38, 39, 5.

Though I think the thing asserted far from being true, viz. that the scripture represents the afflictions of mankind in general, and particularly their common mortality, as the chastisements of an hi-avenly father, yet it is needless to stand to dispute that matter ; for if it be so, it will be no argument that the afflictions and death of mankind are not evidences of their sinfulness. Those would be strange chastisements from the hand of a wise and good Father, which are wholly for nothing ; especially such severe chastisements as to break the child's bones, when at the same time the Father does not

ORIGINAL SIN. $49

suppose any guilt, fault or offence in any respect belonjjing to the child ; but it is chastised in this terrible manner, only for fear that it will be faulty hereafter. I say, these would be a strange sort of chastisements ; yea, though he should be able to make it up to the child afterwards. Dr. Taylor tells of representations made by the whole current of scripture : I am certain it is not agreeable to the current of scripture, to represent divine, fatherly chastisements after this manner. It is true, that the scripture supposes sudi chastenings to be the fruit of God's goodness ; yet at the same time it evermore represents them as being for the sin of the subject, and as evidences of the divine displeasure for its sinfulness. Thus the apostle in 1 Cor. xi. 30...,.'^2, speaks of God's chastening his people by mortal sickness, for their good, that they inighf. not be condemned with the Tjorld, and yet signifies that it was Jbr their sin ; for this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleeji : That is, for the prefaneness and sinful disorder before mentioned. So Elihu, Job xxxiii. 16, &c. speaks of the same chastening by sickness, as for men's good, to withdrew man from his sinful piir/iose, and to hide firicle from man., and keep back his soul from the pit ; that therefore God chastens man with pain on his bed, and the multitude of his bones with strong pain. But these chastenings are for his sins, as appears by what follows, verse 28, where it is observed, that •when God by this means has brought men to repent, and humbly confess their sins, lie delivers them. Again, the same E-lihu, speaking of the unfailing love of God to the righteous, even when he chastens them, and they are bound in fetters, and holden in cords of affliction, chap, xxxvi. 7, &c. yet speaks of these chastenings as being for their sins, verse 9. »' Then he sheweth them their work, and their transgressions, that they have exceeded." So David, Psalm xxx speaks of God's chastening by sore afflictions, as being for his good, and issuing joyfully ; and yet being the fruit of God's anger for his sin, verse 5. " God's anger endureth but for a moment" &c. Compare Psalm cxix. 67, 71, 75. God's fatherly chastisements are spoken of as being for sin. 2 Sam. vii. 14, 15. *' I will be his Father, and he shall be my Son. If he com-VoL. VL 2 H

HS^ ORIGINAL sin:

mit injquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and ^vhfc the stripes of the children of men, but my mercy shall not de« part away from him." So the prophet Jeremiah speaks of the great affliction that Go.Vs people of the young generation suffered in the time of the captivity, as being for their good. Lam. iii. 25, &c. But yet these chastisements are spoken of as being for their sin, see especially verses 39, 40. So Christ says, Rev. iii. 19. "As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten." But the words following shew that these chasteninga from love, are for sin that should be repented of : " Be zeal* ouH, therefore, and repent." And though Christ tells us, thejr are blessed that are persecuted for righteousness' sake, and have reason to rejoice and be exceeding glad ; yet even the persecutions of God's people, as ordered in divine Providence, are spoken of as divine chastenings for sin, like the just corrections of a Father, when the children deserve them, Ileb. xii. The apostle, there speaking to the Christians concerning the persecutions which they suftered, calls their sufferings by the name of divine rebukes, which implies testifying against a fault ; and that they may not be discouraged, puts them in mind, that lohom the Lord loves he chastens^ arid sccurgeth ex'-erij aon that he receivcth. It is also very plain, that the persecutions of God's people, as they are from the disposing hand of God, are chastisements for sin, from 1 Pet, iv. 17, 18, compared with Prov. xi. 31. See also Psalm Ixix. 4....9.

If divine chastisements in general are certain evidences that the subjects are not wholly without sin, some way belonging to them, then in a peculiar manner is death so, for these reasons :

1. Because slaying, or delivering to death, is often spoken of as in general a more awful thing than the chastisements that are endured in this life. So Psalm cxviii. 17, 18. "I shall not die, but live, and declare the works of the Lordv The Lord hath chastened me sore, but he hath not given me over unto death." So the Psalmist, in Psalm Ixxxviii. 15, setting forth the extremity of his affliction, represents it by this, that it was next to death. " I am afflicted, and ready to die: While I suffer thy terrors, lam distracted." Sci

David, 1 Sam. xx. 3. So God's tenderness towards persons under chastisement, is from time to time set forth by that, tliat he did not proceed so far as to m&ke an end of them by death, as in Psalm Ixxviii. 38, 39, Psahn ciii. 9, wiih verses 14, 15, Psalm XXX 2, 3, 9, and Job xxxiii. 22, 23, 24. So we have God's people often praying, when under great affliction, that God would not proceed to this, as being the greatest extremity. Psalrn xiii. 3. " Consider, and hear me, O Lord rny God : Lighten mine eyes, lest I sleep the sleep of death." So Job X, 9, Psalm vi. 1....5, Ixxxviii. 9, 10, 11, and cxliii. T. Especially may death be looked upon as the most extreme of all temporal sufferings, when attended with such dreadful circumstances, and extreme pains, as those with which I'rovi-dence sometimes brings it on infants, as on the ciiildren that %vere offered up to Moloch, and some other idols, who were tormented to death in burning brass. Dr. Taylor says, p. 83, 128,5. " The Lord ot all being can never want time, and place, and power, to compensate abundantly any sufferings infants now undergo in subserviency to his good providence." But there are no bounds to such a license, in evading evidences from fact. It might as well be said, that there is not and cannot be any such thing as evidence, from events of God's displeasure, which is most contrary to tlie whole current of scripture, as may appear in part from things which have been observed. This gentleman might as well go further still, and say that God may cast guiltless persons into hellfire, to remain there in the most unutterable torments for ages of ages, (which bear no greater proportion to eternity than a quarter of an hour) and if he does so, it is no evidence of God's displeasure, because he can never want time, place, and power, abundantly to compensate their sufferings afterwards. If it be so, it is not to the purpose, as long as the scripture does so abundantly teach us to look on great calamities and sufferings which God brings on men, especially death, as marks of his displeasure for sin, and for sin belonging to them that suffer. 2. Another thing which may well lead us to suppose death, in a peculiar manner, above other temporal sufferings, intended as a testimony of God's displeasure for sin, is, that

death is a thine: attended with that awful appearance, that gloomy and terrible a'.pect, that naturally suggests to our minds God's awful displeasure Which is a thing that Dr. Taylor himself takes particular notice of, page 69, speaking of death, '^Herein," says he, " have we before our eyes a striking ciemonstration that sin is infinitely hateful to God, and the corruption and ruin of our nature. Nothing is more proper than such a sight to give us the utoiost abhorrence of all iniquity, &c." Now if death be no testimony of God's displeasure for sin, no evidence that the subject is looked upon, by him who inflicts it, as any other than perfectly innocent, free from all manner of imputation of guilt, and treated only as an object of favor, is it not strange, that God should annex to it such affecting appearances of his hatred and anger for sin, more than to other chastisements ? Which yet the scripture teaches us are always for sin. These gloomy and striking manifestations of Cod's hatred of sin attending death, are equivalent to awful frowns of God attending the stroke of his hand. If we should see a wise and just father chastising his child, mixing terrible frowns with severe strokes, we should justly argue, that the father considered his child as having something in nim displeasing to him, and that he did not thus treat his child only under a notion of mortifying him, and preventing his being faulty hereafter, and making it up to him afterwards, when he bad been perfectly innocent, and without fault, either of action or disposition thereto. - We may well argue from these things, that infants are not looked upon by God as sinless, but that they are by nature children of wrath, seeing this terrible evil comes so heavily on mankind in infancy. But besides these things, which are observable concerning the mortality of infants in general, there arc some particular cases of the death of infants, which the scripture sets before us, that are attended with circumstances, in a peculiar manner giving evidences of the sinfulness of such, and their just exposedness to divine wrath. As particularly,

The destroying of the infants in Sodom, and the neighboring cities; which cities, destroyed in so extraordinary,

miraculous, and awful a manner, are set forth as a signal example, of God's dreadful vengeance for sin, to the world in all generations; agreeable to that of the apostle, Jude, verse 7. God did not reprove, but manifestly countenanced Abra--ham, when he said, with respect to the destruction of Sodom, (Gen. xviii. 23, 25 ) " Wilt thou destroy the righteous with the wicked?....That be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked, and that the righteous should be as the wicked, that be far from thee. Shall not the judge of all the earth do right ?" Abraham's words imply that God would not destroy the innocent with the guilty. We may well understand innocent as included in the word righteous, according to the language usual in scripture, in speak-ing of such cases of judgment and punishnient; as is plain in Gen. XX. 4. Exod. xxiii. 7. Deut. xxv. 1. 2Sain. iv 11. 2 Chron. vi. 23, and Prov. xviii. 5. Eliphaz says, Job iv. 7. "Who ever perished, being innocent? Or where were the righteous cut off ?" We see v.-hat great care God took that Lot should not be involved in that destruction. He was miraculously rescued by angels, sent oii purpose ; who laid hold on him, and brought him, and set him without the gates of the city ; and told him that they could do nothint^- till he was out of the way. Gen. xix. 22. And not only was he thus Hiiraculously delivered, but his two wicked daughters for his sake. The whole afTair, both the destruction, and the rescue of them that escaped, was miraculous ; and God could as easily have delivered the infants which were in those cities. And if they had been without sirt, their perfect innocency, one should think, would have pleaded nuich more strongly for them, than those lewd women's relation to Lot pleaded for them. When in such a case, we must suppose these infants ■much further from deserving to be involved in that destruction, than even Lot himself. To say here, that God cov.id make it up to those infants in anotiier world, must be an insufficient reply. For so he could as easily have nu;r!e !•: up to Lot, or to ten or fifty righteous, if they had been c rsti oved in the same fire; Nevertheless it is plainly signified, mai this

"would not have been agreeable to the wise and holy proceedings of the judge of all the eartli.

Since God declared, that if there had been found but ten righteous in Sodom, he would liave spared the whole city for their sakcj may we not well suppose, if infants are perfectly irlnocent, that he would have spared the old worlds in which there were, without doubt, many hundred thousand infants, and in general one in every family, whose perfect innocence pleaded for its preservation ? Especially when such vast care vas taken to save Noah and his family, (some of whom, one at least, seem to have been none of thu best) that they might not be involved in that destruction. If the perfect sinlessness of infants had been a notion entertained among the people of God of old, in the ages next following the flood, handed down from Noah and his children, who well knew that vast multitudes of infants perished in the flood, is it likely that Eliphaz, who lived within a few generations of Shem and Noah, would have said to Job, as he does in that forcmentioned, Job iv. 7. " Who ever perished, being innocent? And when were the righteous cut off?" Especially since in the same discourse (Chap. v. 1.) he appeals to the tradition of the ancients fur a confirmation of this very point; as he also does in Chap. xv. 7....10, and xxii. 15, 16. In which last place he mentions that very thing, the destruction of the wicked by the flood, as an instance of that perishing of the wicked, which he supposes to be peculiar to them, for Job's conviction ; in which the nvicked ivere cut down cut of tmie, their foimdation bcwg Gverjloivn ivith a Jlood. Where it is also observable, that he speaks of such an untimeliness of death as they suffered by the flood, as one evidence of guilt ; as he also does, Chap. xv. 32, S3. " It shall be accomplished before his time ; and his branch shall not be green." But those that were destroyed by the flood in infancy, above all the rest were cut donvn out of time ; when instead of living above nine hundred years, according to the common period of man's life, many were cut down before they were one year old.

And when God executed vengeance on the ancient inhabitants of Canaan, not only did he not spare their cities and

families for the sake of the infants that were therein, nor take any care that they should not be involved in the destruction ; but often with particular care repeated his express commands, that their infants should not be spared, but should be utterly destroyed, without any pity; while Raliab the Aar/o;; (who had been far from innocence, thouc^h she expressed her fdith in entertaining, and safely dismissing the spies) was preserved, and all her friends for her sake. And when God executed his wrath on the Egyptians, by slaying their first born, though the children of Israel, who were most of them wicked men, as was before shewn, were wonderfully spared by the destroying angel, yet such firstborn of the Egyptians as were infants, were not spared. They not only were not rescued by the angel, and no miracle wrought to save them (as was observed in the case of tha infants of Sodom) but the angel destroyed them by his own immediate hand, and a miracle was wrought to kill them.

Here, not to stay to be particular concerning the command by Moses, respecting the destruction of the infants of the Midianites, Num. xxxi. 17. And that given to Saul to destroy all the infants of the Aroalekites, 1 Sam. xv. 3, and what is said concerning Edom, Psalm cxxxvii. 9. " Happy shall he he that taketh, and dashelh thy little ones against the stones, I proceed to take notice of something remarkable concerning the destruction of Jerusalem, represented in Ezek. ix. when command was given to them, that had cliarge over the city, to destroy the inhabitants, verse 1....8 And this reason is given for it, that their iniquity required it, and it was a just recompense of their sin, verse 9, 10. And God at the same time was most particular and exact in his care that such should by no means be involved in the slaughter, as had proved by their behavior, that they were not partakers in the abominations of the city. Command was given to the angel to go through the city, and set a mark upon their foreheads, and the destroying angel had a strict charge not to come near any man, on whom was the mark ; yet the infants were not marked, nor a word said of sparing them : On the contrar}'^, infants were expressly mentioned as those that should be utter-

}y destrovecl, withoiU pity, verse 5, 6. « Go through the city, and smite : Let not your eye spare, neither have ye pity. Slay utterly old and young, both maids and little children ; but come not near any man upon whom is the mark.

And if any should suspect that such instances as these were peculiar to a more severe dispensation, under the Old Testament, let us consider a remarkable instance in the days of the glonons gospel of the grace of God ; even the last destruction of Jerusalem ; which was far more terrible, and with greater testimonies of God's wrath and indignation, than the destruction of Sodom, or of Jerusalem in Nebuchadnezzar's time, or any thing that ever had happened to any city or people, from the beginning of the world to that time : Agreeable to Matth. xxiv. ^1, and Luke xxi. 22, 23. But at that time particular care was taken to distinguish and deliver God's people, as was foretold Dan. xii. 1. And we have in the New Testament a particular account of the care Christ took for the preservation of his followers : He gave them a sign, by which they might know when the desolation of the city was nigh, that they that were in Jerusalem might flee to the mountains, and escape. And as history gives account, the Christians followed the directions given, and escaped to a place in the mountains called Pella, and were preserved. Yet no care was taken to preserve the infants of the city, in general; but, according to the predictions of that event, they were involved with others in that great destruction : So heavily did the calamity fall upon them, that those words were verified, Luke xxiii. 29. " Behold the days are coming, in which they shall say. Blessed are the barren, and the womb that never bare, and the paps which never gave suck. And that prophecy in Deut. xxxii. 21....25, which has undoubtedly special respect to this veiy time, and is so applied by the btst commentators. " I will provoke them to jealousy, with those that are not a people ; for a fire is kindled in mine anger ; and it shall burn to the lowest hell. I will heap miscliiefs upon them : I will spend mine arrows upon them. They shall be burnt with hunger, and devoured with burning heat, and bitter destruction. The sword without, and terror within, shall destroy

both the young man, and the virgin, the suckling also, with the man of grey hairs." And it appears by the history of that destruction, that at that time was a remarkable fulfilment of that in Deut. xxviii. 53....57, concerning parents' eating (heir children in the siege ; and the tender and delicate ivoynan eating her newborn child. And here it must be remembered, that these very destructions of that city and land are spoken of in those places forementioned, as clear evidences of God's wrath, to all nations which shall behold them. And if so, they were evidences of God's wrath towards infants ; who, equally with the rest, were the subjects of the destruction. If a particular kind or rank of persons, which made a very considerable part of the inhabitants, were from time to time partakers of the overthrow, without any distinction made in divine providence, and yet this was no evidence at all of God's displeasure •with any of them ; then a being the subjects of such a calamity could not be an evidence of God's wrath against any of the inhabitants, to the reason of all nationsf or any nation, or so much as one person.

Vol* VI. SI

aaJ ORIGINAL sncv

PART II.

Containing observations on particular parts of the Holy Scripture, which prove the Doctrine of

Original Sin.

CHAPTER r.

Observations relating to things contained in the three first Chapters of Genesis, with rejer-.enc€ to the Doctrine of Original Sin.

SECTION I.

Concerning Original Righteousness ; and •whether our first Parents noere created ivith Righteousness^ or moral recti* tude of Heart ?

THE doctrine of Original Righteousness, or the creation of our first pavents with holy principles and dispositions, has a close connexion, in several respects, with the doctrine of Original Sin. Dr Taylor was sensible of this ; and accordingly he strenuously opposes this doctrine, in his book against Original sin. And therefore in handling the subject, 1 would in the first place remove this author's main objection against this doctrine, and then shew how the doctrine may be inferred from the account which Moses gives us, in the three first chafitcrs of Genesis.

Dr. Taylor's grand objection at^ainst this doctrine, which he abundantly insists oh, is this : That it is utterly inconsistent with the nature of virtue, that it should be concreated with any person ; because, if so. It must be by an act of God's absolute power, without our knowledge or concurrence ; and that moral virtue, in its very nature implieth the choice and consent of the moral agent, without which it cannot be virtue and holiness : That a necessary holiness is no holiness. So p. 180, •vhere he observes, "That Adam must exist, he must be created, yea he must exercise thought and reflection, before he was righteous." See also p. 250, 261. In p. 161. 5. he says, "To say, that God not only endowed Adam with a capacity of being righteous, but moreover that righteousness and true holiness were created with him, or wrought into hb nature, at the same time he was made, is to affirm a contn.diction, or what is inconsistent with the very nature of righteousness." And in like manner Dr. TurnbuU in many places insists upon it, that it is necessary to the very being of virtue, that it be ov/ing to our own choice, and diligent culture.

With respect to this, I would observe, that it consists in a notion of virtue quite inconsistent wiih the nature of things, and the common notions of mankind ; and also inconsistent with Dr. Taylor's own notions of viriue- Therefore if it be truly so, that to affirm that to be virtue or holiness, which is not the fruit of preceding thought, reflection and choice, is to affirm a contradiction, I shall shew plainly, that for him to affirm otherwise, is a contradiction to himself.

In the first place, I think it a contr:idiction to the nature of things, as judged of by the common sense of mankind. It is agreeable to the sense of the minds of men in all nations and ages, not only that the fruit or effect of a good choice is virtuous, but the good choice itself, from whence that effect proceeds ; yea, and not only so, but also the antecedent good disposition, temper, or affection of mind, from whence proceeds that good choice, is virtuous. This is the general notion, not that principles deiive their goodness from actions, but that actions derive their goodness from the principles

whence they proceed; and sothattheact of choosing that which is g:ood, is no further virtuous than it proceeds from a (^ood principle, or virtuous disposition of mind. Which supposes, that a virtuous disposition of mind may be before a virtuous act of choice ; and that therefore it is not necessary that there should firgt be thought, reflection and choice, before there can be any virtuous disposition. If the choice be first, before the existence of a good disposition of heart, what signifies that choice ? There can, according lo our natural notions, be no virtue in a choice which proceeds from no virtuous principle, but from mere selflove, ambition, or some animal appetite ; and therefore a virtuous temper of mind may be before a good act of choice, as a tree may be before the fruit, and the fountain before the stream which proceeds from it. The following things in Mr. Hutcheson's inquiry concerning moral good and evil, are evidently agreeable to the nature of things, and the voice of human sense and reason. Sectwn II. p. 132, 133. " Every action which we apprehend as either morally good or evil, is always supposed to flow from some affections towards sensitive natures. And whatever we call virtue or vice, is either some such affection, or some action consequent ufion it. All the actions counted religious in any country, are supposed by those who count thera so, to Jloiv from some affections towards the Deity ; and , •whatever we call social virtue, we still suppose to Jiov} from affections towards our fellow creatures. Prudence, if it is only employed in promoting private interest, is never imagined to be a virtue." In these things Dr. Turnbull expressly agrees with Mr. Hutcheson, who is his admired author.* If a virtuous disposition or affection is before acts that proceed from it, then they are before those virtuous acts of choice which proceed from it. And therefore there is no necessity that all virtuous dispositions or affections should be the effect of choice : And so no such supposed necessity can be a good objection against such a disposition's being natural, or from a kind of instinct, implanted in the mind in its creation. A-

* Moral rhiloscphy p, xi2 115, p. 142, ct aiiii passim.

gieeable to what Mr. Hutcheson says, (Ibid. Section III, p. 196, 197.) " I know not, says he, for what reason some will not allow that to be virtue, which flows from instinct or passions. But how do they help themselves ? They say, virtue arises from reason. What is reason, but the sagacity wc have in prosecuting any end ? The ultimate end proposed by common moralists, is the happiness of the agent himself. And this certainly he is determined to pursue from instinct. Now may not another instinct towards the public, or the good of others, be as proper a principle of virtue, as the instinct towards private happiness ? If it be said, that actions from instinct are not the effect of prudence and choice, this objection will hold full as strongly against the actions which flow from selflove."

And if we consider what Dr. Taylor declares as his own notion of the essence of virtue, we shall find, what he so confidently and often affirms, of its being essential to all virtue, that it should follow choice, and proceed from it, is no less repugnant to that, than it is to the nature of things, and the general notions of mankind. For it is his notion, as well as Mr. Hutcheson's, that the essence of viitue lies in good affec-tion, and particularly in benevolence or love ; as he very fully declares in these words in his Key,* " That the word that signifies goodness and mercy should also signify moral rectitude in general, will not seem strange, if we consider that love is the fulfilling of the law. Goodness, according to the sense of scripture, and the nature of things, includes^ll moral rectitude^ which, I reckon, may every part of it, where it is true and genuine, be resolved into this single principle." If it be so indeed, then certainly no act whatsoever can have moral rectitude^ but what proceeds ivom this principle. And consequently no act of volition or choice can have any moral rectitude, that takes place before this principle exists. And yet he most confidently afiirms, that thought, reflection and choice must go before virtue, and that all virtue or righteousness must be the fruit of preceding choice. This brings his

• Marginal Note annexed to % 3^8.

scheme to an evident contradiction. For no act of choice can be virtuous but what proceeds IVom a principle of benevolence or love ; for he insists that all genuine, moral rectitude, in every part of it, is resolved into this single principle ; and yet the principle of benevolence itself cannot be virtuous, unless it proceeds from choice, for he affirms, that nothing can have the nature of virtue but what comes from choice. So that virtuous love, as the principle of -ill virtue, must go before virtuous choice, and be the principle or spring of it ; and yet virtuous choice must go before virtuous benevolence, and be the spring of that. If a virtuous act of choice goes before a principle of benevolence, and produces it, then this virtuous act is something distinct from that principle which follows it, and is its effect. So that here is at least one part of virtue, yea, the spring and source of all virtue, viz. a virtuous choicCi that cannot be resolved into that single principle of love.

Here also it is worthy to be observed, that Dr. Taylor, p. 128, says, " The cause of every effect is alone chargeable with the effect it preduceth ; or which proceedelh from it :" And so he argues, that if the effect be bad, the cause alone is sinful. According to which reasoning, when the effect is good, the cause alone is righteous or virtuous ; To the cause is to be ascribed all the praise of the good effect it pro-duceth. And by the same reasoning it will follow, that if, as Dr. Taylor says, Adam must choose to be righteous, before he was righteous, and if it be essential to the nature of righteousness or moral rectitude, that it be the effect of choice, and hence a principle of benevolence cannot have moral rectitude, unless it proceeds from choice ; then not to the principle of benevolence, which is the effect, but to the foregoing choice alone is to be ascribed all the virtue or righteousness that is in the case. And so, instead of all moral rectitude in every part of it, being resolved into that single principle of benevolence, no moral rectitude, in any part of it, is to be resolved into that principle ; but all is to be resolved into the foregoing choice, which is the cause.

But yet it follows from these inconsistent principles, that there is no moral rectitude or virtue in that first act of choice;

that is the cause of all consequent virtue. This follows two ■ways : 1. Because every part of virtue lies in the bcnevoleryt principle, which is tiie effect, and therefore no part of it can lie in the cause. 2. The choice of virtue, as to the first act at least, can have no virtue or righteousness at all, because it does not proceed from any foregoing choice. For Dr. Taylor insists that a man must first have reflection and choice, before he can have righteousness, and that it is essential to holiness that it proceed from choice. So that the first choice of holiness, which holiness proceeds from, can have no virtue at all, because by the supposition it does not proceed from choice, being the first choice. Hence if it be essential to holiness, that it proceeds from choice, it must proceed from an unholy-choice ; unless the first holy choice can be before itself, or there be a virtuous act of choice before that which is first of all.

And with respect to Adam, let us consider how, upon Dr, Taylor's principles, it was not possible he ever should have any such thing as righteousness, by any means at all. In the state wherein God created him, he could have no such thing as love to God, or any love or benevolence in his heart. For if so, there wotild have been original nghteousness; there would have been genuine moral rectitude : Nothing would have been wanting ; for our author says, True., genuine^ moral rectitude, in everij fiart of it, is to be resolved into this single princi}ile. But if he v/ere wholly without any such thing as love to God, or any virtuous love, how should he come by virtue ? The answer doubtless will be, by act of choice : He must first choose to be virtuous. But what if he did choose to be virtuous ? It could not be from love to God, or any virtuous principle, that he chose it; for, by the supposition, he has no such principle in his heart : And if he chooses it without such a principle, still, according to this author, there is no virtue in his choice ; for all virtue, he says, is to be resolved into that single pr nciple of love. Or will he say, there tnay be produced in the heart a virtuous benevolence by an act or acts of choice, that are not virtuous ? But this does not consist with what he implicitly asserts, that to the

cause alone is to be ascribed what is in the effect. So that there is no way that can possibly be devised, in consistence Tvith Dr. Taylor's scheme, in which Adam ever could have any righteousness, or could ever either obtain any principle of virtue, or perform any one virtuous act.

These confused, inconsistent assertions, concerning virtue and moral rectitude, arise from the absurd notions in vogue, concerning Frecdo7n of JVill, as if it consisted in the will's sclf-determiriing fioiver, supposed to be necessary to moral agency, virtue and vice. The absurdities of which, with the grounds of these errors, and what the truth is respecting these matters, •with the evidences of it, I have, according to my ability, fully and largely considered, in my Inquiry on that subject; to which I must refer the reader, who desires further satisfaction, and is willing to give himself the trouble of reading that discourse.

Having considered this great argument, and pretended demonstration of Dr. Taylor's against original righteousness ; I proceed to the proofs of the doctrine. And in the first place, I would consider, whether there be not evidence of it in the three first chapters of Genesis : Or, whether the history there delivered, does not lead us to suppose, that our first parents were created in a state of moral rectitude and holiness.

I. This history leads us to suppose, Adam's sin, with relation to the forbidden fruit, was the first sin he committed. Which could not have been, had he not always, till then, been perfectly righteous, righteous from the first moment of his existence, and consequently, created, or brought into existence righteous. In a moral agent, subject to moral obligations, it is the same thing to be perfectly innocent^ as to be perfectly righteous. It must be the same, because there can no more be any medium between sin and righteousness, or between a being right and being Avrong, in a moral sense, than there can be a medium between straight and crooked, in a natural sense. Adam was brought into existence capable of acting immediately, as a moral agent, and therefore he was immediately under a rule of right ac-

tion : He was obliged as soon as he existed to act right. And if he was obliged to act right as soon as he existed, he was obliged even then to be inclined to act right. Dr. Taylor says, p. 165, 5. " Adam could not sin without a sinful inclination ;"* And just for the same reason he could not do right, without an inclination to right action. And as he was obliged to act right from the first moment of his existence, and did do so till he sinned in the affair of the forbidden fruit, he must have an inclination or disposition of heart to do right the first moment of his existence ; and that is the same as to be created or brought into existence, with an inclination to right action, or, which is the same thing, a virtuous and hply disposition of heart.

Here it will be in vain to say, it is true that it was Adam's duty to have a good disposiiion or inclination, as soon as it was possible to be obtained, in the nature of things , but as it could not be without time to establish such an habit, which requires antecedent thought, reflection, and repeated right action ; therefore all that Adam could be obliged to in the first place, was to reflect and consider things in a right manner, and apply himself to right action, in order to obtain a right disposition. For this supposes, that even this reflection and consideration, which he was obliged to, was 7-ighs action. Surely he was obliged to it no otherwise than as a thing that was right ,• and therefore he must have an incli?t Tiation to this right action immediately, before he could perform those first right actions. And as the inclination to them should be right, the principle or disposiiion from which he performed even these actions, must be good ; otherwise the actions would not be right in the sight ©f him who looks,at the heart ; nor would they answer the man's obligations, of be a doing his duty, if he had done them for some sinister end, and not from a regard to God and his duty. Therefore

* This is doubtless true ; for although there was ao natural, sinful incU-aation in Adam, yet an inclination to that sin of eating the forbidden truitj was begotten in hira by the delusion and err, r be was led into, and this inclination to eat the forbiddea fruit, must precede hu acluil eating.

Vol. VI. 3R

there must be a regard to God and his duty implanted in him at his first existence ; othenvise it is certain he would have done nothing from a regard to God and his duty ; no, not so much as to reflect and consider, and try to obtain such a disposition. The very supposition of a disposition to right action being first obtained by repeated right action^ is grossly inconsistent with itself; for it supposes a course of right action, before there is a disposition to perform any right action. These are no invented quibbles or sophisms. If God expected of Adam any obedience or duty to him at all, when he first made him, whether it was in reflecting, considering, op any way exerting the faculties he had given him, then God expected he should immediately exercise love and regard to. bim. For how could it be expected, that Adam should have a strict and perfect regard to God's commands and authority, and his duty to him, when he had no love nor regard to him in his heart, nor could it be expected he should have any ? If Adam from the beginning did his duty to God, and had more respect to the will of his Creator than to other things, and as much respect to him as he ought to have ; then from the beginning he had a supreme and perfect respect and love to God ; and if so, he was created v.'ith such a principle. There is no avoiding the consequence. Not only external duties, but internal duties, such as summarily consist in love, must be immediately required of Adam, as soon as he existed, if any duty at all was required. For it is most apparently absurd, to talk of a spiritual being, with the faculties of understanding and will, being required to perform external duties, without internal. Dr. Taylor himself observes, that love is the fulfilling of the law, and that all moral rectitude^ even every part of it, must be resolved into that single principle. Therefore, if any morally right act at all, reflection, consideration, or any thing else, was required of Adam immediately, on his first existence, and was performed as required ; then he must, the first moment of his existence, have his heart possessed of that principle of divine love ; which implies the ■whole of moral rectitude in every part of it, according to our author's own doctrine ; and so the whole of moral rectitude

or righteousness must begin with his existence ; ^vhich is the thing taught in the doctrine of Original Righteousness.

And let us consider how it could be otherwise, than that Adam was always, in every moment of his existence, obliged to exercise such regard or respect of heart towards every object or thing, as was agreeable to the apparent merit of that oBject. For instance, would it not at any time have been a becoming thing in Adam, on the exhibition to his mind of God's infinite goodness to him, for him to have exercised answerable gratitude, and the contrary have been unbecoming and odious ? And if something had been presented to Adam's view, transcendently amiable in itself, as for instance, the glorious perfection of the divine nature, would it not have become him to love, relish and delight in it ? Would not such an object have merited this ? And if the view of an object so amiable in itself did not affect his hiind with complacence, would it not, according to the plain dictates of our understanding, have shewn an unbecoming temper of mind?

To say that he had not had time, by culture, to form and establish a good disposition or relish, is not What would have taken dff the disagreeableness and odiousness of the temper. And if there had been never so much time, I do not see how it could be expected he should improve it aright, in order to obrain a good disposition, if he had not already scirsf; r'ood disposition to engage him to it.

That belonging to the will and disposition cf the heart, which is in itself either odious or amiable, 'unbecoming or decent, always would have been Adam's virtue or sin, in any moment of his existence ; if there be any such thing as virtue or vice, by which nothing can be meant, but that in our moral disposition and behavior, which is becoming or unbecoming, amiable or odious.

Human nature must be created with some dispositions ; a disposition to relish some things as good and amiable, and to be averse to other things as odious and disagreeable ; otherwise it must be without any such thing as inclination or will : It must be perfectly indifferent, without preference, without choice or aversion towards any thing as agreeable or disa

greeable. But if it had any concreated dispositions at all, they must be eill'.er right or wrong, either agreeable or disagreeable to the nature of things. It man had at first the highest relish of those things that were most excellent and beautiful, a disposition to have the quickest and highest delight in those things that were most x\ orthy of if, then his dispositions were morally right and amiable, and never can be d<3-cent and excellent in a higher sense. But if he had a disposition to love most those things that were inferior and lese ■worthy, then his dispositions were vicious. And it is evident there can be no medium between these.

II- This notion of Adam's being created without a prin» ciple of holiness in his heart, taken with the rest of Dr. Taylor's scheme, is inconsistent with what the history, in the beginning of Genesis, leads us to suppose of the great favors and smiles of heaven, which Adam enjoyed while he remained in innocency. The Mosaic account suggests to us that till Adam sinned he was in happy circumstances, surrounded with testimonies and fruits of God's favor. This is implicitly owned by Dr. Taylor, when he says, page 252. " That in the dispensation our first parents were under before the fall, they were placed in a condition proper to engage their gratitude, love and obedience." But it will follow on our author's principles, that Adam, while in innocency, was placed in far worse circumstances than he was in after his disobedience, and infinitely worse than his posterity arc in ; under unspeakably greater disadvantages for the avoiding of sin. and the performance of duty. For by his doctrine, Adam's posterity come into the world with their hearts as free from any propensity to sin as he, and he v^as made as destitute of any propensity to righteousness as they ; and yet God, in favor to them, does great things to restrain them from sin, and excite them to virtue, which he never did for Adam in innocency, but laid him, in the highest degree, under contrary disadvantages.

God, as an Instance of his great favor, and fatherly love to man, since the fall, ha? denied him the case and pleasures of Paradise, which gratified and allured-his senses, and bodily

appetites; that he might diminish his temptations to sin. And as a still greater means to restrain from sin, and promote virtue, has subjected him to labor, toil and sorrow in the ■world ; and not only so, but as a means to promote his spiritual and eternal good far beyond this, has doomed him te death : And when all this was found insufficient, he, in further prosecution of the designs of his love, shortened men's lives exceedingly, made them twelve or thirteen times shorter than in the first ages. And yet this, with all the innumerable calamities, which God in great favor to mankind has brought on the world, whereby their temptations are so vastly cut short, and the means and inducements to virtue heaped one upon another, to so great a degree, all have proved insufficient, now for so many thousand years together, to restrain from wickedness in any considerable degree ; innocent human nature, all along, coming into the world with the same purity and harmless dispositions that our first parents had in 'Paradise. What vast disadvantages indeed then must Adan^« and Eve have been in, that had no more in their nature to keep them from sin, or incline them to virtue, than their postei'ity, and yet were without all those additional and extraordinary means J Not only without such exceeding great means as we now have, when our lives are made so very short, but having vastly less advantages than their an+ediluvian postcrit)', who to prevent their being wicked, and to make them good, had so much labor and toil, sweat and sorrow, briers and thorns, with a body gradually decaying and returning to the dust; when our first parents had the extreme disadvantage of being placed in the midst of so many and exceeding great temptations, not only without toil or sorrow, pain or disease, to hum-hie and mortify them, and a sentence of death to wean them from the world, but in the midsi of the most exquisite and alluring sensitive deJight*^ the reverse in every respect, and to the highest degree, of that most gracious state of requisite means, and great advantages, which mankind now enjoy ! If mankind now vmder these vast restraints, and great advantages, are not restrained from general, and as it were universal wickedness, how could it be expected that Adam and Eve,

-70 ORIGINAL SIN.

created with no better hearts than men bring into the world now, and destitute of all these advantages, and in the midst of all contrary disadvantages, should escape it ?

These things are not agreeable to Moses' account ; which represents an happy state of peculiar favors and blessings before the fall, and the curse coming afterwards ; but according to this scheme, the curse was before the fall, and tha great favors and testimonies of love followed the apostacy. And the curse before the fall must be a curse with a witness, being to so high a degree the reverse of such means, means so necessary for such a creature as innocent man, and in all their multitude and fulness proving too little. Paradise therefore must be a mere delusion I There was indeed a great shew of favor, in placing man in the midst of such delights. But this delightful garden, it seems, with all its beauty and sweetness, was in its real tendency worse than the apples of Sodom : It was but a mere bi-.it (God forbid the blasphe-Vny) the more effectually enticing by its beauty and delicious-ness, to Adam's eternal ruin ; which might be the more expected to be fatal to him, seeing that he was the first man that ever existed, having no superiority of capacity to his posterity, and wholly without the advantage of the observations, experiences, and improvements of preceding generations; whiclvhis posterity have.

I proceed now to take notice of an additional proof of the doctrine we are upon, from another part of the holy scripture. A very clear text for original righteousness is that in Eccles. vii. 29. <' Lo, this only have I found, that God made man upright ; but they have sought out many inventions."

It is an observation of no weight which Dr. Taylor make^ on this text, that the word man is commonly used to signify mankind in general, or mankind collectively taken. It is true, it often signifies the species of mankind ; but then it is used to signify the species, with regard to its duration and succession from its beginning, as well as with regard to its extent. The English word mankind is used to signify the species : But what if it be so ? Would it be an improper or unintelligible way of speaking, to say, that when God first made man-

ORIGINAL sin; aft

Itind, he placed them in a pleasant paradise, (meaning in their first parents) but now they live in the midst of briers and thorns ? And it is certain, that to speak of God's making mankind in such a meaning, viz. his giving the species an existence in their first parents, at the creation of the world, is-agreeable to the scripture use of such an expression. As in Deut. iv. 32. " Since the day that God created man upon the earth." Job xx. 4. " Knowest thou not this of old, since man was placed upon the earth." Isa. xlv. 12. " I have Hiade the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens." Jer. xxvii. 5. " I have made the earth, the man and the beast that are upon the ground, by my great power." All these texts speak of God's making man, by the word wzan, signifying the species of mankind ; and yet they all plainly have respect to God's making man at ^rst, when God made the earth, and stretched ozii the heavens^ and created the first parents of mankind. In all these places the same word Adam is used, as here in Ecc'esiastes; and in the last of them, used with he evifihaticum, as it is here ; tliough Dr. Taylor omits it, when he tells us, he gives us a catalogue t3f all the places in scripture where the word is used. And ii argues nothing to the doctor's purpose, that the pronoun theij is used. They have sought out many invent tiona. Which is properly appHed to t.he species, which God made at first upright: God having begun the species with more than one, and it being continued in a multitude. As Christ speaks of the two sexes, in the relation of man and wife, as coatinuedin successive generations. Matth. xix. 4. " He that made them at the beginning, made them male and female ;" having reference to Adam and Eve.

No less impertinent, and also very unfair, is his criticisiu on the word jasha?; translated ufiright. Because the word sometimes signifies right, he would from thence infer, that it does not properly signify a moral rectitude, even when used to express the character of moral agents. He might as well insist, that the English word ufiright, sometimes, and in its most original meaning, signifies right ufu or in an erect posture, therefore it does not properly signify any morgl characis

TTU. ORIGINAL SIN.

ter, -when applied to moral agents ; and indeed less unreasonably ; for it 13 known, that in the Hebrew language, in a pe* culiar manner, most words used to signify moral and spiritual tl)ings, are taken from things external and natural. The word jashar is used, as applied to m.oral agents, or to the words and actions of such, (if I have not misreckoned*) about an liundrcd and ten times in scripture ; and about an hundred'of thera, without all dispute, to signify virtue, or moral rectitude, though Dr. Taylor is pleased to say, the word does not generally signify a moral character) and for the most part it signifies true virtue, or virtue in such a sense, as distinguishes it from all false appearances of virtue, or what is only virtue in some respects, but not truly so in the sight of God. It is used at least eighty times in this sense : And scarce any word can be found in the Hebrew language more significant of this. It is thus used constantly in Solomon's writings, (where it is often found) when used to express a character or property of moral agents. And it is beyond all controversy, that he uses it in this place, in the 7th of Ecclesiastes to signify a moral rectitude, or character of real virtue and integrity. For the wise man, in this context, is speaking of meii with respect to their moral character, inquiring into the corruption and depravity of mankind (as is confessed p. 184) and he here declares, he had not found more than one among a thousand of the right stamp, truly and thoroughly virtuous and upright ; which appeared a strange thing I But in this text he clears God, and lays the blame on man : Man was not jTiade thus at first. He was made of the right stamp, altogether good in his kind, (as all other things were) truly and thoroughly virtuous, as he ought to be ; but they have sough: out many inveiitions. Which last expression signifies things sinful, or morally evil ; as is confessed, p. 185. And this expression, used to signify those moral evils he found in man^ which he sets in opposition to the uprightness man was made in, shews, that by uprightness he means the most true and

* Making use of Buxtorf's Concordance, which, according to the author's professed desiga, directs to all the places where the word is lucd.

sincere goodness. The word rendered inventions, most naturally and aptly si2;nifics the subtle devices, and crooked, deceitful ways of hypocrites, wherein they are of a character cout'iry to men of simplicity and godly sincerity; who, thoui^h wise in that which is good, are simple concerning evil. Thus the same wise man, in Prov. xii. 2, sets a truly good wian in opposition to a man of wicked devices, whom God will condemn. Solomon had occasion to observe many who put on an artful disguise ahd fair shew of goodness ; but on searching thoroughly, ho found very few truly upright. As he says, Prov. XX. 6. " Mos-t men will proclaim every one his own goodness : But a faithful man who can find ?" So that it is exceeding plain, that by uprightness, in this place in Ecclesi-asies, Solomon means true moral goodness.

What our author urges concerning 77ia2iy ijivendons being spoken of, whereas Adam's eating the forbidden fruit was but cne i7ive7itio?i, is of as little weight as ihe rest of what he says on this text. For the many lusts and corruptions of mankind, appearing in innumerable ways of sinning, are all the consequence of that sin. The great corruption men are fallen into by the original apostasy, appears in the multitude of wicked ways they are inclined to. And therefore these are properl)' mentioned as the fruits and evidences of the greatness of that apostasy and corruption.

SECTION II.

Concerrdng the kind of Death, threatened to our Jirst Parents, if they should eat of the Forbidden Fruit.

DR. TAYLOR, in bis observations on the three first chapters of Genesis, says, p. 7. " The threatening to man, in case of transgression was, that he should surely die. Death

Vox.. VJ. 2 L

is the losing of iiie. Death is opposed to life, and must be understood according to the nature of that life, to which it is opposed. Now the death here threatened can, with any certainty, be opposed only to the life God gave Adam, when he treated him, verse '. Any thing besides this must be pure conjecture, without solid foundation."

To this I would say. It is true, death is opposed to life, and mvst be imdcrstood according to the nature of that life^ to which it ia oJi/)osed : But does it therefore follow, tnai nothing can be meant by it but the toss of life ? Misery is opposed to happiness, and sorrow is in scripture often opposed to joy ; but can we conclude from thence, that nothing is meant in scrip-line by sorrow, but the loss of joy ? Or that there is no more in misery, than the loss or absence of happiness ? And if it be i:o, lliat the death threatened ta Adam can, with certainty, he opposed only to the li.'e giv/:n to Adav^nvhen God created him ; I think, a state of perfect, perpetual and hopeless misery is proper'y opposed to that state Adam -iras in, nvhen God created :,ii!i. For I suppose it will not be denied, that the life Adam liad, was truly a }iappij life ; happy in perfect innocency, In the favor of hb maker, surrounded with the happy fruits and testimonies cf his love : And I think it has been proved, that he also was happy in a state of perfect righteousness. And roihing is more manifest, than that it is agreeable to a very common acceptation of the word life, in scripture, that it be luiderstcod as signifying a state of excellent and happy existence. Now that which is most oppobitc to that life and state Adam ivas created in, is a state of total, confirmed wickedness, and perfect hopeless misery, under the divine displeasure and curse ; not excluding temporal death, or the destruction of (he body, as an introduction to it.

And besides, that which is much more evident, than any thing Dr- Taylor says on this head, is this, viz. that the death., which was to come on Adam, as the punishment of his disobedience^ was opposed to that life, which he would have had as the reward of his obedience in case he had not sinned. Obedience and disobedience are contraries : And the threatcn-in^s aval prc7niscs, that are sanctions of a law, arc set in direct

ORIGINAL SIN. dTS

opposition ; and the 'firomised reivards and threatened punish' ments, are what dre most properly taken as each other's oppo-sites. But none will deJiy, that the life which would have been Adam's reward, if he had persisted in obedience, was eternal life. And therefore we argue justly, that the deatii which stands opfiosed to that life (Dr. Taylor himself being judge, p. 120. S.) is mariifcsibj eternal dcath^ a death widely diff'erent from the death nve novj die....to use his own words. If Adam, for his persevering obedience, was to have hadVr^r-/asting life and hafifiiness, in perfect holiness, union whh his maker, and enjoyment of his favor, and this was the life which was to be confirmed by the tree of life ; theii doubtless the death threatened in case of disobedience, which stands in direct opposition to this, was a being given over to everlasting vj-ickedness a7id misery, in se/iarat:o?i from God, and in enduring his ivrath.

And it may with the greatest reason be supposed, (liUt -irhen God first made manldnd, and made Icnown to them the methods of his moral government towards them, in the reveialioa he made of himself (o the natural !ioad of the whole species ; and let him know, that obedience to him was expected as his duty ; and enforced this duty with the sanction of a threatened punishment, called by the name oi death ; I say, we may with the greatest reason suppose in such a case, that by dea!:h was meant that same death which God esteemed lo be tlic most proper punishment of the sin of mankind, and wliich he speaks of under that name, throug) out the scripture, as the proper wages of the sin of man, and was always from the beginning understood to be so in the chu xh of God. It would be strange indeed, if it should be otherwise. It would have been strange, if when the law of God was first given, and enforced by the threatening of a punislio.i'^nt, nothing at all had been mentioned of that great punisiinient, ever spoken of under the name of death, fin the revelations which he has given to mankind from age to age) as the proper puiiisiiment of the sin of m.ankind. Audit would be no less strange, ii' v/hen the punishment which was mentioned and threatened on that occasion, was called by the same liairjf", even deathj

yet we must not understand it to mean the same thing, but something infinitely diverse, and infinitely more inconsiderable.

But now let us consider what that death is, which the scripture ever speaks of as the proper wages of the sin of mankind, and is spoken of as such by God's saints in all ages of the church, from the first beginning of a written revelation, to the conclusion of it. I will begin with the Ne\v Testament. When the Apostle Paul says, Rom. vi. 23. the ivagea ofsinis death, Dr. Taylor tells us, p. 120. S. that " this means eternal death, the second death, a death widely diffcent from the death we now die." The same apostle speaks of death as the proper punishment due for sin, m Rom. vii. 5. and chap. viii. 13. 2 Cor. iii. 7. 1 Cor. xv. 56, In all which places, Dr. Taylor himself supposes the apostle to intend eternal death.* And when the Apostle James speaks of death as the proper reward, fruit, and end of sin. Jam. i. 15. " Sin when it is finished bringelh forth death." It is manifest that our author supposes eternal destruction to be meant.f And the Apostle John, agreeable to Dr. Taylor's sense, speaks of the second death as that which sin unrcpented of will bring all men to at last. Rev. ii. 11. xx. 6. 14. and xxi. 8, In the same sense tlie Apostle John uses the word in his 1st epistle, chap. iii. 11. " We know, that we have passed from death to life, because we love the brethren : He that hateth his brother, abideth in death.

In the same manner Christ used the word from time to lime when he was on earth, and spake concerning the punishment and issue of sin. John v. 24. « He that heareth my word, and bclitveih, &c. hath everlasting life ; and shall not come into condcmnaiion ; but is passed from death to life." Where, according to Dr. Taylor's own way of arguing, it

• See p. 78. Note on Rom, vii. 5. and Note on verse 6. Note on Rom, V. 20. Note on Rom. vii. 8.

+ By comparing what he says, p, 126, witli what he often says of that death and destruction which is rhe demerit and end of personsl ijn, which he says is the second death, or eternal dist^tidifr.

ORIGINAL SIN. srr

cannot be the death which we now die, that Christ speaks oi", but eternal death, because it is set in opposition to everlasting life. John vi. 50. This is the bread -which comcth down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die." Chap. viii. 51. "Verily, verily, I say unto you, if a man keep my saying, he shall never see death." Chap. xi. 26. « And whosoever liveth and believeth in me, shall never die." In which places it is plain Christ does not mean that believers shall never see temporal death. See also IMatth. x. 28, and Luke X. 28. In like manner, the word Avas commonly used by the prophets of old, when they spake of death as the proper end and recompense of sin. So, abundantly by the Prophet Eze-k'iel. Ezek. iii. 18. "When I say unto the wicked man, thou shall surely die." In the original it is. Dying thou shal: die. The same form of expression, which God used in the threatening to Adam. We have the same words again, chap. xxxiii. 18. In chap, xviii. 4, it is said, IVie soul that siimeth^ it shall die. To the like purpose are chap. iii. 19, 20, and xviii. 4, 9, 13, 17....21, 24, ^6, 28, chap, xxxiii, 8, 9, 12, 14, 19. And that temporal death is not meant in these places is plain, because it is promised most absolutely, that the righteous shall not die the death spoken of. Chap, xviii. 21. He ihall surely live., he shall not die. So verses 9, 17, 19, and 22, and chap. iii. 21. And it is evident the Prophet Jeremiah uses the v/ord in the same senses. Jer. xxxi. 30. Every «ne shall die/or his own iniquity. Ap,d the same death is spoken of by the Prophet Isaiah. Isai. xi. 4. With the breath of his Ufia shall he slay the wicked. See also chap. Ixvi. 16, with verse 24. Solomon, who we must suppose was thoroughly acquainted with the sense in which tlie word was used by the wise, and by the ancients, continually speaks of death as the proper fruit, issue, and recompense of sin, using the word only in this sense. Prov. xi. 19. ./,? righteousness tendeth to life, so he that fiursueth evil, pursueth it to his own death. So chap. V. 5, 6, 23, vii. 27, viii. 36, ix. 18, x. 21, xi. 19, xiv. 12, XV. 10, xviii. 21, xix. 16, xxi. 16, and xxiii. 13, 14. In these places he cannot mean temporal death, for he often speaks of it as a punishment of the wicked, wherci!i the righteous shall

?"8 ORIGINAL SIN.

certainly be dislinguished from them ; aj in Prov. xii. 28. In the Tjay of rightcoimnrss is life., and in the fiatlnvay thereof is no death. So in chap. x. 2, xi. 4, xiii. 14, xiv. 27, and many-other places. But we find this same wise man observes, that as to temporal death, and temporal events in general, there is }io distinction, but that they happen alike to good and bad. Eccl.ii. 14,15, 16, viii. 14, and ix. 2,3. His words are remarkable in Eccl. vii. 15. "There is a just man that/zfmAc?/; in his righteousness, and there is a wicked man that/iro/orz^-e/Zi his life in his wickedness." So we find David, in the Book of psalms, uses the word death in the same sensc,when he speaks of it as the proper wages and issue of sin. Psal. xxxiv. 21, "Evil shall j/ay the wicked." He speaks of it as a certain thing, Psal. cxxxix. 19. «' Surely thou wilt slay the wicked,

0 God." And he speaks of it as a thing wherein the wicked are distinguished from the righteous. Psalm Ixix. 28. " Let them be blotted out of the book of the living, and not be written with the righteous." And thus we find the word death used in the Pentateuch, or Books of Moses ; in which part of the Scripture it is, that we have the account of the threatening of deatli to Adam. When death, in these books, is spoken of as the proper fruit, and appointed reward of sin, it is to be understood of eternal death. So Deut. xxx. 15. " See,

1 have set before thee this day life and good, and death and evil." Verse 19. "I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have t^ct before you life and deaths blessing and cursing." The life that is spoken of here, is doubtless the same that is spoken of in Levit. xviii. 5. " Ye shall therefore keep my statutes and my judgments, which if a man do, he shall live in them." This the apostle understands o{eternal life, as is plain by Rom. x. 5, and Gal. iii. 12. But that the death threatened for sin in the law of Moses, meant eternal death, is what Dr. Taylor abundantly declares. So in his Note on Rom. v. 20, Par. p. 291. " Such a constitution the law of Moses was, subjecting those who were under it to death for every transgression ; meaning by death eternal death" These are his words. The like he asserts in many other places. When it is said, in the place now men-

fioned, J have set before thee life and death, blessing and cursing, without doubt, the same blessing and cursing is meant which God had already set before them with such solemnity, in the 27th and 28th chapters, where we have the sum of tije curbcs in those last words of the 27lh chapter, " Cursed is every one, which confirmeth not all the words of this law to do them." Which the apostle speaks of as a threatening of eternal death, and v/ith him Dr. Taylor himself.* In this sense also Job and his friends, spake of death, as the wa;^es and end of sin, who lived before any written revelation, and had their religion and their phraseology about the things of religion from the ancients.

If any should insist upon it as an objection against supposing that death Avas intended to signify eternal death in tije threatening to Adam, that this use of the word is figurative ; I reply, that though this should be allowed, yet it is by no means so figurative as many other phrases used in the history contained in these three chapters ; as when it is said, God naid^ Let there be light : God said, Let there be ajirmamentf 8cc. as though God spake such words with a voice. So when it is said, God called the light, day : God called the firmament, heaven, Sec. : God rested on the seventh day ; as though he had been weary, and then rested. And when it is said, They heard the x'ozct of God walking ; as though the Deity had two feet, and took steps on the ground. Dr. Taylor supposes, that when it is said of Adam and Eve, "Their eyes were opened, and they saw that they were naked ;" by the word naked is TCi&Q.T\x. 2k state of guilt ; page 12. Which sense of the word naked, is much further from ih.e comnioii use of the word, than the supposed sense of the word death. So this author supposes the promise concerning the seed of the woman's bruising the sfr/ient's heady while the serpent should bruise his heel, is to be understood of '^ the Messiah's destroying the power and sovereignty of the Devil, and rc-receiving some slight hui't from him ;" pages 15, 16. Which iiaakes the sentence full of figures, vastly more beside the - nmmon use of words. And why might not God deliver * Note OR Rom. v. 20. Par. p. 29'.—299.

threa'cnirif^s to our first parents in figurative expressions, as well as pi'omises ? Many other strong figures are used in these chapters.

But indeed, there is no necessity of supposing the word dcathf or the Hebrew word so translated, if used in the man-rer that has been supposed, to have been figui-ative at all. It does not appear but that this word, in its true and proper meaning, might signify perfect inisery, and sensible destruction, thougli the word was also applied to signify something more external and visible. There are many words in our language, such as heart., sen.sc, vie-.v, disco-very.^ concefitio77,lig/i(, and many others, which are applied to signify external things, as that muscular part of the body called /leari ; external feeling, called sense / the sight of the bodily eye, called view ; the finding of a thing by its being uncovered, called discovery ; the first beginning of the fo2tus in the womb, called conccfi-don ; and the rays of the sun, called liiiht : Yet these words do as truly and properly signify other things of a more spiritual, intcinal nature, as those : Such as the disposition, affection, perception, and thought of the mind, and manifestation and evidence to the soul. Common use, which governs the propriety of language, makes the latter things to be as much signified by those words, in their proper meaning, as the former. It is especially common rn the Hebrew, and I suppose, other oriental languages, that the same word that signifies something external, docs no less properly and usually •Jgnify something more spiritual. So the Hebrew words used for breath, have such a double signification : J\''eshama signifies both brcat/i and the so^d, and the latter as commonly as the former. Bnach is used for breath or TWTzrfjbut yet more commonly signifies .spirit. Jy'rfthesh is oscd for breath, but yet TYiove commonly signifies soul. So the word lebh, heart, no less properly signifies the snni, especially with regard to the will and affections, than that part of the body so called. The word nhalom, vf\\\ch we render/:pccr, no less properly signifies prosperity and happiness, than mutual agreement. The word translated life, signifies the natural life of the body, and also the perfect and happy state of sensible, active being;

trid the latter as properly as the former. So the word death signifies destruction, as to outward sensibility^ activity and enjoyment ; but it has most evidently anothev signification, which, in the Hebrew tongue, is no less proper, viz. perfect^ sensible^ hopeless ruin and misery.

It is therefore wholly without reason urged, that death properly signifies only the loss of this present life ; and that therefore nothing else v/as meant by that death which was threatened for eating the forbidden fruit. Nor does it at all appear but that Adam, who, from what God said concerning the seed of the woman, that was so very figurative, could understand, that relief was promised as to the death which was threatened, (as Dr. Taylor himself supposes) understood the death thai was threatened in the more important sense ; es-pecially seeing temporal death, as it is originally, and in itself, is evermore, excepting as changed by divine grace, an introduction or entrance into that gloomy, dismal state of misery, which is shadowed forth by the dark and awful circumstances of this death, naturally suggesting to the mind the most dreadful state of hopeless, sensible ruin.

As to that objection which some have made, that the phrase, dying thou shall die, is several times used in the Books of Moses, to signify temporal death, it can be of no force : For it has been shewn already, that the same phrase is sometimes used in scripture to signify etei-nal death, in instances much more parallel with this. But indeed nothing can be certainly argued concerning the nature of the ihmg intended, from its being expressed in such a manner. For it is evident that such repetitions of a word in the Hebrew language, are no more than an emphasis upon a word in the more modern languages, to signify the great degree of a thing, the importance of it, or the certainty of it, Sec. When we would signify and impress these, we commonly put an emphasis oti our words : Instead of this, the Hebrews, when they would express a thing strongly, repeated or doubled the word, the more to impress the mind of the hearer ; as may be plain to every one in the least conversant with the Hebrew Bible. The repetition in the threatening to Adam, therefore only Vol. VL 2 M

implies the solemnity and importance of the threatening. But God may denounce either eternal or temporal death with peremptoriness and solemnity, and nothing can certainly be inferred concerning the nature of the thing threatened, because it is threatened v.-ith emphasis, more than this, that the threatening is much to be regarded. Though it be true, that it might in an especial manner be expected that a threatening of eternal death would be denounced with great empha* " sis, such a threatening being infinitely important, and to be regarded above all others.

SECTION III.

Wherein it is inquired, tvhether there be any tiling in the history of the three first chapters of Genesis, nvhich should lead us to supfiose that God, in his constitution with Adam, dealt with mankind in general, as included in their first father, and that the threat etiitiff of death, in case he should eat the for-kiddefi fruit, had respect not only to him, but Ms pos^ terity ?

DR. TAYLOR, rehearsing that threatening to Adam. Thou shall surely die, and giving us his paraphrase of it, p. 7, 8, concludes thus : " Observe, here is not 07ie word relating to Adam*s posterity." But it may be observed in opposition to this, that there is scarcely one word that we have an account of, which God ever said to Adam or Eve, but what does manifestly include their posterity in the meaning and design of it. There is as much of a word said about Adam's posterity in that threatening, as there is in those wcrds of God to Adam and Eve, Gen. i. 28 ; « Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it ;" and as much in events.

to lead us to suppose Adam's posterity to be included. There 3S as much of a word of his posterity in that threatening, as in those words, verse 29. « Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed....and every tree in which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed," Sec. Even when God was about to create Adam, what he said on that occasion, had not respect only to Adam, but to his posterity. Gen. i. 26. « Let us make man in our image, antl let them have dominion over the fish of the sea," &c. And, what is more remarkable, there is as much of a word said about Adam's posterity in the threatening of death, as there is in that sentence. Gen. iii. 19, " Unto dust shalt thou return." Which Dr. Taylor himself supposes to be a sentence pronounced for the execution of that very threatening, « Thou shalt surely die ;" and which sentence he himself also often speaks of as including Adam's posterity ; and what is much more remarkable still, is a sentence which Dr. Taylor himself often speaks of, as including' his posterity^ as a sentence of cQnde7nnation, as a judicial sentence, and a sentence which God pronounced with regard to Adam's pos-terity^ acting the part of a Judge, and as such condemning them to temporal death. Though he is therein utterly inconsistent with himself, inasmuch as he at the same time abundantly insists, that death is not brought on Adam's posterity in consequence of his sin, at all as a punishment ; but merely by the gracious disposal of a Father, bestowing a benefit of the highest nature upon them.*

But I shall shew that I do not in any of these things falsely charge, or misrepresent Dr. Taylor. He speaks of the sentence in chap. iii. 19, as pronounced in pursuance of the threatening in the former chapter, in these words, pages 17, 18. " The sentence upon man, verses 17, 18, 19, first affects the earth, upon which he was to subsist: The ground should be incumbered with many noxious weeds, and the tillage of it more toilsome ; which would oblige the man to procui'e a sustenance by hard labor, till he should die, and drop into the ground, from whence he was taken. Thus death entered by

* Page 27, S.

sin into the world, and man became mortal,* accordlt'ig to the threatening in the former chapter.'' Now, if mankind becomes mortal, and must die, according to the threatening in the former chapter, then doubtless the threatening in the former chapter. Thou shalt die, had respect not only to Adam, but to mankind, and mcluded Adam's posterity. Yea, and Dr. Taylor is express in it, and very often so, Jiat the sentence concerning dropping into the ground, or returning to the dust, did include Adam's posterity. So, page 20, speaking there of that sentence, " Observe, (says he) that we their posterity are in fact subjected to the same affliction and mortality, here by sentence inflicted upon our first parents. Page 42, Note. But yet men through that long tract, were all subject to death, therefore they must be included in the sentence." The same he affirms in innumerable other places, some of which I shall have occasion to mention presently.

The sentence which is founded on the threatening, and, as Dr. Taylor says, according to the threalerdng, extends to as many as were included in the threatening, and to no more. If the sentence be upon a collective subject, infinitely, (as it were) the greatest part of which were not included in the threatening, nor were ever threatened at all by any threatening whatsoever, then certainly this sentence is not according to the threatening, nor built upon it. If the sentence be according to the threatening, then we may justly explain the threatening by the sentence ; and if we find the sentence spoken to the same person, to whom the threatening was spoken, and spoken in the second person singular, in like manner with the threatening, and/ounded on the threatening, and according to the Areatening ; and if we find the sentence includes Adam's posterity, then we may certainly infer, that so did the threatening ; and hence, that both the threatening and sentence were delivered to Adam as the public head and representative of his posterity.

* The subsequent part of the quotation, the reader will not meet with in die third edition of Dr. Taylor, but in the fecond of 1741.

And we may also further infer from it, in another respec*; directly contrary to Dr. Taylor's doctrine, that the sentence which included Adam's posterity, was to death, as a fiwiishment to that posterity, as well as to Adam himself. For a sentence pronounced in execution of a threatening, is to a punishment. Threatenings are of punishments. Neither God nor man are wont to threaten others with favors and benefits.

But lest any of this author's admirers should stand to it, that it may very properly be said, God threatened mankind with bestowing great kindness upon them, I would observe, that Dr. Taylor often speaks of this sentence as pronounced by God on all mankind as condemning them, speaks of it as a sentencf^ of condemnation judicially fironohnced^ or a sentence which God pronounced on all mankind acting as their judge, and in a judicial proceeding. Which he affirms in multitudes of places. In p. 20, speaking of this sentence, which he there says, subjects us, Adam's and Eve's posterity, to affliction and mortality, he calls it a judicial act of condemnation. " The judicial act of condemnation (says he) clearly implies, a taking him to pieces, and turning him to the ground from whence he was taken." And p. 28, 29, Note. " in all the scripture from one end to the other, there is recorded but one judgment to condemnation, which came upon all men, and that is, Gen. iii. \7...19. Dust thou art," 8cc. P. 40, speaking of the same, he says, " all men are brought under condemnation." In p. 27, 28. " By judgment, judgment to condemnation, it ap-peareth evidently to me, he (Paul) means the being adjudged to the forementioned death ; he means the sentence of death, of a general mortality, pronounced upon mankind, in consequence of Adam's first transgression. And the condemnation inflicted by {he judgment of God, answereth to, and is in effect the same thing with being dead." P. 30. "The many, that is mankind, were subject to death by the judicial act of God." P. 31. "Being made sinners, may very well signify, being adjudged, or condemned to death. For the Hebrew word &c. signifies to make one a sinner by a judicial sentence, or to condemn." P. 178. Par. on Rom. v. 19. " Upon the account of one man's disobedience, 7nankind were judicially constituted

sinners ; that is, subjected to death, by the sentence of God the judge." And there are many other places where he re» peats the same thing. And it is pretty remarkable, that in p. 48,49, immediately after citing Prov. xvii. 15. "He that justifieth the wicked, and he that condem.neth the just, are both an abomination to the Lord ;" and when he is careful in citing these words to put us in mind, that it is meant of a j'Uo dicial act ; yet in the very next words he supposes that God himself does so, since he constantly supposes that Adam's posterity, whom God condemns, are innocent. His words are these, " From all this it followeth, that as the judgment, that passed upon all men to covde7nnation^\% death's coming upon all men, by ihe judicial act oj' Godf upon occasion of Adam's transgression ; So, &c." And it is very remarkable, that in p. 3, 4, 7. S. he insists, « That in scripture no action is said to be imputed, reckoned, or accounted to any person for righteousness or CONDEMNATION, btz-t the proper act and deed of that person.'* And yet he thus continually affirms, that all mankind are made sinners by a judicial act of God the Judge, even to condemnation, ^n^ judicially constituted sinners, and so subjected to a judicial sentence of condemnation, on occasion of Adam's sin ; and all according to the threatening denounced to Adam, thou shalt surely die : Though he supposes Adam's posterity were not in^^luded in the threatening, and are looked upon as perfectly innocent, and treated wholly as such.

I am sensible Dr. Taylor does not run into all this inconsistence, only through oversight and blundering ; but that he is driven to it, to make out his matters in his evasion of that noted paragraph in the 5th chapter of Romans ; especially those three sentences, ver. 16. "The judgment was by one to condemnation." Ver. 18 " By the offence of one, judgment came upon all men to condemnation ;" and ver. 19, " By one man's disobedience many were made sinners." And I an^ also sensible of what he offers to salve the inconvenience, viz. " That if the threatening had immediately been executed on Adam, he would have had no posterity ; and that so far the possible existence of Adam's posterity fell under the threaten*

ORIGINAL SIN. S8f

ingof the law, and into the hands of the judge, to be disposed of as he should think fit: And that this is the ground of the judgment to condemnation, coming upon all men."* But tliis is trifling, to a great degree : For,

1. Suffering death, and failing of possible existence, are entirely different things. If there had never been any such thing as sin committed, there would have been infinite numbers of possible beings, which would have failed of existence, by God's appointment. God has appointed not to bring into existence numberless possible worlds, each replenished with innumerable possible inhabitants. But is this equivalent to God's appointing them all to suffer death ?

2. Our author represents, that by Adam's sin, tiie possible existence of his posterity fell into the hands of the judge, to be disposed of as he should think ft. But there was no need of any sin of Adam's, or anybody's else, in order to their being brought into God's hands in this respect. The future possible existence of all created beings, is in God's hands, antecedently to the existence of any sin. And therefore by God's sovereign appointment, infinite numbers of possible beings, without any relation to Adam, or any other sinning being, do fail of their possible existence. And if Adam had never sinned, yet it would be unreasonable to suppose, but that innumerable multitudes of his possible posterity, would have failed of existence by God's disposal. For will any be so unreasonable as to imagine, that God would, and must have brought into existence as many of his posterity as it was possible should be, if he had not sinned ? Or that in that case, it would not have been possible, that any other persons of his posterity should ever have existed, than those individual persons, who now actually fall under that sentence of suffering death, and returning to the dust ?

3. We have many accounts in scripture, which imply the actual failing of the possible existence of innumerable multitudes of Adam's posterity, yea, of many more than ever come into existence. As of the possible posterity of Abel, tU»

* Page qo, 91 95.

possible posterity of all them that were destroyed by the flood) andihc possible posterity of the innumerable muUitudes which Mvc read of in,scripture, destroyed by sword, pesliler.ee, &c. And if the threatening to Adam reached his posterity, in no other respect than this, that they were liable to be depiived by it ot their possible existence, then these instances are much more properly a fulfilment of that threatening, than the suffering of death by such as actually come into existence ; and so is that which is most properly the judgment to condemnation, executed by the sentence of the judge, proceeding on the foot of that threatening. But where do we ever find this so represented in scripture ? We read of multitudes cut off for their personal sins, who thereby failed of their possible posterity. And these are mentioned as God's judgments on them, and effects of God's condemnation of them : But when are they ever spoken of as God's judicially proceeding against, and condemning their possible posterity ?

4, Dr. Taylor, in what he says concerning this matter, speaks of the threatening of the law delivered to Adam, which the possible existence of his posterity fell under, as the ground of the judgment to condem7iatiG7i coming upon all men. But herein he is exceeding inconsistent with himself ; for he affirms in a place forecited, that the scripture never speaks of any sentence of condemnation coming upon all men, but that sentence,in the third of Genesis, concerning man's turning,to dust. But according to him, the threatening of the law delivered to Adam, could not be the ground of that sentence ; for . ii^ gre.atjy insists upon it, that that law was entirely abrogated Jbefore thiJt sentence was pronounced, that this law at that time was ?iQ.t in beings had no existence to have any such influence, as might procure a sentence of death ; and that therefore this sentence was introduced entirely «gi another foot, viz. on the foot of a new dispensation of grace. The reader m; y see this matter strenuously urged, and particularly argued by himj, p. 113...220. iS". So that this sentence could not, according to him, have the threatening of that law for its ground, as he supposes ; for it never stood upon that ground. It could not be called a iudement of condemnation ^lnder awj

s'uch view ; for it could not be viewed under circumstances under which it never existed.

5, It it be as our author supposes, that the sentence of | death on all men comes under the notion of a judgment to condemnation by this means, viz. that the threatening to Adam was in some respect the ground of it; then it also comes under the notion of a punishment: For threatenings annexed to breaches of laws, are to punishments ; and a judgment of condemnation to the thing threatened, must be to punishment; and the thing condemned to, must have as much the notion of a punishment, as the sentence has the notion of a judgment to condemnation. But this, Ur. Taylor wholly denies : He denies that the death sentenced to, comes as any punishment at all, but insists that it comes only as afavor and benefit, and a fruit of fatherly love to Adam's posterity, respected, not as guilty, but wholly innocent. So that his scheme v/ill not admit of its coming under the notion of a sentence to condemnation in any respect whatsoever. Our author's supposition, that the possible existence of Adam's posterity comes under the threatening of the law, and into the hands of the judge, and is the ground of the condemnatidn of all men to death, implies, that death, by this sentence, is appointed to mankind as an evil, at least negatively so ; as it is a privation of good : For he manifestly speaks of a nonexistence as a negative evil. But herein he is inconsistent with himself: For he continually insists, that mankind are subjected to death only as a ben-t^C, as has been before shewn. According to him, death is not appointed to mankind as a negative evil, as any cessation of existence, as any cessation or even diminution of good; but on the contrary, as a means of a more hafifiy existence^ and a great increase of good.

So that this evasion, or salvo of Dr. Taylor's, is so far from helping the matter, or salving the inconsistence, that it Increases it.

And that the constitution or law, with the threatening of death annexed, which was given to Adam, was to him as the head of mankind, and to his posterity as included in him, not only follows from some of our author's own assertions, and

Vol. VI. 2 N

the plain and full declarations of the apostle, in the fifth of Romans (of which more afterwards) which drove Dr. Taylor into such gross inconsistencies : But the account given in tho three first chapters of Genesis, directly and inevitably leads us to such a conclusion.

Though the sentence, Gen. iii. 19, Unto dust thou shali returriy be not of equal extent with the threatening in the foregoing chapter, or an execution of the main curse of the law therein denounced ; for, that ^l^ should have been so, woufd have been inconsistent with the intimations of mercy just before given : Yet it is plain, this sentence is in pursuance of that threatening, being to something that was included in it. The words of the sentence were delivered to the same person, with the words of the threatening, and in the same manner, in like singular terms, as much without any express mention of his posterity : And yet it manifestly appears by the consequence, as well as all circumstances, that his posterity were included in the words of the sentence ; as is confessed en all hands. And as the words were apparently delivered m the form of the sentence of a judge, condemning for something that he was displeased with, and ought to be condemned, viz. sin ; and as the sentence to him and his posterity was but one, dooming to the same suffering, uOder the same cfr-cumstances, both the one and the other sentenced in the saroe words, spoken but once, and immediately to but one persoD, we hence justly infer, that it was the same thing to both ; and not as Dr. Taylor suggests, p. 67, a sentence to a proper punishment to Adam, but a mere promise of favor to his posterity.

Indeed, sometimes our author seems to suppose, that God meant the thing denounced in this sentence, as a favor both to Adam and his posterity.* But to his posterity, or mankind in general, who are the main subject, he ever insists, that it wus purely intended as a favor. And therefore, one would have thought the sentence should have been delivered, with manifestations and appearances of favor, and not of an-

* Page 2 5, 45, 46. .<

ger. How could Adam understand it as a promise of great favor, considering the manner and circumstances of the denunciation ? How could he think, tliat God would go about to delude him, by clothing himself with garments of vengeance, using words of displeasure and rebulie, setting forth the hei-nousness of bis crime, attended with cherubimsand a flaming sword ; when all that he meant was only higher testimonies of favor, than he bad before in a state of innocence, and to -manifest fatberly love and kindness, in promises of great blessings ? If this was the case, God's words to Adam must be understood thus : " Because thou hast done so \vickedly, bast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree of which I commanded thee, saying. Thou shalt not eat of it; therefore I will be more kind to thee than I was in thy state of innocence, and do now appoint for thee the following great favors : Cursed be the ground for thy ,<sakr," &c. And thus Adam must understand what was said, imless any will say (and God forbid that any should be so blasphemous) that God clothed himself with appearances of displeasure, to deceive Adam, and make him believe the contrary of what he intended, and lead him to expect a dismal train of evils on his posterity, contrary to all reason and justice, implying the most horribly unrighteous treatment of millions of perfectly innocent creatures. It is certain there is not the least appearance in what God said, or the manner of it, as Moses gives us the account, of any other, than that God was now testifying displeasure, condemning the subject of the sentence he was pronouncing, as justly exposed to punishment for sin, and for that sin which he mentions.

When God was pronouncing this sentence, Adam doubtless understood, that God had respect to his posterity, as well as himself, though God spake wholly in the second person singular, " Because thou hast eaten....In sorrow shall thou eat ....Unto the dust shalt thou return.'? But he had as much reason to understand God as having respect to his posterity, when he directed his speech to him in like manner in the .threatening, Thou shalt surely die. The sentence plainly re-and results from il. The threatening

says, If thou tat,, thou shalt die : The sentence says, iJ(?« cause thou hast eaten, thou shalt die. And Moses, who wrote the account, had no reason to doubt but that the affair would be thus understood by his readers ; for such a way of speaking was well understood in those days : The history he gives us of the origin of things, abounds with it. Such a manner of speaking to ihe first of the kind, or heads of the race, having respect to the progeny, is not only used in almost every thing that God said to Adam and Eve, but even in what he said to the very birds and fishes. Gen. i. 22 ; and also in what he said afterwards to Noah, Gen. ix. and to Shem, Ham and Japhelh, and Canaan, Gen. ix. 25....27. So in promises made to Abraham, in which God directed his speech to him, and spake in the second person singular, from time to time, but meant chiefly his posterity : " To thee will I give this land. In thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed,*' &c. &c. And in what is said of Ishmael, as of his person, but meant chiefly of his posterity, Gen. xvi. 12, and xvii. 20. And so in what Isaac said to Esau and Jacob, in his blessing ; in which he spake to ibem in the second person singular, but meant chiefly their posterity. And so for the most part in the promises made to Isaac and Jacob, and in Jacob's blessing of Eph-raim and Manasseh, and of his twelve sons.

But I shall take notice of one or two things further, shewing that Adam's posterity were included in God's establishment with him, and the threatening denounced for his sin ; and that the calamities which come upon them in consequence of his sin, are brought on them as punishments.

This is evident from the curse on the ground i which, if it be any curse at all, comes equally on Adam's posterity with himself. And if it be a curse, then against whomsoever it is designed and on whomsoever it terminates, it comes as a punishment, and not as a blessing, so far as it comes in consequence of that sentence.

Dr. Taylor, page 19, says, " A curse is pronounced upoi> the ground, but no curse upon the woman and the man." And in pages 45, 46, 5. he insists that the ground only was cursed, and not the man ; just as though a curse could ler-

minate on lifeless, senseless earth 1 To understand this curse otherwise than as terminating upon man through the ground, would be as senseless as to suppose the meaning to be, The ground shall he punished, and shall be miserable for thy sake. Our author interprets the curse on the ground, of its being incumbered with noxious weeds ; but would these weeds have been any curse on the ground, if there had been no inhabitants, or if the inhabitants had been of such a nature, that these weeds would not have been noxious, but useful to them? It is said, Deut. xxviii. 17, "Cursed shall be thy basket, and thy store ;" and would he not be thought to talk very ridiculously, who should say, " Here is a curse upon the basket, but not a word of any curse upon the owner ; and therefore we have no reason at all to look upon it as any punishment upon him, or any testimony of God's displeasure towards him." How plain is it, that when lifeless things, which are not capable of either benefit or suffering, are said to be cursed or blessed with regard tp sensible beings, that use or possess these things or have connexion with them, the meaning must be, that these sensible beings are cursed or blessed in the other, or with respect to them ! In Exod. xxiii. 25, it is said, " He shall bless thy bread and thy water." And I suppose, never any body yet proceeded to such a degree of subtilty in distinguishing, as to say, " Here is a blessing on the bread and the water, which went into the possessors' mouths, but no blessing on ihem." To make such a distinction with regard to the curse God pronounced on the ground, would in some respects be more unreasonable, because God is express in explaininr; the matter, declaring that it was/or man^s sake, expressly referring this curse to /zzm, as being with respect to him, and for the sake of his guilt, and as consisting in the sorrow and suffering he should have from it. « In sorrow shalt thou eat of it. Thorns and thistles shall it bring forth to thee" So that God's oun words tell us where the curse terminates. The words are parallel with those in Pent, xxviii. 16, but only more plain and explicit, « Cursed shalt thou be in the field," or in the ground.

If Ihir. part of the senlcnce was pronounced under no notion of any curse or punishment at all upon mankind, but on the contrary) as making an alteration in the ground, that should be for the better, as to them ; that instead of the sweet, but templing, pernicious fruits of paradise, it might produce ■wholesome fruits, more for the health of the soul ; that it might bring forth thorns and thistles, as excellent medicines, to prevent or cure moral distempers, diseases which would issue in eternal death ; 1 say, if what was pronounced was under this notion, then it was a blessing on the ground, and not a curse ; and it might more properly have been said, *■*■ Blessed shall the ground be for thy sake. I will make a happy change in it, that it may be a habitation more fit for a creature so infirm, and so apt to be overcome with temptation, as thou art."

The event makes it evident, that in prot^ouncing this curse, God had as much respect to Adam's posterity, as to himself: And so it was understood by his pious posterity before the flood ; as appears by what Lamech, the father of Noah, says, Gen. V. 29. " And he called his name Xoah, saying, This same shall comfort us concerning our work, and the toil of our hands, because of the ground ivhich the Lord hath cursed.'^

Another thing which argues, that Adam's posterity were included in the threatening of death, and that our first parents understood, when fallen, that the tempter, in persuading them 10 eat the forbidden fruit, had aimed at the punishment and ruin of both them and their posterity, and had procured it, is Adam's immediately giving his wife that new name, Eve, or Zifc, on the promise or intimation of the disappointment and overthrow of the tempter in that matter, by her seed, which Adam understood to be by his procuring life, not only for themselves, but for many of their posterity, and thereby delivering them from that death and ruin which the serpent had brought upon them. Those that should be thus delivered, and obtain life, Adam calls the living ; and because he observed, by what God had said, that deliverance and life were to be by the seed of the woman, he therefore remarks that

s/»^ is the mother of all living, and thereupon gives her a new name, calls her Chavah, life, Gen. iii. 20.

There is a great deal of evidence, that this is the occasion of Adam's giving his wife her new name. This was her new honor, and the greatest honor, at least in her present state, that the Redeemer was to be of her seed. New names were wont to be given for something that was the person's peculiar honor. So it was with regard to the new names of Abraham, Sarah, and Israel. Dr. Taylor himself observes,* that they Avho are saved by Christ, are called the livers, S* ^wtTi?, 2 Cor. iv. 11, the livings or they that live. So we find in the Old Testament, the righteous are called by the name oi the living, Psalm Ixix. 28. » Let them be blotted out of the book of the living, and not be written with the righteous." If what Adam meant by her being the 7nother of all living, was only her being the mother of mankind, and gave her the namej life upon that account; it were much the most likely that he would have given her this name at -first, when God first united them, under that blessing, " Be fruitful and multiply," and when he had a prospect of her being the mother of mankind in a state ofimmortalitij, living indeed, living, and never dxjing. But that Adam should at that time give her only the. name of Isha, and then immediately on that melancholy change, by their coming under the sentence of death, with all their posterity, having now a new, awful prospect of her being the mother of nothing but a dijing race, all from generation to generation turning to dust, through her folly ; I sa;^, that immediately on this, he should change her name into life, calling her now the mother oi all living is perfectly unaccountable. Besides, it is manifest that It was not her being the •mother of all mankind, or her relation as a mother, which she stood in to her posterity, but the qualitij of those she was to be the mother of, which was the thing Adam had in view, in giving his wife this new name; as appears by the name itself, which signifies life. And if it had been only a natural and mortal life which,he had in view, this was

• Note annexe^ to \ 287,

*

S96 ORIGINAL SIN'.

nothing diblinguishing of her posterity from the brutes ; lot the very same name of livvi,^ ones, or living things, is given from time to time in this Book of Genesis to them ; as in chap. i. 21, 24, 28, ii. 19, vi. 19, vii. 23, viii. 1, and many other places in the Bible. And besides, if by life the quahty of her posterity was not meant, there was nothing in it to distinguish her from Adam ; for thus she was no more the mother of all living, than he was the father of all living ; and she coukl no more properly be called by the name ol life on any such account, than he ; but names are given for distinction. Doubtless Adam took notice of something distinguishing concerning her, that occasioned his giving her this new name. And I think it is exceeding natural to suppose, that as Adam had given her htrfrst name from the manner of her creation^ so he gave her her new name from redemfition, and as it were, ?2£'w creation, through a Redeemer, of her seed; and that he should give her this name from that which comforted him, with respect to the curse tha: Cod had pronounced on him and the earth, as Lamech named Noah, Gen. v. 29, " Saying, This same shall comfort us concerning our work, and toil of otir hands, because of the ground which the Lord hath cursed." Accordingly he gave her this new name, not at her first creation, but immediately after the promise of a R.edeemer, of her seed. See Gen. iii. 15....20.

Now as to the consequence which I infer from Adam's giving his wife this name, on the intimation which God bad given, that Satan should by her seed be overthrown and disappointed, as to his malicious design, in that deed of his which God then spake of, viz. his tempting the woman. Adam infers from it, that great numbers of mankind should be saved, whom he calls the living ; they should be saved from the effects of this malicious design of the old serpent, and from that ruin which he had brought upon them by tempting their first parents to sin ; and so the serpent would be, with respect to them, disappointed and overthrown in his design. But how is any death or ruin, or indeed any calamity at all, brought upon their posterity by Satan's malice in that temptation, if instead of that, all the death and sorrow that was con-

sequent, was the fruit of God's fatherly love, ard not Satan*s malice, and was an instance of God's free and sovereign favor, such favor as Satan could not possibly foresee ? And if multitudes of Eve's posterity are saved, from' either spiritual or temporal death, by a Redeemer, of her seed, how is that any disappointment of Satan's design in tempting our first parents ? How came he to have any such thing in view, as the death of Adam's and Eve's posterity, by tempting them to sin, or any expectation that their death would be the consequence, unless he knew that they were included in the threatening ?

Some have objected against Adam's posterity's being included in the threatening delivered to Adam, that the threatening itself was inconsistent with his having any posterity ; it being that he should die on the day that he sinned.

To this I answer, that the threatening was not inconsistent with his having posterity, on two accounts.

Those words, "In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die," according to the use of such like expressions a« mong the Hebrews, do not signify immediate death, or that the execution shall be within twentyfour hours from the commission of the fact ; nor did God, by those words, limit himself as to the time of executing the threatened punishment, but that was still left to God's pleasure. Such a phrase, according to the idiom of the Hebrew tongue, signifies no more than these two things :

1. A real connexrion between the sin and the punishment. So Ezek. xxxiii. 12, 13. "The righteousness of the righteous shall not deliver him in the day of his transgression. As for the wickedness of the wicked, he shall not fall thereby in the day that he turneth from his wickedness ; neither shall the righteous be able to live in the day that he sinneth; But for his iniquity that he hath committed, he shall die for it." Here it is said, that in the day he sinneth, he shall not be able to live, but he shall die ; not signifying the time when death shall be executed upon him, but the connexion between bis sin and deatii; such a connexion as in our present common use of language is signified by the adverb of time, v:hen s Vol. VI. 2 0

as if one should say, « According to the laws of our nation^ so long as a man behaves himself as a good subject, he may live ; but nvhen he turns rebel, he must die :" Not signifying the hour, day or month in which he must be executed, but only the connexion between his crime and death.

2. Another thing which seems to be signified by such an expression, is, that Adam should be exposed to death for one transgression, without waiting on him to try him the second time. If he eat of that tree, he should immediately fall under condemnation, though afterwards he might abstain ever so strictly. In this respect the words are much of the same force with those words of Solomon to Shimei, 1 Kings ii. 37. " For it shall be that on the day that thou goest out, and passest over the brook Kidron, thou shalt know for certain, that thou shall furely die." Not meaning that he should certainly be executed on that day, but that he should be assuredly liable to death for the first offence, and that he should not have another trial to see whether he would go over the brook Kidron a second time.

And then besides,

II. If the words had implied that Adam should die that very day, within twentyfour or twelve hours, or that moment that he transgressed, yet it will by no means follow, that God obliged himself to execute the punishment m'lis utmost extent on that day. The sentence was in great part executed immediately : He then died spiritually : He lost his innocence and original righteousness, and the favor of God ; a dismal alteration was made in his soul, by the loss of that holy, divine principle, which was in the highest sense the life of the soul. In this he was truly ruined and undone that very day, becoming corrupt, miserable and helpless. And I think it has been shewn that such a spiritual death was one great thing implied ir the threatening. And the alteration then made in his body and external state, was the beginning of temporal death. Grievous, external calamity is called by the name of death in scripture, Exod. x. 17. « Intreat the Lord that he may take away this death." Not only was Adam's soul ruined that day, but his body was ruined : It lost its

he&Mty and vigor, and became a poor, dull, decaying;, dying thing. And besides all this, Adam was that day undone in a more dreadful sense : He immediately fell under the curse of the law, and condemnation to eternal perdition. In the language of scripture, he is dead, that is, in a state of condemnation to death ; even as our author often explains this language in his expo^tion upon Romans. In scripture language, he that believes in Christ, immediately receives life. He passes at that time from death to life, and thenceforward (to use the Apostle John's phrase) « has eternal life abiding in him." But yet he does not then receive eternal life in ita highest completion ; he has but the beginning of it, and receives it in a vastly greater degree at death ; but the proper time for the complete fulness is not till the day of judgment. When the angels sinned, their punishment was immediately executed in a degree ; but their full punishment is not until the end of the world. And there is nothing in God's threat* ening to Adam that bound him to execute his full punishment at once, nor any thing which determines that he should have no posterity. The law or constitution which God established r.nd declared, determined that if he sinned, and had posterity, he and they sheuld die ; but there was no constitution determining concerning the actual being of his posterity in this case ; what posterity he should have, how many, or whether any at all. All these things God liad reserved in his own power : The law and its sanction intermeddled not with the matter.

It may be proper in this place also to take some notice of that objection of Dr. Taylor's, against Adam's being supposed to be a federal head for his posterity, that it gives him greater honor than Christ, as it supposes that all his posterity would have had eternal life by his obedience, if he' had stood ; and so a greater number would have had the benefit of his obedience, than are saved by Christ.* I think a very little consideration is sufficient to shew that there is no

*Fagc 120, &C.S.

weight in this objection ; for the benefit of Christ's merits may nevertheless be vastly beyond that which would have been by the obedience of Adam. For those that are saved by Christ, are not merely advanced to happiness by his merits, but are saved from the infinitely dreadful effects of Adam's sin, and many from immense guilt, pollution and misery, by personal sins ; also brought to a holy and happy state, as it were through infinite obstacles, and are exalted to a far greater degree of dignity, felicity and glory, than would have been due for Adam's obedience, for aught I know, many thousand times so great. And there is enough in the gospel dispensation, clearly to manifest the sufficiency of Christ's merits for such effects in all mankind. And how great the number will be, that shall actually be the subjects of them, or how great a proportion of the whole race, considering the vast success of the gospel, that shall be in that future, extraordinary and glorious season, often spoken of, none can tell. And the honor of these two federal heads arises not so much from what •was proposed to each for his trial, as from their success, and the good actually obtained, and also the manner of obtaining. Christ obtains the benefits men have through him by proper merit of condignity, and a true purchase by an equivalent ; which would not have been the case with Adam, if he had obeyed.

I have now particularly considered the account which Moses gives us in the beginning of the Bible, of our first parents, and God's dealings with them, the constitution he established with them, their transgression, and what followed. And on the whole, if we consider the manner in which God apparently speaks to Adam from time to time ; and particularly, if we consider how plainly and undeniably his posterity are included in the sentence of death pronounced on Adam after his fall, founded on the foregoing threatening ; and consider the curse denounced on the ground for his sake, and for his and his posterity's sorrow : And also consider what is evidently the occasion of his giving his wife the new name of Eve, and his meaning in it, and withal consider apparent fact in constant and universal events, with relation to the state of our first parents*

and their posterity from that time forward, through all ages of the world ; I cannot but think, it must appear to every impartial person, that Moses' account does,-"with sufficient evidence, lead all mankind, to whom his account is communicated, to understand, that God, in his constitution with Adam, dealt with him as a public person, and as the head of the human species, and had respect to his posterity, as included in him : And that this history is given by djvine direction, in the beginning of the first written revelation, to exhibit to our view the origin of the present, sinful, miserable state of mankind, that we might see what that was, which first gave occasion for all those consequent, wonderful dispensations of divine mercy and grace towards mankind, which are the great subject of the scriptures, both of the Old and New Testament: And that these things arp not obscurely and doubtfully pointed forth, but delivered in a plain account of things, which easily and naturally exhibits them to our understandings.

And by what follows in this discourse, we may have, in some measure, opportunity to see how other things in the Holy Scripture agree with what has been now observed from the three first chapters of Genesis.

CHAPTER II.

Observatidiis on other parts of the Holy Scripture:', " chiefLy in the Old Testament, thai prove the doctrine of Original Sin.

ORIGINAL depravity may well be argued, from wickedness being often spoken of in scripture, as a thing belonging to the race of mankind, and as if it were a firofierty of the sfie-cice. So in Psal. xiv. 2, 3. « The Lord looked down from

heaven upon the childrm ofmen^ to see if there were any th^ did understand, and seek God. They are all gone aside ; they are togetlier become filthy : There is none that doeth i^ood ; no, not one." The like we have again, Psal. liii. 2, 3. Dr. Taylor says, p. 104, 105. " The Holy Spirit does not mean this of every individual ; because in the very same psalm, he speaks of some that were righteovis, ver. 5, God h in the generation of the rif^hteous." But how little is this observation to the purpose ? For who ever supposed, that no unrighteous men were ever chanj^ed by divine grace, and afterwards made righteous ? The Psalmist is speaking of what men are as they are the children of men, born of the corrupt human race ; and not as born of God, whereby they come to be the children of God, and of \.\\e generation of the righteous^ The Apostle Paul cites this place in Rom. iii. 10, 11, 12, to prove the universal corruption of mankind ; but yet in the same chapter he supposes these same persons here spoken of as wicked, may become righteous, through the righteousness and grace of God.

So wickedness is spoken of in other places in the Book of Psalms, as a thing that belongs to men, as of the human racCf as sons of men. Thus in Psal. iv. 2. " O ye sons of men, how long will ye turn my glory into shame ? How long will ye love vanity ?" &c. Psal. Ivii. 4. « I lie among them that are set on fire, even the sons ofmeji, whose teeth are spears and arrows, and their tongue a sharp sword." Psal. Iviii. 1,2. « Do ye indeed speak righteousness, O congregation ? Do ye judge* uprightly, 0 ye sons of men ? Yea, in heart ye work wickedness ; ye weigh out the violence of your hands in the earth." Our author, mentioning these places, says p. 105, Note, " There was a strong party in Israel disaffected to David's person and government, and sometimes he chooseth to de-:note them by the sons or children of men." But it would liave been worth his ^vhile to have inquired, Why the Psalmist should choose to denote the wickedest and worst men in Israel by this name ? Why he should choose thus to disgrace «^be human race, as if the corapellation of sons of men most properly belonged to such as were of the vilest character,

tand as if all the sons of men, even every one of them, were of such a character, and none of them did good ; no, not one ? Is it not strange, that the righteous should not be thought worthy to be called sons of men, and ranked with that noble race of beings, who are born into the world wholly right and innocent! It is a good, easy, and natural reason, why he chooscth to call the wicked, sons of men, as a proper name for them, that by being of the sons of men, or of the corrupt, ruined race of mankind, they come by their depravity. And the Psalmist himself leads us to this very reason, Psal, Iviii. at the beginning. " Do ye judge uprightly, 0 ye sons of men ? Yea, in heart ye work wickedness, ye weigh out the violence of your hands. The wicked are estranged from the womb,'* &c. of which I shall speak more by and by.

Agreeable to these places is Prov. xxi. 8. " The way of man is froward and strange ; but as for the pure, his work is right." He that is perverse in his walk, is here called by the name oiman, as distinguished from the pure : Which I think is absolutely unaccountable, if all mankind by nature are pure, and perfectly innocent, and all such as are froward and strange in their ways, therein dejjart from the native purity of all mankind. The words naturally lead us to suppose the contrary ; that depravity and perverseness properly belong t» mankind as they are naturally, and that a being made pure, is by an afterwork, by which some are delivered from native pollution, and distinguished from mankind in general ; which is perfectly agreeable to the representation in Rev. xiv. 4, •where we have an account of a number that iverc not defiled^ but were pure, and followed the Lamb ; of whom it is said, These -were redeemed from among men.

To these things agree Jer. xvii. 5, 9. In ver. 5, it is said, " Cursed is he that trusteth in man** And in ver. 9, this rea-son is given, " The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked ; who can know it ?" What heart is this so wicked and deceitful ? Why, evidently the heart of him, tohom, it was said before, lue must not trust; and that is 7nan. It alters not the case, as to the present argument, whether the deceilfulness of the heart here spoken of, be its deceitfulness

to the man himself, or to others. So Eccl. ix. 3. " Madness is in the heart of the sons ofmen^ while they live." And those words of Christ to Peter, Matth. xvi. 23. " Get thee behind me, Satan, for thou savorest not the things that be of God, but the things that beofnzf/z." Signifying plainly, that to be carnal and vain, and opposite to uhat is spiritual and divine, is •what properly belongs to men in their present state. The same thing is supposed in that of the apostle, 1 Cor. iii. 3. " For ye are yet carnal. For whereas there is among you envying and strife, are ye not carnal, and walk as vicn ?" And that in Hos. vi. 7. " But they like men, have transgressed the covenant." To these places maybe addedMatth.vii.il. " If ye, being evil, know how to give good gifts." Jam. iv. 5. " Do ye think that the scripture saith in vain. The spirit that dioclleth in us, lusteth to envy ?" 1 Pet. iv. 3. '' That he no longer should live the rest of his time in the lusts of men, but to the will of God." Yet above all, that in Job xv. 16. »' How much more abominable and filtliy is man,'whQ drinkcth iniquity like li-ater? Of which more presently.

Now what account can be given of these things, on Dr. Taylor's scheme ? How strange is it, that we should have such descriptions, all over the Bible, of man, and the sons of men I Why should man be so continually spoken of as evil, carnal, perverse, deceitful, and desperately Avicked, if all men are by nature as perfectly innocent, and free from any propensity to evil, as Adam was the first moment of his creation, all made rig/it, as our author would have us understand, Eccl. vii. 29 ? Why, on the contrary, is it not said, at least as often, and with equal reason, that the heart of man ts right and pure ; that the way of man is innocent and holy j and that he who savors true virtue and wisdom, savors the thi?igs that be of men ? Yea, and why might it not as well have been said, The Lord looked doitmfrom heaven on the so7i3 of men, to see if there were any that did tinderstand, and did seek after God ; and they were all right, altogether pure, there was none inclined to do wickedness^ no, not one ?

Of the like import with the texts mentioned are those which represent wickedness as what properly belongs to the

iL'orld ; and that they who are otherwise, are saved from the ivorld, and called out of it. As John vii. 7. " The ivorld cannot hate you ; but me it hateth ; because I testify of it, that the works thereof are evil." Chap,, viii. 23. " Ye are of this world: I am not of this world." Chap. xiv. 17. « The spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive; because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him : But ye know him." Chap. XV. 18, 19. " If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you. If ye were of the ivorld., the world would love its own : But because ye are not ot the world., but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." Rev. xiv. 3, 4. " These are they v/hich were redeemed from the car^/z....redeemed from among men." John xvii. 9. " I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me." Ver. 14. " I have given them thy word ; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world." I Jolm iii. 13. " Marvel not, my brethren, if the wor/i hate you." Chap. iv. 5 " They are of the world, therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them." Chap. v. 19. '• We are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness." It is evident, that in these places, by the world is meant the world of mankind j not the habitation, but the inhabitants : For it is the world spoken of as loving, hating, doing evil works, sfieaking, hearing, 8c c.

It shews the same thing, that wickedness is often spoken of as being man's own, in contradistinction from virtue and holiness So men's lusts are often called their own heart's lusts, and theii' practising wickedness is called walking in their own Avays, walking in their own counsels, in the imagination of their own heart, and in the sight of their own eyes, according to their ovjn devices, &c. These things denote wickedness to be a quality belonging properly to the character and nature of mankind in their present state : As, when Christ would represent that lying is remarkably the character and the very nature of the devil in his present state, he expresses it thus, John viii 4 4. " When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of hi% own : For he is a liar, and the father of it,"

Vol. VI. 2 P

And that wickedness belongs to the nature of mankind m their present state, may be argued from those places M-hich speak of mankind as being wicked in their childhood, or from their childhood. So, that in Prov. xxii. 15. « Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child ; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him." Nothing is more manifest, than that the wise man in this book continually uses the -word folly, or foolishness, for wickedness : And that this is what he means in this place, the words themselves do shew : For the rod of correction is proper to drive away no other foolishness, than that which is of a moral nature. The word rendered (5o?/n(/, signifies, as is observed in Pool^s Syno/isis, a close and firm union. The same word is used in chap, vi. 21. " Bind them continually upon thy heart." And chap. vii. 3. « Bi7id them upon thy fingers, write them upon the table of thine heart.''' To the like purpose is chap. iii. 3, and Deut. xi. 18, where this word is used. The same verb is used, 1 Sam. xviii. I. " The soul oi Jojiathan was kynt (or bound) to the soul of ZJa-rid, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul." But how comes wickedness to be so firmly bound, and strongly-fixed, in the hearts of children, if it be not there naturally ? They having had no time firmly to fix habits of sin, by long custom in actual wickedness, as those that have lived many years in the world.

The same thing is signified in that noted place. Gen. viii. 21. « For the imagination of man's heart is c\i\, from his youth." It alters not the case, whether it be translated for or though the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth, as Dr. Taylor would have it ; still the words suppose it to be so as is said. The word translated youth, signifies the whole of the former part of the age of man, which commences from the beginning of life. The word, in its derivation, has reference to the birth or beginning of existence. It comes from JWigiiar, which signifies to shake off, as a tree shakes off its ripe fruit, or a plant its seed : The birth of children being commonly represented by a tree's yielding fruit, or a plant's yielding seed. So that the word here translated youth, comprehends not only what we in English most

coitimonly call the lime of youth, but also childhood and in-Fancy, and is very often used to signify these latter. A word of the same root is used to signify a yowig child, or a little child, in the following places ; 1 Sam. i. 24, 25, 27 ; 1 Kings iii. 7, and xi. 17 ; 2 Kings ii. 23 ; Job xxxiii. 25 ; Prov. xxii. 6, xxiii. 13, and xxix. 21 ; Isai. x. 19, xi. 6, and lxv.20 ; Hos. xi. L The same word is used to signify an infant, in Exod. 11. 6, and X. 9 ; Judg. xiii. 5, 7, 8, 24 ; 1 Sam. i, 22, and iv. 21 ; 2 Kings v. 14 ; Isai. vii. 16, and viii. 4.

Dr. Taylor says, p. 124, Note, that he " conceives, frojn fhe youth, is a phrase signifying the greatness^ or long duration of a thing." But if by long duration he means any thing else than what is literally expressed, viz. from the beginning of life, he has no reason to conceive %o ; neither has what he offers, so much as the shadow of a reason for his conception. There is no appearance in the words of the two or three texts he mentions, of their meaning any thing else than what is most literally signified. And it is certain, that what he suggests is not the ordinary import of such a phrase among the Hebrews : But that thereby is meant from the beginning, or early time of life, or existence ; as may be seen in the places following, where the same word in the Hebrew is used, as in this place in the 8th of Genesis. 1 Sam. xii. 2. '* I am old, and gray headed...and I have walked before you from my child' hood unto this day ;" where the original word is the same, Psal. Ixxi. 5, 6. " Thou art my trusty/o;H vnj youth : By thee have I been holden up from the womb. Thou art he that took me out of my mother's bowels," Ytw 17,18. " O God, thou hast taught me from my youth ; and hitherto have I declared thy wondrous works : Now also, when I am old and gray headed, forsake me not." Psal. cxxlx. 1, 2. " Many a time have they afflicted me from viy youth, may Israel now say : Many a time have they afflicted me/rc7?2 my youth ; yet have they not prevailed against me." Isai. xlvii. 12. " Stand now with the multitude of thy sorceries, wherein thou hast Uhm-e,^, from thy youth." So ver. 15, and 2 Sam. xix. 7. -' That will be worse unto thee, than all the evil that befel thee,/rom ;//7/i/oz/M until now." Jer. iii. 24, 25. "Shame

hath devoured the labor of our fathers,/ro7n our youth. Wo have sinned against the Lord our God/rom our youth, even tq this day." So Gen. xlvi. 34 ; Job xxxi. 18 ; Jer. xxxii. 30, and xlviii. 11 ; Ezek. iv. 14 ; Zech. xiii. 5.

And it is to be observed, tliat according to the manner of the Hebrew language, when it is said, such a thing has been from youth, or iho. first part of existence, the phrase is to be understood as including that first time of existence. So, Josh. vi. 21. « They utterly destroyed all, from the young to the old," (so it is in the Hebrew) i. e. including both. So Gen. xix. 4, and Esther iii. IS.

And as mankind are represented in scripture, as being of a wicked heart from their youth, so in other places they are spoken of as being thus/rom the ivomb. Psal. Iviii. 3. « The wicked are estranged/ro;;? the womb : They go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies." It is observable, that the Psalmist mentions this as what belongs to the wicked, as the sons of men : For, these are the preceding words : " Do ye judge uprightly, O j/e sons o/'w(?7i.? Yea, in heart ye work wickedness." (A phrase of the like import with that in Gen. viii. 21. The imasmation, or operation, as it might have been rendered, of his heart is evil.) Then it follows. The wicked are estrant^ed from ihe womb, £ic. The next verse is. Their poison is like the poison of a ser/ieiit. It is so remarkably, as the very nature of a serpent is poison : Serpents are poison-bus as soon as they come into the world : They derive a poisonous nature by their generation. Dr. Taylor, p. 134, 135, says, " It is evident that this is a scriptural figurative way of aggravating wickedness on the one hand, and of signifying early and settled halnts of virtue on the other, to speak of it a^ being/rom the womb." And as a probable instance of the latter, he cites that in Isai. xlix. 1. " The Lord hath called me from the nuomb ; from the bowels of my mother he made mention of !viy name.' But I apprehend, that in order to seeing this to be cither evident or probable, a man must have eyes peculiarly afTccted. I humbly conceive that such phrases as that in the 49th of Isaiah, of God's calling the prophet from the tvotnb) arc evidi-ntly not of the import which he sup-

poses ; but mean truly from the beginning of existence, and are manifestly of like signification with that which is said of the prophet Jeremiah, Jer. i. 5. " Before I formed thee in the belly, I knew thee : Before thou earnest out of the womb, I sanctified thee, and ordained thee a prophet unto the nations." Which surely means something else besides a high degree of virtue : It plainly signifies that he was, from his first existence, set apart by God for a prophet. And it would be as unreasonable to understand it otherwise, as to suppose the angel meant any other than that Samson was set apart to be a Nazarite from the beginning of his life, when he says to his mother, " Behold, thou shalt conceive and bear a son : And now drink no wine, nor strong drink, Sec. For the child shall be a Nazaiile to God,//o.vz the nvombf to the day of his death." By these instances it is plain, that the phrase, frcm the voojub^ as the other, from the youth., as used in scripture, properly signifies from the beginning of life.

Very remarkable is that place. Job xv. 14, 15, 15. <' What is man, that he should be clean ? And he that is born of a woman, that he should be righteous ? Behold, he putteth no trust in his saints: Yea, the heavens are not clean in his sight ? How much more abominable and filthy is man, which drinketh iniquity like watei- ?" And no less remarkable is our author's method of managing it. The sixteenth verse expresses an exceeding degree of wickedness, in as plain and emphatical terms, almost, as can be invented ; every word representing this in the strongest manner : " How much more abominable and filthy is man, that drinketh iniquity like water ?" I cannot now n-oollect where we have a sentence equal to it in the whole Bible, for an emphatical, lively and strong representation of great wickedness of heart. Any one of the words, as such words are used in scripture, would represent great wickedness : If it had been only said, " How much more abominable is man ?" Or, " How much more filthy is man V Or, " Man that drinketh iniquity." But all these are accumulated with the addition of....///re ivatei' ,.:Al\e further to represent the boldness or rreediness of men

7Tien in wickedness ; though iniquity be the most deadly poison, yet men drink it as boldly as they drink water, are as familiar with it as with their common drink, and drink it with like greediness, as he that is thirsty drinks water. That boldness aiid eagerness in persecuting the saints, by which the great degree of the depravity of man's heart often appears, is represented thus, Psal. xiv. 4. " Have the workers of iniquity no knowledge, who eat up my people as they cat bread?*' And the greatest eagerness of thirst is represented by thirsting as an animal thirsts after water, Psalm xlii. 1.

Now let us see the soft, easy, light manner, in which Dr. Taylor treats this place, p. 143. " How much more abominable and filthy is man, in comfiarison of the divine purity^ who drinketh iniquity like water ? Who is attended with so many sensual appetites, and so apt to indulge them. You see the argument, man, in his present weak and fleshly state, cannot be clean before God. AVhy so ? Because he is conceived and born in sin, by reason of Adam's sin : No such thing. But because, if the purest creatures are not pure, in comjiari-son of God, much less a being subject to so many infmiities, as a mortal man. Which is a demonstration to me, not only that Job and his friends did not intend to establish the doctrine we are now examining, but that they were Avholly strangers to it." Thus this author endeavors to reconcile this text with his doctrine of the perfect, native innocence of mankind ; in which we have a notable specimen of his demonstrations, as well as of that great impartiality and fairness in examining and expounding the scripture, which he makes so often a profession of.

In this place we are not only told how wicked man's heart is, but also how men come by such wickedness ; even by being of the race of mankind, by ordinary generation. " What is man, that he shoidd be clean ? And he that is born of a woman, that he should be righteous ?" Our author, pages 141, 142, represents man's being born of a woman, as a periphrasis, to signify man ; and that there is no design in the words to give a reason, why man is not clean and righteous. But the case is most evidently otherwise, if we may interpret

the Book of Job by itself : It is most plain, that man's being born of a woman is given as a reason of his not being clean, chap. xiv. 14. "Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean ?" Job is speaking there expressly of man's being born of a woman, as appears in verse 1. And here hov/ plain is it, that this is given as a reason of man's not being clean ? Concerning this Dr. Taylor says, " That this has no respect to any moral uncleanness, but only common frailty," See. But how evidently is this also otherwise ? When that uncleanness, which a man has by being born of a woman, is expressly explained of unrighteousness, in the next chapter at verse 14. « What is man that he should be clean ? And he that is born of a woman, that he should be righteous ?" And also in chap. xsv. 4. " How then can man be justified with God ? And how can he be clean that is born of a woman ?" It is a moral cleanness Bikiad is speaking of, which a man needs in order to being justified. His design is, to convince Job of his moral impurity, and from thence of God's righteousness in his severe judgments upon him ; and not of his natural frailty.

And without, doubt, David has respect to this same way of derivation of wickedness of heart, when he says, Psalm li. 5. *' Behold, I was shapcn in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me." It alters not the case as to the argument we are upon, whether the word translated cojiccive, signifies conceive, or nurse ; which latter our author takes so much pains to prove : For when he has done all, ha speaks of it as a just translation of the words to render them thus : " I was born in iniquity, and in sin did my mother nurse me," page 135. If it is owned that man is horn in sin, it is not worth the while to dispute whether it is expressly asserted that he is conceived in sin. But Dr. Taylor after his manner insists, that such expressions, as being born in sin, being transgressors from the womb, and the like, are only phrases figuratively to denote aggravation and high degree of wickedness. But the contrary has been already demonstrated, from many plain scripture instances. Nor is one instance produced, in which there is any evidence that

S12 ORIGINAL SIN.

such a phrase is used in such a manner. A poetical sen' tence out of Virgil's ^£neids, has here been produced, and made much ofb3'some, as parallel with this, in what Dido iays to iEneas in these lines :

Nee tibi diva parens, generis ncc Dardanus auctor, Perfide : Sed duris genuit te cau'ibus horrens Caucasus, hyrcanxque admorunt ubera tygres.

Jn which she tells TEneas, that not a goddess was his motherj nor Anchises his father ; but that he had been brought forth by a horrid, rocky mountain, and nursed at the dugs of ty-gers, to represent the greatness of his cruelty to her. But how unlike and unparallel is this ? Nothing could be more natural than for a woman, overpowered with the passion of love, and distracted with raging jealousy and disappointment, thinking herself treated with brutish perfidy and cruelty, by a lover, wh.ose highest fame had been his being the son of a goddess, to aggravate his inhumanity and hardheartedness with this, that his behavior was not worthy the son of a goddess, nor becoming one whose father was an illustrious prince i and that he acted more as if he had been brought forth by hard, unrelenting rocks, and had sucked the dugs of tygers. But what is there in the case of David parallel, or at all in like manner leading him to speak of himself as born in sin, in any such sense ? He is not speaking himself, nor any one else speaking to him, of any excellent and divine father and mother, that he was born of; nor is there any appearance of his aggravating his sin by its being unworthy of his high birth. There is nothing else visible in David's case, to lead him to take notice of his being born in sin, but only his having such experience of the continuance and power of indwelling sin, after so long a time, and so many great means to engage him to holiness ; which shewed that sin was inbred, and in his very naiure.

Dr. Taylor often objects to these and other texts, brought by divines to prove Original Sin, that there is no mention made in them of Adam, nor of bis sin. He cries out," Here

ts hot the least mention or intimation of Adam, or any ill effects of his sin upon us Here is not one Word, nor the least

hint of Adam, or any consequences of his sin, &c. &c.* He says,t " If Job and his friends had known and believed the doctrine of a corrupt nature, derived from Adam's sin only, they ought in reason and truth to have given this as the true and only reason of the human imperfection and uncleanness they mention." But these objections and exclamations are made no less impertinently, than they are frequently. It is no more a proof, that corruption of nature did not come by Adam*s sin, because many times when it is mentioned, Ad-am*s sin is not expressly mentioned as the cause of it, than that death did not come by Adam's sin (as Dr. Taylor says it did) because though death, as incident to mankind, is mentioned so often in the Old Testament, and by our Saviour in his discourses, yet Adam's sin is not once expressly mentioned, after the three first chapters of Genesis, any where in all the Old Testament, or tlie four evangelists, as the occasion of it.

What Christian has there ever been, that believed the moral corruption of the nature of mankind, who ever doubted that it came that way, which the apostle speaks of, when he says, '< Bij one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin" ? Nor indeed have they any more reason to doubt of it, than to doubt of the whole history of our first parents, because Adam's name is so rarely mentioned, on any occasion in scripture, after that first account of him, and Eve's never at all; and because we have no more any express mention of the particular m.anner, in which m.ankind were first brought into being, either with respect to the creation of Adam or Eve. It is sufficient, that the abiding, most visible effects of these things, remain in the view of mankind in all ages, and are often spoken of in scripture ; and that the particular manner of their being introduced, is once plainly set forth in the beginning of the Bible, in that history which gives us an ac-

•Page 5, 64, q6, 97, 98, xoe, 108, ai2, ii8, lao, laa, 127, teg, igf, 142,143,149,152,155,229. +142.

Vol. VT. 2Q -

count of the origin of all things. And doubtless it was eX' pectcd, by the great autlwr of the Bible, that the account in the three first chapters of Genesis should be taken as a plain account of the introduction of both natural and moral evil into the world, as it has been shewn to be so indeed. The history of Adam's sin, with its circumstances, God's threatening, and the sentence pronounced upon him after his transgres-•iion, and the immediate consequences, consisting in so vast an alteration in his state, and the state of the world, which abides still, with respect to all his posterity, do most directly and suf-ikiently lead to an understanding of the rise of calamity, sin. and death, in this sinful, miserable world.

It is fit we all should know, that it does not become us ta teil the Most High, how often he shall particularly explain and give the reason of any doctrine which he teaches, in order to our believing what he says. If he has at all given uS' evidence that it is a doctrine agreeable to his mind, it becomes us to receive it with full credit and submission ; and not sullenly lo reject it, because our notions and humors are. not suited in the manner, and number of times, of his parlic-ulavly explaining it to us. How often is pardon of sins promised in the Old Testament to repenting and returning sinners ? How many hundred times is God's special favor there promised to the sincerely righteous, without any express mention of these benefits being through Christ ? Would it therefore be becoming us to say, that, inasmuch as our dependence on Christ for these benefits, is a doctrine, which, if true, is of such importance, God ought expressly to have mentioned Christ's merits as the reason and ground of the b'^nefits, if lie knew they were the ground of them, and should l»«ve plainly declared it sooner, and more frequently, if ever he expected wc should believe him, when he did tell us of it: How often is vengeance and misery threatened in the Old Testament to the wicked, without any clear and express sig-i)ificalion of any such thing intended, as that everlasting fire, where there is wailinjj and gnashing of teeth, in another world, which Christ so often speaks of as the punishment appointed for all the wicked ? Would it now become a Christ-

ian, to object and say, that if God really meant any such thing, he ought in reason and triith to have declared it plainly and fully ; and not to have been so silent about a matter of such vast importance to all mankind, for four thousand years together.

CHAPTER III.

Ohservatidns on various other Places of Scripture, principally of the New Testament, proving the Doctrine of Original Siu.

SECTION I.

Observations on John iii. 6, in connexion with some other passages in thc'jVenv Testament.

THOSE words of Christ, giving a reason to Nicode-rnus, why we must be born again, Jolin iii. 6, " That which is born of the flesh, is flesh ; and that which is born of the spirit, is spirit; have not, without good reason, been produced by divines, as a proof of the doctrine of original sin ; supposing, that by Jlesh here is meant the human nature in a debased and corrujit state. Yet Dr. Taylor, p. 144, thus explains these words, That '■johich is born of the Jiesh^ is Jlesh : " That which is born by natural descent and propagation, is a man, consisting of body and soul, or the mere constitution and powers of a man in their natural stale." But the constant use of these terms, Jlesh and spirit^ in other parts of the New Testament, v/hen thus set in opposition one to another,

and the latter said to be produced by the Spirit of God, j^j. here, and when speaking of the same thing, which Christ is here speaking of to Nicodemus, viz. the requisite qualifica"-tions to salvation, will fully vindicate the sense of cur divines. Thus in the 7th and 8th chapters of Romans, where these terms^es/i and sfiirit (craff and wwu^a) are abundantly repeated, and set in opposition, as here. So, chap. vii. 14, The law is spiritual (oi»tofx«T»!t^) but I am carnal {cafy-u^) sold under sin. He cannot only mean, " I am a man, consisting of body and soul, and having the powers of a man." Ver. 18. « I know that in me, that is in rayjles/t, dwelleth no good thing." He does not mean to condemn his frame, as consisting of body and soul; and to assert, that in his human constitution, with the powers of a many dwells no good thing. And when he says in the last verse of the chapter, " With the mind, I myself serve the law of God, but with the^fsA, the law of sin ;" he cannot mean, " I myself serve the law of God ; but with -my innocent human constitution, as having the powers of a man, / aerve the law ofsin.'* And when he says in the next words in the beginning of the 8lh chapter, " There is no condemnation to them, that walk not after ihojlesh, but after the s/iiri! ;" and ver. 4, " The righteousness of the law is fulfilled in us, ■who walk not after the flesh ;" he cannot mean, " There is[ no condemnation to them that walk not according to the powers of a man" Sec. And when he says, ver. 5 and 6, <' They that are after \.\\t flesh, do mind the things of \\\c flesh ; and to be carnally minded is death ;" he does not intend, " They that are according \.o Xhc human constitution, and ihe powers of a man, do mind the things of the human constitution and powers ; and to mind these, is death." And when he says, ver. 7 and 8, " The carnal {pvjieshly) mind is enmity against God, and is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be ; so that they that ave in xhejiesh, car.not please Gcd ;" he cannot mean, that, <■'■ to mind the things which are agreeable to \.\iiC powers and constitution of a man" (who, as our author says, is constituted or made right) " js enmity against God ; and that a mind which is agreeable to this right human constitution, as God hath made it, is not subject to the law of

ORIGINAL SIN. Air

Cod, nor indeed can be ; and that they who are according to fluch a constitution, cannot please God." And when it is said, ver. 9, « Ye are not in the Jlesh, but in the spirit;" the apostle cannot mean, " Ye are not in the human nature, as consti^ tuted of body and soul, and with the fio'ivers of a man*'' It is most manifest, that by x\\& flesh here, the apostle means some nature that is corrupt, and of an evil tendency, and directly opposite to the law, and holy nature of God ; so that to be, and walk according to it, and to have a mind conformed to it, IS to be an utter enemy to God and his law, in a perfect inconsistence with being subject to God, and pleasing God ; and in a sure and infallible tendency to death, and utter destruction. And it is plain, that here by being and walking after, or according to ^^^& flesh, is meant the same tiling as being and talking according to a corrupt and sinful nature ; and to be and walk according to the sfxirit, is to be and walk according to a holy and divine nature, or principle : And to be carnally minded, is the same as being viciously and corruptly minded ; and to be sftiritually minded, is to be of a virtuous and holy disposition,

When Christ says, John iii. 6. « That which is born of the feshj is fesh" he represents the fesh not merely as a quality ; for it would be incongruous, to speak of a quality as a thing born : It is a person, or man, that is born. Therefore man, as in his whole nature corrupt, is called flesh: "Which is agreeable to other scripture representations, where the corrupt nature is called the old man, the body of sin, and the body of death. Agreeable to tliis are those representations in the 7th and 8th chapters of Romans : Thtvefesh is figuratively represented as a person, according to the apostle's manner, observed by Mr. Locke, and after him by Dr. Taylor, who takes notice, that the apostle, in the 6th and 7th of Romans, represents sin as a person ; and that he figuratively distinguishes in himself two persons, speaking of flesh as his person. For I know that in me, that is in my flesh, dwelleth no good thing. And it may be observed, that in the 8th chapter he still continues tliis representation, speaking of t.he fcsh as a person: And accordingly in the 6th and 7th

S18 , ORIGINAL SIN.

verses, speaks of the. mind of the Jlcsh, Ogon;//* ^rapx®-, and of the mind of the spirit, fl>fo)}^a •cr»£Vf<aT©-; as if the fesh and ffiirit were two opposite persons, each having a mind contrary to the mind of the other. Dr. Taylor interprets this 7nind of the flesh, and viind of the s/iirit, as though the Jlesh and the sftirit Avere here spoken of as the different objects, about which the mind spoken of is conversant. Which is plainly beside the apostle's sense ; who speaks of the Cesh and spirit as the subjects and agents, in which the mind spoken of is ; and not the objects about which it acts. We have the same phrase again, ver. 27. He that scarcheth the hearts, knoweth what is the mind of the spirit, *gotT;/Aa 'ssivjt/.xT©^ ; the mind of the spiritual nature in the saints being the same with the mind of the Spirit of God himself, who imparts and actuates that spiritual nature ; here the spirit is the subject and agent, and not the object. The same apostle in like manner uses the word, vav, in Col. ii. 18. Vainlij puffed up by his fleshly mind, ccjo is va<^ 75!5 cci^x.©^ avra, by the mind of his fesh. And this agent so often called fesh, represented by the aposlle, as altogether evil, without any good thing dwelling in it, or belonging to it; yea, perfectly contrary to God and his law, and tending only to death and ruin, and directly opposite to the spirit, is "vvhat Christ speaks of to Nicodemus as born in the first birth, as giving a reason why there is a necessity pf a new pirth, in order to a better production.

One thing is particularly observable in that discourse ot the apostle, in the 7th and 8th of Romans, in which he so often uses the term fcsh, as opposite to spirit, which, as well as many other things in his discourse, makes it plain, that by fiesh he means something in itself corrupt and sinful, and that is, that he expressly calls it sinful fesh, Rom. yiii. 0. It is manifest, that by si?2ful flesh he means the same thing with that flesh spoken of in the immediately foregoing and following words, and in all the context: And that when it is said, Christ was made in the likeness of sinful flesh, the expression is equipollent with those that speak of Christ as made sin, and made a curst' for 7.'.?,

Flesh and sfiirit are opposed to one another in Gal. v. ia the same manner as in the 8th of Romans : And there, hyfe&h cannot be meant only the human nature of body and souly or the mere cojistitution andfionversofaman, as in its natural state, innocent and right. In the 16th ver. the apostle says,'' Walk in the spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lusts of the fcsh :" Where the fiesh is spoken of as a thing- of an evil inclination, desire or lust. But this is more strongly signified in the next words : " For \.\\Qjlesh lusteth against the sfiirit^ and the sfiirit against ihejksh ; and these are contrary the one to the other." What could have been said more plainly, to shew that \\ hat the apostle means by Jiesh, is something very evil in its nature, and an irreconcileable enemy to all goodness ? And it may be observed, that in these words, and those that follow, the apostle still figuratively represents ihe Jlesh as a person or" agent, desiring, acting, having lusts, and perforniing works. And by works o^thefesh, and fiuits of the spirit, which are. opposed to each other, from ver. 19, to the end, are plainly meant the same as works of a sinful nature, and fruits of vc holy, renewed nature. Now the works of the Jiesh aic manifest, which are these : Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, Avitchcraft, haired, variance, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, Sec. But the fruit of the s/tirit is love, joy, peace, long suffering, genileness, goothiess, &c. The apostle, by Jiesh, does not i«ean any thing that is innocent and good in itself, that only needs to be restrained, and kept in proper bounds ; but something altogether evil, which is to be destroyed, and not merely restrained. 1 Cor. v. 5. « To deliver such an one to Satan, for the destruction of the flesh. We must have no mercy on it; we cannot be too cruel to it ; it must even be crucifed." Gal. v. 24. " They that arc Christ's, have crucified the fc&h, with the aft'cctions and lusts."

The Apostle John, the same apostle that writes the account of what Christ said to Nicodemus, by the sjiij-it means the same thing as a new, divine, and holy nature, exerting itself in a principle of divine love, which is the sum of all Christian holiness. 1 John iii. 23, 24. « And tliai. we should

love one another, as he gave us commatjdment; and hie ttiat fceepeth his commandnicnis, dwelleth in him, and he in hiiti: And hereby we know that ht abideth in us, by the sfiirit thai he hath given us." With chap. iv. 12, 13. « If we love one another, Cod dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us : Hereby know we, that we dwell in him, because he kath given us of his fifurit." The spiritual principle in us being as it were a communication of the spirit of God to us.

And as by mnv^x is meant a holy nature, so by the epithet, 'mnv(/.ot'riy.^, f^piritnal^ is meant the same as truly virtuous and holy. Gai. vi. 1. " Ye that are spiritual^ restore such an one in the spirit of m.cekness.'* The apostle refers to what he had just said, in the end of the foregoing chapter, where he had mentioned jneekness, as a fruit of the sfiirit. And so by canml^ or feshly^ aa.^mx.'^, is meant the same as sinful. Rom. vii. 14. " The law is spiritual (i, e. holy) but I am carnal, sold under sin."

And it is evident, that by fesh^ as the word is used in the New Testament, and opposed to s/.-tnV, when speaking of the qualincations for eternal salvation, is not meant only what is i^ow vnlf^arly called the dris of the Jlesh, consisting in inordinate appetites of the body, and their indulgence ; but the whole body of sin, implying those lusts that are most subtle, and furthest from any relation to the body ; such as ^Sde, malice, envy, &c. When the works of the flesh are enumerated, Gal. v. 19, 20, 21, they are vices of the latter kind chiefly, that arc mentioned; idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, sfife, seditions, heresies, envyings. So, pride of heart is the effect or operation of the/fsA. Col. ii. 18. » Vainly puffed up by hisfeshly mind:" In the Greek, by the mind of Che fesh. So, pride, envying, strife and division, are spoken of as works of Ihe flesh. 1 Cor. iii. 3. 4. " For ye arc yet carnal [caetuMi, fleshly.) For whereas there is envying, and strife, and division, are ye net carnal.^ and walk as men ? For while one saith, 1 am of Paul, and another, I am of Jfiollosi, are ye not carnal ?" Such kind of lusts do not depend on the body, or external senses ; for the devil himscli

has ihem in the hig;hest degree, who has not, nor ever had, my body or external senses to gratify.

Here, if it should be inquired, how corruption or depravity in general, or the nature of man as corrupt and sinful, came to be cMad Jlesh ; and not only that corruption which consists in inordinate bodily appetites, I think, what the apostle says in the last cited place, .^re ye not carnal, and walk as ■men ? Leads us to the trufe reason. It is because a corrupt and sinful nature is what properly belongs to mankind, or the race of Adam, as they are in themselves, and as they are by nature. The \sKi\dji('^h is often used in both Old Testament and New, to signify mankind in their present state. To enumerate all the places, would be very tedious ; I shall therefore only mention a few places in the New Testament. Matth. xxiv. 22. " Except those days should be shortened, no Jlesh should be saved." Luke iii. 6. " h\\ Jlesh shall see the salvation of God." John xvii. 2. <« Thou hast given him power over all Jlesh." See also Acts ii. 17, Rom. iii. 20, 1 Cor. i. 29, Gal. ii. 16. Man's nature, being left to itself, forsaken of the Spirit of God, as it was when man fell, and consequently forsaken of divine and holy principles, of itself became exceeding corrupt, utterly depraved and ruined : And so the word Jlesh, which signifies man, came to be used to signify man as he is in himself^ in his natural state, debased, corrupt and ruined : And on the other hand, the word siiirit came to be used to signify a divine and holy principle, or new nature ; because that is not ojman, but oJGod, by the indwelling and vital influence of his Sfiirit. And thus to be cornifit, and to be carnal, ovfeshly., and to walk as men^ are the same thing with the apostle. And so in other parts of the scripture, to savor the things that be ojmen, and to savor things which are corrupt, are the same ; and sons oJmen, and wicked men, also are the same, as was observed before. And on the other hand, to saxwr the things that be of God, and to receive th^ things ojthe Sfiirit oj God, are phrases that signify as much as relishing and embracing true holiness or divine virtue.

All these things confirm what we have supposed to be Christ's meaning, in saying, " That which is born of the.

Vol. VL 3R

flesh, is flesh ; and that which is born of the spirit, is spirit."" His speech implies, that what is born in the first birth of man, is nothing but man as he is of himself, without any thing divine in him ; depraved, debased, sinful, ruined man, utterly \infit to enter into the kingdom of God, and incapable of the spiritual, divine happiness of that kingdom : But that which is born in the new birth, of the Spirit of God, is a spiritual principle, and holy and divine nature, meet for the divine and heavenly kingdom. It is a confirmation that this is the true meaning, that it is not only evidently agreeable to the constant language of the Spirit of Christ in the New Testament; but the words understood in this sense, contain the proper and true reason, Avhy a man must be born again, in order to enter into the kingdom of God ; the reason that is given every where in other parts of the scripture for the necessity of a renovation, a change of mind, a new heart, 8cc. in order to nalvation : To give a reason of which to Nicodemus, is plainly Christ's design in the words which have been insisted on.

Before I proceed, I would observe one thing as a corolla^ ry from what has been said.

CoROLL. Ifbyfiesh and spirit, when spoken of in the New Testament, and opposed to each other, in discourses on the necessary qualifications for salvation, we are to understand what has been now supposed, it will not only follow, lliat men by nature are corrupt, but nvhoUy corrufit, without any good thing. If by flesh is meant man's nature, as he receives it in his first birth, then therein dwelkth no good thing ; as appears by Rom. vii. 18. It is wholly opposite to God, and to subjection to his law, as appears by Rom. viii. 7, 8. It is directly contrary to true holiness, and wholly opposes it, and holiness is opposite to that ; as appears by Gal. v. 17. So long as men are in their natural state, they not only have no good thing, but it is impossible they should have or do any-good thing ; as appears by Rom. viii. 8. There is nothing in their nature, as they have it by the first birth, whence should arise any true subjection to God; as appears by Rom. \iii. 7. If there were any thing truly good in the Jlesh, or in man's nature, or natural disposition, under a moral view, then

it should only be amended ; but the scripture represents as though we were to be enemies to it, and were to seek nothing short of its entire destruction, as has been observed. And elsewhere the apostle directs not to the amending of the old man, hut fiutting it off, and putting on the new man ; and seeks not to have the body of death made better, but to be delivered from it, and says, " That if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature (which doubtless means the same as a man new bom) old things are (not amended) but passed away, and all things are become new."

But this will be further evident, if we particularly consider the apostle's discourse in the latter part of the second chapter of 1 Cor. and the beginning of the third. There the apostle speaks of the natural man, and the sjiiritual man ; where nat--ural and spiritual are opposed just in the same manner, as I have observed carnal ^nd s/iiritual oiien are." In chap. ii. 14, 15, he says, « The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God : For they arc foolishness unto him ; neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual, judgeth all things." And not only does the apostle here oppose natural and spiritual, just as he elsewhere does carnal and sjtiritua/, but his following discourse evidently shews, that he meani; (he very same distinction, the same two distinct and opposite things. For immediately on his thus speaking of the difference between the natural and the spiritual man, he turns to the Corinthians, in the first words of the next chapter, connected witlj this, and says, " And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto cariial." Referring manifestly to what he had been saying, in the immediately preceding discourse, about spiritual and natural men, and evidently using the word car72al, as synonymous with natural. By which it is put out of all reasonable dispute, that the apostle by natural men means the same as men in that carnal, sinful state, that they are in by their first birth ; notwithstanding all the glosses and criticisms, by which modern writers have endeavored to palm upon us another sense of this phrase ; and so to deprive us of the clear instruction the apostle gives in that 14th verse^

concerning the sinful, miserable slate of man by nature. Dr Taylor says, by ■^vx}it'^, is meant the aninial man., the man who maketh sense and appetite the law of his action. If he aims to limit the meaning of the word to external sense, and bodily appetite, his meaning is certainly not the apostle's. For the apostle in his sense includes the more spiritual vices of envy, strife, 8cc. as appears by the four first verses of the next chapter ; where, as I have observed, he substitutes the word carnal in the place of 4'f%«>'^« So the Apostle Jude uses the word in like manner, opposing it to sfiiritiial, or /mv' ing the s/iirit, \er. 19. " These are they that separate themselves, sensual, ('^vx,moi) not having the spirit." The vices he had been just speaking of, Avere chiefly of the more spiritual kind. Ver. 16. " These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their ovsrn lusts ; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men-s persons in admiration, because of advantage." The vices mentioned are much of the same kind with those of the Corinthians, for which he calls them carnal^ envying, strife and divisions, and saying, lam of Paul, and / of Jiiollos ; and being fniffed ufifor one against another. We have the same word again. Jam. iii. 14, 15. « If ye have bitter envying and strife, glory not, and lie not against the truth : This wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly, sensual (j^vx^nri) and devilish ;" where also the vices the apostle speaks of are of the more spiritual kind.

So that on the whole, there is sufficient reason to understand the apostle, when he speaks of the natural man in that 1 Cor. ii. 14, as meaning man in his native, corrupt state. And his words represent him as totally corrupt, wholly a stranger and enemy to true virtue or holiness, and things appertaining to it, which it appears are commonly intended in the New Testament by things sfiiritual, and are doubtless here meant by things of the Sfiirit of God. These words also represent that it is impossible man should be otherwise, while in his natural state. The expressions are very strong : The natural man reccivcth not the things of the Spirit of God, is not susceptible of things of that kind, neither can he know them, can have no true sense or relish of them, or notion of iheir

f ca'l nature and true excellency, because theij are sfiiritually discerned : They are not discerned by means of any principle in nature, but altogether by a principle that is divine, something introduced by the grace of God's Holy Spirit, •which is above all that is natural. The words are in a considerable degree parallel with those of our Saviour, John xiv, 16, 17. « He shall give you the Spirit of Truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither know-eth him ; but ye know him, for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you."

SECTION XL

Observations on Romans iii. 9....24.

IF the scriptures represent all mankind as wicked in their Srst state, before they are made partakers of the benefits of Christ's redemption, then they are wicked by nature ; for doubtless men's first state is their native state, or the state they come into the world in. But the scriptures do thus represent all mankind.

Before I mention particular texts to this purpose, I would observe that it alters not the case as to the argument in hand, whether we suppose these texts speak directly of infants, or only of such as are capable of some understanding, so as to understand something of their own duty and state. For if it be so with all mankind, that as soon as ever they are capable of reflecting and knowing their own moral state, tliey find themselves wicked, this proves that they are wicked by nature ; either born wicked, or born with an infallible disposition to be wicked as soon as possible, if there be any differ-

ence between these, and either of tliem will prove men to bt born exceedingly depraved. I have before proved, that a native propensity to sin certainly follows from many things said in the scripture of mankind ; but what I intend now, is something more direct, to prove by direct sci-ipture testimony, that all mankind, in their first state, are really of a wicked character.

To this purpose is exceeding full, express, and abundant that passage of the apostle, in Rom. iii. beginning with the 9th verse to the end of the 24th ; which I shall set down at large, distinguishing the universal terms which are here so often repeated, by a distinct character. The apostle, having in the first chapter, verse 16, 17, laid down his proposition, that none can be saved in any other way than through the righteousness of God, by faith in Jesus Christ, proceeds to prove this point, by shewing particularly that all arc in themselves wicked, and without any righteousness of their own. rirst, he insists on the wickedness of the Gentiles, in the first chapter, and next, on the wickedness of the Jews, in the second chapter. And then in this place, he comes to sum up the matter, and draw the conclusion in the words following : " What then, are we better than they ? No, in nowise ; for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin ; as it is written, There is nojie righteous, no, not 07ie ; there is none that understandeih ; there is none that seeketh after God ; they are all gone out of the way ; they are together become unprofitable ; there is none that doth good, no, not owe. Their throat is an open sepulchre ; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips ; whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness; their feet are swift to shed blood ; destruction and misery are in their ways, and the way of peace they have not known ; there is no fear of God before their eyes. Now avc know that whatsoever things the law sailh, it saith to them that are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight ; for by the law is the know!-

edge of sin. But now the righteousness of God vathout the law, is manifest, being witnessed by the law and the prophets ; even the righteousness of God, which is by faith of Jesus Christ, unto all, and upon all them that believe ; for there is no difference. For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God. Being justified freely by his grace, through the redemption which is in Jesus Christ."

Here the thing which I would prove, viz. that mankind in their first state, before they are interested in the benefits of Christ's redemption, are universally wicked, is declared with the utmost possible fulness and precision. So that if here this matter be not set forth plainly, expressly, and fully, it must be because no words can do it, and it is not in the power of language, or any manner of terms and phrases, however contrived and heaped up one upon another, determinately to signify any such thing.

Ur. Taylor, to take off" the force of the v/hole, would have us to understand, pages 104...107, that these passages, quoted from the Psalms, and other parts of the Old Testament, do not speak of all mankind, nor of all the Jews ; but only of them of whom they were trtie. He observes, there were many that were innocent and righteous ; though there were also many, a strong party, that were wicked, corrupt, Sec. of whom these texts were to be understood. Concerning which I would observe the following things :

1. According to this, the universality of the terms that are found in these places, which the apostle cites from the Old Testament, to prove that all the world, both Jews and Gentiles, are under sin, is nothing to his purpose. The apostle uses universal terms in his proposition, and in his conclusion, that all are under sin, that every mouth is stopped, all the world guilty....that by the deeds of the law no fcsh can be justified. And he chooses out a number of universal sayings or clauses out of the Old Testament, to confirm this universality ; as, " There is none righteous, no, not one : They are all gone out of the way : There is none that understand-eth," &c. But yet the universality of these expressions is nothing to this purpose, because the universal terms found

in them have indeed no reference to any such univefrjnality a* this the apostle speaks of, nor any thing akin to it ; thejr mean no universality, either in the collective sense, or personal sense ; no universality of the nations of the world, or of particular persons in those nations, or in any one nation in the world : " But only of those of whom they ore true.'* That is, there are none of them righteous, of whom it is true. that they are not righteous, no, not one : There are none that understand, of whom it is true, that they understand not : They are all gone out of the way, of whom it is true, that they are gone out of the way. Sec. Or if these expressions are to be understood concerning that strong party in Israel, in David's and Solomon's days, and in the prophets* days, they are to be understood of them universally. And what is that to the apostle's purpose ? How does such an universality of wickedness as this....that all were wicked in Israel, who were wicked ; or that there was a particular evil party, all of which were wicked, confirm that universality which the apostle would prove, viz. that all Jews and Gentiles, and the whole world, were wicked, and e7ery mouth stopped, and that no flesh could be justified by their own righteousness.

Here nothing can be said to abate the nonsense but this^ That the apostle would convince the Jews that they were capable of being wicked, as well as other nations ; and to prove it, he mentions some texts, which shew that there was a "wicked party in Israel a thousand years ago ; and that as to the universal terms which happened to be in these texts, the , apostle bad no respect to these ; but his reciting them is as it were accidental, they happened to be in some texts which speak of an evil party in Israel, and the apostle cites them as they are, not because they arc any more to his purpose for the universal terms, which happen to be in them. But let the reader look on the words of the apostle, and observe the violence of such a supposition. Particularly let the words of the 9th and 10th verses, and their connexion, be observed-" All are under sin : As it is written, There is none righteous ; no, not one." How plain is it, that the apostle cites that latter universal clause out of the 14th Psalm, to confirm

the preceding universal words of his own proposition ? And yet it will follow from the things which Dr. Taylor supposes, that the universality of the terms in the last words, There is none righteous ; no, not one, hath no relation at all to that universality he speaks of in the preceding clause, to which they are joined, all are under sin ; and is no more a confirmation of it, than if the words were thus : " There are some, or there are 7nany in Israel, that are not righteous."

2. To suppose the apostle's design in citing these passages, was only to prove to the Jews, that of old there was a considerable number of their nation that were wicked men, is to suppose him to have gone about lo prove what none of the Jews denied, or made the least doubt of. Even the Pharisees, the most selfrightcous sect of them, who went furthest in glorying in the distinction of their nation from other nations, as a holy people, knew it and owned it : They openly confessed that their forefathers killed the firofihets, Matth. xxiii. 29....31. And if the apostle's design had been only to refresh their ptiemories, to put them in naind of the ancient wickedness of their nation, to lead to reflection on themselves as guilty of the like wickedness, (as Stephen does, Acts vii) what need had the apostle to go so far about to prove this ; gathering up many sentences here and there, which prove that their scriptures did speak of some as wicked men, and then, in the next place, to prove that the wicked men spoken of must be of the naion of the Jews, by this argument, " That what things soever the law saith, it saith to them that are under the law," or that whatsoever the books of the Old Testament said, it must be understood of that people that had the Old Testament ? What need had the apostle of such an ambages or fetch as this, to prove to the Jews, that there had been many of their nation in some of the ancient ages, which were wicked men ; when the Old Testament was full of passages that asserted this expressly, not only of a strong party, but of the nation in general ? How much more would it have been to such a purposcj to have put them in mind of the wickedness of the people n general, in worshipping the golden calf, and the unbe-Vor,. VI. 2 S

S30 ORIGINAL SIN.

lief, murmurini;, and perverseness of the whole congregation in the wilderness, for forty years, as Stephen does ? Which things he had no need to prove to be spoken of their nation, by any such indirect argument, as that, " Whatsoever things the law saith, it saith t© them that are under the law."

3. It would have been impertinent to the apostle's purpose, even as our author understands his purpose, for him to have gone about to convince the Jews that there had been a strong party of bad men in David's, Solomon's, and the prophet's times. For Dr. Taylor supposes, the apostle's aim is to prove the great corruption of both Jews and Gentiles at that day, when Christ came into the world.*

in order the more fully to evade the clear and abundant testimonies to the doctrine of Original Sin, contained in this part of the holy scripture, our author says, "The apostle is here speaking of bodies of people, of Jews and Gentiles in a collective sense, as two great bodies into which mankind are divided ; speaking of them in their collective capacity, and not with respect to particular persons ; that the apostle's design is to prove, neither of these two great collective bodies, in their collective sense, can be justified by law, because both were corrupt; and so that no more is implied, than that the generality of both were wicked."t

On tliis I observe,

(1.) That this supposed sense disagrees extremely with the terms and language which the apostle here makes use of. For according to this, we must understand, either,

First, That the apostle means no universality at all, but only the far greater part. Bui if the words which the apostle uses, do not most fully and determinately signify an universality, no words ever used in the Bible are suflicient to do it. I might challenge any man to produce any one paragraph in the scripture, from the beginning to the end, where there is such a repetition and accumulation of terms, so strongly and

* See Key, ^ 3O7, 310. i Page loz, 104, 117, 119. 120, and Note on Rom. iii. 10....ig.

eiTiphatically and carefully, to express the most perfect and absolute universality, or any place to be compared to it. What instance is there in the scripture, or indeed any other writing, •when the meaning is only the much greater part, where this meaning is signified in such a manner, by repeating such expressions, "They are all....they are all....they are all....together....every one....all the world," joined to multiplied negative terms, to shew the universality to be without exception, saying, "There is no flesh....there is none....there is none.... there is none....there is none, four times over ; besides the addition of" No, not one....no, not one," once and again !

Or, secondly,if any universality at all be allowed, it is only of the collective bodies spoken of; and these collective bodies but two, as Dr. Taylor reckons them, viz. the Jewish nation, and the Gentile world ; supposing the apostle is here representing each of these parts of mankind as being wicked. But is this the way of men's using language, when speaking of but two things, to express themselves in universal terms of such a sort, and in such a manner, and when they mean no more than that the thing affirmed is predicated of both of them ? If a man, speaking of his two feet as both lame, should say, " All my feet are lame, they are all lame, all together are become weak : None of my feet are strong, none of them are sound, no, not one ;" would not he be thought to be lame in his understanding, as well as his feet ? When the apostle says, that every mouth may be stopped^ must we suppose, that he speaks only of these two great collective bodies, figuratively ascribing to each of them a mouth, and means that these two mouths are stopped !

And besides, according to our author's own interpretation, the universal terms used in these texts cited from the Old Testament, have no respect to those two great collective bodies, nor indeed to either of them, but to some in Israel, a particular disaffected p.rty in that one nation, which was made up of wicked men. So that his interpretation is every way absurd and inconsistent.

(2.) If the apostle is speaking only of the wickedness or guilt of great collective bodies, then it will follow, that al-

so the justification he here treats of, is no other than the justification of such collective bodies. For they are tlie same he speaks of as f^uilty and Avicked, that he argues cannot be justified by the works of the law, by reason of their being •wicked. Otherwise his arp;uinent is wholly disannulled. If the guilt he speaks of be only of collective bodies, then what he argues from that guilt, must be only that collective bodies cannot be justified by the works of the law, having no respect to the justification of particular persons. And indeed, this is Dr. Taylor's declared opinion. He supposes the apostle here, and in other parts of this epistle, is speaking of men's justification considered only as in their collective cafiacity* But the contrary is most manifest. The 26th and 2Slh verses of this third chapter cannot, without the utmost violence, be understood otherwise than of the justification of particular persons. « That he might be just, and the jusiifier of few that believeth in Jesus. Therefore we conclude that a ma?i is justified by faith, without the deeds of the law." So chap. iv. 5. « But to him that worketh not, but believelh on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness." And what the apostle cites in the 6th, 7th and 8th verses from the Book of Psalms, evidently shews that he is speaking of the justification of particular persons. " Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man unto whom God imputeth righteousness ■without works, saying. Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered." David says these things in the 32d Psalm, with a special respect to his own particular case ; there expressing the great distress he was in, while under a sense of the guilt of his personal sin, and the great joy he had when God forgave him.

And then, it is very plain in that paragraph of the 3d chapter, which we have been upon, that it is the justification of particular persons that the apostle speaks of by that place in tlie Old Testament, which he refers to in ver. 20. " Therefore by the deeds of the law, there shall no flesh be justified

• Sec Note on Rom, iii. iO„..i9, chap, v, ii, and ix. 30, gr.

in his sight." He refers to that in Psal. cxliii. 2. « Enter not into judgment with thy servant; for in thy sight shall no ?nan living be justified." Here the Psalmist is not speaking of the justification of a nation, as a collective body, or of one of the two parts of the world, but of a particular man. And it is further manifest, that the apostle is here speaking of personal justification, inasmuch as this place is evidently parallel with that, Gal. iii. 10, 11, " For as many as are of the works of the law, are under the curse : For it is written. Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things that are written in the book of the law to do them. But that no man is justified by the works of the law, is evident; for the just shall live by faith." It is plain, that this place is parallel with that in the 3d of Romans, not only as the thing asserted is the same, and the argument by which it is proved here, is the same as '.here, viz. that all are guilty, and exposed to be condemned by the law : But the same saying of the Old Testament is cited herein the beginning of this discourse in Galatians, chap, ii, 16. And many other things demonstrate, that the apostle is speaking of the same justification in both places, which I omit for brevity's sake.

And besides all these things, our author's interpretation makes the apostle's argument wholly void another way. The apostle is speaking of a certain subject, which cannot be justified by the works of the law ; and his argument is, that that same subject is guilty, and is condemned by the law. If he means, that one subject, suppose a collective body or bodies, cannot be justified by the law, because another subject, another collective body, is condemned by the law, it is plain, the argument would be quite vain and impertinent. Yet thus the argument must stand according to Dr. Taylor's interpretation. The collective bodies, which he supposes are spoken of as wicked, and condemned by the law, considered as in their collective capacity, are those two, the .lewish nation, and the Heathen world : But the collective body which he supposes the apostle speaks of as justified without the deeds of the law, is neither of these, but the Christian church, or body of believers ; which is a new coliective body, a new

creature, and a new man faccording to our author's undet-standing of such phrases) which never had any existence before it was justified, and therefore never was wicked or condemned, unless it was with regard to the individuals of which it was constituted ; and it does not appear, according to our author's scheme, that these individuals had before been generally wicked. For according to him, there was a number both among the Jews and Gentiles, that were righteous before. And how does it appear, but that the comparatively few Jews and Gentiles, of which this new created collective body was constituted, were chiefly of the best of each ?

So that in every view, this author's way of explaining this passage in the third of Romans, appears vain and absurd. And so clearly and fully has the apostle expressed himself, that it is doubtless impossible to invent any other sense to put upon his words, than that which will imply, that all mankind, even every individual of the whole race, but their Redeemer himself, are in their first original state, corrupt and wicked.

Before I leave this passage of the apostle, it may be proper to observe, that it not only is a most clear and full testimony to the native depravity of mankind, but also plainly declares that natural depravity to be total and exceeding great. It is the apostle's manifest design in these citations from the Old Testament, to shew these three things. 1. That all wanki?id are by nature corrufit. 2. That every one is altogether corru/it, and, as it were, depraved in every part. 3. That they are in every part corrufit in an exceeding degree. With respect to the second of these, that every one is wholly, and, as it were, in every part corrupt, it is plain the apostle chooses out, and puts together those particular passages of the Old Testament, wherein most of those members of the body are mentioned, that are the soul's chief instruments or organs of external action. The hands (implicitly) in those expressions, They are together become unfirojitable.^ There is none that doth good. The thioat, tongue, lips and mouth, the organs of speech ; in those words, " Their throat is an open sepulchre : With their tongues they have used deceit: The

poison of asps is under their lifts ; whose month is full of cursing and bitterness." The feet in those words, ver. (5, " Their feet are swift to shed blood." These things together signify, that man is, as it were, all over corrupt in every part. And not only is the total corruption thus intimated, by enumerating the several parts, but by denying of all good ;• any true understanding or spiritual knowledge, any virtuous action, or so much as truly virtuous desire, or seeking after God. There is none that understandeth : There is none that seeketh after God : There is none that doth good: The way of peace have they not known. And in general, by denying all true piety or religion in men in their first state, ver. 18. " There is no fear of God before their eyes." The expressions also are evidently chosen to denete a most extreme and desperate wickedness of heart. An exceeding depravity is ascribed to every part: To the throat, the scent of an open sefiulchre ; to the tongue and lips, deceit, and the poison of asps ^ to the mouth, cursing and bitterness ; of their feet it is said, they are sivift to shed blood : And with regard to the whole man, it is said, de-structio7i and misery are in their ways. The representation is very strong of each of these things, viz. That all mankind are corrupt ; that every one is wholly and altogether corrupt; and also extremely and desperately corrupt. And it is plain, it is not accidental, that we have here such a collection oi" such strong expressions, so emphatically signifying these things ; but that they are chosen of the apostle on design, as being directly and fully to his purpose ; which purpose appears in all his discourse in the whole of this chapter, and indeed from the beginning of the epistle.

SECTION III.

Observatic7is 071 V^omans V. 6...AOf and Ephesians ii. 3, mt/i the Context^ and Romans vii.

ANOTHER passage of this aposlle in llie same epistle to the Romans, which shews that all that are made partakers of the benefits of Christ's redemption, are in their first state wicked, and desperately wicked, is that, chap. v. 6... 10. " For when we were yet withoztt .strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. For scarcely for a righteous man will one die ; yet peradventure for a good man, some would even dare to die. But God commendeth his love towards us, in that while we Avere yet sin?2ers, Christ died for us. Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. For if while we were enemira, we were reconciled to God through the dea'h of his Son ; much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life."

Here all that Christ died for, and that are saved by him, are spoken of as being in their first state sinners, iingodc'y, enemies to God, exposed to divine wrath, and without strength, ■without ability to help themselves, or deliver their souls from this miserable state.

Dr. Taylor says. The apostle here speaks of the Gentiles only in their heathen state, in contradistinction to the Jews ; and that not of particular persons among the heathen Gentiles, or as to the state they were in personally; but only of the Gentiles collectively taken, or of the miserable state of that great collective body, the heathen world : And that these appellations, sinners, ungodly, enemies^ &c. were names by which the apostles in their writings were wont to signify and distin-tinguish the heathen world, in opposition to the Jews ; and that in this sense these appellations are to be taken in tlieir epistles, and in this place in particular.* And it is observa-

* Page 114,...! 20. See also Dr. Taylor's Paraph, and Notes on the place.

ble, that this way of interpreting these phrases in the apostolic writings, is become fashionable with many late writers ; whereby they not only evade several clear testimonies to the doctrine of original sin, but make void great part of the New Testament; on which account it deserves the more particular consideration.

It is allowed to have been long common and customary among the Jews, in Christ's and the apostle's days, especially those of the sect of the Pharisees, in their pride and confidence in their privileges, as the peculiar people of God, to exalt themselves exceedingly above other nations, and greatly to despise the Gentiles, and call them by such names as sinners.) enemies, dog's, &c. as notes of distinction from themselves, whom they accounted in general (excepting the publicans, and the noioriously profligate) as \\\cfrie7ids, specialyafonVc'^j and children of God ; because they were the children of Abraham, were circumcised, and had the law of Moses, as their peculiar privilege, and as a wall of partition between them and the Gentiles.

But it is very remarkable, that a Christian divine, who hap> studied the New Testament, and the episile to the Romans in particular, so diligently as Dr. Taylor, should be strong in an imagination, that the apostles of Jesus Christ should so far countenance, and do so mucli to cherish these selfexalting, uncharitable dispositions and notions of the Jews, which gave rise to such a custom, as to fall in with that custom, and adopt that language of their pride and contempt; and especially that the Apostle Paul should do it. It is a most unreasona= ble imagination on many accounts.

1. The whole gospel dispensation is calculated entirely to overthrow and abolish every thing to which this selfdistin-gnishing, selfexalting language of the Jews was owing. It was calculated wholly to exclude such boasting, and to destroy that pride and self righteousness that were the causes of it : It was calculated to abolish tiie enmity, and break flown the partition wall between Jews and Gentiles, and of tivain lo make one new man, so making fieace j to destroy ull disposition's in nations and particular persons to despise one another, or to , Vol. VL ST

Bay one to another, Stand by thyself^ come not near to me ; for I am holier than thou ; and to establish the contrary principles of humility, mutual esteem, honor and love, and universal union, in the most firm and perfect manner.

2. Christ, when on earth, set himself, throu|;h the course of his ministry, to militate as^ainst this pharisaical spirit, practice, and lani^uage of the Jews ; appearinfj in such representations, names, and epithets, so customary amoni^ them ; by which they shewed so much contempt of the Gentiles, publicans, and such as were openly lewd and vicious, and so exalted themselves above them ; calling them sinners and enemies, and themselves holy and God's children; not allowin?^ the Gentile to be their neighbor. Sec. He condemned the Phari-bces for not esteeming themselves si?mers, as well as the publicans ; trusting in themselves that they were righteous, and despising others, lie militated against these things in his uvvn treatment of some Gentiles, publicans, and others, whom they called siriners, and in what he said on those occasions.*

He opposed these notions and manners of the Jews in his parables,! and in his instructions to his disciples how to treat the unbelieving Jews ;| and in what he says to Nicodemus about the necessity of a new birth, even for the Jews, as well as the unclean Gentiles, with regard to their proselytism, ■which some of the Jew^ looked upon as a new birth : And in opposition to their notions of their being the children of God, because the children of Abraham, l)iit the Gentiles by nature sinners and children of wrath, he tells them that even they were children of the devil.\\

* Matth. viii.5. .13. Chap. ix. 9...13. Chap. xi. 19...24, Chap xv. i;i...s8. Luke vii. 37, to the end. Chap, xvil 12. .19. Chap. xix. 1...10. Tohn iv. 9, &c. ver. 39, &c. Compare Luke x. 29. &c.

+ Matih xxi £8...32. Chap. xxii. 1...1O. Luke xiv. i6,..24. Com-pare Luke xiii. 28, 29, 30. % M^uh x. 14, 15 || John viii. 33 ..44.

It mav also be ob.served, that John the Baptist greatly contradicted the Jews'opinion of themselves, as being a holy people, and accepted of God, because ihey were the children of Abraham, and on that account better than theheaihen, whom they calkd iinners, enemies, unclean, &c. in baptizing tlir

3. Though we should suppose the apostles not to have been thoroughly brought off from such notions, manners and language of the Jews, till after Christ's ascension ; yet after the pouring out of the Spirit on the day of pentecost, or at least, after the calling of the Gentiles, begun in the conversion of Cornelius, they were fully indoctrinated in this matter, and effectually taught no longer to call the Gentiles uncleati^ as a note of distinction from the Jews, Acts x. 28, which was before any of the apostolic epistles were written.

4. Of all the apostles, none were more perfectly instructed in this matter, and none so abundant in instructing others hi it, as Paul, the great Apostle' of the Gentiles. He had abundance to do in this majter : None of the apostles had so much occasion to exert themselves against the forementioned notions and language of the Jews, in opposition to Jewish teachers, and judaizing Christians, that strove to keep up the separation wall between Jews and Gentiles, and to exa't the former, and set the latter at nought.

5. This apostle does especially strive in this matter in his epistle to the Romans, above all his other writings ; exerting himself in a most elaborate manner, and wijh his utmost skill and power, to bring the Jewish Christians off from every thing of this kind ; endeavoring by all means that there might no longer be in them any remains of these old notions they had been educated in, of such a great distinction between Jews and Gentiles, as were expressed in the names they used to distinguish them by, calling the Jews holy, children of Abraham, friends and children of God ; but the Gentiles sinners, unclean, enemies, and the like. He makes it almost his whole business, from the beginning of the epistle, to this passage in the 5th chapter, which we are upon, to convince them that there was no ground for any such distinction, and

jews as a polluted people, and sinners, as the Jews used to baptize proselytes from among the heathen; calling them to repentance as sinners, saying, "Think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father ; for 2 say unto you, that God is able, of these stones, to raise up children unto Abraham ;" iind teaching the Pharisees, that instead of their being a holy generation, and children of God, as they called themselves, they were z. generation oj vipers.

to prove that in common, both Jews and Gentiles, all were desperately wicked, and none righteous ; no, not one. He tells liiem, chap. iii. 9, that the Jews were by no means better than the Gentiles ; and (in what follows in that chapter) that there was no difference between Jews and Gentiles ; and represents all as without strength, or any sufficiency of their own in the affair of justification and redemption : And in the continuation of the same discourse, in the 4th chapter, teaches that all that were justified l^y Christ, were in themselves ungodly ; and that being the children of Abraham was not peculiar to the Jews. In this 5th chapter, still in continuation of the same discourse, on the same subject and argument of justification through Christ, and by faith in him, he speaks of Christ's dying for the imgodly and sinners, and those that were without strength or sufficiency for their own salvation, as he had done all along before. But now, it seems, the apostle by sinners and ungodly must not be understood according as he used these words before ; but must be supposed to mean only the Gentiles as distinguished from the Jews ; adopting the language of those selfrighteous, selfexalting, disdainful, judaizing teachers, whom he was with all his nught opposing ; countenancing the very same thing in them, which he had been from the beginning of the epistle discountenancing and endeavoring to discourage, and utterly to abolish, with all his art and strength.

One reason why the Jews looked on themselves better than the Gentiles, and called themselves holy, and the Gentiles sinners, was, that they had the laiv of Moses. They wa(/(? their boast of the law. But the apostle shews them, that this was so far from making them better, that it condemned them, and was an occasion of their being sinners, in a higher degree, and more aggravated manner, and more effectually and dreadfully dead in, and by sin, chap. vii. 4... 13, agreeable to those words of Christ, John v. 45.

It cannot be justly objected here, that this apostle did indeed use this language, and call the Gentiles sinners, in contradistinction to the Jews, in what he said to Peter, which he himself gives an account of in Gal. ii, 15, 16. '• We who

are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles, knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ." It is true that the apostle here refers to this distinction, as what was usually made by the selfrip;ht-eous Jews, between themselves and the Gentiles, but not in such a manner as to adopt or favor it ; but on the contrary, so as plainly to shew his disapprobation of it; q. d. <' Though we were born Jews, and by nature are of that people which are wont to make their boas' of the law, expecting to be justified by it, and trust in themselves that they are righteous, despising others, calling the Gentiles sinners, in distinction from themselves; yet we, being now instructed in the gospel of Christ, know better. We now know that a man is not iustified by the works of the law ; that we are all justified only by faith in Christ, in whom there is no difference, no distinction of Greek or Gentile and Jew, but all are one in Christ Jesus." And this is the very thing he there speaks of, ■which he blamed Peter for ; that by his withdrawing and separating himself from the Gentiles, refusing to eat with them. Sec, he had countenanced this selfexalting, selfdistin-guishing, separating spirit and custom of the Jews, whereby they treated tiie Gentiles, as in a distinguishing manner, sinners and unclean, and not fit to come near them who were a holy people.

6, The words themselves of Jhe apostle in this place, shew plainly, that he here uses the word sinners, not as signifying Gentiles, in opposition to Jews, but as denoting the morally evil, in opposition to such as are righteous or good : Because this latter opposition or distinction between sinners and righteous is here expressed in plain terms. " Scarcely for a righteous man will one die ; yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die ; but God commended his love towards us, in that while we were yet simiers, Christ died for us." By righteousmen are doubtless meant the same that are meant by such a phrase, throughout this apostle's writings, and throughout the New Testament, and throughout the Bible. Will any one pretend, that by the righteous man, whom men would scarcely die for, and by the good man, that per-

haps some migbt even dare to die for, is meant a Jew ? Dr. Taylor himself does not explain it so, in his exposition of this epistle, and therefore is not very consistent with himself, in supposing that in the other part of the distinction the apostle means Gentiles, as distin,2;uished from the Jews. The apostle himself had been laboring abundantly, in the preceding part of the epistle, to prove that the Jews were sinners in this sense, namely, in opposition to righteous ; that all had tinned, that all were under sm, and therefore could not be justified, could not be accepted as righteous by their own righteousness.

7. Another thing which makes it evident that the apostle, when he speaks in this place of the sinners and enemies which Christ died for, docs not mean only the Gentiles, is that he includes himself among them, saying, while nue were sinners, and when tve were enemies.

Our author from time to time says, "The apostle, though he speaks only of the Gentiles in their Heathen state, yet puts hhnaelf with themy because he was the ajiostleofthe Ge7i-iiles" But this is very violent and unreasonable. There is no more sense in it than there would be in a father's ranking himself among his children, when speaking to his children of the benefits they have by being begotten by himself, and saying, JVe children....or in a physician's ranking himself with his patients, when talking to them of their diseases

and cure, saying, JVe sick folks Paul being the apostle of

the Gentiles, to save them from their Heathenism, is so far from being a reason for him to reckon himself among the Heathen, that on the contrary, it, is the very thing that would render it in a peculiar manner unnatural and absurd for him so to do. Because, as the apostle of the Gentiles, he appears as their healer and deliverer from Heathen'iim ; and therefore in that capacity does in a peculiar manner appear in his distinction from the Heathen, and in opposition to the slate of Heathenism. For it is by the most opposite qualities only, that he is fitted to be an apostle of the Heatlien, and recoverer from Heathenism. As the clear ligiit of the sun is the thing which makes it a proper restorative from

darkness ; and therefore the sun's being spoken of as such a remedy, none would suppose to be a good reason why it should be ranked with darkness, or among dark things. And besides (which makes this supposition of Dr. Taylor's appear more violent) the apostle in this epistle, does expressly rank himself with the Jews, when he speaks of them as distinguished from the Gentiles, as in chapter iii. 9. " What then ? Are we better than they ?" That is, are we Javs better than the Gentiles ?

It cannot justly be alleged in opposition to this, that the Apostle Peter puts himself with the heathen, 1 Pet. iv. 3. " For the time past of ow life may suflRce us to have wrought the will of the Gentiles ; when ive walked in lasciviousness, lusts, excess of wine, revellings, banquetings, and abominable idolatries. For the Apostle Peter, (who by the way was not an apostle of the Gentiles) here does not speak of him-self as one of the Heathen, but as one of the church of Christ in general, made up of those that had been Jews, Proselytes, and Heathens, who were now all one body, of which body he was a member. It is this society therefore, and not the Gentiles, that he refers to in the pronoun us. He is speaking of the wickedness that the members of this body or society-had lived in before their conversion ; not that every member had lived in all those vices here mentioned, but some in one, others in another. Very parallel with that of the Apostle Paul to Titus, chap. iii. 3. " For nve ourselves also (i. e. we of the Christian church) were sometimes foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, (some one lust and pleasure, others another) living in n)alicc, envy, hateful and hating one another," Sec. There is nothing in this, but what is very natural. That the apostle, speaking to the Christian church, and of that church, confessing its former sins, should speak of himself as one of tiiat society, and yet mention some sins that he personally had not been guilty of, and among others, Heathenish idolatry, is quite a different thing from what it Would have been for the apostle, expressly distinguishing those of the Christians which had been

Heathen, from those which had been Jews, to have ranked himself with the former, tliough he was truly of the latter.

If a minister in some congregation in England, speaking in a sermon of the sins of the nation, being himself of the nation, should say, " IVe have greatly corrupted ourselves, and provoked God by our deism, blasphemy, profane swearing, lasciviousness, venality," &c. speaking in the first person plural, though he himself never had been a deist, and perhaps none of his hearers, and they might also have been generally free from other sins he mentioned ; yet there would be nothing unnatural in his thus expressing himself. But it would be a quite different thing, if one part of the British dominions, suppose our king's American dominions, had universally apostatised from Christianity to deism, and had long been in such a stale, and if one that had been born and brought up in England among Christians, the country being universally Christian, should be sent among them to shew them the folly and great evil of deism, and convert them to Christianity ; and this missionary, when making a distinction between English Christians, and these deists, should rank himself with the latter, and say,'' We American deists, ii>e foolish, blind infidels," See. this indeed would be very-unnatural and absurd.

Another passage of the apostle, to the like purpose with that which we have been considering in the 5th of Romans, is that in Eph. ii. 3. " And were by nature children of wrath, even as others." This remains a plain testimony to the doctrine of Original Sin, as held by those that used to be called orthodox Christians, after all the pains and art used to torture and pervert it. This doctrine is here not only plainly and fully taught, but abundantly so, if we take the words with the context, where Christians are once and again represented as being, in their first state, (icarf i'j M", and as quickened and raised u[i from such a state of death, in a most marvellous display of free and rich grace and love, and exceeding greatness of the power of God, &c.

With respect to those words, »/*e» t8k»« (pvan ogy>)j. We ivcre by nature children cfivra'.hi Dr. Taylor says, pages 1 \2....\ !4.

■(■ The apostle means no more by this, tlian truly or reath) children of nvralh ; nsin^ a metaphorical expression, borrowed from the word that is used to signify a true and genuine child of a family, in distinction from one that is a child only by adoption." In which it is owned, that the proper sense of the phrase is, being a child by nature, in the same sense as a child by birth or natural generation ; but only he supposes that here the word is used metaiihorically. ■ The instance he produces as parallel, to confirm Ids supposed metaphorical sense of the phrase, as meaning only truly, really^ or firofierly children of wrath, viz. the Apostle Paul's calling Timothy his oiun sen in the faith, fncnov riKnv, is so far from confirming his sense, that it is rather directly against it. For doubtless the apostle uses the word ytrxnov in its original signification here, meaning his btgotten son, ynj«r»©- being the adjective from yo»D, oifspring, or the verb ymuca, to beget ; as much as to say, Timothy, my begotten son in the faith ; only allowing for the two ways of being begotten, spoken of in the NcAV Testament, one natural, and the other spiritual; one being the first generation, the other regeneration ; the one a being bec;otten as to the human nature, the other a being begotten in the faith, begotten in Christ, or as to one's Christianity. The apostle expressly signifies which of these he means in this place, Timothy my begotten son in the faitli, in the same manner as he says to the Corinthians, 1 Cor. iv. 15. " In Christ Je-^us J have begotten you through the gospel." To say the apostle uses the word ^vset, in Eph. ii. 3, only as sigi iiying real, true, and proper, is a most arbitrary interpretation, having nothing to warrant it in the whole Bible. The word ^u3-»s is no where used in this sense in the New Testament.*

Another thing which our author alleges to evade the fores of this, is that the word rendered nature^ someiimes signifies habit contracted by custom, or an acquired nature. But this is not the proper meaning of the word. And it is plain the

* The following are all the other places wheie the word is used, Rom. j. 26, ii. 14, 27, xi. 21, 24, thrice i.i ihar verse, i Cor. xl. i.^. Gal. ii. \^^ iV. 8 James iii. 7, twice in that verse, and 2 Pet. i. 4,

Vol. VI. 2 U

word in its common use, in the New Testament, signifies what we properly express in English by the worJ nature. There is but one place where there can be the least pretext for supposing it can be used otherwise; and that is 1 Cor. xi. 14. " Doth not even nature itself teach you, that if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him ?" And even here there is, I think, no manner of reason for understanding nature otherwise, than in the proper sense. The emphasis used avrn »J ffo-i?) nature itself^ shews that the apostle does not mean custom, but nature in the proper sense. It is true, it was long custom, that made having the head covered a token of subjection, and a feminine habit or appearance ; as it is custom that makes any outward action or word a sign or signification of any thing ; but nature itself^ nature in its proper sense, teaches that it is a shame for a man to appear with 'he established signs of the female sex, and with significations of inferiority, &c. As nature itself shews it to be a shame for a father to bow down or kneel to his own child or servant, or for men to bow to an idol, because bowing down is by custom an established token or sign of subjection and submission ; such a sight, therefore, would be unnatural, shocking to a man's very nature. So nature would teach that it is a shame for a woman to use such and such lascivious words or gestures, though it be custom, that establishes the unclean signification of those gestures and sounds.

It is particularly unnatural and unreasonable, to understand the phrase, T«jt»a. ^t«r«, in this place, any otherwise than in the proper sense, on the following accounts.

1. It may be observed that both the words rixia, and (pv(n(;, in their original signification, have reference to the biilh or generation. So the word ^i/aij, which comes from <i>vu, which signifies to beget, or bring forth young, or to put forth, or bud forth as a plant that brings forth young buds and branches. And so the word imvov comes from tmnru, which signifies to bring forth children.

2. As though the apostle took care by the word used here, to signify what we arc by birlh, he changes the word he used before for children. In the preceding verse he used

wo», speaking of the children of disobedience ; but here T(x»a which is a word derived, as was now observed, from TixTw, to bring forth a child, and more properly signifies a kegotten or born child.

3. It is natural to suppose that the apostle here speaks in opposition to the pride of some, especially the Jews, (for the church in Ephesus was made up partly of Jews, as well as the church in Rome) who exalted themselves in the privileges they had by birth, because they were born the children of Abraham, and were Jews by nature^ (ftvaet Ia^a»e», as the phrase is, Gal. ii. 15. In opposition to this proud conceit, he teaches the Jews, that notwithstanding this, they were by nature children of wrath, even as others, i. e. as well as the Gentiles, which the Jews had been taught to look upon as sinners, and out of favor with God by nature, and borri children »f wrath.

A: It is more plain, that the apostle uses the word nature in its proper sense here, because he sets what they were by nature, in opposition to what they are by grace. In this verse, the apostle shews what they are by nature, viz. children of wrath ; and in the following verses he shews how very difTerent their state is by grace, saying, verse 5, By grace ye are saved, repeating it again, verse 8, By grace ye are saved. But if by being children of wrath by nature, were meant no ntore than only their being really and truly children of wrath, as Dr. Taylor supposes, there would be no opposition in the signification of these phrases ; for in this sense they were by nature in a state of salvation, as much as by nature children of wrath ; for they were truly, really, and firojierly in a state of salvation.

If we take these words with the context, the whole a-bundantly proves that by nature we are totally corrupt, without any good thing in us. For if we allow the plain scope of the place, without attempting to hide it, by extreme violence used with the apostle's words and expressions, the design here is strongly to establish this point ; that what Christians have that is good in them, or in their state, is in no part of it naturally in themselves, or from themselves, but is wholly

from divine grace, all the gift of God, and his tvorkmanshifi, tht effect of his power, and free and wonderful love : None of our good works are primarily from ourselves, but with respect to them all, ive are God's nvorkmanihifi, created tmto good nvorka, as it were out of nothing : Not so much as faith itself the first principle of good works in Christians, is of themselves, but that is the gift cfGod.

Therefore the apostle compares the work of God, in forming Christians to true virtue and holiness, not only to a neiv creation, but a resurrection, or raising from the dead, ver. 1. " You hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins." And again, ver. 5. " Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ." In speaking of Christians being quickened with Christy the apostle has reference to what he had said before, in the latter part of the foregoing chapter, of God's manifesting the exceeding greatness of his fioiver towards Christian converts in their conversion, agreeable to the operation of his Tnighty power, nvheti he raised Christ from the dead. So that it is plain by every thing in this discourse, the apostle would signify, that hy nature we have no goodness ; but are as destitute of it as a dead corpse is of life : And that all goodness, all good works, and faith the -principle of all, are perfectly the gift of God's grace, and the ^vork of his great, almighty, and exceeding excellent power. I think, there can be need of nothing but reading tlie chapter, and minding what is read, to convince all who have common understanding, of this ; whatever any of the most subtle critics have done, or ever can do, to twist, rack, perplex, and pervert the words and phrases here used.

Dr. Taylor here again insists, that the apostle speaks only of the Gentiles in their heathen state, when he speaks of those that were rffac? ?n sin, am] litj nature children of wrath ; and that though he seems to include himself among these, saying, " IVe were by nature children of wrath, we were dead in sins ;" yet he only puts himself among them because he was the apostle of the Gentiles. The gross absurdity of which may appear from what was said before. But besides the things which have bten already observed, there are some

things which make it peculiarly unreasonable to understand it so here. It is true, the greater part of the church of Ephe-sus had been heathens, and therefore the apostle often has reference to their heathen state, in this epistle. But the words in this chap. ii. 3, plainly shew, that he means himself and other Jews in distinction from the Gentiles ; for the distinction is fully expressed. After he had told the Ephesians, who had been generally heathen, that they had been dead in sin, and had walked according to the course of this world, &c. ver. 1 and 2, he makes a distmctio7i, and says, " Among whom vje also had our conversation. Sec. and were by nature children of wrath, evm as others." Here first he changes the person ; whereas, before he had spoken in the second person, " Ye were dead....Ye in time past walked," &C. Now he changes stile, and uses the first person, in a most manifest distinction, *' Among whom ive also" that is, lue Jeivs^ as well as ije Gentiles : Not only changing the person, but adding a particle of distinction, also ; which would be nonsense, if he meant thie same without distinction. And besides all this, more fully to express the distinction, the apostle further adds a pronoun of distinction : " We also, even as others" or, we as well as others : Most evidently having respect to the notions, so generally entertained by the Jews, of their being much better than the Gentiles, in being Jews by nature^ children of Abraham, and children of God ; when they supposed the Gentiles to be utterly cast off, as born aliens, and by nature children of wrath : In opposition to this, the apostle says, " We Jews, after all our glorying in our distinction, were by nature children of ivrath, as well as the rest of the world." And a yet further evidence, that the apostle here means to include the Jews, and even himself, is the universal term he uses, " Among whom also we all had our conversation," &c. Thouf;h wickedness was supposed by the Jev/s to be the course of this world, as to the generality of mankind, yet they supposed themselves an exempt people, at least the Pharisees, and the devout obi^^crv-ers of the law of Moses, and traditions of the elders ; whatever might be thought of publicans and harlots. But in opposition to this, the apostle asserts, that they all were no better

by nature than others, but were to be reckoned among the children of disobedience^ and children ofiurath.

And then besides, if the apostle chooses to put himself among the Gentiles, because he was the apostle of the Gentiles, I would ask, why does he not do so in the 11th verse of the same chapter, where he speaks of their Gentile state expressly ? Remember that ye being in time past Gentiles in the Jlcch. Why does he here make a distinction between the Gentiles and himself? Why did he not say, Let us remember, that we being in times past Gentiles ? And why does the same apostle, even universally, make the same distinction, speaking either in the second or third person, and never in the first, where he expressly speaks of the Gcntilism of those that he wrote to ; or speaks of them with reference to their distinctior; fix>m the Jews ? So every where in this same epistle ; as in chap. i. 12, 13, where the distinction is made just in the same manner as here, by the change of the person, and by the disdnguishing particle, also. " That we should be to the praise of his glory who first trusted in Christ (the first believers in Christ being of the Jews, before the Gentiles were called) in whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation," And in all the following part of this second chapter, as ver. 11, 17, 19, and 22, in which last verse the same distinguishing particle again is used : " In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit." See also the following chapters : Chap. iii. 6, and iv. 17. And not only in this epistle, but constantly in other epi-stles ; as Rom. i. 12, 13 ; chap. xi. 13, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21,22, 23, 24, 25,-28, 30,31 ; chap. XV. 15, 16 ; 1 Cor. xii. 2 ; Gal. iv. 8 ; Col. i. 27 ; chap. ii. 13 ; 1 Thess. i. 5, 6, 9 ; chap. ii. 13, 14, 15, 16.

Though I am far from thinking our author's exposition of the 7th chapter of Romans to be in any wise agreeable to the true sense of the apostle, yet it is needless here to stand particularly to examine it ; because the doctrine of Original Sin may be argued not the less strongly, though we should allow the thing wherein he mainly differs from such as he opposes in his interpretation, viz. That the apostle docs not

speak in his own name, or to represent the state of a true Christian, but as representing the state of the Jews under the law. For even on this supposition, the drift of the place will prove, that every one who is under the law, and with equal reason every one of mankind, is carnal, sold under sin, in his first state, and till delivered by Christ, For it is plain, that the apostle's design is to shew the insufficiency of the law to give life to any one whatsoever. This appears by what he says when he comes to draw his conclusion, in the continuation of this discourse ; chap. viii. 3.* " For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh ; God sending his own Son," See. Our author supposes this here spoken of, viz. " That the law cannot give life, because it is weak through the flesh," is true with respect to evej^ij one of ■mankind.\ And when the apostle gives this reason, In that it is nveak through the Jiesh, it is plain, that by the flesh, which here he opposes to the S/iirit, he means the same thing which, in the preceding part of the same discourse, in the foregoing chapter, he had called by the name flesh, ver. 5, 14, 18 ; and the law of the members, ver. 23 ; and the body of death, ver. 24. Which is the thing that through this chapter he insists on as the grand hindrance and reason why the law could not give life, just as he does in his conclusion, chap. viii. 3. Whicli in this last place, is given as a reason why the law cannot give life to any cf mankind. And it being the sarne reason of the same thing, spoken of in the sarne discourse, in the former part of it; as appears, because this last place is the conclusion, of which that former part is the premises : And inas^ much as the reason there given is being in the flesh, and a be^ ing carnal, sold under sin : Therefore taking the whole of the apostle's discourse, this is justly understood to be a rea>^on why the law cannot give life to any of mankind ; and consequently, that all mankind are in the fli\sh, and are carnal, sold under sin, and so remain till delivered by Christ: And consequently, all mankind in their first or original state are very sinful ; which was the thing to be proved.

* Dr. Taylor himself reckons this a part of the siitip d'scourse or paragraph, in the dvisior> h» makes of the epistle, in his paraphrase and uotes. upon it, + See Note on Rom. v. 20.

CHAPTER IV.

Containing Observations en Romans v. 12, to the End.

SECTION I.

Remarks on Dr. Taylor's ivay of explainiyig this Text.

THE foll9wing thinc^s are worthy to be taken notice of, concerning our author's exposition of this remarkable passage of the Apostle Paul.

1. He greatly insists, that by death in this place no mora is meant, than that death which we all die, when this present life is extinguished, and the body returns lo the dust ; that no more is meant in the 12th, l4th, 15th, and 17th verses. Page 27, he speaks of it as evidently^ clearly^ and infallibly so, because the apostle is still discoursing on the same subject ; plainly implying, that it must most infallibly be so, that the apos'le means no moie by ciealh, throughout this paragraph on the subject. But as infallible as this is, if we believe what Dr. Tiiyior elsewhere says, it must needs be otherwise. He, in p. 120, S, speaking of ihose words in the last verse of the next chapter, " The vages of sin is deaths but the gift of God is eternal Ife, through .Tt-sus Christ our Lord," says, " D'cath in this place is wifle'y d fferent from the death we now die ; as it stands there opfioscd to eternal life, which is the gift of

God through Jesus Christ, it manifestly signifies eternal death, the second death, or that death which they shall hereafter die, who lire after the flesh." But death (in the conclusion of the paragraph we are upon in the 5th chapter, concerning the death that comes by Adam) and the life that comes by Christ, in the last verse of the chapter, is opfiosed to eternal life just in the same manner as it is in the last rerse of the next chapter : " That as sin has reigned unto death, even so might grace reign, through righteousness, unto eternal life, by Jesus Christ eur Lord." So that by our author's own argument, death in this place also is manifestly nvidely different from the death ive now die, as it stands here opposed to eternal life^ through Jesus Christ; and signifies eternal death, the second death. And yet this is a part of the same discourse or paragraph with that begun in the 12th verse, as reckoned by Dr. Taylor himself in his division of paragraphs, .in his paraphrase and notes on the epistle. So that if we will follow him,,and admit his reasonings in the various parts of his book, here is manifest proof against infallible evidence ! So that it is true, the apostle throughout this whole passage on the same subject, by death, evidently, clearly, and infallibly means no more than that death ive now die, when this life is extinguished ; and yet by death, in some part of this passage, is meant something widely difFerent from the death we now die, and is man' ifestly intended eternal death, the second death.

But had our author been more consistent with hinoself In his laying of it down as so certain and infallible, that because the apostle has a special respect to temporal death, in the 14th verse. Death reigned from Adam to Moses, therefore he means no more in the several consequent parts of this passage, yet he is doubtless too confident and positive in this matter. This is no more evident, clear, and infallible, than that Christ meant no more by perishing, in Luke xiii. 5, when he says, '* I tell you, Nay, but except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish ;" than such a teniporal death, as came on those that died by the fall of the tower of Siloam, spoken of in the preceding words of the same speech ; and no mure infallible, than that by Uf; Christ moans r*o more than thi.^:

Vol. VI. 2W

temnnrnl life, in each part of that one sentpnce, Matth. x. 59* " He -hi't finddh his hf, shall ^o e il; and he tha» loseHi hii /z/f for my sake, shall find/V;" because in the first part of each clause, he has respect especially to ten^poral life.*

The truth of he case, with re-pect to wha' the apostle inten''s bv the woid dt-ath in this place, is this, viz. That the same thinjr is meant, 'hat is meant hy death in the forec:oing and followinp: parts of ihis epistle, and other writings of this apostle, where he speaks of death as the consequence of sin, viz. the whole of that death, which he, and the scripture every where, speaks of as the proper wages and punishment of sin, inchuline: death, temporal, spiritual, and eternal ; though in some parts of this discourse he has a more special respect to one part of this whole, in others to another, as his argument leads him ; without any more variation thaw is common in the same.disrourse. That life, which the scripture speaks of as the rewaid of righteousness, is a whole, containiny; several part!^, viz. The life of the body, union of soul and body, and the most perfect sensibility, activity, and felicity of both, Avhich is the chief thing. In like manner the death, which the scripture speaks of as the punishment of sin, is a whole, including the death of the body, and the death of the soul, and the eternal, sensible, perfect destruction and misery of both. It is this latttr whole, that the apostle speaks of by the name

♦ There are many placts parallel with these as John xi. 25, 26, " I ara the resurrection and the life : He that believeth in me though he were dead, vet he shall live : •^nd whosoc>er liveth, .ind believeih in me shall never die " lier:' both the words, life and death, are ustd with this variation : " I am ihi restr ection and the life, ' meaning spritual an eternal life : " He that belicvcth in mc, hough he were dead." having r sped to temporal death, «• \et shall he live," with respect to spirit 'al life and hv- restoration ot the life of the body. " And whosoever liveth and believeth in me. shall never liie, ' meaning a spiri'u 1 and eternal -^ieath So in John vi 49. 50. " Your iathtrs did eat.ma.;na ii the wilderness and are dead," havnig respect hiefly to temporal death. " This is he bread which cometh dnvrn fr m heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die," i c. by the loss of spiritual life and by etcrial des h. 'See al-o ver 58 ) And in ;he next verse " If any m n eat of this biead he shall livr forever," have eternal life. So ver. 54. bee an-other like instance, John v. 24....29.

6f death in this discourse, in Rom. v. thouoh in some sentences he has a moie special respect to one part, in others to another: And this, without chanq;int^ the signification of the word. For an havins^ respect to several things included in the extensive signification of the word, is not the same tiling as using the word in several distinct sic^nificdtions. As loi* inft.ince, '.he appellative, jnan,ov the proper name of any particular man, is the name of a w!)ole, inchidn g the different parts f)f soul and body. And if any one in speaking of James or John, should say, he was a wise man, and a beautiful mau ; in the former part of the sentence, respect would be liad more especially to his soul, in the latter to his body, in the word man : Bu; ye without any pioper change of the signification of the name to distirrct senses. In John xxi. 7, it is said, Peter wa/i naked, and in the following part of the same story-it is said, Peter was grieved. In the former luoposition, respect is had especially to his body, in the latter to his soul : But yet here is no proper change of the meaning of the name, Peter. And as to the apostle's use of the word death, in the passage now under consideration, on the sujiposiiion that he in general means the whole of that death, which is the wages of sin, there is nothing but what is perfectly natural in sup-posiiig that he, in order to evince, thai death, the proper punishment of sin, comes on all mankind, in consequence of Adam's sin, should take notice of that part of this punishment, which is visible in this world, and which every body therefore sees, does in fact come on all mankind (as in ver. 14) and from thence should infer, that all n)ankind are exposed to the whole of that death which is the proper punishment of sin, whereof that temporal death M-hich is visible, is a nart, and a visible imag-e of the whole, and (unless cl\jing-ed by divine grace) an introduction to the principal, and infinitely the most dreadful part.

II. Dr. Taylor's explanation of this passage makes wholly insignificant those first words, " By one man sin entered into the world," and leaves this proposition without any sense or signifiration at all. The apostle had been largely and elaborately representing, how the whole world was full of sin, in all

parts of it, both among Jews and Gentiles, and all exposed to death and condemnation. It is plain, that m these words he would tell us how this came to pass, viz. that this sorrowful event came by one man^ even the first man. That the world \v full of sin, and full of death, were two great and notorious facts, deeply affecting the interests of mankind; and they seemed very wonderful facts, drawing the attention of the more thinking part of mankind every where, who often asked this question, Whence coynes evil, moral and natural evil ? (the latter chiefly visible in death.) It is manifest the apostle here means to tell us, how these came into the world, and came to prevail in it as they do. But all that is meant, according to Dr. Taylor's interpretation, is, " He begun transgression."* As if all that the apostle meant, was, to tell us who happened to sin first; not how such a malady came upon the world, or how any one in the world, besides Adam himself, came by such a distemper. The words of the apostle, <' By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin," shew the design to be, to tell us how these evils came, as affecting the state of the world ; and not only as reaching one man in the world. If this -were not plain enough in itself, the words immediately following demonstrate it: " And so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned." By sin's being in the world, the apostle does not mean being in the ■world only in that one instance of Adam's first transgression, but being abroad in the world, among the inhabitants of the earth, in a wide extent, and continued series of wickedness ; as is plain in the first words of the next verse, " For until the law, sin was w the world,'* And therefore when he gives us an account how it came to be in the world, or, which is the same thing, how it entered into the world, he does not mean only coming in, in one instance.

If the case were as Dr. Taylor represents, that the sin of Adam, either in its pollution or punishment, reached none but himself, any more than the sin of any other man, it would be no more proper to say, that by one man sin entered into the

* Page 56.

tDorld^ than if it should be inquired, how mankind came into America, and there had anciently been a ship of the Pheni-cians wrecked at sea, and a single man of the crew was driven ashore on this continent, and here died as soon as he reached the shore, it should be said, By that one man mankind came into America.

And besides, it is not true, that by one man, or by Adam, sin entered into the world, in Dr. Tayloi''s sense ; for it was not he, but Eve^ that begun transgression. By one man Dr. Taylor understands Adam, as the figure of Christ. And it is plain that it was for his transgression, and not Eve's, that the sentence of death was pronounced on mankind after the fall. Gen. iii. 19. It appears unreasonable to suppose the apostle means to include Eve, when he speaks of Adam ; for he lays great stress on it, that it was by one, repeating it several times.

III. In like manner this author brings to nothing the sense of the causal particles, in such phrases as these, so often repeated ; " Death by sin," verse 12. « If through the offence of one, many be dead," verse 15. « i5t/ one that sinned....Judgment was by one to condemnation," verse 16. "JSyone man's offence, death reigned by one," verse 17. « By the offence of one, judgment came upon all," &c. verse 18. " J?J/ one man's disobedience," verse 19. These causa! particles, so dwelt upon, and so variously repeated, unless ■we make mere nonsense of the discourse, signify some connexion and dependence, by some sort of influence of that sin of one man, or some tendency to that effect, which is so often said to come by it But according to Dr. Taylor, there can be no real dependence or influence in the case of any sort whatsoever. There is no connexion by any natural influence of that one act to make all mankind mortal. Our author does not pretend to account for this effect in any such manner, but in another most diverse, viz. A gracious act of God, laying mankind under affliction, toil and death, from special favor and kindness. Nor can there be any dependence of this effect on that transgression of Adam, by any moral influence, as deserving such a consequence, or exposing to it on

any moral account, for he supposes ti.at mankind are not in this ■way exposed to the least cleti:iee of evil. Nor has tliis effect ar.\ ifffal dependence on that sin,or any connexion hy virtue of anv antecedent co:islitution, which God had established with A'iam ; for he insists that in that threatening, Jn the day thou eatest t-hou shalt die, there is not a word said of his posterity, page 8. And death on mankind, according to him, cannot come by virtue of that legal constitution with Adam ; because the sentence by which it came, was after the annall-ing and abolisl-.ing that constiiution, page 113, 5. And it is manifest that this consequence cannot be through any kind of tendencu of that sin to such an effect, because the effect comes on! as a benefit, and is the fruit of mere favor ; but sin has no tendency, either natural or moral, tCi benefiio and divine favors. And thus that sin of Adam could neither be the efficient c use nor the proeming cause, nei.her the natural, moral, tior le^al cause, nor an exciting and moving cause, any more than Adam's eating of any other tree of the garden. And the only real relation that the effect can have to that sin, is a relation as to,time, viz. that it i.s after it. And when the matter is closely examined, the whole amounts to no more than this, Th t God is pleased, of his mere good will and pieasure, to bestow a greater favor upon us, than he did upon Adam in innncci.cy, after that sin of his eating the forbidden fruit ; whicii sin we are no more concerned in, than in the sin of the king of Pegu, or emperor of China.

IV. It is altogether inconsistent with the apostle's scope, and the import ol what he says, to suppose that the death which he here speaks of, as coming on mankind by Adam's sin, conies not as a punishment, but only as a favor. It quite makes void the opposition, in Avhich the apostle sets the consequences of Adam's sin, and the consequences of the grace and righteousness of Christ They are set in opposition to each other, as opposite effects, arising from oppo-.ite causes, throughout the [)aragraph : One as the Juit con&c^ fjuence of an offence, the other a free gift, verse 15... 18. W'nereas, accoiding to this scheme, there is no such opposition in the case ; both are benefits, and both are free gifts.

A very wholesome TnefUcine to save from perishing, ordered by a k nd father, or a shield to preserve Vom an enemy, bestowed by a friend, is as much a free gift as pleasant food. The death that comes by Adam, is stt in opposiii«n to the life and happiness that comes by Christ, as being the froit of «irz, and judgment for sin ; when the latter is the fruit of divine grace, verses 15, 17, 20, 2\. Whereas, according to our author, both ct^nie by grace : Death comes on mankmd by the free kindness'and love of God, much more truly and properly than by Adam's sin. Dr. Taylor speaks ol it as coming by occasion of Adam's sin. (But as I have observ< d, it is an occasion without any influence.) Yet the proper cause is God'fi grace ; so that the true cause is wlioUy good. Which by the way, is directly repugnant to the apostle's doctrine in Rom. vii. 13. « Was then that which is good, made death unto me ? God forbid. But sin, that it might appeal sm, working death in me by that which is good." Where the apostle utterly rejects nny siicli suggestion, .iS though that which is good were the firofier cause of death ; and signifies that sin is the proper cause, and that which is good, only the occasion. But acrording to this author, the .reverse is true': That which is good iii \ne highest sense, even the love of God, and a divine, gracious (.onstiiutiun, is the proper cause of death, and sin only the occasion.

But to return, it is plain, that death by Adam, and life and happiness by Christ, are here set in opposition ; the latter bemg spoken of &% good, the other as evil ; one. as the effect of ri,q/iteo7isnesSf the other of an offence j one the fruit of obedience, the other of disohclience,; one as the fruit of God's favor, in consequence of what was pleasing and acceptable to him, but the other the fruit of his disjikasure, in consequence of what was displeasing and hateful to him ; the latter coming by justification, the former by the condemnation of the subject. But according to the scheme of our author, there can be no opposition in any of these respects ; the death here spoken of, neither cones as an evil, nor from an ew7 ffltw<?, ciihcr an evil efficient c2M1,q, (v -/irocuring caiise ; not at all as any testimony of God's disfileasure to the subject, but as

properly the effect of God's favor, no less than that which is spoken of as coming by Christ; yea, and as much as to that appointed by an act of juatijication of the subject, as he understands and explains the word justification ; for both are by a grant of favor^ and are instances of mercy and goodness. And he does abundantly insist upon it, that " any grant of favor, any instance of mercy and goodness, whereby God delivers and exempts from any kind of danger, suffering or calamity, or confers any favor, blessing, or privilege, is called justification^ in the scripture sense and use of the word."*

And over and above all these things, our author makes void, and destroys the grand and fundamental opposition of all, to illustrate which is the chief scope of ihis whole passage, viz. That between the first and second Adam, in the death that comes by one, and the life and happiness by the other. For, according to his doctrine, both come by Christ, the second Adam ; both by his grace, righteousness, and obedience : The death that God sentenced mankind to in Gen. iii. 19, being a great deal more properly and truly by Christ, than by Adam. For, according to him, that sentence was not pronounced on the foot of the covenant with Adam, because that was abrogated, and entirely set aside, as what was to have no more effect, before it was pronounced ; as he largely insists for many pages together, pages 113.... 119, 5. He says, page 113, S. " This covenant with Adam was disannulled immediately after Adam sinned. Even before God passed sentence upon Adam, grace was introduced." And in p. 119,-S. he says, " The death that mankind are the subjects of now, stands under the covenant of grace." And in p. 120, 5. " In the counsel and appointment of God, it stood in this very light, even before the sentence of death was pronounced upon Adam ; and consequently, death is no proper and legal pun-

• Key, ^ 374, where it is to be observed, thai he himself puts the 'A-ord ANY in capital letters. The same thing in substance is often asserted else--where. And this, indeed, is his main poiot in what he calls " the true gospel scheme."

ishnient of sin." And he often insists, that it comes only as a favor and benefit ; and standing, as iie says, under the cov-enan' of grace, which is by Christ, therefore is truly one of the benefits of the new covenant, which comes by Christ, the second Adam. For he himself is full in it, to use his own words,* " 1 hat all the grace of the gospel is dispensed to us, in, by, or through the Son of God." *' Nothing is clearer (says hef) from the whole current of scripture, than that all the mercy and loVe of God, and all the blessings of the gospel, from first to last, are /«, by, and through Christ, and particularly by his blood, by the redemption that is in him. This (says hej can bear no dispute among Christians." What then becomes of all this discourse of the apostle, a-bout the great difference and opposition between Adanr? and Christ ; as death is by one, and eternal life and happiness by the other ? This grand distinction between the two Adams, ■ and all the other instances of opposition and difference here insisted on, as between the effects of sin and righteous' ness, the consequences of obedience and disobedience, of the offence and ihe free gift, judgment and grace^ condemnation and justif cation, they all come to nothing ; and this whole discourse of the apostle, wherein he seems to labor much, as if it were to set forth some very grand and most important distinctions and o/i/iositions in the state of things, as derived from ihe two great heads of mankind, proves nothing but a multitude of words without meaning, or rather an heap of inconsistencies.

V. Our author's own doctrine entirely makes void what he supposes to be the apostle's argument in the 13th and 14th verses, in these words : " For until the law, sin was in the world ; but sin is not imputed where there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that hiid not sinned alter the similitude of Adam's transgression.

Whtt he supposes the apostle would prove here, is, 'hat death, or the morialiiy of mankind, comes only by Adam's

* Key, char): viii. Title, p 41. + K:-y, \ 145.

Vol. VI. " 2X'

sin, and not by men's fiersonal sins ; and that it is here proved by this argument, viz. because there was no lavj threatening death to Adam's posterity for {iers<mal sins, before the law of Moses ; but death, or the mortality of Adam's posterity, took place many ages before the law was given ; therefore death could not be by any law threatening death for fiersonal sins, and consequently could be by nothing but Adam's sin.*

On this I would observe,

1. Thai which he supposes the apostle to take for a truth in this argument, viz. That there was no law of God In being, by which men were exposed to death for personal sin, during the time from Adam to Moses, is neither truc^ nor agreeable to this apostle's own doctririe.

First, It is not true. For the law of nature, written in men's hearts, was then in being, and was a law by which men were exposed to death for fiersonal sin. That there Avas a divine establishment, fixing the death and destruction of the sinner, as the consequence of personal sin, which was ■well known before the giving of Moses' law, is plain by many passages in the Book of Job, as fully and clearly implying a connexion between such sin and such a punishment, as any passage in the law of Moses ; such as that in Job xxiv, 19. "Drought and heat consume the snow waters: So doth the grave them that have sinned." (Compare verse 20 and 24.) Also chap, xxxvi. 6. " He prcserveih not the life of the wicked." Chap. xxi. 29....32. " Have ye not asked them that go by the way ? And do ye not know their tokens ? That the wicked is reserved to the day of destruction ; they shall be brought forth to the day of wrath." Ver. 52. " He shall be brought to the grave."t

Secondly, to suppose that there is no law in being, by which men are exposed to death {ov personal sins, where or when a revealed law of God, before, in, or afler Moses' time is not in being, is coyitrary to this afiostlc^s own doctrine

* Page 40, 41,42, 57, and often elsewhere. + See also Job iv. 7, 8. 9. Chap. XV. 17....35. Chap, xviii. 5....21, xix, 29, and xx. 4.,,.8, and many other places.

in this epistle. Rom. ii. 12, 14, 15. " For as many as have sinned without law, (i. e. the revealed law) shall perish without law." But how they can be exposed to die and perish, who have not the law of Moses, nor any revealed law, the apostle shews us in the Uth and l5th verses, viz. in that they have the law of nature, by which they fall under sentence to this punishment. " For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law to themselves ; which shew the work of the law written in their hearts ; their conscience also bearing witness." Their conscience not only bore witness to the duty prescribed by this law, but also to the punishment before spoken of, as that which they who sinned without law, were liable to suffer, viz. that they should perish. In which the apostle is yet more express, chap. i. 32, speaking more especially of the Heathen,'« Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death." Dr. Taylor often calls the law the rule of right; and this rule of right sentenced those sinners to death, who were not under the law of Moses, according to this author's own paraphrase of this verse, in these words, « The Heathen were not ignorant of the rule of right, which God has implanted in the human nature; and which shews that they which commit such crimes, are deserving of death." And he himself supposes Abraham, who lived between Adam and Moses, to be under laivy by which he would have been ex/wsed to Jiumshment without hope, were it not for the promise of grace....in his paraphrase on Rom. iv. 15.

So that in our author's way of explaining the passage before us, the grand argument, which the apostle insists upon here, t© prove his main point, viz. that death does not come by men's personal sins, but by Adam's sin, because it came before the law was given, that threatened death for personal sin : I say, this argument which Dr. Taylor supposes so clear and strong,* is brought to nothing more than a mere shadow without substance ; the very foundation of the argument having no truth. To say, there was no such law actually cx-• • Page 117. 5.

pressed in any standing revelation, would be mere trifling > For it no more appears, tliat God wf)iild not bims? temporal death for personal sins, without a standnig revealed law threatening it, than that he would not bring eternal death before there was a revealed law threatening that : Which yet^vick-ed men that lived in Noah's time, were exposed to, as appears by 1 Pet. iii. 19, 20j and which Dr. Taylor supposes all mankind are exposed to by th( ir personal sins ; and he himself says,* " Sin, in its own unalterable nature, leads to death." Yea, it might be argued with as much strength of reason, that God could bring on men no punishment at all for any sin, that ■was committed from Adam to Moses, because there was no standing revealed law then extant, threatening any punishment. It may here be properly observed, that our author supposes the shortening of man's days, and hastening of death, entered into the world by the sin of the antediluvians, in the same sense as death and mortality entered into the world by Adam's sin.f But Where was there any standing revealed law for that, though the event was so universal ? If God might bring this on all mankind, on occasion of other men's sins, for which they deserved nothing, without a revealed law, what could there be to hinder God's bringing death on men for their /frsowa/sins, for which their own consciences teli them they do deserve death without a revealed law ?

3. If it had been so, that from Adam to Moses there had been no law in being, of any kind, revealed or natural, by Surhieh men could be properly exposed to temporal death for peisonal sin, yet the mention of Moses' law would have been wholly impertinent, and of no signification in the argument, according to our author's understanding of it. He supposes, what the apostle would prove, is, that temfioral death, or the death we now die, comes by Adam ; and not by any law threatening such a punishment fur personal sin ; because this death prevailed before the law of Moses was in being, which is the only law threatening deatli for personal sin. And yet he hint-self supposes, that the law of Moses, when it -was in beings

•Page 77, 78. + Page 68.

threatened no such death for personal sin. For he abundantly asserts, that the death which the law of Moses threatened for personal sin, was eternal death, as has been already noted : And he says in express terms, that eternal deaih is of a na* ture widely different from the death we now die ;* as was also observed before.

How impertinently therefore does Dr. Taylor make an inspired writer argue, when, according to him, the apostle would prove, that this kind of death did not come by any law threatening this kind of deaths because it came before the existence of a law threatening another kind of death, of a nature widely different ? How is it to the apostle's purpose, to fix on that period, the time of giving Moses' law, as if that had been the period wherein men began to be threatened with this punishment for their personal sins, when in truth it was no such thing ? And therefore it was no more to his purpose, to fix on that period, from Adam to Meses, than from Adam to David, or any other period whatsoever. Dr. Taylor holds, ihac even now, since the law of Moses has been given, the mortality of mankind, or the death we now die, does not come hy that law; but that it always comes only by Adam.f Aiifiifit never cornea by that law, we may be sure it never was threat-ened'in that law.

3. If we should allow the argument in Dr. Taylor's sense of it, to prove that death does not come by personal sin, yet it will be wholly without force to prove the main point, even that it must come by Adam's sin : For it might come by God's sovereign and gracious pleasure ; as innumerable other divine benefits do. If it be ordered, agreeably to our author's supposition, not as a punishment< nor as a calamity, but only as afavor^ what necessity of any settled constitution, or revealed sentence, in order to the bestowing such a favor, more than other favors ; and particularly more than that ^reat benefit, which he says entered into the world by the sin of the antediluvians, the shortenmg men's lives so much af-

* Page 120. 5 He says to the like purpose in his Note on Rom, v. 17. i This is plain by what he says, p. 38, 40, 53, 117, S.

ter the flood ? Thus the apostle's arguing, by Dr. Taylor's explanation ofit, is turned into mere triflini;, and a vain and impertinent use of words, without any real force or significance.

VI. The apostle here speaks of that great benefit which we have by Christ, as the antitype of Adam, under the notion of a fruit of grace. I do not mean only that snfierabounding of grace, wherein the benefit Ave have by Christ goes beyond the damage sustained by Adam ; but that benefit, with regard to which Adam nvafi the figure of him that was to come, and which is, as it were, the counterpart of the suffering by Adam, and which repairs the loss we have by him. This is here spoken of as ihe fruit of the free grace of God ; as appears by ver. 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21. This, according to our author, is the restoring of mankind to that life which they lost in Adam : And he himself supposes this restoration of Mfe by Christ to be what grace does for us, and calls it the ^ree gift of God, and the grace and favor of the laivgiver* And speaking of this restoration, he breaks out in admiration of the tinsficakable riches of this grace.\

But it follows from his doctrine, that there is no grace at all in this benefit, and it is no more than a mere act of justice, being only a removing of what mankind suffer, being innocent. Death, as it commonly comes on mankind, and even on infants (as has been observed) is an extreme positive calamity ; to bring which on the perfectly innocent, unremedied, and without any thing to countervail it, we are sufficiently taught, is not consistent with the righteousness of the Judge of all the earth. What grace, therefore, worthy of being so celebrated, would there be in affording remedy and relief, after there had been brought on innocent mankind that which is (as Dr. Taylor himself represents)! the dreadful and universal destruction of their nature ; being a striking demonstration how infinitely hateful sin is to God 1 What grace in delivering from

* Page 39,70. 148, 27,5. See also contents of this paragr^h in Rotn. v. in his notes on the epistle, and bis note on ver. 15, 16, 17. + Page 119, S. X P'ge 69.

such shocking ruin, them that did not deserve the least calamity ! Our author says, " We could not justly lose communion with God by Adam's sin."* If so, then we could not justly lose our lives, and be annihilated, after a course of extreme pains and agonies of body and mind, without any restoration ; which would be an eternal loss of communion with God, and all other good, besides the positive suffering. The apostle, throughout this passage, represents the deaths which is the consequence of Adam's transgression, as coming in a way of judgmeiit and condemnation for sin ; but deliverance and life through Christ, as by grace^ and the free gift of God. Whereas, on the contrary, by Dr. Taylor's scheme, the death that comes by Adam, comes by grace, great grace i it being a great benefit, ordered in fatherly love and kindness, and on the foot of a covenant of grace : But in the deliverance and restoration by Christ, there is no grace at ali. So things are turned tofisy turvy, the apostle's scope and scheme entirely inverted and confounded.

VII. Dr. Taylor explains the words, judgment, condemnation^ justification, and righteousness, as used in this place, in a very unreasonable manner.

I will first consider the sense he puts upon the two former, judgment and condemnation. He often calls this condemnation a ^wrf/c/c/Acr, and a sentence of condemnation. But, according to his scheme, it is a judicial sentence of condemnation passed upon them that are perfectly innocent, and viewed by the Judge, even in his passing the sentence, and condemning them, as having no guilt of sin, or fault at all chargeable upon them ; Siud ?t. judicial/iroceeding, passing sentejice arhi' traiily, without any law or rule of rigiit before established : For there was no preceding law or rule threatening death, that he, or any one else, ever pretended to hav^ been established, but only this, " In the day that thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die," And concerning this, he insists, that there is not a word said in it of Adam's posterity. So that the condemnation spoken of, is a sentence of condemnation tr

* Pagf 14^.

death, for, or in consequence of the sin of Adam, without any law, by which that sin could be imputed to biintr any such consequence ; contrary to the apostle's plain scope. And not only so, but over and above all this, it is a judicial sentencf oi condemnation to that which is no calamity, nor is considered as such in the sentence ; but it is condemnation to a great favor 1

The apostle uses the words judg?nrnt and condemnation in other places ; they are no strans>:e and unusual terms with him : But never are they used by him in this sense, or any like it ; nor are they ever used thus any where else in the New Testament. This apostle elsewhere in this epistle to the Romans is often speaking of condemnatio?!, using the same. or similar terms and phrases as here, but never in the above-said sense. Chap. ii. 1, 2, 3. six times in these verses ; also ver. 12 and 27, and chap. iii. 7 ; chap. viii. 1 and 3 ; chap. xiv. 3, 4 and ver, 10, 13, 22 and 23. This will be plain to every one that casts his eye on these places : And if we look into the former part of this chapter, the apostle's discourse here makes it evident, that he is here speaking of a condemnation, that is no testimony of favor to the innocent ; but of God's displeasure towards those that he is not reconciled to, but looks on as offenders, sinners, and enemies, and holds as the objects of his wrath, which we arc delivered from by Christ ; as may be seen in verses 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11.

And viewing this discourse itself, in the very paragraph \ve are upon, if we may judge any thing by language and manner of speaking, there is every thing to lead us to suppose, that the apostle uses these words here, a^ he does elsewhere, properly and as implying a supposition of sin, chargeable on the subject, and exposing to punishment. He speaks of condemnation with reference to sin, as what comes by sin, and as a condemnation to death, which seems to be a most terrible evil, and capital punishment, even in what is temporal and visible ; and this in the way of judgment and execution of justice, in opposition to grace or favor, and gift or a benefit coming by favor. And sin and cffcnce, transgression and disobedience, are over and over .ngain spoken of as ilie ground

of ihe condemnation, and of the capital sufTeting condemned !o, for ten verses success \ely, that is, in every verse in the whole paragraph, without missing one.

The words, justification and righteousness., are explained by Dr. Taylor, in a no less unreasonable manner. He wW' ders\.ands jiistjfication, in ver. 18, and righteousness, in ver. 19, in such a sense, as to suppose them to belong to all, and actually to be applied to all mankind, good and bad, believers and unbelievers ; to the worst enemies of God, remaining such, as well as his peculiar favorites, and many that never had any sin imputed to them ; meaning thereby no more than what is fulfilled in an universal resurrection from the dead, at the last day.* Now this is a most arbitrary forced sense. Though these terms are used every where, all over the New Testament, yet nothing like such an use of them is to be found in any one instance, through all the writings of the apostles and evangelists. The •v/ovd^ justify, justification., and righteousness, as from God to men, are never used but to signify a privilege belonging only to some, and that which is peculiar to distinguished favoi-ites. This apostle in particular, above all the other writers of the New Testament, abounds in the use of these terms ; so that we have all imaginable opportunity to understand his language, and know the sense in which he uses these words : But he never elsewhere uses them in the sense supposed here, nor is there any pretence that he does. Above all, does this apostle abound in the use of these terms in this epistle. Justification is the subject he had been upon through all the pieccding part of the epistle. It was the grand subject of all the foregoing chapters, and the precediDg part of this chapter, where these terms are continually repeated. And the v;o\\\, justificationy is constantlv used to signify something peculiar to believers, who had been sinners ; implying some reconciliation and forgiveness of sin, and special privilege in nearness to God, above the re-t of the woild. Yea, the word is constantly used thus, according to Dr. Taylor's own explamuions, in his paraphrase and i.otes

• So, page 47, 49, 60, 61, 62, and orher places. Vol., VI. ? Y

on this epistle. And there is not the least reason to suppose but that he is still speaking of the same jusli/icalioji and rights eousness, which he had dwelt upon from the beginnins* to this place. He speaks of justijication and righteousness here, just in the same manner as he had done in the preceding part of the epistle. He had all along spoken of justification as standing in relation to am, disobedience to God, and offence against God, and so he does here : He had before been speaking of justification through free grace, and so he does ^ere : He before had been speaking of justification ihi'ough rightcous-ness, as in Christ Jesus, and so he does here.

And if we look into the former part of this very chapter, there we shall find justijicatiori spoken of just in the same sense as in the rest of the epistle ; \vhich is also supposed by our author in his exposition : It is still jusiijication by faith., justijication of them that had been sinners, justijication attended with reconciliation, justification peculiar to them that had the love of God shed abroad in their hearts. The apostle's foregoing discourse on justification by grace through faith, and what he had so greatly insisted on as the evidence of the truth of this doctrine, even the universal sinfulness of mankind in their original state, is plainly what introduces this discourse in the latter part of this 5th chapter ; where he shews how all mankind came to be sinful and miserable, and so to need this grace of God, and righteousness of Christ. And therefore we cannot, without the most absurd violence, suppose any other than that he is still speaking of the %d^\a& justification.

And as to the universal expression used in the 18th verse, " By the righteousness of one, the free gift came upon all n,en to justification of life ;" it is needless here to go into the con-troversv between the remonstrants and aiiti remonstrants, concerning universal redemption, and their dift'erent interpretations of this place. If we take the words even as the Arniin-ians do ; yet, in their sense of them, the free gift comes on all men to justification only conditiojmll'j ; i. e.firovided ihty believe, repent. Sec. But in our author's sense, it actually comes on all,, whether they believe and repent, or not ; which

certainly cannot be inferred from the universal expression, as here used. Dr. Taylor himself supposes, the main design of the apostle in this universal phrase, all men, is to signify that the benefits of Christ shall come on Gentiles as well as Jews.* And he supposes that the many, and the all, here signify Ihe same : But it is quite certain, that all the benefits here spoken of, which the apostle says are to the many, does not actually come upon all mankind ; as particularly the abounding of grace, spoken of ver. 15. The grace of God, and the gift by grace, hath abounded unto the many, ttt; th; tao'KKai;.

This abounding of grace our author explains thus : " A rich overplus of grace, in erecting a new dispensation, furnished with a glorious fund of light, means and motives," p. 44. But will any pretend, that all mankind have actually been partakers of this new fund of light, 8cc. How were the many millions of Indians, on the American side of the globe, partakers of it, before the Europeans came hither ? Yea, Dr. Taylor himself supposes, all that is meant is, that it is free for all that are vAlling to accefit ofit.'f The agreement between Adam, as the type or figure of him that was to come, and Christ as the antitype, appears as full and clear, if we suppose all which are in Christ (to use the common scripture phrai5e) have the benefit of his obedience, as all that are in Adam have the sorrowful fruit of his disobedience. The scripture speaks of believers as the seed or posterity of Christ. (Gal. iii. 29.) They are in Christ by grace, as Adam's posterity are in him by nature : The one are in the frst Adam naturally, as the other are in the second Adam spiritually ; Exactly agreeable to the representation this apostle makes of the matter, 1 Cor. xv. 45....49. The spiritual seed are those which this apostle often represents as On-ist's body : And the CI 'BTo?Jio» here spoken of as made righteous by Christ's obedience are doubtless the same with the o» o^oXAoj which he speaks of in chap. xii. 5. JTe, being ?nanyy are one body ; or, we, the many, oi •o^eTk^ot i» au(*et Slitv. And again, 1 Cor. x. 17, e» vufioi

* Page 6o, 6i, See also Contents of this paragraph, in his notes on the epistle. + Notes on the epistU, p. 284.

oj OTo^Xoj £«-^£r. And the same which the apostle had spoken of in tlie preceding chapter, Rom. iv. 18, compared with Gen. XV. 5.

Dr. Taylor mvich insists on that place, 1 Cor. xv. 21, 22. " For since hy man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead : For as in Adam all die, so in Christ shall all be made alive ;" to confirm his suppositions, that the apostle here in the 5th of Romans, speaking of the death and condemnation which come by Adam, has respect only to the death ive all die, when this life ends : And that by the justification and life which come by Christ, he has reipect only to the general resurrection at the last day. But ii is observable, that his argument is wholly built on these two suppositions, viz._ First, That the resurrection meant by the apostle, in that place in the 1 Cor. xv. is the resurrection of all mankind, both just and unjust. Secondly, That the opposite consequences of Adam's s,in, and Christ's obedience, spoken of here in Rom. v. are the very same, neither more nor less, than are spoken of there. IJut there are no grounds for supposing cither of these things to be true.

1. There is no evidence, that the resurrection there spoken of, is the resurrection both of the just and unjust j but abundant evidence of the contrary. The resurrection of the wicked is seldom mentioned in the New Testament, and rarely included in the meaning of the word ; it being esteemed not worthy to be called a rising to life, being only for a great increase of the misery and darkness of eternal death : And therefore by the reF.urrrction is most commonly meant a rising to life and hitppiness ; as may be observed in Matth. xxii. 30 ....Luke XX. 35, 36....John vi. 39, 40, 54....Philip, iii. 11, and other places. The saints avq called the children of the resurrection, as Dr. Taylor observes in his note on Rom. viii. 11, And it is exceeding evident, that it is the resurrection to life and happiness, the apostle is speaking of in this 1 Cor. xv. 21, 22. It appears by each of the three foregoing verses, ver. i8. " Then I hey which are fallen asleep in Christ (i. e. the saints) are perished." Ver. 19. " If in this life only ive (Christians or apostles) have hope in Chribt (and have no resuireclion

ORIGINAL SIN. SfS

and, eternal life to hope for) we are of all men most miserable." Ver. 20. *' But now is Christ risen from the dead, and is become Xhejirstfruits of them that slepc." He is the forerunner and first fruits only with respect to them that are his ; who are lo follow him, and partake with him in the glory and happiness of his resurrection : But he is not the first fruits of them that shall come forth to the resurrection oi damnation. It also appears by tiie verse immediately following, ver. 23. " But every man in his own order ; Christ the first fruits, and afterward lliey that are Christ's^ at his coming." The same is plain by what is said in verse 29, 30, 31 and 32, and by all that is said from the 35th verse to the end of the chapter, for nventythree verses together : It there expressly appears, that the apostle is speaking only of a rising to glory^ with a glori-mis body, as the little grain that is sown, being quickened, rises a beautiful flourishing plant. He there speaks of the different .degrees of glory among them that shall rise, and compares it to the different degrees of glory among the celestial luminaries. The resurrection which he treats of, is expressly a being raised in incorrufiiion^ in glory^ in /lowevj -xith a spiritual body., having the image of the second man, the spiritual and heavenly Adam ; a resurrection wherein this /■.orrujitible dhall fiiit on incorrvfition^ ayid this mortal fiut on im-7norta'ity, and death be sivalloived up in -victory, and the s^nta shall gloriously triumph over that last enemy. Dr. Taylor himself says, that which is in effect owning the resurrection hfere spoken of is only of the righteous ; for it is expressly a resurrection, w a^a.i)xa.Mx., and a(p^uq7f.a., ver. 53 and 42, But Dr. Taylor says, »'These are never attributed t© the wicked In scripture.* So that when the apostle says here, " As in Adam all die, so in Christ shall all be made alive ;" it is as much as if he had said. As in Adam we all die, and our bodies' are sown in corruption, in dishonor, and in weakness ; so in Christ we all (we Christians, whom I have all along been speaking of) shall be raised in power, glory, and incorruption, spiritual and heavenly, conformed to the second Adam. « For

* Note on Rom. viii. 27.

as we have lioi ne the imat^e of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly," ver. 49. Which clearly explains and determines his meaning in verse 21, 22.

2. There is no evidence that the benefit by the second Adam, spoken of in Rom. v. is the very same (containing neither more nor less) as the resurrection spoken of in I Cor. XV. It is no evidence of it, that the benefit is opposed to the death that comes by the first Adam, in like manner in both places. The resurrection to eternal life, though it be not the whole of that salvation and happiness which comes by the second Adam, yet it is that wherein this salvation is principally obtained. The time of the saints' glorious resurrection is often spoken of as the proper time of the saints' salvation, 4he day of their redem/ition, the time of their adofition, glory, and recompense. (As in Luke xiv. 14, and xxi. 28, Rom. viii. 23, Eph. iv. 30, Coloss. iii. 4, 2 Thess. i. 7, 2 Tim. iv. 8, 1 Pet. i. 13, and v. 4, 1 John iii. 2, and other places.) All that salvation and happiness which is given before, is only a prelibation and earnest of their great reward. Well therefore may that consummate salvation bestowed on them, be set in opposition to the death and ruin which comes by the first Adam, in like manner as the whole of their salvation is opposed to the same in Rom. v. Dr. Taylor himself observes,* " T'^t the revival and resurrection of the body, is frequently put for our advancement to eternal life." It being the highest part, it is often put for the whole.

This notion, as if the justification, righteousness, and life spoken of in Rom. v. implied the resurrection to damnation, is not only without ground from scripture, but contrary to reaf.on. For those things are there spoken of as great benefits, by the grace and free gift of God ; but this is the contrary, in the highest degree possible, being the most consummate and infinite calamity. To obviate this, our author supposes the resurrection of all to be a great benefit in itself, tho\igh turned into a calamity by the sin and folly of obstinate pinners, who abuse God's goodness. But the far greater pari

^ * No'.e on Rom. viii. Ji,

of mankind, since Adam, have never had opportunity to abuse this goodness, it having; never been made known to tbem.-Men cannot abuse a kindness, which they never had either in possession, promise, ofl'er, or some intimation ; but a resurrection is made known only by divine revelation, which few comparatively have enjoyed. So that as to such wicked men as die in lands of darkness, if their resurrection comet; at all by Christ, it comes from him, and to them, only as a curse, and not as a blessing ; for it never comes to them at all by any conveyance^ grant, firomise.^ or offer, or any thing by which they can claim it, or know any thing of it, till it comes as an infinite calamity, past all remedy.

VIII. In a peculiar manner is there an unreasonable vi« olence used in our author's explanation of the words shmers and sinned, in the paragraph before us* He says, " These words, By one man's disobedience many tvere made siftners, mean neither more nor less, than that by one man's disobedience, the many were made subject to death, by the judicial act of God."* And he says in the same place, " By death most certainly is meant no other than the death and mortality common to all mankind.'* And those words, verse 12, For that all have sinned, he thus explains, " All men became dnners as all mankind are brought into a stale of suf-£ering."t

Here I observe,

I. The main thing, by which he juslilies such interpretations, is, that sin, in various instances, is used for snfferinq;, in the Old Testament.:^ To which I reply, though it be true that the word Chattaah, signifies both sin, and a sin offering ; and this, and some other Hebrew words, which signify sin, iniquity, and wickedness, are sometimes put for the effect or punishment of iniquity, by a metonymy of the cause for the effect ; yet it does not appear, that these words are ever used for enduring suffering, where the suffering is nee spoken of under any notion of a punishment of sin, or a fruit of God's anger for sin, or of any imputation of guilt, or under

♦ Page 30. + Page 54, and elsewhere. % Page 34.

anjr notion of sin's bein^ at all laid to the chart^e of tiie sufferer, or the suffering's being at all of the nature of any recompense, compensation, or satisfaction for sin. And therefore none of the instances he mentions, come up to his purpose. When Lot is commanded to leave Sodom, that he might not be consumed m the iniquity of the city, meanintr in that fire, which was the effect and punishment of the iniquity of the city ; this is quite another thing, than if that fire came on the city in general, as no punishment at all, nor as any fruit of a charge of iniquity on the city, or of God's displeasure for their sin, but as a token of God's favor to the inhabitants ; which is what is supposed with respect to the deatii of mankind ; it being introduced only as a benefit, on the foot of a covenant of grace. And especially is this quite another thing, than if, in the expression used, the iniquity had been asciibed to Lot ; and God, instead of saying, Lest thou be consumed in the iniquity of the city, had said. Lest thou be consumed in thine iniquity, or. Lest thou sin, or be made a sinner. Whereas the expression is such, as does expressly remove the iniquity spoken of from Lot, and fix it on another subject, viz. the city. The place cited by our author in Jer. li, is exactly parallel. And as to what Abimelech says to Abraham, " What have I offended thee, that thou hUst brought on me, and on my kingdom, a great sin ? It is manifest, Abimelech was afraid that God was angry, for what he had done to Sarah ; or, would have been angry with him, if he had done what he was about to do, as imputing sin to him for it: Which is a quite different thing from calling some calamity, sin, under no notion of its being any punishment of sin, nor in the least degree from God's displeasure. And so with regard to evf>ry place our author cites in the margin, it is plain, that what is meant in each of them, is the puidshment of sin, and not some suRering which is no punishment at all. And as to the instances he mentions in his Supplement, p. 8, the two that look most favorable to his design, are those in Gen. xxxi. 39, and 2 Kings vii. 9. With respect to ihe former, where J;tcob says, That which was torn of beasts, Anochi-achattenah, Dr. Taylor is pleased to iianslate it, J was the sinner ; but prop-

eriy rendered, it is, I exfiiatecl it ; the verb in Pihel properly ^h^m^y'm^ to exfiiate ; and the plain meaning is, I bore the blame ofit^and ivas obliged to fiay for it, as being supposed to be lost throuj^h my fjult or neglect : Which is a quite different thing from suffering without any supposition of fault. And as to the latter place, where the lepers say, " Tliis day is a day of good tidings, and we hold our peace : If we tarry till morning some mischief will befal us :" In the Hebrew it is Umetzaanu gnavon, " Iniquity will find us," that is, some punishment of our fault will come upon us. Elsewhere such phrases are used, as, Your iniquity nvilljind you out^ and the like. But certainly this is a different thing from suffering without fault, or supposition of foult. And it does not appear, that the verb in Hiphil, hirshiang, is ever put for condemn, in any other sense than condemning for sin, or guilt, or supposed guilt belonging to the subject condemned. This word is used in the participle of Hiphil, to signify condemning^ in Prov. xvii. 15. » He that justifieth the wicked, and he that condemneth the just, even both are an abomination to the Lord." This Dr Taylor observes, as if it were to his purpose, when he is endeavoring to shew, that in this place, in the 5th of Romans, the apostle speaks of God himself as con-demjiiyig (ht just, or perfectly innocent, in a parallel signification of terms. Nor is any instance produced, wherein the verb, dn, which is used by the apostle when he says, All ha-oe sinned, is any where used in our author's sense, for being brought into a state of suffering, and that not as a punishment for sin, or as any thing arising from God's displeasure ; much less'for being the subject of what comes only as the fruit of divine love, and as a benefit of the highest nature * Nor can any thing like this sense of the verb be found in the whole Bible.

2. If there had been any thing like such an use of the words, sin and sinner, as our author supposes, in the Old Testament, it is evident that such an use of them is quite alien from the language of the New Testament. Where c.\n

* Pige 27, S.

Vol.. VI. 2Z

an instance be produced of any thjnt^ like it, in any one place, besides what is pretended in this ? And particularly, where else shall we find these words and phrases used in such a sense in any of this apostle's writings ? We have enough of his writings, by which to learn his language and way of speaking about sin, condemnation, punishment, death, and suffering. He wrote much more of the Ncav Testament than any other person. He very often has occasion to speak of condemnation, but where does he express it by being made sinners ? Especially how far is he elsewhere from using such a phrase, to signify a being condemned without guilt, or any imputation or supposition of guilt ? Vastly more still is it remote from his language, so to use the verb sin, and to say, man sinneth, or has sinned, though hereby meaning nothing more nor less, than that he, by a judicial act, is condemned, on the foot of a dispensation of grace, to receive a great favor ! He abundantly uses the words sin and sinner ; his writings are full of such terms ; but where else does he use them in such a sense ? He has much occasion in his epistles to speak of death, temporal and eternal ; he has much occasion to speak oi suffering, of all kinds, in this world, and the world to come ; but where does he call these things sin, and denominate innocent men sinners, or say, they have sinned, meaning that they are brought into a state of suffering ? If the apostle, because he was a Jew, was so addicted to the Hebrew idiom, as thus in one paragraph to repeat this particular Hebraism^ which, at most, is comparatively rare even m the Old Testament, it is strange that never any thing like it should appear any where else i\t his wiiiings ; and especially that he should never fall into such a way of speakmg in his epistle to the Hebrews, written to Jews only, who were most used to the H-^brew idiom. And why does Christ never use such language in any of his speeches, though he was born and brought up amongst the Jews, and delivered almost all his speeches only to Jews ? And why do none of the rest of the writers of the New Testament ever use it, who were all born and educated Jews, (at least all excepting Luke) and some of them wrote especially lor the benefit of the Jews ?

It is worthy to be observed, what liberty is taken, and boldness used xrith this apostle ; such words as a,t<a|To^©', afca^rava, xpif^eij xaraxp/Aa, Jtxa»oft», Jixanuo-if, and words ol the same root and signification, are words abundantly used by him elsewhere in this and other epistles, and also when speaking, as he is here, of Christ's redemption and atonement, and of the general sinfulness of mankind, and of the condemnation of sinners, and of justification by Christ, and of death as the consequence of sin, and of life and restoration to life by Christ, as here ; yet no where are any of these words used, but in a sense very remote from what is supposed here. However in this place, these terms must have a diatinguishtd, singular sense found out for them, and annexed to them ! A new language must be coined for the apostie, which he ia evidently quite unused to, and put into his mouth on this occasion, for the sake of evading this clear, precise, and abundant testimony of his, to the doctrine of Original Sin.

3. The putting such a sense on the word sin, in this place, is not only to make the apostle greatly to disagree with himself in the language he uses every where else, but also to disagree with himself no less in the language he uses in this very passage. He often here uses the word airiy and other words plainly of the same design and import, such as transgression^ disobedience^ offence. Nothing can be more evident, than that these are here used as several names of the same thing ; for they are used interchangeably, and put one for another, as will be manifest only on the cast of an eye on the place. And these words are used no less than seventeen times in this one paragraph. Perhaps we shall find no place in the whole Bible, in wliich the word sin, and other words synonymous, are used so often in so little compass ; and in all the instances, in the proper sense, as signifying moral evil., and even so understood by Dr. Taylor himself (as appears by his own exposition) but only in these two places ; wheie in the midst of all, to evade a clear evidence of the doctrine of Original Sin, another meaning must be found out, and it must be supposed that the apostle uses the

word in a sense entirely different, signifying something that neither imfilies nor stififioscs any moral evil at all in the subject.

Here it is very remarkable, the gentleman who so greatly insisted upon it, that the word death must needs be understood in the same sense throughout this paragraph ; yea, that it is evide-ntly, clearly, and infallibly so, inasnmch as the apostle is still discoursing on the same subject ; yet can, without the least difficulty, suppose the word sin, to be used so differently in the very same passage, wherein the apostle is discoursing on the same thing. Let us take that one instance in verse 12. " Wherefore as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death passed upon alt men, for that all have sinned." Here by sin, implied in the word sinned, in the end of the sentence, our author understands something perfectly and altogether diverse from what is meant by the word sin, not only in the same discourse on the same subject, but twice in the former part of the very same sentence, of which this latter part is not only the conclusion, but the explication ; and also entirely different from the use of the word twice in the next sentence, wherein the apostle is still most plainly discoursing on the same subject, as is not denied : And in the next sentence to that (verse 14) the apostle uses the veiy same verb sinned, and as signifying the committing of moral evil, as our author himself understands it. Afterwards fvcse 19) the apostle uses the word sinners, which our author supposes to be in somewhat of a different sense still. So that here is the utmost violence of the kind that can be conceived of, to make out a scheme agamst the plainest evidence, in changing the meaning of a word backward and forward, in one paragraph, all about one thing, and in different parts of the same sentences, coming over and over in quick repetitions, with a variety of other synonymous words to fix its signification ; besides the continued use of the word in the former part of this chapter, and in all the preceding part of this epistle, and the continued use of it in the next chapter, and in the next to that,and the 8th chupier following that, aiid to the end of the epistle ;

in none of which places it is pretended, but that the word is used in the proper sense, by our author in his paraphrase and notes on the whole epistle.*

But indeed we need go no further than that one, verse 12. What the apostle means by sin, in the latter part of the verse, is evident with the utmost plainness, by comparing it with the former part ; one part answering to another, and the last clause exegetical of the former. " Wherefore as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin ; and so death passed upon all men, for that (or, unto which) all have sinned.'* Here sin and death are spoken of in the former part, and sin and deafh are spoken of in the latter part ; the two parts of the sentence so answering one another, that the same things are apparently me^nt by sin and death in both parts.

And besides, to interpret sinning, here, of falling under the suffering o( death, is yet the more violent and unreasonable, because the aposile in this very place does once and again distinguish between sin and death ; plainly speaking of one as the effect, and the other the cause. So in the 21st verse, " That assm hath reigned unto death ;"" and in the I2th verse, '^ Sin entered into the world, and death by sin." And this plain distinction holds through all the discourse, as between death and the offence, ver. 15, and ver. 17, and between the offence and condemnation, ver. 18.

4. Though we should omit the consideration of the manner in which the apostle u.^es the words, sin^ sinned, £cc. in

♦ Agreeably to th's manner, our author, in explaining the ylh chapter of Romans, ur.dtrstands the pron.un /, ox me, usi d by the apostle in that one continued discourse, in no less than six different senses. He takes it in the ist verse to signify the Apostle Paul himself 'n the 8th gh, lOth and nth vevses, for the people of the Jews, through all ages, both before and after Moses, especially the carnal, ungodly part of them. In the 13th verse for an objec ing Jew, entering into a dialo;jue with the apostle. In the I5ih, 16th, t7th, ■?o:h, and latter part of the 25th verse, it is understood in two different senses, for two /'s in the same person ; one, a man's reason ; and the other, his passions and carnal appetites. And in the 7th and former part of the last verse, for us Chris ians in general; or, for all thnt enjov the word of God, the law and thf go'pfl : \x\A hese difFcre-'t sen es. the most of them strangely iaterraixed and interchanged ijackwards and forwards.

other places, and in other parts of this discourse, yet Dr. Tay* lor's interpretation of them would be very absurd.

The case stands thus : According to his- exposition, we are said to have sinned by an active verb, as though we had actively sinned ; yet this is not spoken truly and properlyj but it is put figuratively for our becoming sinners//ass/T'e/t/, our being made or constituted sinners. Yet again, not that we do truly become sinners/ia*s/t>e/?/, or are really rnade sinnersy by any thing that God does ; this also is only a figurative or tropical representaiion ; and the meaning is only, we are con-demned, and treated as if we were sinners. Not indeed that ■we are properly condemned, for God never truly condemns the innocent: But this also is only a figurative representation of the thing. It is but as it were condemning ; because it is appointing to death, a terrible evil, as if it ivere a punishment. But then, in reality, here is no appointment to a terrible evil, or any evil at all; but truly to a benefit, a great benefit: And so, in representing death as a punishment or calamity condemned to, another figure or trope is made use of, and an exceeding bold one ; for, as we are appointed to it, it is so far from being an evil or punishment, that it is really ix favor, and that of the highest nature, appointed by mere grace and love, though it see7ns to be a calamity. Thus we have tropes and figures multiplied, one upon the back of another ; and all in that one word, sinned ; according to the manner, as it is sup-poi^ed, the apostle uses it. We have a figurative refiresenta-tion, not of a reality, but of a figurative re/iresentation. Neither is this a representation of a reality, but of another thing that still is but -d. figurative refiresentation of something else : Yea, even this something else is still but a figure, and one that is very harsh and far fetched. So that here we have a figure to represent a figure^ even z. figure of a figure, representing some very remote figure, which most obscurely represents the thing intended ; if the most terrible evil can indeed be said at all to r<'/i7V'sr??Mhe contrary g-oorf of the highest kind. And now, what cannot be made of any place of scripture, in such a way of managing it, as this ? And is there any hope of ever deciding any controversy by the scripture) in the way of

using such a licence with the scripture, in order to force it to a compliance with our own schemes ? If the apostle indeed uses language after so strange a manner in this place, it is perhaps such an instance, as not only there is not the like of it in all the Bible besides, but perhaps in no writing whatsoever. And this, not in any parabolical, visionary, or prophetic description, in which difficult and obscure representations are wont to be made use of; nor in a dramatic or poetical representation, in which a great licence is often taken, and bold figures are commonly to be expected : But it is in a familiar letter, wherein the apostle is delivering gospel instruction, as a minister of the New Testament; and wherein, as he professes, he delivers divine truth without the vail of ancient figures and similitudes, and uses great plainness of speech : And in a discourse that is wholly didactic, narrative, and argumentative ; evidently setting himself to explain the doctrine he is upon, in the reason and nature of it, with a great variety of expressions, turning it as it were on every side, to make his meaning plain, and to fix in his readers the exact notion of what he intends. Dr. Taylor himself observes,* " This apostle takes great care to guard and explain every part of his subject: And I may venture to say, he has left no part of it unexplained or unguarded. Never was an author more exact and cautious in this than he. Sometimes he writes notes on a sentence liable to exception, and wanting explanation." Now I think, this care and exactness of the apostle no where appears more than in the place we are upon. Nay, I scarcely know another instance equal to this, of the apostle's care to be well understood, by being very particular, explicit, and precise, setting the matter forth in every light, going over and over again with his doctrine, clearly to exhibit, and fully to settle and determine the thing which he aims at.

• Preface to Paraph, on Rom. p. 14S, 48

SECTION LI.

Some Observations on the Connexion, Scopci and Sense of this remarkable paragrafih in Rom. v. With some Rejiectiuns on the Evidence nvhichnve here have of the Doctrine o/Ohio-iNAL Sin.

THE connexion of' this remarkable paragraph with the foregoing discourse in this epistle, is not obscure and difficult, nor to be sought for at a distance. It may be plainly seen, only by a general glance on things which went before, from the beginning of the epistle : And indeed what is said immediately before in the same chapter, leads directly to it. The apostle in the prr-ceding part of this epistle had largely treated of the sinfu/n^s and misery of all mankind, Jews as well as Gentiles. He had particularly spoken of the depravity and ruin of mankind in their natural state, in the foregoing part of this chapter ; representing them as being .<?/«-nei's, ungodly, enemies, exposed to divine lurath, and without strength. No wonder now, this leads him to observe, hoiv this so great and deplorable an event came to pass ; how tins universal sin and ruin came into the world. And with regard to the Jews in particular, who, though they might allow the doctrine of Original Sin in their own profession, yet were strongly prejudiced against what was implied in it, or evidently followed from it, with regard to themselves ; in this respect they were prejudiced agtiinst the dociiine of iiniversal sinfulness, and cxposedness to wrath by natiire. looking on themselves as by nature holy, and favorites of God, because they were the children of Abraham ; and with them the apostle had labored most in the foregoing part of the episle, to convince them of their being by nature as sinful, and as much

the children of wrath, as the Gentiles :....! say, with regard to them, it was exceeding proper, and what the apostle's design most naturally led him to, to take off their eyes from their fatlier A'jraham, who was their father in distinction from other nations, and direct them to their father Adam, who was the common father of mankind, and equally of Jews and Gentiles. And when he was entered on this doctrine of the derivation of sin and ruin, or death, to all mankind from Adam, no wonder if he thought it needful to be son.ewhat particular in it, seeing he wrote to Jews and Gentiles ; the former of which had been brought up under tlie prejudices of a proud opinion of tliemselves, as a holy people by nature, and the latter had been educated in total ignorance of all things of this kind.

Again, the apostle had, from the beginning of the epistle, been endeavoring to evince the absolute dependence of all mankind on the free grace of God for salvation, and the greatness of this grace ; and particularly in the former part of this chapter. The greatness of this grace he shews especially by two things. (1.) The universal corruption and misery of mankind ; as in all the foregoing chapters, and in the 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th and 10th verses of this chapter. (2.) The greatness of the benefits which believers receive, and the greatness of the glory they have hope of. So especially in verse 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and llih of this chapter. And here, in ihis place we are upon, from verse 12 to the end, he is still on the sarae design of magnifying the grace of God, in the same thing, viz. the favor, life, and happiness which believers in Christ receive ; speaking here of the grace of God, the gift by grace, the abounding of grace, arid the reign of grace. And he still ^ets forth the freedom and riches of grace by the same two argiimenis, viz. The universal sinfulness and ruin of mankind, all having sinned, all being naturally exposed to death, judgment and condemnation ; and the exceeding greatness of the benefit received, being far greater than the misery whicli comes by the first Adam, and abounding beyond it. And it is by no means consistent witli the apostle's scope, to .suppose, that the benefit which we have by (ilirist, as the aii-^'«I.. VI. '5 A

titypc of Adam, liere mainly insisted on, is without any grace at all, being only a restoration to life ot such as never deserved death.

Another thing observable in the apostle's scope from the beginning of the epistle, is, he endeavors to shew the gieat-iiess and absoluteness of the dependence of all mankind on the redemption and righteousness of Christ, for justification and life, that he might magnify and exalt the Redeemer ; which design his wiiole heart was swallowed up in, and may be looked upon as the main design of the whole epistle. And this is what he had been upon in the preceding part of this chapter ; inferring it from the same argument, the utter sinfulness and ruin of all men. And he is evidently still on the same thing in this place, from the 12th verse to the end ; ^peaking of the same justification and righteousness, which he had dwelt on before, and not anoti>er totally diverse. No wonder, when the apostle is treating so fully and largely of our restoration, righteousness, and life by Christ, that he is led by it to consider our fall, sin, death, and ruin by Adam ; and to observe wherein these two opposite heads of mankind agree, and wherein they differ, in the manner of conveyance of opposite influences and communications from each.

Thus, if the place be understood, as it used to be understood by orthodox divines, the whok stands in a natural, easy, and clear connexion with the preceding part of the chapter, and all the former part of the epistle ; and in a plain agreement with the express design of all that the apostle had been saying ; and also in connexion with the words last before spoken, as introduced by the two immedrately preceding verses, where he is speaking of our justification, reconciliation, and salvation by Christ ; which leads the aposik directly to observe, how, on the contrary, we have sin and death by Adam. Taking this discourse of the apostle in its true and plain sense, there is no need of great extent of learning, or depth of criticism, to find out the connexion : But if it be understood in Dr. Taylor's sense, the plain scope and connexion are wholly lost, and there was truly need of a skill in criticism, and art of discerning, beyond or at least diilercnt from

ORIGINAL SIN. S«7

that of former divines, and a faculty of seeing something afar off, which other men's sight could not reach, in order to find . out the connexion.

What has been ah-eady observed, may suffice lo shew the apostle's general scope in this place. But yet there seem to be some other things, which he has his eye to, in several expressions ; some particular things in the then present state, temper and notions of the Jews, which he also had before spoken of, or had reference to, in certain places of the foregoing part of the epistle. As particularly, the Jews had a very superstitious and extravagant notion of their law, delivered by Moses ; as if it were the prime, grand, and indeed only rule of God's proceeding with mankind as their judge, both in men's justification and condemnation, or from whence all, both sin and righteousness, were imputed ; and had no consideration of the law of nature, written in the hearts of the Gentiles, and of all mankind. Herein they ascribed infinitely too much to their particular law, beyond the true design of it. They vxade their boast oftlie latv ; as if their being distinguished from all other nations by that great privilege, the giving of the law, sufficiently made them a holy people, and God's children. This notion of theirs the apostle evidently refers to, chap.ii. 13, 17, 18, 19, and indeed through that whole chapter. They looked on the law of Moses as intended to be the only rule and means of justification ; and as such, trusted in the works of the law, especially circumcision ; which appears by the 3d chapter. But as for the Gentiles, they looked on them as by nature sinners, and children of wrath ; because born of uncircumcised parents, and aliens from their law, and who themselves did not know, profess and submit to the law of Moses, become proselytes, and receive circumcision. What they esteemed the sum of their wickedness and condemnation, was, that they did not turn Jews, and act as Jews.* This notion of theirs the apostle has a plain respect to, and endeav-

* Here are worthy to be observed tlie things which Dr. Taylor himself i.ays to the same purpose, K-cy, ^ 302, 303, and Preface to Paraph, on Epist, -.0 Rom. p, 144, 43.

ors to convince them of the falseness of, in chapter ii, \t....\t. And he has a manifest regard again to the same thing here, in the 12th, 13th, and 14th verses of chapter v. Which may lead us the more clearly to see the true sense of those verses ; about the sense of which is the main controversy, and the meaning of which being determined, it will settle the meaning of every other controvciled expression through the whole discourse.

Dr. Taylor misrepresents the apostle's argument in these verses (Which as has been demonstrated, is in his sense aU together vain and impertinent.) He supposes, the thing which the apostle mainly mtends to prove, is, that deaf/i or mortality does not come on mankind by personal sin ; and that he would prove it by this medium, that death reigned when there was no law in being which threatened personal sin with death. It is acknowledged, that this is implied, even that dtath came into the world by Adam's sin : Vet this is not the main thing the apostle designs to prove. But his main point evidently is, that sin and guit'ty and Junt exfiosedness to death and ruin, came into the world by Adam's sin ; as righteous-luss, juatijication, and a title to eternal life come by Christ, Which point he confirms by this consideration, that from the veiy time when Adam sinned, these things, viz. sin, guilt, and desert of ruin, became universal \n\\\t world, long before the law given by Moses to the Jewish nation had any being.

The apostle's reniark, that sin entered into the world by one man, who wastlu; I'aiher of the whole human race, was an observation which afforded proper instruction for the Jews, who looked on tl-.emselves as an holy people, because they had the law of IVIoscs, and were the children of Abraham, an h"lv father ; while they looked on other nations as by nature unholy and sinners, because they were not Abraham's child-dren. He leads them up to an higher ancestor than this patriarch, even to Adam, who being equally the father of Jews and Gentiles, both alike come from a sinful father ; from whom guilt and pollution were derived alike to all mankind. And this the apostle provts by an argument, which of all that could possibly be invented, tended the most briefly and direct-

)y to convince the Jews ; even by this reflection, that death had come equally on all mankind from Adam's time, and that the posterity of Abraham vpcre eqiialh subject to it with the rest of the world. This was apparent in/act,a thin;^ they all knew. And the Jews had always been taught that death (which began in the destruction of the body, and of this present life) was the proper punishment of sin. This they were taught in Moses' history of Adam, and God's first threatening of punishment for sin, and by the constant doctrine of the law and the prophets, as has been already observed.

And the apostle's observation, that sin tvas in the ivorld long before the law was given, and was as universal in the world from the times of Adam, as it had been among the Heathen since the law of Moses, this shewed plainly that the Jews were quite mistaken in their notion of their particular law, and that the law which is the oViginal and universal rule of righteousness and judgment for all mankind, was another law, of far more ancient date, even the law of nature, which began as early as the human nature began, and was established with the first father of mankind, and in him with ♦he whole race : The positive precept of abstaini-it; from the forbidden fruit, being given for the trial of his compliance with this law of nature ; of which the main rule is supreme regard to God and his will. And the apostle proves that it must be thus, because, if the law of Moses had been the highest rule of judgment, and if there had not been a superior, prior, divine rule established, mankind in general would not have been judged and condemned as sinners, before that was given, (for " sin is not imputed, when there is no law") «s it is apparent in fact they were, because death reigned before that time, even from the times of Adam.

It may be observed, the apostle in this episile, and that to the Galatians, endeavors to convince the Jews of these two things, in opposition to the notions and prejudices they had entertained concerning their law. 1. That it never was in-tended to be the covenant, or method by which they should actually he Just/Jed. 5. That it was not the highest and uni-

■versal rule or law, by which mankind in general, and particularly the Heathen world, were condemned. And he proves both by similar arguments. lie proves that the law of Moses was not the covenafit, by which any of mankind were to obtain yw.s/'i/?ca//o7J, because that covenant was of older date, being expressly established in the time of Abraham, and Abraham himself was jusUJicd by it. This argument the apostle particularly handles in the 3d chapter of Galatians, especially in verses 17, 18, 19. And this argument is also made use of in the apostle's reasonings in the 4th chapter of this epistle to the Romans, especially verses 13, 14, 15. He proves also that the law of Moses was not ihe prhne rule of judgment, by which mankind in general, and particularly the Heathen world, were coyjdeimied. And this he proves also the same ■way, viz. by shewing this to be of older date than that law, and that it was established with Mam. Now these things tended to lead (he Jews to right notions of their law, not as the intended method of justification, nor as the original and universal rule of condemnation, but something superadded to both, both being of older date, superadded to the latter., to illustrate and confirm it, that the offence might abound; and superadded to the former, to be as a schoolmaster, to prepare men for the bencfils of it, and to magnify divine grace in it, that this might much more abound.

The chief occasion of the obscurity and difficulty which seems to attend the scope and connexion of the various clauses in the three first verses of this discourse, particularly the l3iU and 14th verses, is, that there are ivjo things (although things closely connected) which the apostle has in his eye at once, in which he aims to enlighten them he writes to ; which -will not be thought at all strange by them that have been con* versant with, and have attended to this apostle's writings. He would illustrate the grand point he had been upon from the beginning, CMtwjustiJication through Christ's righteousiicis clo7ic, by shewing how we arc originally in a sinful, miserabl9 state, and how we derive this sin and misery from Adam, and how we are delivered and justified by Christ as a second Adam. At the same time he would confute tiiose foolish

and corrupt notions of the Jews, about their nation and their la7Vi that were very inconsistent with these doctrines. And be here endeavors to establish, at once, these two things in opposition to those Jewish notions.

1. That it is our natural relation to Adam, and not to Abraham, which determines our native, moral state ; and that therefore the being natural children of Abraham, will not make us by nature holy in the sight of God, since we are the natural seed of sinful Adam ; nor does the Gentiles' being not descended from Abraham, denominate them sinners^ any more than the Jews, seeing both alike are descended from Adam.

2. That the law of Moses is not the prime and general law and rule of judgment for mankind, to condemn them, and denominate them sinners ; but that the state they are in with regard to a higher, more ancient and universal law, determines mankind in general to be sinners in the sight of God, and liable to be condemned as such. Which observation is, in many respects, to the apostle's purpose ; particularly in this respect, that if the Jews were convinced, that the law, which was the prime rule of condemnation, was given to all^ was common to all mankind, and that all fell under condemnation ihrough the violation of that law by the common father of all, both Jews and Gentiles, then they would be led more easily and naturally to believe, that the method of justification which God had established, also extended equally to all mankind ; and that the Messiah, by whom we have this justification, is appointed, as Adam was, for a common head to all, both Jews and Gentiles.

The apostle's aiming to confute the Jewish notion, is the principal occasion of those words in the 15th verse : " For until the law, sin was in the world ; but sin is not imputed, when there is no law."

As to the import of that expression, '< Even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression," not only is the thing signified by it, in Dr. Tay-loi*s sense of it, not true; or if it had been true, would have been impertinent, as has been shewn ; but his intevpre-

S92 ORIGINAL SIN.

tation IS, otherwise, very much stravied and unnatural. According to him, by " sinning after the simihtude of Adain'j transgression," is not meunt any similitude of the act of sin» ning, nor of the command sinned against, nor properly any circumstance of the sin ; but only the similitude of a circumstance of the command, viz. the threatening it is attended with, A far fetched thing, to be called a similitude .of sinning ! Besides this expression in such a meaning, is only a needless, impertinent, and awkward jr/un/m^'over again the same thing, which it is supposed the apostle had observed in the foregoing verse, even after he had left it, and had proceeded another step in the series of his discourse, or chain of arguing. As thus, in the foregoing verse the apostle had plainly laid down his argument, (as our author understands it) by which he would prove, death did not come by personal sin, viz. that death reigned before any law, threatening death for personal sin, was in being ; so that the sin then committed was against no laiif, threatening death for personal sin. Having laid this down, the apostle leaves this part of his argument, and proceeds another step. Xevrtheless death reigned from Adam tb Moses; and then returns, in a strange, unnatural manner, and refieat3 that argument or assertion again, but only more obscurely than before, in these words, Even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, i. e. over thtm that had not sinned against a law threatening death for personal sin. Which is jubt the same thing as if the apos>tlt had said, " They that sinned before the law, did not siu against a law threatening death for personal sin ; for there was no Ruch law for any to sin agaihst at tliat time : J^ever-theless death reii^ned at that lime, even o,<er such as did not tin against a law threatening death for personal sin." Which htter clause adds nothing to the premises, and tends nothing to illustrate what was said before, but rather to obscure and darken it. The pi^r icle xai, even, when prefixed in this manner used to signify sometliing additional, some advance in the sense or argunicnt ; implying that tlie words following express something more, or express the same thing more fully, plainly, or forcibly. But to unite two clauses by such a par-

licle, m such a manner, when there is noihlng besides a flat repetition, with no superadded sense or force, but rather a greater uncertainty and obscurity, would be very unusual, and indeed very absurd.

I can see no reason why we should be dissatisfied with that explanation of this clause, which has more commonly been given, viz. That by thnn ivho have not sinned after the similitude of Adam* s transgression^ are meant infants ; who, though they have indeed sinned in Adam, yet never sinned as Adam did, by actually transgressing in their own persons ; unless it be that this interpretation is too old., and too common. It was well known by those the apostle wrote to, that vast numbers had died in infancy, within that period which the apostle speaks of, particularly in the time of the deluge ; and it would be strange the apostle should not have the case of such infants in his m.ind ; even suppqsing his scope were what our author supposes, and he had enly intended to prove that' death did not come on mankind for their personal sin. How directly would it have served the purpose of proving this, to have mentioned so great a pan of mankind that are subject to death, who, all knew, never committed any sin ia M«'r o%v7i persons ? How much more plain and easy the proof of the point by that, than to go round about, as Dr. Taylor supposes, and bring in a thing so dark and uncrrtaiii as this. That God never would bring death on all mankind for personal sin, (though they had personal sin) without ai> express, revealed constitution; and then to observe that there was no revealed constitution of this nature from Adam* to Moses ; which also seems a thing without any plain evidence ; and then to infer that it must needs be so, that it could come only on occasion of Adam's sin, though not for his sin, or as any punishment of it ; which inference also is very dark and imintelligible.

If tiie apostle in this place meant those who never sinned by their personal act, it is not strange that he should express this by their not sinning- after the similitude of Ada }i's trans" grrssicn. We read of two ways of men's being like Adam, or in which a similitude 'o him is ascribed to men : One is

Vol. VI. 5 B

a beinjj bep^otten or born in his image or likeness, Gen. v. S. Another is a transgressing God's covenant or law, likp hirrif Hos vi 7. « They, like Adam, (so in the Heb. and Vulg. Lat.) have transgressed the covenant." Infants have the fornier similitude, but not the latter. And it was very na'ural, when the apostle would infer that infants become sinners by that one act and offence of Adam, to observe that they had not renewed the act of sin themselves, by any second instance ofa like sort. And such might be the state of language among Jews and Christians at that day, that the apostle might have no phrase more aptly to express this meaning. The manner in which the epithets, fiersonal and actual, are used and applied now in this case, is probubly of later date and more modern use.

And then this supposition of the apostle's having the case of infants in view, in this expression, makes it more to his purpose, to mention death reigning before the law of Moses was given. For the Jews looked on all nations, besides themselves, as sinners^ by virtue of (heir laiv ; being made so especially by the law of circumcision, given first to Abraham, and completed by Moses, making the want of circumcision a legal/?o//urzon, utterly disqualifying for the privileges of the sanctuary. This law, the Jews supposed, made the very infants of the Gentiles sinners, polluted and hateful to God; they being uncircumcised, and born of uncircumcised parents. But the apostle proves against these notions of the Jews, that the nations of the world do not become sinners by nature, and sinners from infancy, by virtue of their law, in this manner, hut by Adam's sin ; inasmuch as infants were treated as sinners long before the law of circumcision was given, as well as before they had committed actual sin.

What has been said, may, as 1 humbly conceive, lead us to that which is the true scope and sense of the apostle in these three verses ; which I will endeavor more briefly to represent in the foilowing paraphrase.

" The things which I have 12. Wherefore, an by one

largely insisted on, viz. the man sin entered into the r.wldy evil that is in the world, the and death by sin ; and so deatfi

general wickedness, guilt and flashed ufion all men^ Jot that ruin of mankind, and the op- all have sinned. posite good, even justification and life, as only by Christ, lead me to observe the likeness of the manner in which they are each of them introduced. For it was by one man, that the general corruption and guilt which I have spoken of, came into the world, and condemnation and death by sin : And this dreadful punishment and ruin came on all mankind by the great taw of works, originally estal)lished with mankind in their first father, and by his one offence, or breach of that law ; all thereby becoming sinners in God's sight, and exposed to final destruction.

" It is manifest that it was 13. For until the law,sin ivas in this way the world became in the world ; but sin is not sinful and guilty ; and not in im/mted, when there in no la'W. that way which the Jews suppose, viz. That their law, given by Moses, is the grand, universal rule of righteousness and judgment for mankind, and that it is by being Gentiles, uncircumcised, and aliens from that law, that the nations of the world are constituted smncra, and unclean. For before the law of Moses was given, mankind were all looked upon by the greatJudge

as sinners, by corrnption and guilt derived fiom Ada n's vi'Iation of the oritjinal law. of works ; which shews that the original, universal rule of ricjhteousness is not the law of Moses ; for if so, there would liave been no sin imputed before that was given, because sin is not imputed when there is no law.

" But that at that time sin U. J^'everthelesa, death

was im/mted^ and men were reigned from Adam to Moaea^ by their Judge reckoned as even over them that had not sin» sinners, throus:;h guilt and ned after the similitude of Ad' corruption derived from Ad- c;«'« transgression. am, and condemned for sin to deaths the proper punishment of sin, we have a plain proof; in that it appears in fact, all mankind, during that whole time which preceded the law of Moses, were subjected to that temporal death, which is the visible introduction and image of that Utter destruction which sin deserves, not excepting even infants, who could be sinners no other way than by virtu*^ of Adam's transgression, having never in their own persons actually sinned as Adam did ; nor could at that time be made polluted by the law of Mosc<^, as being uncircuuicised, or Iiorn of un-circumcisecj parents."

Now, by way of reflection on the whole, I would observe, that though there are two or three expressions in this paragraph, Rom. V. 12, &c. the design of which is attended with some difficulty and obscurity, as particularly in the 13th and 14th verses, yet the scope and sense of the discourse in general is not obscure, but on the contrary very clear and mani-fest ; and so is the particular doctrine mainly taught in it. The apostle sets himself with great care and pains to make it plain, and precisely to fix and settle the point he is upon. And the discourse is so framed, that one pari of it does greatly clear and fix the meaning of other parts ; and the whole is determined by the clear connexion it stands in with other parts of the epistle, and by the manifest drift of all the preceding part of it.

The doctrine of Original Sin is not only here taught, but most plainly, explicitly, and abundantly taught. This doc-ta-ine is asserted, expressly or implicitly, in almost every verse, and in some of the verses several times. It is fully implied in that first expression in the 12th verse, " By one man sin entered into the world." The passage implies, that sin became universal in the world ; as the apostle had before largely shewn it was ; and not merely (which would be a trifling, insignificant observation) that one man, who was made first, sinned first, before other men sinned ; or, that it did not 80 happen that many men began to sin just together at the same moment. The latter part of the verse, " And death by sin, and so death passed upon all men, for that (or, if you will) unto nvhich) all have sinned," shews, that in the eye of the Judge of the world, in Adam's first sin, all sinned ; not only in some sort, but all sinned so as to be exposed to that death, and final destruction, which is the proper ivaqes of sin. The same doctrine is taught again twice over in the 14th verse. It is there observed, as aproof of this doctrine, that " Death reigned over them which had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression ;" i. e. by their personal act ; and therefore could be exposed to death, only by deriving guilt and pollution from Adam, in consequence of his sin. And it ts taught again m those words, « Who is the figure of him'

S9B ORIGINAL SIN.

that was to come." The reseniblunce lies very much in this circumstance, viz. our deriving sin, guilt, and punishment by Adam's sin, as we do righteousness, justification, und the reward of life by Christ's obedience ; for so the apostle explains himself. The same doctrine is expressly taught again, verse 15. " Through tlie offence of one, many be dead," And again twice in the :6th verse. " It was by one that sinned ;" i. c it was by Adam, that guilt and punishment (before spoken of) came on mankind : And in these words, '• Judgment was by one to condemnation." It is again plainly and fully laid down in the 17th verse, « By one man's offence, death reigned by one." So again in the 18th verse, « By the oflfence of one, judgment came upon all men to condemnation." Again very plainly in the 19th verse, " By one man's disobedience, many were made sinners."

And here is every thing to determine and fix the meaning of all important terms, that the apostle makes use of: As, the abundant use of them in all parts of the New Testament; and especially in this apostle's writings, which make up a very great part of the New Testament: And his repeated use of them in this epistle in particular, especially in the preceding part of the epistle, which leads to and introduces this discourse, and in the former part of this very chapter ; and also the light, that one sentence in this paragraph casts on another, wliich fully settles their meaning : As, with respect to the words junti^cadon, rightcouNneas and condemnation ; and above all, in regard of the word ■«>:, which is the most important of all, with relation to the doctrine and controversy we are upon. Besides the constant use of this term every where else through the New Testament, through the epistles of this apostle, this epistle in particular, and even the former part of this chapter, it is often repeated in this very paragraph, and evidently used in the very sense that is denied to belong to it in the end of verse 12, and verse 19, though owned every where else : And its meaning is fully determined by the apostle's varying the term ; using logt-ther ^vith it, to signify llie same thing, such a variety of other synonymous words, such as offence^ transgression, disobedience. And fur-

ther, to put the matter out of all controversy, it is particularly and expressly and repeatedly distinguished from that which our opposers would exfilain it by, viz. condemnation and death. And What is meant by sin's entering into (he ivorld, in verse 12, is determined by a like phrase of sin's being in the worlds in the next verse. And that by the offence of one, so oiten spoken of here, as bringing death and condemnation on all, the apostle means the sin of one, derived in its guilt and pollution to mankind in general, is a thing which (over and above all that has been already observed) is settled and determined by those words in the conclusion of this discourse, verse 20. « Moreover, ihe law entered, that the offence might abound : But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound." These words plainly shew, that the offence spoken of so often, and evidently spoken of still in these words, which was the offence of one man, became the sin of all. For when he says, " The law entered, that the offence might abound," his mean-xns^ cannot be, that the offence of Adam, merely as his personally, should abound ; but, as it exists in its derived guilt, corrupt influence, and evil fruits, in the sin of mankind in general, even as a tree in its root and branches.*

It is a thing that confirms the certainty of the/?ro&/'of the doctrine of Original Sin, which this place affords, that the utmost art cannot pervert it to another sense. What a variety of the most artful methods have been used by the enemies of this doctrine, to wrest and darken this paragraph of holy wiit, which stands so much in their way, as it were to force the Bible to speak a language that is agreeable to their mind ! How have expressions been strained, words and phrases rack-

• The offence, according to Dr Taylor's explanation, does not abound by the law at all really and truly, in any sense ; neither the sin, nor the punishment. For ha savs, " The meaning is not, that men should be made more wicked ; but, that men should be liable to death for every transgression.'' But after all, they are liable to no more deaths, nor to any worse deaths, if t,hcy are not more sinful : For they were to have punishments accoiding to their desert, before. Such as died, and went into another world, before the law of Mos s was given, were punished according to their deserts ; and the law, when it came, threatened no moie.

ed ! What strange figures of speech have been invented, and with violent hards thrust into the apostle's mouth ; and then with a bold countenance and magisterial airs obtruded on the world, as from him l....But, blessed be God, we have his worda as he delivered them, and the rest of the same epistle, and his other writings to compare with them ; by which his meaning stands in too strong and glaring a light to be hid by any oi the artificial mists which they labor to throw upon it.

It is really no less than abusing the scripture and its readers, to represent this paragraph as the most obscure of all the places of scripture, that &peak of the consequences of Adam's sin ; and to treat it as if there was need first (o consider other places as more filain. Whereas, it is most manifestiy a place in which these things are declared, beyond ail, the most plainly, particularly, precisely, and of set purpose, by that great apostle, who has most fully explained to us those doctrines in general, which relate to the redemption by Christ, and the^ sin and misery we are redeemed from. And it must be now left to the reader's judgment, whether the Christain church has not proceeded reasonably, in looking on this as a place of scripture most clearly and fully treating of these things, and in using its determinate sense as an help to settle the meaning of many other passages of sacred writ.

As this place in general is very full and plain, so the doctrine of the corruption of nature, as derived from Adam, and also the imputation of his first sin, are bot/i clearly taugiit in it. The i»i/iufation of Adam's one transgression, is indeed most directly and frequently asserted. We are here assured that bi; one man's sin, death fiassed on oil; all being adjudged to this punishment, as having s/Vmrc/ (so it is implied) in that one man's sin. And it is repeated over and over, that all are condemned^ many are dead, tnatiy made sitmersy 8tc. iJy one nian't offence, by the disrjbedience of one, and by one offence. And the doctrine of original defiravity is also here taught, when the apostle says, By one man sin entered into the -world ; havin.i; a plain respect (as hath been shewn) to that univeisal coriup-tion and wickedness, as well as guilt, which he h^d before largely treated of.

PART III

Ohserving the Evidence given us, relative to the Doctrine 0/ Original Sin, in what the Scriptures reveal concerning the Redemption by Christ.

CHAPTER I.

The Evidence o/Original Sin, /ronz the JVaiure of Redcrfifi-tion in the firocurement of it.

ACCORDING to Dr. Taylor's scheme, a very great part of mankind are the subjects of Christ's redemfition, who live and die perfectly innocent^ who never have had, and never will have any sin charged to their account, and never are either the subjects of, or exposed to any punishment whatsoever, viz. all that die in infancy. They are the subjects of Christ's re-dem/ition, as he redeems them from death, or as they by his righteousness haye justif cation, and by his obedience are made righteous, in the resurrection of the body, in the sense of Rom. V. 18, 19. And all mankind are thus the subjects of Christ's redemption, while they are perfectly guiltless, and ex.'oscd to no punishment, as by Christ they are intilled to a resurrection. Though, with respect to such persons as have sinn'd, he allows it is w seme sort by Christ and his fTeath, 'hat ihey are sfived from sin, and the punishment nf it Vol. VI. 3 C

Now let us see whether such a scheme well consists witTi-the scripture account of the redemption by Jesus Ciirist.

I. The representations of the redemption by Christ, everywhere in scripture, lead us to suppose, that all whom he came to redeem, are sinners; that his salvation, as to the term from nvhich (or the evil to be redeemed from) in all is sin^ and the deserved punishment of sin. It is natural to suppose, that when he had his name Jesus, or Saviour, given him by God's special and immediate appointment, the salvation meant by that name should be his salvation in general ; and not only a part of his salvation, and with regard only to some of them ?hat he came to save. But this name was given him to signify his saving his peofile from their sins, Matth, i. 21. And the great doctrine of Christ's salvation is, that he came into the world to save sinners, 1 Tim. i. 15. And that Christ hath once suffered, the just for the unjust, 1 Pet. iii. 18. In this was ■manifested the love of God towards us (towards such in genera! as have the benefit of God's love in giving Christ) that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him. Herein is love, that he sent his sc^n to be the fire-pitiation for our sins, 1 John iv. 9, 10. Many other texts might be mentioned, which seem evidently to suppose, that all who are redeemed by Christ, are saved from sin. We are led by what Christ himself said, to suppose, that if any are jiot sinners, they have 720 need of him as a redeemer, any more than a well man of a physician, Mark ii. 17. And that men, in ord<;r to being the proper subjects of the mercy 01 God through Christ, must first be in a state oisin, is implied in Gal. iii. 22. " But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe." To the same effect is Rom. xi. 32.

These things are greatly confirmed by the scripture doctrine of sacrifccs. It is abundantly plain, by both old and New Testament, that they were types of Christ's death, and were for sin, end supposed sin in those for whom they w?re offered. The apostle supposes, that in order to any having the benefit of the efrrnal inlieritance by Christ, there must 0/ necessity be the death of the testator ; and gives that reason for

■=it, that ivithout sheddin!^ of blood there is no remissioriy Heb. ix.

15, &c. And Christ himself, in representing the benefit of

his blood, in the institution of the Lord's supper, under the notion of the blood of a testament., calls it, The blood of tht

Kei!} Testament., shed for the remission of sins, Matth. xxvi. 28.

But according to the scheme of our author, many have the eternal inheritance by the death of the testator, who never 'had any need of remission.

II. The scripture represents the redemption by Christ as a redemption from deserved destruction ; and that, not merely as it respects some particulars, but as the fruit of God's love to mankind. John iii. 16. " God so loved the ivorld, that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believeth in hina should not perish, but have everlasting life :" Implying, that otherwise they must perish, or be destroyed : But what necessity of this, if they did not deserve to be destroyed ? Now, that the destruction here spoken of, is deserved destruction, is manifest, because it is there compared to the perishing of such of the children of Israel as died by the bile of the fiery serpents, which God, in his wrath, for their rebellion, sent amongst them. And the same thing clearly appears by the last verse of the same chapter, « He that believeth ©n the Son, hath everlasting life ; and he that believeth not the Son, shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on him," or, is left remaining on him : Implying, that all in general an

found under the rorath of God, and that they only of all mankind, who are interested in Christ, have this wrath removed, and eternal life bestowed ; the rest are left with the ivrath of God still remaining on them. The same is clearly illustrated and confirmed by John v, 24. " He that believeth, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation, but is passed from death to life." In being passed from death to life is implied, that before, they were all in a state of death ; and they are spoken of as being so by a sentence oi condeiyina-tion ; and if it be a just condemnation, it is a deserved condemnation.

III. It will follow on Dr. Taylor's scheme, that Christ's redemption, with regard to a great part of them who are the

subjects of it, is not only a redemption fron» no muy but from no calamity, and so from no evil of any kind. For as to deathf which infants are redeemed from, they never were subjected to it as a calamity, but purely as a benefit. It came by no threatening or curse denounced upon or through Adam ; the covenant with him being utterly abollslied, as to all its force and power on mankind (according to our author) before the pronouncing of the sentence of mortaliiy. Therefore trouble and death could be appointed to innocent mankind no other way than on the foot of another covenant, the covenant of grace ; and in this channel they come only as favors, not as evils. Therefore they could need no medicine or remcdvj for they had no disease. Even death itself, which it is supposed Christ saves them from, is only a medicine ; it is preventing physic, and one of the greatest of benefits. It is ridiculous to talk of persons needing a medicine, or a physician to save them from an excellent medicine; or of a remedy from a happy remedy ! If it be said, though death be a benefit, yet it is so because Christ changes it, and turns it into a benefit, by procuring a resurrection: I would here ask. What can be meant by turning or c/ianging it into a benefit, when it never was otherwise, nor could ever jusllij be otherwise ? Jn-fants could not be brought under death as a calamity ; for they never deserved it. And it would be only an abuse (be it far from us, to ascribe such a thing to Cod) in any being, to jBake the offer to any poor sufferers, of a redeemer from some calamity, which he had brought upon them without the least desert of it on ihcir part.

But it is plain, that death or mortality was not at first brought on mankind as a blessing, on the foot of the cove-nantof giace through Christ; and that Christ and grace do not bring mankind under death, hm find them under it. 2 Cor. v. 14, " We thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead." Luke xix. 10, " The Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost." The grace which appears in providing a deliverer from ahy state, supposes the subject vo be in that state prior to that grace and deliverance ; and not that such a state is first introduced by that grace. In our

author's scheme, there never could be any sentence of death or condemnation that requires a Saviour from it ; because the very sentence itself, according to the true meaning of it, implies and makes sure all that good which is requisite to abolish and make void the seeming evil to the innocent subject. So that the sentence itst If is in effect the deliverer, and there is no need of another deliverer to deliver from that sentence. Dr. Taylor insists upon it, that " Nothing comes upon us in consequence of Adam's sin, in any sense, kind or degree, inconsistent with the original blessirig pronounced on Adam at his creation ; and nothmg but what is perfectly consistent with God's blessing, love and goodness, declared to Adam as soon as he came out of his Maker*s hands."* If the case be so, it is certain there is no evil or calamity at all for Christ to redeem us from ; unless things agreeable to the divine goodness^ love and blessing, are things which we need redemption from.

IV. It will follow, on our author's principles, not onlv with respect to infants, but even adult persons, that redemption is needless, and Christ is dead in vain. Not only is there no need of Christ's redemption in order to deliverance from any consequences of Adam's sin, but also in order to perfect freedom from personal sin, and all its evil consequences For God has made other sufficient provibion for that, viz. c sufficient power aJid ability, in all mankind, to do all their duty, and wholly to avoid sin. Yea, this author insists upon it, that " when men have not sufficient power to do their duty, they have no dutij to do. We may safely and assuredTy conclude, (says he) that mankind in all parts of the world, have sufficient power to do the duty which God requires of them ; and that he requires of them no more than they have sufficient powers to do."t And in another place4 " God has given powers equal to the duty which he expects." And he expresses a great dislike at R. R's supposing <» that our propensities to evil, and temptations, are too strong to be effcctU" afhj and constantly resisted, or that we are unavoidably siniul vn

"• P. 88, 89, S. + P. Ml, 63, 64, S. tP. 67,S'

a degree ; that our appetites and passions will be breaking out, notwitlistandinG; our everlasting watchfulness."* These things fully imply that men have in their own natural ability sufficient means to avoid sin, and to be perfectly free from it ; and so, from all the bad consequences of it. And if the means are sufficient, then there is no need of more; and therefore there is no need of Christ's dying, in order to it. "What Dr. Taylor says, in p. 72, 6'. fully implies that it would be unjust in God to give mankind being in such circumstances, as that they would be more likely to sin, so as to be exposed to final misery, than otherwise. Hence then, without Christ and his redemption, and without any grace at all, mere justice makes sufficient provision for our being free from sin and misery, by our own power.

If all mankind, in all parts of the world, have such sufficient power to do their whole duty, without being sinful in any degree, then they have sufficient power to obtain righteousuess by the law ; and then, according to the Apostle Paul. Christ is dead in vain. Gal. ii. 21. " If righteousness come by the law, Christ is dead in vain -"....ha, ►o;*«, without the article, brj /aw, or the rule of right action, as our author explains the phrase.f And according to the sense in which he explains this very place,«' It would have frustrated or rendered useless the grace of God, if Christ died to accomplish what was or might have been effected by law itself, without his death.":| So that it most clearly follows from his own doctrine, that Christ is dead in vain, and the grace of God is tiseless. The same-apostle says, " If there had been a law which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law," Gal. iii. 21 ; i. e. (still according to Dr. Taylor's own sense) if there was a law that man, in his present state, had sufficient power perfectly to fulfil. For Dr. Taylor supposes the reason why the law could not give life, to be, " not because it was weak in itself, but through the weakness of our flesh, and the infirmity of the human nature in the present stale."§

• P. 68, S. + Pref. to Par, on Rom. p. 143, 38. t Note on Fom. v. 20, p. 297. S ^^^^'

But he says, "We are under a mild dispensation of grace, making allowance for our infirmities."* By our itifirmlties, ■we may upon good grounds suppose he means that infirmity of human nature which he gives as the reason why the law cannot give life. But what grace is there in making that allowance for our infirmities, which justice itself (according to his doctrine) most absolutely requires, as he supposes divine justice exactly proportions our duly to our ability ?

Again, If it be said, that although Christ's redemption •was not necessary to preserve men from beginning to sin, and getting into a course of sin, because they have sufficient power in themselves to avoid it ; yet it may be necessary to deliver men, after they have by their own folly brought themselves under the dominion of evil appetites and passions.f I answer, if it be so, that men need deliverance from 'hose habits and passions, which are become too strong for them, yet that deliverance, on our author's principles, would be no salvation from sin. For, the exercise of passions which arc too strong for us, and which we cannot overcome, is necessary, and he strongly urges that a necessary evil can be no moral evil. It is true, it is the effect of evil, as it is the effect of a bad practice, while the man remained at liberty, and had power to have avoided it. But then, according to Dr. Taylor, that evil cause alone is sin ; and not so, the necessary effect ; For he says expressly, " The cause of every effect is alone chargeable with the effect it produceth, or which proceedeth from it."I And as to that sin which was the cause, the man needed no Saviour from that, having had sufficient fiotver in himself to have avoided it. So that it follows, by our author's scheme, that none of mankind, neither infants nor adult persons, neither the more nor less vicious,-neither Jews nor Gentiles, neither Heathens nor Christians, ever did or ever could stand in any need of a Saviour ; and that, with respect to all, the truth is, Christ in dead in vain.

* Page 92, S, + See p. 228, and also what he .'ays of the helpless state oi the Heathen, in Par. and Notes 'on Rom. 7ii. and beginning of Chap. viii. t P. 125.

If any should say, Although all manUind in all nc!;e9 hare sufficient ability to do their whole duty, and so may by their own power enjoy perfect freedom from sin, yet God/orMa« that rhey would sin, and that after they had sinned, they would need Christ's death ; I answer, it is plain by what the apostle says in those places \yhich were just now mentioned, Gal. ii. 21, and iii. 21, that" God would have esteemed it needless to t^ive his Son to die for men, .unless there had been a prior impossibility of their Iiavinf* riighteousness by jaw ; and that, if there had been a law which eouid have given life, this other way by the death of Christ would not have been provided. And this appears to be agreeable to our author's own sense of things, by his words which have been cited, wherein he says, " It would hSiVe fries (rated or rendered iisrless the grace of God, if Christ died to accomplisli what was or mig/it have been effected by law itself, vvithout his death."

V. It will follow on Dr. Tayloi's scheme, not only that Christ's redemption is 7ieedless for the saving from sin, or its consequences, but also that it does no good that way, has no tendency to any diminution oi sin in the world. For as to any infiisicn of virtue or holiness into the heart, by divine power through Christ or his redemption, it is altogether inconsistent with this author's notions. With him, inwrought virtue, if there were any such thing, would be no virtue ; not being the effect of our own will, choice and design, but only of a sovereign act of God's power.* And therefore, all that Christ docs to increase virtue, is only increasing our talents, our light, advantages, means and motives, as he often explains the inatter.t But sin is not at all diminished. For he says, Our duty 7nust be measured by our talf:nt$ ; as, a child that has less talents, has less duty, and therefore must be no more exposed to commit sin, than he that has greater talents, because he that has greater talents, has more duty required, in exact proportion.!: If so, he that has but ouc talent, has as much

* See pages i8o, 245, 250. + In p. 44, 50, and innumerable olhe'-

places, X See p. 234, 61, 64.,.,70, S.

(idvantage to perform that one degree of duty which is required of him, as he that has^x^e talents, to perform \\\sjive degrees of duty, and is no more exposed to fail of it. And that man's 5"i^?V^, who sins against greater advantages, means and motives, is greater in proportion to his talents, f And therefore it will follow, on Dr. Taylor's principles, that men stand no better chance^ have no more eligible or valuable probability of freedom from sin and punishment, or of contracting but little guilt, or of performing required duty, with the great advantages and talents implied in Christ's redemption, than without them ; when all things are computed, and put into the balances together, the numbers, degrees and aggravations of sin exposed to, degrees of duty required, &c. So that men have no redemption from sin, and no new means of performing duty, that are valuable or worth any thing at all. And thus the great redemption by Christ in every rc-pect comes fo nothing, with regard both to infants and adult persons.

CHAPTER IL

.T/ie Evidence of the Doctrine of Original Sin from what the Scrijilure teaches of the Application cf Redemjition.

THE truth of the doctrine of Original Sin is very clearly manifest from what the scripture says of that change of state which it represents as necessary to an actual interest ift the spiritual and eternal blessings of the Redeemer's kingdom.

In order to this, it speaks of it as absolutely necessary fop every one, that he be regeneJated, or born again. John iii. 3,

* See Paraph, on Rom. ij< 9, also on vtree 12, .Vol. VI. 3 D

"Verily, Tcrily, I say unto thee, except a man ytm^n tt»ti5i»^ be begotten again, or born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." Dr. Taylor, though he will not allow that this signifies any change from a state of natural firo/iensUy to sin, yet supposes that the new birth here spoken of means a man's being brought to a divine life, in a right use and afifiUcation of the natural fioivers, in a life of true holiness ;* and that it is the attainment of those habits of virtue and religion, which gives tis the real character of true Christians, and the children of God ;\ and that it is fmtting on the nenv nature of right action.\

But in order to proceed in the most sure and safe manner, in our understanding what is meant in scripture by being born again, and so in the inferences we draw from what is said of the necessity of it, let us compare scripture with scripture, and consider what other terms or phrases are used in other places, where respect is evidently had to the same change.

And here I would observe the following things :

I. If we compare one scripture with another, it will be sufficiently manifest, that by regeneration, or being begotten, or born again, the same change in the state of the niind is signified with that which the scripture speaks of as effected in true refientance and cojiversion. I put repentance and conversion together, because the scripture puis them together, Acts iii. 19, and because they plainly signify much the same thing. The word, fAErafota, (repentance) signifies a change of the mi7id ; as the word conversion means a change or turning from sin to God. And that this is the same change with that which is called regeneration, (excepting that this latter term especially signifies the change, as the mind is fiassive in it) the following things do shew.

In the change which the mind passes under in repentance and conversion, is attained that character of true Christians, which is necessary to the eternal privileges of such. Acts iii. 19. " Refient ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord." And so it is with regcneva

» Page 144.. + Page 246, 248, % Page 251

tion ; as is evident from wliat Cluist says to Nicodemus, and as is allowed by Dr. Taylor.

The change the mind passes under in repentance and conversion, is that in which s&v'in^fait/i is attained. Mark i. 15. « The kingdom of God is at hand : Repent ye, and believe the gospel." And so it is with a being born again, or born of God ; as appears by John i. 12, 13. <' But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name, which were born, not of blood, See. but of God."

Just as Christ says concerning conversion, Matth. xviii. 3. " Verily, verily, I say unto you, except ye be converted and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven ;■' so does he say concerning being born again, in what he spake to Nicodemus.

By the change men pass under in conversion, they become as iitdc children.) which appears in the place last cited ; and so they do by regeneration, 1 Pet. i. at the end, and chap, ii« at the beginning. Being born again.... Wherefore, as newboj-n itabes, desire, &c. It is no objection that the disciples, whom Christ spake to in Matth. xviii. 3, were converted already t This makes it not less proper for Christ to declare the necessity of conversion to them, leaving it with them to tiy themselves, and to make sure their conversion ; in like manner as he declared lo them the necessity of re/ientance, in Luke xiii. 3, 5. " Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish."

The change that men pass under at their re/ientance, is expressed and exhibited by baptism. Hence it is called the bafitism of repentance, ivom time to time, Matth. iii. 11, Luke iii. 3, Acts xiii. 24, and xix. 4. And so is regeneration, or being born again, expressed by baptism ; as is evident by such representations of regeneration as those, John iii. 5. "Except a man be born of water, and of the Spirit".. ..Titus iii. 5. « He saved us by the washing of regeneration," Many other things iftight be observed, to shew that the change men pass under in their repentance and conversion, is the same with that which they are the subjects of in regeneration. But these observations may be sufficient.

11. The chanj^e which a man passes under when feoTu again, and in his repentance and conversion, is the same thai: the scripture calls the circumcision of the heart. This may easily appear by considering,

That as regeneration is that in which are attained the habits of true virtue and holiness, as has been shewn, and as is Confessed ; so is circumcision of heart. Deut. xxx. 6. " And the Lord thy God will circumcise thine heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and \>ith all thy soul.**

Regeneration is that whereby men come to have the character of true Christians ; as is evident, and as is confessed ; and so is circumcision of heart ; for by this men become Jews inivardly, or Jews in the spiritual and Christian sense (and that is the same as being true Christians) as of old firoselytes were made Jews by circiirricision of the flesh. Rom. ii. 28, 29. "For he is not a7fw,which is one outwardly ; neither is tnat cirtumcision, which is outward in the flesh : But he is a Jew, Avhich is one inwardly ; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit and not in the letter, whose praise is not of men, but of God."

That circu7nc!sion of the heart is the same with conversion, or turning from sin to God, is evident by Jer. iv. 1....4. " If thou wilt retvirn, O Israel, return (or. convert unto me)....c/r-cumcisp yourselves to the Lord, and put away the foreskins of your heart.** And Deut. x. 16. " Circumcise therefore the foreskiii of your heart, and be no more stiff"necked."

Circumcision of the heart is the same change of the heart that men pass under in their repentance ; as is evident by Lc-vit. xxvi. 41; ''If their uncircumcised hearts be humbled, and they accept the punishment of their iniquity."

The change men pass under in regeneration, repentance, and conversion, is signified by baptism, as has been shewn; ard so is circumcision of the heart signified by the same thing. Kone will deny that it was this internal circumcision, which efold was signified by external circumci=icn ; nor will any deny, now under the New Testament, that inward and spivit-tal baptism* or the cleansing of the heart, is signified by- ex-

tcrnal washine; or baptism. But spiritual circumcision and spirittial baptism are the same thing ; both being the putting iff the body of the sins of the Jiesh ; as is very plain by Col. ii ! 1, 12, 13, "'In whom also ye are circumcised with the a'r-cumcision mafle without hands, in putting off the body of the sitis ofthefesh, by the circumcision of Chrisi, buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him," &c.

III. This inward change, called regeneration and circumcision of the hearty which is wrodght in repentance and convert sion, is the same with that spiritual resurrection so often spoken of, and represented as a dying unto sin, and living unto righteousness.

Tiiis appears with great plainness in that last cited place. Col. ii. "•' In whom also ye aie circumcised, with the circumi cioion made without hands....buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen ivith him, through the faith of the operation of God, £cc. And you, being dead in your sins, and the uncircumcision of your flesh hath he quickened togeth-. er with him ; having forgiven you all trespasses.

The same appears by Rom. vi. 3, 4, 5. " Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ, were baptized into his death ? Therefore we are buried with hi in by baptism into death ; that, like as Christ was raised up from the dead, by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life," ^c. Verse 11. " Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead unto sin, but alive unto God, through Jesus Christ our Lord.

In which place also it is evident, by the words recited, and by the whole context, that this spiritual resurrection is that change, in which persons are brought to habits of hoii-jiess and to the divine life, by which Dr. Taylor describes the thing obtained in being bom again.

That a spiritual resurrection to a new divine life, should be called a being born again, is agreeable to the language oi Scripture, in which we £i.n^ ix resurrection is called a being horn, or begotten. So those words in the 2d Psalm, " Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee," are applied to Christ's resurrection, Ac'.c- Kii;, Si So in Col i. 18, Christ i« •

A.H ORIGINAL SIN.

called ihe Jirst born from the dead ; and in Rev. i. 5, The first begotten of the dead. The saints, in their conversion or sfiirit-ual resurrection^ are risen with Christy and are begotten and born idth him. 1 Pet. i. 3. " Which hath b.'gotten us again to a lively hope, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the deadf to an inheritance incorruptible." This inheritance is the same thing with ihai kingdom of heaven, which men obtain by being born again, according to Christ's words to Nicodemus ; and that same inheritance of them that are sanctified, spoken of as what is obtained in true conversion. Acts xxvi. 18. " To turn them (or convert them) from darkness to light, and from ihe power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them that are sanctified^ through faith that is in me." Dr. Taylor's own words, in his note on Rom. i. 4, speaking of that place in the 2d Psalm, just now mentioned, are very worthy to be hero recited. He observes how this is applied to Christ's resurrection and exaltation, in the New Testament, and then has this remark, " Note, Begetting is conferring a new and happy state : A son is a person put into it. Agreeably to this, good men are said to be the sons of God, as they are the sons of the resurrection to eternal life, which is represented as a vaKiy/inarix, a being be-gotte)T, or born again, regenerated.^^

So that I tl-.ink it is abundantly plain, that the sfiiritual resurrection spoken of in scripture, by which the saints are brought to a new divine life, is the same Avith that being born again, which Christ says is 7iecessarij for every one, in order to his seeing the kingdom of God.

IV. This change, which men are the subjects of, when they are born again, and circuyncised in heart, when they re-fienty and are converted, and spiritually raised fro77i the dead, is the same change which is meant when the scripture speaks of making the heart and sfiirit new, or giving a nc^v heart and sfiirit.

It is needless here to stand to observe, how evidently this is spoken of as necessary to salvation, and as the change io which are attained the habits of true virtue and holiness, and the character of a true saint; as has been observed oiirgen^

sration^ conversion., &c. and how apparent it is from thence, that the change is the same. For it is as it were selfevident i It is apparent by the phrases themselves, that they are different expressions of the same thing. Thus repentance (|tMTavo»a.) or the change of the mind, is the same as being changed to a new mind, or a new heart and spirit. Conversion is the turning of the heart; which is the same thing as changing it so, that there shall be another heart, or a new heart, or a new spirit. To be born again., is to be born anew ; which implies a becoming wew, and is represented as becoming new born babes : But none supposes it is the body, that is immediately and properly new, but the mind, heart, or spirit. And so a spiritual resurrection is the resurrection of the spirit, or rising to begin a new existence and life, as to the mind, heart, or spirit. So that all these phrases imply an having a new heart, and being renewed in the spirit, according to their plain signification.

When Nicodemus expressed his wonder at Christ's declaring it necessary, that a man should be born again in order to see the kingdom of God, or enjcy the privileges of the kingdom of the Messiah, Christ says to him, '• Art thou a master of Israel, and know est not these things ?" i. e. " Art thou one set to teach others the things written in the law and the prophets, and knowest not a doctrine so piainlv taught in your scriptures, that such a change as I speak of, h necessary to a partaking of the blessings of the kingdom of the Messiah r"....But what can Christ have respect to in this, unless such prophecies as that in Ezek. xxxvi. 25, 26, 27 I Where God, by the prophet, speaking of the days of the Messiah's kingdom., says, " Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean....^ new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you....and I will put my spirit within you." Here God speaks of having a new heart and spirit, by being washed with water, and receiving the Spirit of God, as the qualification of God's people, that shall enjoy the privileges of the kingdom of the Messiah. How much is thia like the doctrine of Christ to Nicodemus, of being born agar}:

ofioater^ and of the spirit ? Wc have another like prophecy ia Ezek. xi. 19.

Add to these thing;s, that regeneration, or a being born i^gain^ and the reneiving {or makint^ new) by the Holy Ghost, are spoken of as the same thing. Titus iii. 5. " By the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghosi."

v. It is abundantly manifest, that being bom again, a spiritually rising from the dead to newness of life rer.feiving a 7iet» heart, and being renewed in the spirit of the mind-, these are the same thing with that which is called putting off the old man, and putting on the new 7nan.

The expressions are equivalent ; and the representations are plainly of the same thing. When Christ speaks of being born again, two births are supposed ; 2ifirst and a second; an old birth, and a new one : And the thing born is called man. So what is born in the first birth, is the old man; and what is brought forth in the second birth, is the new man. That which is born in the first birth (says Christ) hfiesh : It is the carnal man, wherein we have borne the image of the earthly Adam, ■whom the apostle calls \\\e first man. That which is born in the new birth, is spirit, or the spiritual and heavenly man : "Wherein we proceed frorn Christ ihc second ?nan, the new man, whb is made a quickening spirit, and is tiie Lord frotn-heaven, and the head of the new creation. In the new birth, men are represented as becoming new born babes (as was observed before) which is the same thing as becoming new men.

And how apparently is what the scripture suys of the spiritual resurrection of the Christian convert, equivalent and of the very same import with putting off the old man, and putting on the neiv man ? So in Rom. vi. the convert is spoken of as dtjing, and being buried with Christ; which is explained in the 6ili verse, by this, that " the old man is crucified that the body of sin miglu he destroyed." And in the 4th verse, converts in this chunge are spoken of as rising to newness of life. Are not these things plain enough ? The apostle does in effect tell us, that when he speaks of that spiritual death and resurrection which is in conversion, he means tlie sarhc thing as tntcifving and burying the old man, and rising a new rncr

And it is most apparent, that spiritual drcumcision^ and spiritual bafithm^ and the spiritual resurrection., are all the same with putting off the old man^ and putting on the new 7nan. This appears by Col. ii. 11, 12. " In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in put ting ojf the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, buried with him in baptism ; wherein also ye are risen witli him." Here it is manifest, that the spiritual circumcision, baptism, and resurrection, all signify that chanj^e wherein men put off the body of the sins ofthejlesh : But that is the same thing, in this apostle's language, as putting off the old man; as appears by Rom. vi. 6. " Our old man is crucified, that the body of sin may be destroyed." A'ld that putting off the old man is the same Avith putting off the body of sins■, appears further by Ephes. iv. 22, 23, 24....and Col. iii. 8, 9, 10.

As Dr. Taylor confesses, that a being born again is '»that "wherein are obtained the habits of virtue, religion, and true holiness ;" so how evidently is the same thing predicated of that change, which is called putting off the old man^ and put' ting on the neiv man? Eph. iv. 22, 23, 24. " That ye put off the old man, which is corrupt, &c. and put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness."

And it is most plain, that this putting off the old man, &c, is the very same thing with making the hrart and spirit ne%i\ It is apparent in itself: The spirit is called the ?nan, in the language of the apostle ; it is called the inivard 7nan, and the hidden man, Rom. vii. 22....2 Cor. iv. 16....1 Pet. iii. 4. And therefore putting off the oW n^arz, is the same thing with the removal of the old heart ; and the putting on the 7ieio ma?!., is the receiving a new heart and a new spirit. Yea, putting on the new man is expressly spoken of as the same thing with receiving a new spirit, or being renewed in spirit. Eph. iv. 22, 23, 24. " That ye put off the old man, and be renewed in the spirit, of your mind, and that ye put on the new man."

From these things it appears, how vuireasonable, and contrary to the utmost degree of scriptural evidence, is Dr. Tay-

Vol. VI. 3 L

lor's way of explaining the old man, and the new man,* as-though thereby was meant nothing/7er5(jwa/; but that by the old 7nan was meant the heathen state, and by the new man the Christian dispensation, or state of professing Christians, or the ■whole collective body of professors of Christianity, made up of Jews and Gentiles ; Avhen all the color he has for it is, that the apostle once calls the Christian church a new man, Eph. ii. l5o It is very true, in the scriptures often, both in the Old Testamen' and New, collective bodies, nations, peoples, cities, are figuratively represented by persons ; particularly the cfturch of Christ is represented as one holy person, and has the same appellatives as a particular saint or believer ; and so is called a child and a son of God, Exod. iv. 22....Gal. iv. 1,2; and z servant of God, Isai. xli. 8, &, and xliv. 1. The daughter of God, and spouse of Christ, Psal. xlv. 10, 13, 14.... Rev. xix. 7. Nevertheless, would it be reasonable to argue from hence, that such appellations, as a servant of God, a child of God, &c. are always or commonly to be taken as signifying only the church of God in general, or great collective bodies ; and not to be understood in a personal sense ? But certainly this would not be more unreasonable, than to urge, that by the old and the new man, as the phrases are mostly used in scrip-lure, is to be understood nothing but the great collective bodies of Pagans and of Christians, or the Heathen and the Christian world, as to their outward profession, and the dispensation they are under. It might have been proper, in this case, to have considered the unreasonableness of that practice which our author charges on others, and finds so much fault with in them,t " That they content themselves with a few scraps of scripture, which, though wrong understood, they make the test of truth, and the ground of their principles, in contradiction to the whole tenor of revelation."

VI. I observe once more, it is very apparent, that a being born again, and spiritually raised irom death to a state of new existence and life, having a new heart created in us, being renewed in (he spirit of our mind, and being the subjects of tha'.

♦ Pagci49..,^153, S. t Page 221,

change hy which vre/iu( off" the old man, and put on the neti^ man, is the same thing ^yith that which, in scripture, is called a being created aneiv, or made nenu creatures.

Here, to pass over many other evidences of this, which migiu be mentioned, I would only observe, that the repre-. sentadons arc exactly equivalent. These several phrases naturally and most plainly signify the same effect. In the first birth, or generation, we ?^re created, or brought into existence ; it is then the whole man first receives being : The soul is then formed, and then our bodies ■sx^ fearfully and kvonderfully madc^ being curiously ivrought by our Creator : So that a new born child is a nenu creature. So, when a man is born again, he is created again ; in that neiv birth, there is a netv creation ; and therein he becomes as a new born babe, or a new creature. So, in a resurrection, there is a nezv creation. When a man is dead, that which was creat*;d or made in the first birth or cre-alior. is destroyed : When that which was dead is raised to life, the mighty power of the Creator or Author of life, is exerted the second time, and the subject restored to new existence, and new life, as by a new creation. So giving a new heart is called creating a clean heart, Psal li. 10. Where the word translated, create, is the same that is used in the first veise in Genesis. And when w<i read in scripture of the nenv creature, the creature that is called new, is man ; not angel, or beast, or any other sort of creature ; and therefore the phrase, new man, is evidently equippolent with new creature ; and a putting off the old man, and putting on the new man, is spoken of expressly as brought to pass by a work of creation. Col. iii. 9, 10, " Ye have put off the old man, and have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge, after the image of him that created him." So Eph. iv. 22, 23, 24. " That ye put off the old man, which is corrupt, Sec. and be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness." Tjiese things absolutely fix the meaning of that in 2 Cor. v. 17. " If any man be in Christ, he is a new creature : Old things are passed away ; behold, all things are become new."

On the whole, the following reflections may be made ;

1. That it is a truth of the utmost certainty, with respect to every man, born of the race of Adam, by ordinary generation, that unless he be bom again^ he cannot see the kingdom of God. This is true, not only of the Hcuthen, but of them that are born of the professing people of God, as Nicodemus, and the Jews, and every man born of the Jiesh. This is most manifest by Christ's discourse in John iii. 3....11. So it is plain by 2 Cor, V. 17, That everxj man ivho is in Christ, is a new creature.

2. It appears from this, together -with what has been proved above, that it is most certain with respect to every one of the human race, that he can never have any interest in Christ, or see the kingdom of God, unless he be the subject of that change in the temper and disposition of his heart, which is made in repentance and conversion,, circumcision of heart, spiritual baptism, dying to s?>?, and rising to a new and holy life ; and unless he has the old heart taken away, and a new heart and spirit given, z.x\A puts off the old man, and puts on the new man, and old things are passed away, and all things made new.

3. From what is plainly implied in these things, and from what the scripture most clearly teaches of the nature of them, it is certain, that every man is born into the world in a state of moral pollution : For spiritual baptism is a cleansing from moral filthiness. Ezek. xxxvi. 25, compared with Acts ii. 16, and John iii. 5. So the washing of regeneration, or the new birth, is a change from a state of wickedness. Tit. iii. 3, 4, 5. Men are spoken of as purified in their regeneration. 1 Pet. i. 22, 23. See also 1 John ii. 29, and iii. 1, 3. And it appears that every man, in his first or natural state, is a sinner ; for otherwise he would then need no repentance, no conversion, no turning from sin to God. And it appears, that every man in his original state has a heart of stone ; for thus the scripture calls that old heart, which is taken away, when a new heart ^r\^ new spirit is given. Ezek. xi. 19, and xxxvi. 26. And it appears, that man's nature, as in his native state, is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts, and of its own motion e^certs itself in nothing but wicked dteds. For thus the

scripture characterizes the old inan^ which is put off, when men are renewed in the spirit of their minds, and put on the new man, Eph. iv. 22, 23, 24....CoI. iii. 8, 9, 10. In a word, it appears, that man's nature, as in its native state, is a body of sin^ which must be destroyed., must die, be buried, and 7iever rise more. For thus the old man is represented, which is cru-cijied, when men are the subjects of a spiritual resurrection, Rom. vi. 4, 5, 6. Such a nature, such a body of sin as this, is put off in the spiritual renovation, wherein we put on the neto man, and are the subjects of the spiritual circumcision, Eph. iv. 21, 22,23.

It must now be left with the reader to judge for himself, whether what the scripture teaches of the apjilication of Christ's redemption, and the change of state and nature necessary to true and final happiness, does not afford clear and abundant evidence to the truth of the doctrine of Original §in.

PART IV.

Containing Answeri to Objections.

CHAPTER I.

t!onceming that Objection^ That to sufifiose meti's being born in sirif ivithout their choice,, or any fireuious act of their own, is to supfiose nvhat is iticonsiste7it with the nature of sin.

SOME of the objections made against the doctrine of Original Sin, which have reference to particular arguments used in defence of it, have been already considered in the handling of those arguments. What I shall therefore now consider, are such objections as I have not yet had occasion to take any special notice of.

There is no argument Dr. Taylor insists more upon, than that which is taken from the Arrainian and Pelagian notion of freedom of will, consisting in the Avill's sclfdetermination, as neccssaiy to the being of moral good or evil. He often urges, that if we come into the world infected with sinful and depraved dispositions, then sin must be natural to us ; and if natural, then necessarxj ; and if necessary, then no sin, nor any thing we are blameable for, or that can in any respect be our fault, being what we cannot help : And he urges, that sin must proceed from our own choice^ Sec*

* Page 125, 128, 129, 130, t86, 187, 188, 190, 200, 245, 246, 253, 258, 63, 64, 161, S, and other places.

Here I would observe in general, that the forementionecl notion of Freedom of Will, as essential to moral agency, and necessary to the very existence of virtue and sin, seems to be a grand favorite point with Pelagians and Arminians, and all divines of such characters, in their controversies with the orthodox. There is no one thing mor« fundamental in their schemes of religion ; on the determination of this one leading point depends the issue of almost all controversies we have with such divines. Nevertheless, it seems a needless task for roe particularly to consider that matter in this place ; having already largely discussed it, with all the main grounds of this notion, and the arguments used to defend it, in a late book on this subject, to which I ask leave to refer the reader. It is very necessary, that the modern prevailing doctrine concerning this point, should be well understood, and therefore thoroughly considered and examined : For without it there is no hope of putting an end to the contrc-ryersy about Original Sin, and innumerable other controversies that subsist, ?.bout many of the main points of religion, I stand ready to confess to the forementioned modern divines, if they can rnainiaiu their peculiar notion o{freedom, consisting in the selfdetermin-ing poTjer of the kvHI, as necessary to moral agency, and can thoroughly establish it in opposition to the arguments lying against it, then they have an impregnable castle, to which they may repair, and remain invincible, in all the controversies they have with the reform.ed divines, concerning Original Sin, the sovereignty of grace, election, redemption, conversion, the efficatious operation of theHoly Spirit, the nature of saving faith, perseverance of the saints, and other principles of the like kind. However at the same time I think this same thing will be as strong a fortress for the deists, in common with them, as the great doctrines, subverted by their notion of freedom, are so plainly and abundantly taught in the scripture-But I am under no apprehensions of any danger, the cause of Christianity, or the religion of the reformed is in, from any possibility oi that notion's being ever established, or of its being ever evinced that there is not proper, perfect, and nir.ni' fold demonstration lying against it. But as I said, it would be

needless for me to enter into a particular disquisition of this point here ; from which I shall easily be excused by any reader who is willing to give himself the trouble of consulting tvhat I have already written : And as to others, probably they will scarce be at ihe pains of reading the present discourse ; or at least would not, if it should be enlarged by a full consideration of that controversy.

I shall at this time therefore only take notice of some gross inconsistencies that Dr. Taylor has been guilty of, in his handling this objection against the doctrine of Original Sin.

In places which have been cited, he says, that " Sin must proceed from our own choice : And that if it does not, it being necessary to us^ it cannot be sin, it cannot be our fault, or "what we are to blame for :" And therefore all our sin must be chargeable on our choice, which is the cause of sin : Foi' he says, " The cause of every effect is alone chargeable with the effect it produceth, and which proceedeth from it."* Now here are implied several gross contradictions. He greatly insists that nothing can be sinful^ or have the nature of sin, but what proceeds from our choice. Nevertheless he says, "....Not the effect, h\xt the rcwse alone is chargeable with blame." Therefore the choice, which is the cause, is alone blamable, or has the nature of sin ; and not the effect of that choice. Thus nothing can be sinful, but the effect of choice ; and yet the effect of choice never can be sinful, but only the cause, which alone is chargeable with all the blame.

Again, the choice which chooses and produces sin, or from which sin proceeds, is itself sinful. Not only is this implied in his saying, " the cause alone is chargeable with all the blame," but he expressly speaks of the choice asfaultj/.^ and calls that choice tvicked, from which depravity and corruption proceeds.^ Now if the choice 4tself be sin, and there be no sin but what proceeds from a sinful choice, then the sinful choice must proceed from another antecedent choice ; it must be chosen by a foregoing act of will, deiermining itself to that sinful choice, that so it may have that v;liich he speaks of as

* Page 128. i Page 19^, + Page 200. Sec alfo page 216.

absolutely essential to the nature of sw, nanaely, that it firo-vecds/i-om our choice, and does not happen to us necessarily. But if the sinful choice itself proceeds from a foregoing choice, then also that foregoing choice must be sinful; it being the cause of sin, and so alone chargeable Avith the blaiiie. Yet if that foregoing choice be sinful, then neither must that happen to us necessarily, but must likewise proceed from choice, another act of choice preceding that : For we must remember, that " nothing is sinful but what proceeds from our choice." And then, for the same reason, even this prior choice, last mentioned, must also be sinful, being chargeable with all the blame of that consequent evil choice, which was its effect. And so we must go back till we come to the vcvyjirst volition, the prime or original act of choice in the whole chain. And this, to be sure, must be a sinful choice, because this is the origin or primitive cause of all the train of evils which follow ; and according to our author, must therefore be " alone chargeable with all the blame." And yet so it is, according to hifn, this " cannot be sinful,'-* because it does not " proceed from our own choice," or any foregoing act of our will; it being, by the supposition, the very first act of will in the case. And therefore it must be necessary, as tQ us, having no choice of ours to be the cause of it.

In page 232, he says, " Adam's sin was from his own disobedient mill; and so roust every man's sin, and all the sin in the world be, as well as his." By this, it seems, he must have a " disobedient will" before he sins ; for the cause must be before the effect: And yet that disobedient will itself is sin-ful; otherwise it could not be called disobedient. But the question is, How do men come by the disobedient will, this cause of all the sin in the world ? It must not come necessarily, without men's choice ; for if so, it is 7iot sin, nor is there 2H)y disobedience in ii. Therefore that disobedient will must also come from a disobedient will; and so on, in infinitum. Otherwise it must be suppo5>ed, that there is some sin in the world, which does not come from a disobedient will : contrary to our author's dogmatical assertions.

Vol. YL 3 F

In page 166, 5". he says. " jidam could iioi sin 'without a sinfulincHnation." Here he calls that inclination ilhclf i/n/i^/j which is the principle from whence sinful acts proceed ; as elsewhere he speaks of the disobedient will from whence all sin comes ; and he allows,* that " the law reaches to all the latent firi7icifiles of sin ;" meaninc: plainly, that it forbids, and threatens punishment for, those latent principles. Now these latent principles of sin, these sinful inclinations, without which, accorcUnj^ to our author, there can be no sinful act, cannot all proceed from a szw/u/cAofce ; because that would imply great contradiction. For, by the supposition, they are the principles from whence a sinful choice comes, and whence all sinful acts of will proceed ; and there can be no sinful act without them. So that the^r*^ latent principles and inclinations, from whence all sinful acts proceed, are sinful; and yet they are not sinful, because they do not proceed from a ivick-ed choice^ without which, according to him, <^' nothing can be sinful."

Dr. Taylor, speaking of that proposifion of the Assembly of Divines, wherein they assert, that Man is by nature utterly corrufit, &c f thinks himself well warranted by the supposed great evidence of these his contradictory notions, to say, " Therefore sin is not natural to us ; and therefore I shall not scruple to say, this proposition in the Assembly of Divines is false.'* But it may be worthy to be considered, wlielher it would not have greatly become him, before he had clotiied himself with so much assurance, and proceeded, on the foundation of these his notions, so magisterially to charge the Assembly's proposition with falsehood, to have taken care that his own propositions, which he has set in opposition to them, should be a htvle more consistent; that he might not liave contradicted himself while contradicting them ; lest some impartial judges, observing his inconsistence, should think they bad warrant to declare with equal assurance, that '• They shall not scruple to say. Dr. Tayloi *s doctrine h false."

♦ Contents of Rom. cHap. viii. in Notes on the Epistle. + Page 125,

CHAPTER II.

Concerning thai objection against the doctrine of native corrufi^ tion, That to sufi/iose men receive their first existence in sin^ is to make him who is the author of their being, the author of iheir dejiravity.

ONE argument against men's being supposed to be "born ^seilh sinful depravity, which Dr. Taylor greatly insists upon, is, " That this does in effect charge him, who is the author of our nature, who formed us in the womb, with being the author cfa sinful corruption of nature ; and that it is highly injurious to the God of our nature, whose hands have formed and fashioned us, to believe our 7iature to be originally corrupted, and that in the worst sense of corruption."*

With respect to this, I would observe in the first place, that this writer, in his handling this grand objection, supposes something to belong to the doctrine objected against, as maintained by the divines whom he is opposing, which does not belong to it, nor does follow from it: As particularly, he supposes the doctrine of Original Sin to imply, that nature must be corrupted by some positive influence; » something, bjr some means or other, infused into the human nature ; some quality or oiher, not from the choice of our minds, but like a taint, tincture, or infection, altering the natural constitution, faculties, and dispositions of our souls.f That sin and evil dispositions are implanted in the foetus in the womb."^ Whereas truly our doctrine neither implies nor infers any such thing. In order to account for a sinful corruption of nature, yea, a

* Page 137, 187, 188, 189, 256, 258, 260, 143,5. and other plaCM. •^ Psge 187, % Page 146, 148, 149, S. and the like in many other placcj.

total native depravity of the heart of man, there is not the least need of supposing any evil quality, infused, im/i/anted, or nvrought into the nature of man, by any fiositive cause, or influence whatsoever, either from God, or the creature ; or of supposing, that man is conceived and born with a fountain of ei;z7 in his heart, such as is any thing properly positive. I think, a little attention to the nature of things will be sufficient to satisfy any impartial, considerate inquirer, that the absence of positive good principles, and so the withholding of a special divine influence to impart and maintain those good principles, leaving the common natural principles of selflove, natural appetite, &c. (which were in man in innocence) leaving these, I say, to themselves, without the government of superior divine principles, will certainly be follov/ed with the corruption, yea, the total corruption of the heart, without occasion for any positive influence at all: And, that it was thus indeed that corruption of nature came on Adam, immediately on his fall, and comes on all his posterity, as sinning in him, and falling with him«

The case with man was plainly this : When God made man at first, he implanted in him two kinds of principles. There was an inferior kind, which may be called natural, being the principles of mere human nature ; such as stlflove, ■with those natural appetites and passions, which belong to the ■nature of man, in Which his love to his own liberty, honor, and pleasure, were exercised: These, when alone, and left to themselves, are what the scriptures sometimes caWfesh, Besides these, there were superior principles, that were spiritual, holy, and divine, Summarily comprehended in divine love ; ■wherein consisted the spiritual image of God, and man's righteousness and true holiness ; which are called in scripture the divine nature. These principles may, in some sense, be called su/ierr.atural^* being (however concreated or con-

♦ To prevent all cavils, the reader is desired particularly to observe, in ■wViat sense I here use the words natural and supernatural: Not as epithets of distinction between that which is concreaicd or connate, and that which is ':xtraordinarily introduced afterwards, besides tlie fust slate ef things, or the

riate, yet) such as are above those principles that are essentially implied in, or necessarily resulting from, and inseparably connected with, mere human nature ; and being such as immediately depend on man's union and communion with God, or divine communications and influences of God's Spirit: Which, though withdrawn, and man's nature forsaken of these principles, humad nature \Vould be human nature still ; man's nature, as such, being etitircj without these divine iirind}iles^ which the scripture sometimes calls spirit., in cotitradistinc* tion to flesh. These superior principles were given tb possess the throne, and maintain an absolute dominion in the heart: The other to be wholly subordinate and subservient. And while things continued thus, all things were in excellent order, peace, and beautiful harmony, and in their proper and perfect state.

These divine principles thus reigning, were the dignity, life, happiness, and glory of man's nature. When man sinned, and broke God's covenant, and fell under his curse, these superior principFes left his heart: For indeed God then left him ; that communion with God, on which these principles depended, entirely ceased ; the Holy Spirit, that divine inhabitant, forsoek the house. Because it would have been utterly improper in itself, and inconsistent with the covenant and constitution God had established, that God should still maintain communion with man, and continue, by his friendly, gracious, ^ital influences, to dwell with him and in him, after he was become a rebel, and had incurred God's wrath and curse.

order established originally, beginning when man's nature began ; but as dii. iinguishing between what belongs to, or flows from, that nature which maa has, merely as man, and those things which are boe this, by which one is denominated, not only a man, but a truly virtuous, holy, and spiritual man ; which, though they began in Adam, as soon as humanity began, and are necessary to the perfection and well being of the human nature, yet are not essential to the contitution of it, or necessary to its being : Inasmuch as one may have every thing needful to his. being man, exclusively of them. If in thus tisins the words, natwal an supernatural, I use them in an uncommon sense, it is not finivi any affcctaiioH of singularity, but for want of other terms more aptly to express my meauing.

Therefore immediately the superior divine principles wholly ceased ; so light ceases in a room when the candle is with* drawn ; and thus man was left in a sta.e of darkness, woeful corruption and ruin ; nothing but flesh without spirit. The inferior principles of selflove, and natural appetite, which were given only to serve, being alone, and left to themselves, of course became reigning principles ; having no superior principles to regulate or control them, they became al>solute masters of the heart. The immediate consequence of which was z fatal catastrofihe, a turning of all things upside down, and the succession of a state of the most odious and dreadful confusion, Man did immediately set up himaelf, and the objects of bis private affections and appeiites, as supreme ; and so they look the place of God. These inferior principles are Uke^?-e in an house ; which, we say, is a good servant, but a bad master ; very useful while kept in its place, but if left to take possession of the whole house, soon brings all to destruction. Man's love to his own honor, separate interest, and private pleasure, which before was wholly subordinate unto love to God, and regard to his authority and glory, now disposes and impels him to pursue those objects, without regard to God's honor or law ; because there is no true regard to these divine things left in him. In consequence of which, he seeks those objects as much when against God's honor and law, as when agreeable to them. And God, still continuing strictly to require supieme regard to himself, and forbidding all gratifications of these inferior pasfeions, but only in perfect subordination to the ends, and agreeableness to the rules and limits, ■which his holiness, honor, and law prescribe, hence immediately nrises enmity in the heart, now wholly under the power of selflove ; and ncihing but war ensues, in a constant course, against God. As, when a subject has once renounced his lawful sovereign, and set up a pretender in his stead, a state of enmity and war against his rightful king necessarily ensues. It were easy to shew, how every lust, and depraved disposition of man's heart would naturally arise from this prrvative original, if here were room for it. Thus it is easy to give an account, how total corruption of heart should follow

on man*s eating the forbidden fruit, though that was but one act of sin, vjithout Gcd's fiuttmg any evil into his heart, or implanting' any bad principle, or infusing any corrupt taint, and so becoming; the author of depravity. Only God's nvithdraiV' itig, as it was highly proper and necessary that he should, from rebel man, being as it were driven away by his abominable wickedness, and men's natural principles being left to tliemsdvesy this is suflRcient to account for his becoming entirely corrupt, and bent on sinning against God.

And as Adam's nature became corrupt, without God's implanting or infusing aay evil thing into his nature ; so doss the nature of his fiosterity, God dealing with Adam as the head of his posterity (as has been shewn) and treating them a* one, he deals with his posterity as having ali sinned in him. And therefore, as God withdrew spiritual communion, and his vital, gracious infl'ience from the common head, so he withholds the same from all the members, as they come into existence ; whereby they come into the world mevefesk. and entirely under the government of natural and inferior principles ; and so become wholly corrupt, as Adam did.

Now, for God so far to have the disposal of this affair, a« to ivithhold tho%t influences, without which nature will be cor--rufit, is not to be the author of sin. IJut^ concerning this, I must refer the reader to what I have said of it in my discourse on the freedom of the ivill* Though, besides what I have there said, I may here observe, That if for God so far to order and dispose the being of §in, as io permit it, by withholding the gracious influences necessary to prevent it, is for him to be the author of ^in, then some things which Dr. Taylor himself lays down, will equaliiy be attended with this very consequence. For, from time to time, he speaks of God's giving men up to the vilest lusts and affections, by permitting, or leaving them.f Now, if the continuance of sin, and its increase and prevalence, may be in consequence of God's disposal, by his withholding that grace, that is needful, under

* Pan iv. § 9, p. 354, &c. + Key, § 3S8, Note; and Pa-apb. en Ron?--4, a6.

sv?ch circumstances, to prevent it, without God's being th^ author of that continuance and prevalence of sin ; then, by parity of reason, may the bcms ofsin^ in the race of Adam, be in consequence of God's disposal, by his withholdmg that grace, that is needful to prevent it, v,ithoul his being the author of that being of sin.

If here it should be said, that God is not the author of sin, in giving men up to sin, who have already made themselves sinful, because when men have once made themselves sinful, their continuing so, and sin's prevailing in them, and becoming more and more habitual, will follow in a course of nature : I answer, Let that be remembered, which this writer so greatly urges, in opposition to them that suppose original corruption comes in a course of nature, viz. That the course of na-ture is nothing "juithout God. He Utterly rejects the notion of the " Course of nature's being a proper active cause, which will work, and go on by itself, nvithout God, if he lets or permits it." But affirms,* " That the course of nature, separate from the agency of God, is no cause, or nothing ; and that the course of nature should continue itself, or go on to operate by itself, any more than at first produce itself, is absolutely imfios-sible." These strong expressions are his. Therefore, to explain the continuance of the habits of sin in the same person, when once introduced, yea, to explain the very being of any such habits, in consequence of repeated acts, our author must have recourse to those same principles, which he rejects a9 absurd to the utmost degree, when alleged to explain the corr ruption of nature in the posterity of Adam. For, that habits, either good or bad, should contimie, after being once esiabiishr ed, or that habits should be settled and have ejcisteice in consequence of repeated acts, can be oAying only to a course of nature, and those laws of nature which God has established.

That the posterity of Adam should be born without holir n'css, and so with a depraved nature, comes to pass as much by the established course of nature, as the continuance of a corrupt disposition in a particular person, after he once has it;

* Fagt 134., S, Sec also with what vehemence this is urged in p, 137, S.

or as much as Adam's continuing uiiiioly and cornipt, after he had once lost his holiness. For Adam's postfiity are from him, and as it were in J im, and belons^in^ to him, according to an establuthed course of nature^ as much as the branches of a tree are, according to a course oynu'ure, from the tree, in the tiee, and beloni^ing; to the tree ; or (to make use of the comparison which Dr. Taylor himself chooses and makes use of from time to time, as proper to illustrate the matter*) Just as trie acorn is derived from the oak. And I think, the acorn is as much derived fiom the oak, according to the course ofnamre^ as the buds and branches. It is true, that God, by his own almit^hty power, creates the soid of the infant; and it is also true, as Dr. Taylor often insists, that God, by his immediate power, forms and fashion;-^ the bodij of the infant in the womb ; yet he does both according to that course of nature^\i\i\c\i he has been pleased to establish. The course of nature is demonsiratedr by late improvements in philosophy, to be indeed what our author himself says it is, viz. Nothing but the established order of the agency and operation of the author of nature. And though there be the immediate agency of God in bringing the soul into existence in generation, yet it is done according to the method and order established by the author of nature, as much as his producing the bud, or the acoin of the oak ; and as much as his contin-tiins; a particular person in being, after he once has existence. God's immediate agency in bringing the soul of a child into being, is as much according to an established order, as his immediate agency in any of the works of nature whatsoever. It is aereeable to the established wder of nature, that the good qualities wanting in the fref, sho-uld also be wanting in the branches and frtdt. It is agreeable to the order of nature, Ihut when a particular person is without good moral qualities in his heart, he should continue witheut then), till some new cause or efficiency produces them 5 and it is as much agreea' ble to an established course and order of nature, that sinc^ Adan!, the head of the race of mankind, the root of that grca^;

* Page 146, 187.

Vol. VL 3 G

tree with many branches sprine:inc: from it, was deprived of original righteo»isness,the branches should come forth without it. Or if any dislike the word nature, as used in this last c^se, and instead of it choose to call it a constitution or established orrfpr of successive events, the alteration of the nanne will not in the least alter the state of the present argument. Where the name, nature., is allowed without dispute, no more is meant than an established method and order of events, settled and limited by divine wisdom.

If any should object to this, that if the want of original righteousness be thus according to an established course of ■nature, then why are not principles of holiness, when restored by divine grace, also communicated io fiostei-ity ? I answer, the divine laws and establishments of the author of nature.^ are precisely settled by him as he pleaseth, and limited by his wisdom. Grace is introduced among the race of mankind by a new establishment; not on the foot of the original establishment of God, as the head of the natural woild, and author of the first creation ; but by a constitution of a vastly hivi^her kind ; wherein Christ is made the root of the tree, whose branches are his spiritual seed, and he is the head of the new creations of which I'need not stand now to speak particularly.

But here I desire it may be noted, that I do not suppose the natural depravity of the posterity of Adam is owing to the course of nature only ; it is also owing to the 'jxistjicdg^ ■ment of God. But yet I'lliink, it is as truly and in the same ■jnanner owing to the course of wc/wrc, that Adam's posterity come into the world without original righteousness, as that Adam continued without it, after he had once lost it. That Adam continued destitute of holiness, when he had lost it, and would always have so continued, had it not been restored by a Redeemer, was not only a natural consequence, according to the course of things established by God, as the Author of Nature ; but it was also a/ienal consequence, or a punish--mcnt of his sin. God, in righteous judgment, continued to absent himself from Adam after he became a rebel ; and •.withheld from him now those influences of the Holy Spirit.,

which he before had. And just thus I suppose it to be with -every natural branch of mankind : All are looked upon as sinning in and with their common root; and God righteously withholds special influences and spiritual communications from all, for this sin. But of the manner and order of these things, more may be said in the next chapter.

On the wliole, this grand objection against the doctrine of men's being born corrupt, That it makes him who gave us our beings to be the cause of the being of corruption^ can have no more force in it, than a like argument has to prove, that if men, by a course of nature, continue wicked, or remain without gocjdncss, after they have by vicious acts contracted vicious habits, and so made themselves wicked, it makes him, who is the cause of their coniinuance in being, and the cause of the continuance of the course of nature, to be the cause of their continued wickedness. Dr, Taylor says,* " God would not viake any thing ;hat is hateful to him ; because, by the very terms, he would hate to make such a thing." But if this be good avguing in the case to which it is applied, may I not as well say, God nvould not continue a thing in being, that is hateful to him, because, by the very terms., he would hate to continue such a thing in being ? Lthink the very terms do as mucli (and no morej infer one of these propositions, as the otl.er. In like manner the rest that he says on that head may be shewn to be unreasonable, by only substituting the word, continue., in the place oi7nake and /iro/iagate, I may fairly imitate his way of reasoning thus: " To say, God continue^' us according to his own original decree, or law of continuation, which obliges him iocontijiue us in a manner he abhors, is really to make bad worse : For it is supposing him to be defective in wisdom, or by his own decree or law to lay such a ■constraint upon his own actions, that he cannot do what he would, but is continually doing what he would not, what he hates to do, and what he condemns in us, viz. continuing us sinful, when he condeinns us for continuing ourselves sml'ul." If the reasoning be tveak in the one case, ii is'no less so in the other.

*Fageis6,S.

If any shall still insist, that there is a difference betweeft God's so disposing things as that depravity of heart shall be continued, according to the settled course of nature, in the same person, who has by his own fault introduced it ; and his so disposing as that men, according to a course of nature, should be born with depravity, in consequence of Adam's introducing sin, by his act which we had no concern in, and cannot be justly charged with. On this I would observe, that it is quite going off the objection, which we have been upon, from God's agency, and flying to another. It is then no longer insisted on, that simply for him, from whose agency the course of nature and our existence derive, so to dispose things, as that we should have existence in a corrupt state, is for him to be the author of sin ; but the plea now advanced is, that it is not proper and just for such an agent so to dispose, in this casp, and only in consequence ot Adam's sin ; it not being just to charge Adam's sin to his posterity. And this matter shall be particularly considered, in answer to the SiiexL objection, to which J, now proceed.

CHAPTER III.

7%fff jTffl? Objection against the Impwizilon of Jdam's sin tq his posterity^ considered, that such Imputation is unjust and unreasonable^ inasmuch as jldam and his fiosterity are not one and the same. With a brief reflection subjoined oftvhat some have su/ifiosed, of God's imputing the guilt ofJdam's sin to his Posterity, but in an infinitely less degi'ee, than to Adam himself.

THAT we may proceed with the greater clearness in considering the main olijeciions against supposing the guilt of Adam's sin lobe imputed to bis posterity ; I would pre-

mise some observations with a view to the right slating of the doctrine of the imputation of Adam's first sin, and then shew the reasonabhmess of this doctrine, in opposition to the great ch»mor raised against it on this head.

I think, it would go far towards directint^ us to the more clear and distinct conceiving and right staling of this affair, were we steadily to bear this in mind : That God, in each step of his proceeding with Adam, in relation to the covenant or constitution established with him, looked on his posterity as being one with him. (The propriety of his looking upon them so, I shall speak to afterwards.) And though he dealt more immediately with Adam, yet it was as the head of the •whole body, and the root of the whole tree ; and in his proceedings with him, he dealt with all the branches, as it they had been then existing in their root.

From which it will follow, that both guilt, or exposedness to punishment, and also depravity of heart, came upon Adam's posterity just as they came upon him, as much as if he and they had all coexisted, like a tree with many branches ; allowing only for the difference necessarily resuhing from the place Adam stood in, as head or root of the whole, and being first and most immediately dealt with, and most immediately acting and suffering. Otherwise, it is as if, in every step of proceeding, every alteration in the root had been attended, at the same instant, wiih the same steps and alterations throughout the whole tree, in each individual branch. I think this will naturally follow on the supposition of there being a constituted oneness or identity of Adam and his posterity in this affair.

Therefore I am humbly of opinion, that if any have supposed the children of Adam to come into the world with a double guilt, one the guilt of Adam's sin, another the guilt arising from their having a corrupt heart, they have not so well conceived of the matter. Thti gicilt a man has upon his soul at his first existence, is one and simple, viz. the guilt of the original apostasy, the guilt of the sin by wiiich the species first rebelled against God. This, and the guilt arising from ihe first corruption or depraved disposition of the heart, are

not to be looked upon as /wo things, distinctly imputed and charged upon men in the sight of God. Indeed the guilt that arises from the corruption of the heart, as it remains a con-■Srmed principle, and appears in its consequent operations, is a distinct and additioncl guilt : But the guilt arising from the first existing of a depraved disposition in Adam's posterity, I apprehend, i%not distinct from their guilt of Adam's first sin. Tor so it was not in Adam himself. The first evil disposition or inclination of the heart of Adam to sin, was not properly-distinct from his first act of sin, but was included in it. The external act lie committed was no otherwise his, than as his heart was in it, or as that action proceeded from the wicked inclination of his heart. Nor was the guilt he had double, as for two distinct sins : One, the wickedness of his heart and will in that affair ; another, the wickedness of the external act, caused by his heart. His guilt was all truly from the act of his inward man ; exclusive of which the motions of his body were no more than the motions of any lifeless instrument. His sin consisted in wickedness of heart, fully sufT;-cient/or, and entirely amounting ?o, all that appeared in the act he committed.

The depraved disposition of Adam's heart is to be considered two ways. (I.) As the first rising of an evil inclination -in his heart, exerted in his first act of sin, and the ground of the complete transgression. (2,) An evil disposition of heart continuing afterwards, as a confirmed principle that came by God's forsaking him ; which was a iiunishment of his first transgression. This confirmed corruption, by its remaining and continued operation, brought additional guilt on his soul.

And in like manner, depravity of heart is to be considered two ways in Adam's posterity. The first existing of a corrupt disposition in their hearts, is not to be looked upon as sin belonging to them, distinct from their participation of Adam's first sin : It is as it Avere the extended fiollution of that sin, through the whole tree, by virtue of the constituted union of the branches with the root; or the inherence of the sin oi that head of the species in the members, in the consent and con-^itrrence of the hearts of the members with the head in that

i!rst act. (Which may be, without God's being the author of sin, about which I have spoken in the former chapter.) But the depravity of nature remaining an established princifile in the heart of a child of Adam, and as exhibited in after operations, is a consequence and imnishment of the first apostasy thus participated, and brings new guilt, 'i'he first being of an evil disposition in the heart of a child of Adam, whereby he is disposed to afiprove of the sin of his first father, as fully as he himself approved of it when he committed it, or so far as to imply a full and perfect consent of heart to it, I think, is not to be looked upon as a consequence of the imputation of that first sin, any more than the full consent of Adam's own heart, in the act of sinning ; which was not consequent on the imputation uf his sin to himself, but rather/irwr to it in the order of nature. Indeed the derivation of the evil disposition to tJie hearts of Adam's posterity, or rather the coexistcvce of the evil disposition, implied in Adam's first rebellion, in the root and branches^ is a consequence of the union that the wise' author of the world has established between Adam and his posterity ; but not properly a consegue7ice of the im/nitadon of his sin ; nay, rather antecedent to it, as it was in Adam himself. The fifs't depravity of heart, and the imputation of that sin, are both the consequences of that established union ; but yet in such order, that the evil disposition is frst, i.nd the charge of guilt consequent, as it was in the case of Adam himself.*^

* My meaning, in the whole of '>vl)at has been Here said, may be illustrated thus : Let us suppose, that Adam and all his posterity had cotxisted, and that his posterity had been, through a law of nature, established by the Creator, united to him, something as the branches of a tree are united to the root, or the members of the body to the head, so as to constitute as it were one complex person, or one moral whole : '^o that by the law of union, there should have been a communion and coexistence in acts and affections ; all jointly participating, and all concurring, as one whole, in the disposition and action of the head : As we see in the body natural, the whole body is affected as the head is affected ; and the whole body concurs wlien the head acts. Now, in this case, the hearts of all the branches of mankind, by the coiistitii-tion of nature and law of union, v/ould have been affected iust as the b' art jrf Adam, their common root, was affected. When the heart of the root, bv

The first existence of an evil tlisposition of hea;t, amount-* ing; to a full consent to Adam's sin, no more infers God's be-int^ the author of that evil disposition in the chihU ^han in the father. The first arising or existing of that evil disposition

a full disposition, committed the first sin, the hearts of all the branches would have concurred ; and wben the root, in consequence of this, became guilty, so would all the branches; and when the heart of the root, as a punishment of the sin committed, was forsaken of God, in like mjnner would it have fared with all the branches ; and when the heart of the root, in consequence of this, was confirmed in permanent depravity, the case would have been the same with all the branches; and as new guilt on the soul of Adam would have been consequent on this, so also would it have been with his moral branches. And thus all things, with rel tion to evil disposition, guilt, pollution and depravity, would exist, in the same order and dependence, la each branch, as in the root. Now, difference of the time of existence does not at all hinder things succeeding in the same order, any meie than difference of place in a coexistence of time.

Here may be worthy to be observed, as in several respects to the present purpose, some things that are said by Stapferus, an emintnt divine of Zurich, in Switzerland, in his I he log'a i olem ca, published about fourteen years ago; in English as follows. "Seeing all Adam's posterity are derived from their first parent, as their root, the whole of the human kind, with its root, may be considered as coristituting but one whole, or rne mass; so as not to be properly a thing d.stinct from its ro. t; the posterity not differing froin it, arv otherwise than the branches from the tne. From which it easily appears, how that when the root sinned, all that which is tier ved from t, and wiih it constitutes but one whole, may be lookea U| on as also sinning; seeing it is not distinct from the root, but is one with it."....Tom, i, cap 3, \ 856. 57.

" It is objected against the imputation of Adam's sin, that we never com-mi;ted tlie same sin with Adam, neither io number nor in kind. I answer, we should distin,;uish here between the physical act itself, which Adam com-tni'ted, and the morality of the action, and consent to it. If we have respect only to the evterna act, to be sure it must be con cssed. that Adam's posterity did not put forth their hands to the (orbidden fruit: In which sense, that act of transgression, and that fall of Adam cannot be physically one with the sin of his poiterity But if we consider the morality of the action, and wha' consent here is 10 it, it is altogether to be maintained, that his posterity commi ted the same sin, both in number and in kind, inasmuch as they arc to be looked upon as consenting to ii. For where there is consent to a sin, there the same sin is c .mmitted. Seeing therefore that Adam, with all his posterity, constitute but one moral person, and are united in the same cove-

jti the heart of Adam, was by God's fierinission ; who could h;tve prevented it, if he had pleased, hy giving'iwcU influences of his Spirit, as would have been absolutely effectual to hinder jt; which, it is plain in fact, he did 'withhold : And whatever

nant, aad are transgressors of the same law, they are also to be looked upon as having, in a moral ellimation, commi ted the same transgression of the law, both in number and in kind Therefore this reasoning avails nothing against the righteous imputation sf the sin of Adam to all mankind, or to he whole moral person that is consenting te it. And for the reason mentioned, we may rather argue thus : The sin of the posterity, on account of iheir consent, and the moral view in which they are to be taken, is the same with the sin of Adam, not only ia kind, but in number ; therefore the sin of Adam is rightfully imputed to his posterity,"....Id. Tom. iv. cap 16, ^ 60, 61.

" The imputation of Adam's first sin consists in nothing else than this, that his posterity are viewed as in the same place with their father, and are like him. But seeing, agreeable to what we have already proved, God might, according to his own righteous judgment, which was founded on his most righteous law, give Adam a posterity that were/(^e Aiwj^//"; and indeed it could not be otherwise, according to the very laws of nature ; therefote he might also in righteous judgment impute Adam's sin to them ; inasmuch as to give Adam a posterity like himaelj, and to impute his sin to th^m, is one and the same thing. And therefore if the former be nqt contrary to the divine perfections, so neither is the latter. Our adversaries contend with us chiefly on this account. That according to our doctrine of Original Sin, such an im-putation of the first si) is maintained, whereby God, without any regard to universal native corruption, esteems all Adam's posteritv as guHtf, and holds them as liable to condemnation, purely on account of that sinful apt qf their first parent; so that they, without any respect had to their own sin, and so, as innocent in themselves, are destined to eternal punishment. I have therefore ever been careful to shew, that they do injuriously suppose t^ose things to be separated, in our doctrine, which a e by no means to be separated. The whole of the controversy they have with us about this matter, evdentiv arises from this, That they suppose the mediate and the immediate imputation arc distinguished one from the other, not only in the manner of conception, but in reality And so indeed they consider imputation only as immediate and abstractly from the mediate ; when yet our divites suppise, ihat neither ought to be considered separately from the other. Therefore I ch se not to use any iuch distinction, or to suppose any such thing, in what I have said on the subject; but only have endeavored to explain the thing itself, and to reconcile it with the divine attributes. And therefore I have every where conjoin-"d both these conception? concerning the imputation «f the first sin, as inser-

Vol. VL 5 H

*42 ORIGINAL SIN.

mystery may be supposed in the affair, yet no Christian will presume to say, it was not in perfect con-:,istence with GodV holiness ancf righteoitsnessy notwithstandintj: Adam had been, guihy of no offence before. So root and branches beini; one» according to God's wise constitution, the case in fact is, that by virtue of this oneness answerable changes or effects throut^h all the branches coexist with the changes in the root: Conse" quenily an evil disposition exists in the hearts of Adam's posterity, equivalent to that which was exerted in his own heart, vhen he ate the forbidden fruit. Which God has no hand in, any otherwise, than in not exerting such an influence, as might be effectual to prevent it ^ as appears by what was observed in the former chapter.

But now the grand objection is against the reasonableness ef such a constitution, by which Adam and his posterity should-be looked upon as one, and dealt with accordingly, in an affuir of such infinite consequence ; so that if Adam sinned, they must necessarily be made sinners by his disobedifnce, and come into existence with the same de/iravity of disposition, and be looked upon and treated as though they were partakers with Adam in his act of sin. I have not room here to rehearse all Dr. Taylor's vehement exclamations against the reasonableness and justice of this. The reader may at his leisure consult his bonk, and see them in the places referred to below.* 'Whatever ])lack colors and frightful representations are employed on this occasion, all may be summed up in this, That Adam and his posterity are not one, but entirely disinict agents. But with respect to this mighty outcry made against the reasonablet^ess of any such constitution, by which

arable; and judged, that one ought never to be considered without the other. While I have been writ!n? this note, I consulted all the systems of divinity, ■which I have by me, that I might see what w>.s the true and genuine opinioo of UT chief divines in this affoir ; and I found that they were of the same mind with me ; nan^elv, (hat these two kinds of imputation are by no mean:. to be seyarated, or to be consideied abstizctly one from the other, but thai csne does involve the other.". .H- there psrticularly c^tes t!>ose two famous -•'forafsed divine.-., Vitringa and Lamp'us... Tom iv. Cap. 17, ^ 7^, ♦ Page 13, 150,151, 156, 261, 108, 109, lit, 5

^o& is supposed to treat Adam and his posterity as one, I would make the following; observations.

I. It signifies nothing to exclaim against \)\a.infact. Such is tht fad, most evident and acknowledgedyac?, with respect to the state of all mankind, without exception of one individual among all the natural descendants of Adam, as makes it apparent, that God actually deals with Adam and his posterity as one, in the affair of his apostasy, and its infinitely terrible consequences. It has been denionstrated, and shewn to be in effect plainly acknowledged, that every individual of mankind comes into the world in such circumstances, as that there is no hope or possibility of any other than their violating God's hoiy law (if they ever live to act at all as moral agents) and being thereby justly exposed to eternal ruin.* And it is thus by God's ordering and disposing of things. And God either thus deals with mankind, because he looks upon them as one •with their first father, and so treats them as tiinful and guilty by his apostasy ; or (which will not -mend the matter) hCs nvithout viewing them as at all concerned in that affair, but as in every respect perfectly innocent, docs nevertheless subject them to this infinitely dreadful calamity. Adam, by his sin, was exposed to the calamities and sorroivs of this life, to teni" fioi-al death and eternal ruin ; as is confessed. And it is also in effect confessed, that all his posterity come into the world in such a state, as that the certain consequence is, their being ex/iosed, and justly so, to the sorrows of this life, io temfiorai death and eternal ruin, unless saved by grace. So that we see, God in fact deals with them together, or as one. If God orders the consequences of Adam's sin, with regard to his posterity's welfare, even in those things v/hich are most important, and which do in the highest degree concern their eternal interest, to be the same with the consequences to Adam himself, then he treats Adam and his posterity as one in that affair. Hence, however the matter be attended with difficulty, fact obliges us to get .over the difficulty, either by finding out ^some solution, or by shutting our mouths, and acknowlcdjjiac;

• Part I. Chap. I, the three first Section;.

the weakness and scantiness of our understandings ; as v/<^ must in innumerable other cases, where apparent and unde-r\\i\hlc/acry in God's works of creation and providence, is at« tended with events and circumstances, the mcmner and reason of which are difficult to our understanding's. But to proceed,

II. We will consider the difficulties themselves, insisted on in the objections of our opposers. They may be reduced to these two : First, That such a constitution is irjjurious to Adam's posterity. Secondly, That it is altogether imfirofier., as it \n\\A\e^ falsehood, viewing and treating those as one, which indeed are not one, but entirely distinct.

First Difficulty, That the appointing Adam to stand, in this great affair, as the rnOra! head of his posterity, and so treating them as one with him, as standing or falling with liim, is injurious to them, and tends to their hurt. To which I answer, it is demonstrably otherwise ; that such a constitution was so far from being injurious and hurtful to Adam's posterity, or tending to their calamity, anymore than if every or.e had been appointed to stand for himself personally, that it was, in itself considered, very much of a contrary tendency, and was attended with a more eligible firobability of a hafifiy issue than the latter would have been : Andsn is a constitution truly expressing the goodness of its author. For, here the following things are to be considered,

1. It is reasonable to suppose, that Adam was as likely, on account of his capacity and natural talents, to fiersevcre in obedience, as his posterity (taking one with another) if they had all been put oh the trial singly for themselves. And supposing that there was a constituted union or oneness of him and his posterity, and that he stood as a public person, or common head, all by this constitution would have been as sure to partake of the benefit of his obedience, as of the ill consequence of his disobedience, in case of his fall.

2. There was a greater tendency to a happy issue, in such ar appointment, than if every one had been appointed to stand for himself; especially on two accounts. (J.) That Adam had stronger motives to ivatchfulness than his posterity would have had ; in that not only his own etemal welfare lay at

)5take, but also that of all his posterity. (2.) Adam was in a istate of complete manhoou. when his trial began. It was a constitution very agreeable to the goodness of God, considering the state of mankind, which was to be propagated in the "way of generation, that the'wjiriit father siiould be appointed to stand for ail. For by reason of the manner of their coming into existence in a state of infancy^ and their coming so gradually to matu;'e state, and so remaining for a great while in a state of chiklbood and comparative imperfection, after they were become moral agents, they would be less fit to stand for themselves, than their first father to stand for them.

If any man, notwithstanding these things, shall say, that for his own part, if the affair had been proposed to him, he should have chosen to have had his eternal interest trusted in his own hands ; it is sufficient to answer, that no man's vain ©pinion cf himself, as more Jit to be trusted than others, alters the true nature and tendency of things, as they demonstrably are in themselves. Nor is it a just objection, that this constitution has in event proved for the hurt of mankind. For it does not follow that no advantage was given for a ha/i/iy event, in such an establishment, because it was not such as to make it utterly impossible there should be any other event,

3. The goodness of God in such a constitution with Adam appears in this : That if there had been no sovereig??y gra-cious establishment at all, but God had proceeded only on the foot of mere justice, and had gone no further than this required, he roight have demanded of Adam and ail his posterity, that they should perform perfect, fierfietual obedience, without ever failing in the least instance, on pain o{ eternal death, and might have made this demand without the firomise of any positive reward for their obedience. For perfect obedience is a debt, that every one owes to his Creator, and therefore is what his Creator was not obliged to pay him for. None is obliged to pay his debtor, only for discharging his just debt. But such was evidently the constitution with Adam, that an eternal happy life was to be the consequence of his persevering fidelity, to all such as were included within t!iat constitution (of which the tree of life was a sign) aa

'Well as eternal death to be the consequence of his disobe-dience.

I come now to consider the

Second Difficulty. It beinf; thus manifest that this constitution, by which Adam and his posterity are deah with as 07?e, is not unreasonable upon account of its being injurious and hnrtful to the interest of mankind, the only thing remaining in the objection against such a consiiiuuon, is the impropriety of it, as imjilying falsehood^ and contradiction to the true nature of things ; as hereby they are viewed and treated as one., who are not one, but wholly distinct; and no arbitrary constitution can ever make that to t>e true, which in itself considered is not true.

This objection, hov/ever specious, is really founded on a false hypothesis, and wrong notion of what we call sameness or oneness^ among created things ; and the seemmg force of the objection arises from ignorance or inconbideration of the degree, in which created identity or oneness with past existence, in general, depends on tlie sovereign constitution and law of the Supreme Author and Disposer of the Universe.

Some things, being most simply considered, are entirely distinct, and very diverse, which yet are so united by the established law of the Creator,in some respects, and with regard to some purposes and effects, that by virtue of that estabhsh* ment it is witii them as if they were one. Thus a tree, grown great, and an hundred years old, is one plant with the little sprout, that first came out of the ground, from whence it grew, and hcis been continued in constant succession, though it is now so exceeding diversr, many thousand times bigger, and of a very different forrR, and perhaps not one atom the very same ; yet God, according to an established law of nature, has in a constant sitccession communicated to it many ©f the same quaUties and most important properties, as if it •were one. It has been his pleasure to constitute an union in these respects, and for these purposes, naturally leading us to look upon all as one. So the body of man at forty years of age, is one with the infant body which first came into the ^orldj from whence it grew ; thougii i\ow constituted of dif-

ferent substance, and the greater part of the substance probably rlian^ed scores (if not hundreds) of times; and though it be now in so many respects exceeding diverse, yet God, according to the course "of na'ure, which he has been pleased to establish, has caused that in a certain method it should communicate with that infantile body, in the same life, the same senses, the same features, and many of the same qualities, and in union with the same soul, and so, with regard to these purposes, it is dealt with by him as one body. Again, the body and soul of a man are o?zc, in a very different manner, and for different purposes. Considered in themselves, they are exceeding different beings, of a nature as diverse as can be conceived ; and yet, by a very peculiar divine conslir tulion or law of nature, which God has been plea.ed to establish, they are strongly united, and become one, in most important respects; a wonderful mutual communication is established ; so that both become different parts of the saine man. But the union and mutual communication they have, has existence, and is entirely regulated and limited, according to the sovereign pleasure of God, and the constitution he has been pleased to establish.

And if we come even to the fiersonai identity of created intelligent beings, though this be not allowed to consist wholly in that which Mr. Locke places it in, i. e. same consciousness ; yet I think it cannot be denied, that this is one thing essential to it. But it is evident that the communication or continuance of the same consciousness and memory to any subject, through successive parts of duration, depends wholly on a divine establishment. There would be no necessity tiiat the remembrance and ideas of what is past should continue to exist, but by an arbitrary constitution of the Creator. If any should here insist that there is no need of having* recourse to any such constitution^ in order to account for the continuance of the same consciousness, and should say, that the very Karwre of the soul is such as will sufficiently account for it; and that the soul will retain the ideas and consciousness it once had, according to the course of nature ; then let it be remembered, who it is gives the soul this nature j and let Ihur

be remembered, which Dr. Taylor says of the course of nature, before observed ; denying, tbat " the course of nature is a proper active cause, which will work ar.d go on by itself without God, if he lets and permits it;" saying that *' the course of nature, separate from the agency of God, is no Cause, or nothing ;" and affirming that <' it is absolutely impossible the course of nature should continue itself, or go on to operate by itself, any more than produce itself ;"* and that " GoH, the Original of all Being, is the Ow/y Cause of all natural effects."! Here is worthy also to be observed, what Dr. Tuinbull says of the laivs of nature^ in words which he cites from Sir Isaac Newton^ " It is the will of the mind that is the Jlrst cause, that gives subsistence and efficacy to all those laivs, who is the efficient cause that produces the phenomena, which appear in amilogy, harmony and agreement, according to these laws" And he says, «' The same princi« pies must take place in things pertaining to morale as well as natural philosophy."§

From these things it will clearly follow, that identity of consciousneas depends wholly on a i?.w of nature, and so, oi\ the sovereign will and agency of God ; and therefore, that personal identity, and so the derivation of the pollution and guilt of past sins in the same person, depends on an arbitrary divine constitution ; and this, even though we should allow the same consciousness not to be 'he only thing which constitutes oneness of person, but should, besides that, suppose sameness of substance requisite. For, if same consciousness be one tiling necessary to personal identity, and this depends on God's sovereij^n constitution, it will still follow that personal identity depends on God';? sovereign consti-tuticn.

And with respect to the identity of created substance itself, in the different moments of its duration, 1 think, we shall grcdtly mistake, if we imagine it to be like that absolute, independent identity of the Tirst Being, whereby he is the same, ijesterdaiJj today, and forever. In. ay, on the contrary,

• Pagei34,S. + Page 140. S, $ Mor. Phil. p. 7. ^ Ibid, p.o.

it may be demonstrated that even this oneness of created substance, tir g at different times, is a merely dependent identity, dependent on the pleasure and sovereign constitution of tiim who loorketh all in all. This will follow from what is generally allowed, and is certainly true, that God not only-created all things, and gave them being at first, but continually preserves them, and upholds them in being. This being a matter of considerable importance, it may be worthy here to be considered with a little attention. Let us inquire therefore, in the first place, whether it be not evident that God does continually, by his immediate power, ufihold every created substance in being ; and then let us see the conse-ijuerice.

That God does, by his immediate power, iifihold every created substance in being, will be manifest, if we consider that their present existence is a defiendent existence, and therefore is an effect, and must have some cause ; and the cause must be one of these two ; either the antecedent existence of the same substance, or the power of the Creator. But it cannot be the antecedent existence of the same substance. For instance, the existence of the body of the 7«oo7z at this present moment, cannot be the effect of its existence at the last foregoing moment. For not only was what existed the last moment, no active cause, but wholly a passive thing; but this also is to be considered, that no cause can produce effects in a ti/ne and f2lace in which itself is not. It is plain, nothing can exert itself, or operate, when and where it is not existing. But the moon's past existence was neither w/iere nor when its present existence is. In point of time, what is fiast, entirely ceases, when present existence begins j otherwise it would not be past. The past moment is ceased and gone, when the present moment takes place ; and does no more coexist with it, than does any other moment that had ceased twenty years ago. Nor could the past existence of the particles of this moving body produce effects in any other place than where it then was. But its existence at the present moment, in isvery point of it, is in a different place from where its exist.

Vol. VI. 3 1

ence was at the last preceding motnent. From these things. I suppose it will certainly follow that the present existencei either of this, or any other created substance, cannot be an effect of its past existence. The existences (so to speak) of an effect, or thinp: dependent, in different parts of space or duration, though ever so near one to another, do not at all coexist one with the other ; and therefore are as truly different effects, as if those parts of space and duration were ever so far asunder ; and the prior existence can no more be the proper cause of the new existence, in the next moment, or next part of space, than if it had been in an age before, or at a thousand miles distance, without any existence to fill up the intermediate time or space. Therefore the existence of created substances, in each successive moment, must be the effect of the immediate agency, will, and power of God.

If any shall say, this reasoning is not good, and shall insist upon it, that there is no need of any immediate divine power to produce the present existeivce of created substances, but that their present existence is the effect or consequence of past exis'ence, according to tht nature of things ; that the established course of nature is sufficient to continue existence, ■where existence is once given j I allow it: But then it should be remembered, tvhat nature is in created things ; and nohat the established course of nature is ; that, as has been oh served already, it is nothings stfmrate from the agency r/ God; and that, as Dr. Taylor says, God, the Original of all being, is the onlt cause of all natural ejects. A father, according to the course of nature, begets a child ; an oak, according to the course of nature, produces an acorn, or a bud ; so, accouling to the course of nature, the former existence of the trunk of the tree is followed b\ its new or present existence. In the one case and the other, the new effect is consequent on the former, only by the established lanvs and settled course of nature, \vl:ich is allowed to be nothing but the continued immediate efficiency of God, according to a constitution. that he has been pleased to establish. Therefore, according to what our author urges, as the child and th.e acorn, which come into esister-ce accctding to the course cf nature, in con

■sequence of the prior existence and state of the parent and the oak, are truly, itmnediately created or made by God ; so must the existence of each created person and thing, at each "inoment of it, be from the immediate continued creation of God. Ii will certainly follow from these things, that God*s preserving created things in 1 ;ing is perfectly equivalent to a continued creation, or to his creating those things oat of nothing at each moment of their existence. If the continued existence of created things be wholly dependent on God'« preservation, then those things would drop into nothing, upon the ceasing of the present moment, without a new exer-tion of the divLie power to cause them to exist in the following moment. If there be any who own, that God preserves things in being, and yet hold that they would continue in be^ ing without any further help from him, after they once have existence ; I think, it is hard to know what \hey mean. To ■what puipose can it be. to talk of God^s fireservinff things in being, when there is 720 need 6f his preserving them ? Or to talk of their being defiendent on God for continued existence, when they v/ould of themselves continue to exist without his help ; nay, though he should wholly withdraw his sustaining power and influence ?

It will follow from what has been observed, that God's upholding created substance, or causing its existence in each successive moment, is altogether equivalent to an immediate 'production out of nothing, at each moment. Because its exist-"Cnce at thi« moment is not merely in part from God., but wholly from him, and not in any part or degree, from its an^ tecedent existence. For the supposing that its antecedent existence concurs with God in efficiency, to produce some fiart of the effect, is attended with all the very same absurdities, ■which have been shewn to attend the supposition of its pro-. ducing it ivhoUy. Therefore the antecedent existence is nothing, as to any proper influence or assistance in the affair j and consequently God produces the effect as much from no^ thing, as if there had been nothing before. So that this effect differs not at all from the first creation, but only circumstan* tiallu I as \x\ first creation there had been no such act and ef-

feet of God's power before ; vhercas, liis giving existence aftei wards,/o/Zows preceding acts and effects ct the same kind, in an established order.

Now, in the next place, let us see how the consequence of these things is to my present purpose. If the existence of created aubsiance, in each successive moment, be wholly the cficct of God's immediate power, in that moment, without any dependence on prior existence, as much as the first creation out of no'hing, then what exists at this moment, by this power, is a new effect^ and simply and absolately considered, not the same with any past existence, though it be like it, and follows it according to a certain established method.*

* When I suppose that an effect which 13 produced every moment, by a Bcw action or exeruon ot power, must be i new effrct in each moment, and not ab= luteiy and numerically the same with hat whi: h existed in preceding moments, the thing th^t 1 intend, may be illustrated by this example. The lucid co!or or brightness of the7BCio«, as we look stedtastly upon it, seemi to be A permanent thing, as though it were perfectly the same brightness continued. But indeed it is an eflect produced every moment. It ceases, and is renewed, in each successive point of time ; and so becomes altogether a netu effect at each instaat ; and no one thing that belongs to it, is numerically the same that existed in the preceding moment. The rays of the sun, impressed on that body, and reflected from it, which cause tlie effect, are none of them the same : The impression, made in each moment on our sensory, is by the stroke of new rays; and the sensation, excited by the stroke, is a new effect, an effect of a new impulse. Therefore the brightness or lucid whiteness of this body is no more numerically the same thing with that which existed in the preceding moment, than the sound of the wind that blows now, is individually the same with the sound of the wind t'-.at blew just before which^ though it be like it, is not the same, any more than the agitated air, that makes the sound, is the .same; or than the water, flowiiig in a river, that now passes by, is indiv,dually th.e same with that which passed a little before. And if it be thus with ihe brightness or color of the moon, so it must be with its solidity, and every thing else belonging to its substance, if all be, each moment, as much the immediate effect of a new exertion or app ication of power.

The matter may peihnps be in some rt-^pects still more clearly illustrated by this. The images of things in ^ glass, as we keep our eye upon them, seem to remain precis ly the same, '-vith a conlin ing, peifi-c; identity. But it is known to be otherwise. Philosophers well know that these images ace constantly renewed, by the impression and reflection of new rays of light; so that the image impressed by the farmer rays is constantly vanishing, and a

And there is no identity or oneness in the case, but what depends on the arbitrary constitution of the Creator ; who by his wise soverei'^-n establishment so unites these successivo new effects, that he treats them as o?zf, by communicating to them like pioperties, relaiions, and circumstances ; and so> leads vs to regard and treat them as one. When I call this an arbitrary constitution, 1 mean, it is a constitution which depends on nothint^^ but the divine will i which divine will de-P' nds on nothint-^ hut the divine wisdom. In this sense, the wlioie course of nature, with ail that belongs to it, all its laws and methods, and constancy and reo-ularity, continuance and proceeding, is an arbitrary constitution. In this ssnse, th« couinuance of the very being of the world and all its parts, as veil as the manner of continued being, depends entirely oa an arbitrary constitution : For it does not at all necessarily follow, that because there was sound, or light, or color, or resistance, or gravity, or thought, or consciousness, or any other dependent thine: the last moment, that therefore there shall be the like at the next. All dependent existence wtiatsoever

}jeui image impressed by new rays every moment, both on the glass and oa the eye. The image constantl^y renewed, hy new successive rays, is no more num-r.cally ihe same, than if it were by some artist put on anew with a pencil, and the colors constantly vanishing as fast as put on. And tlie new images being put on immediately or instantlv, do not make them the same, any more tliari it it were done with ihe iniermiision o4^ an hour or a day. The image that exists thi;. moment, is not at all derived from the image which existed the last preceding moment ; as may be seen, because, if the succession of new rayi be intercepted, by tomething interposed between the object and the glass, the image immediately ceases; tht past existence of the image has no influence to upliold it, so much as for one moment. Which shews, that the image is altogether new made every monieut; and strictly speaking, is in no part numerically the same with that which existed the moment preceding. And truly so the matter must be with the bodies themselves, as well as their images : They also cannot be the same, with an absolute identity, but must be wholly renewed every moment, if he case be as has been proved, that iheir present existence is no:, strictly speaking, at all the effect of their past existence ; but is wholly, every instant, the effect of a new agency, or exertion of the power, of the cause of their existence. V so, the existence caused is every instant a new effectj whether the cause be I'gh!^ or immediate divir.c pcxcr, or whatever it be.

is in a constant flux, ever passing and returning ; renewed every moment, as the colors of bodies are every naoment renewed by the light that shines upon them ; and all is constantly proceeding from God, as light from the sun. In him *>ve live, and ?nove, and have our being.

Thus it appears, if we consider matters strictly, there is no such thinsT as any identity or oneness in created objects, existing at different limes, but what depemls on God's sovereign constitution. And so it appears, that the objection we are upon, made against a supposed divine constitution, whereby Adam and his posterity are viewed and treated as one, in the manner and for tlte purposes supposed, as if it were not consistent ivith truth, because no constitution can make those to be one, which are not one : I say, it appears that this objection is built on a false hypothesis : For it appears, that a di-nine constitution is the thing which ynakcs truth, in affairs of this nature. The objection supposes, there is a oneness in created beings, whence qualities and relations are derived down from past existence, distinct from, and prior to any oneness that can be supposed to be founded on divine co?istitution. Which is demonstrably false, i'ud sufficiently appears so from things conceded by the adversaries themssives : And there«= fore the objection wholly falls to the ground.

There are various kinds of identity and oneness, found among created things, by which they become one in different manners, resfierts and degrees, and to various Jmr/wses ; several of which differences have been observed ; and every kind is ordered, regulated and limited, in every respect, by divine constitution. Some things, existing in different times and places, are treated by their Creator as one in one respect, and others in ayiother; some are united for this communicaticn, and others for that ; but all according to the sovereign pleasure of the fountain of all being and operation.

it appears, particularly, from what has been said, that all oneness, by virtue whereof pollution and guilt from past wickedness are derived, depends entirely on a divine ectablishment. It is this, end this only, that must account for guilt and an evil laint on any individual soul; in consequence of a crime com-

mitted twenty or ferty years ago, remaining still, and even to the end of the world and forever. It is this, that must ac count for the continuance of any such thinj^, any where, as. consciousness of acts that are past; and for the continuance of all /labits, either good or bad : And on this depends every thing that can belong io Jicrsonal identity. And all communications, derivations, or continuation of qualities, properties or relations, natural or moral, from vv?hat is fiasiy as if the subject were one, depends on no other foundation.

And I am persuaded, no solid reason can be given, why God, who constitutes all other created union or oneness, according to his pleasure, and for what purposes, communications, and effects, he pleases, may not establish a constitution whereby the natural posterity of Adam, proceeding from him, much as the buds and branches from the stock or root of a tree, should be treated as one with him, for the derivation, either of righteousness, and communion in rewards, or of the loss of righteousness, and consequent corruption and guilt.*

* I appeal to such as are not wont to content themselves with judging by a superficial appearance and view of things, but are habituated to examine things strictly and closely, that they may judge righteous judgment, Whether on supposition that all mankind had coexisted, in the manner mentioned before, any good reason can be given, why their Creator might not, if he had pleased, have established such an union between Adam aixd the rest of man-kind, as was in that case supposed. Particularly, if it had been the case, thaS Adam's posterity had actually, according to a law of nature, some hov/groan out of him, and yet remained contiguous and literally united to him, as the branches to a tree, or the membeis of the body to the head ; and had all, before the fall, existed together at the same time, though in dijfcrent places, as the head and members are in different places : In this case, who can determine, that the author of nature might not, if it had pleased him, have established such an union between the root and branches of this complex being, as that all should constitute one moral whole ; so that by the law of union, there should be a communion in each moral alteration, and that the heart of every bra^uh should at the same moment participate with the heart of the root, be conformed to it, and concurring with it in all its affections and acts, and so jointly partaking in its state, as a part of the same thing ? Why might not God, if he had pleased, have fixed such a kind of union as this, an union of the various parts of such a moral whole, as well as many other unions, which he has actually fixed» according to his soversigu pleasure ?■ And if he might, by his sovereign con«

As I said before, all oneness in created thingSi ^vhenc8 qualiiicB and relations are derived, depends on a divine constitution that is arbitrarily in every other lesptct, exccpliny; that it is regulated by divine wisdom. The wisdom, which is exercised in these constitutions, appears in these iwo things. Fir&tt In a beautiful analogy and harmomj with other laws or constitutions, especially relating to the same subject ; and secondly^ in the good ends obtained, or useful conscrjucjices of such a constitution. If therefore there be any objection still lying against this constitution with Adam and his posterity, it must be, that it is not sufficiently wise in these respects. But what extreme arrogance would it be in us, to take upon us to act as judges of the beauty and wisdom of the laws and established constitutions of the supreme Lord and Creator of the universe ? And not only so, but if this constitution, in particular, be well considered, its ?wWo7?2, in the two forementioned respects, may easily be made evident. There is an apparent manifold analogy to other constitutions and laws, established and maintained through the whole system of vital nature in this lower world ; all parts of which, in all successions, are derived frorn the^^rs? of the Icindy as froni their root, or fountain ; each deriving from thence all properties and qualities, that are proper to the nature and capacity of the kind, or species : No derivative having any one perfection (unless it be what is merely circumstantial) but what was in its firimitive. And that Adan>'s posterity should be without that original righteousness, which Adam had lost, is also analogous to other laws and establishments, relating to the nature of mankind ; according to which, Adam's posterity have no one perfection of nature, in any kind, superior to what was

ititution, have established such an union of the various branches of mankind, •when existing in diHerent places, I do not see why he might not also do the same, though they exist in different times. I know not why succession, or diversity of time, should make any such constituted union more unreasonable, than diversity of/i/ac*. The only reason, vhy diversity of lime can seem t« make it unreasonable, is. that difference of time shews, there is no absolute identity of the things existing in those different times : But it shews this, I think, not at all more than the difference of the place of existence.

f'ii him, when the human race began to be propagated from 'iiim.

And as such a constitution was fit and 'wise in other respects, so it was in this that follows. Seeing the divine constitution concerning the manner of mankind*s coming into existence in their propagation, was such as did so naturally unite them, and made them in so many respects one^ naturally-leading them to a close union in society, and manifold intercourse, and mutual dependence. Things were wisely so established, that all should naturally be in one and the same 7noral state ; and not in such exceeding different states, as that some should be perfectly innocent and holy, but others corru/ii and wicked ; some needing a Saviour, but others needing none; some in a confirmed state of perfect /la/i/nness, but others in & state of public condemnation to perfect and eternal misery ; some justly exposed lo great calamities in this world, but others by their innocence raised above all suffering. Such a vast diversity of state would by no means have agreed with the natural and necessary constitution and unavoidable situation and circumstances of the world of mankind ; all made »fone blood, to dnveil on all the face of the earth, to be united and blended in society, and to partake together in the natural and common goods and evils of this lower world.

Dr. Taylor urges,* that sorrow and shame are only for/?er-sonal sin : And it has often been urged, that refientance can be for no other sin. To which I would say, that the use of ivords 15 very arbitrary : But that men's hearts should be deeply affected with grief and humiliation before God, for the pollution and guilt which they bring into the world with them, I ;hink, is not in the least unreasonable. Nor is it a thint" strange and unheard of, that men should he ashamed of things done by others, whom they are nearly concerned in. I am sure, it is wot unscrifitural; especially when they are justly sooked upon in the sight of God, who sees the disposition of j«heir hearts, as fully consenting and concurring:

* Page ,^. ¥01.. VI. 3 K

From what has been observed it may appear, there is na» aure ground to conclude, that it must be an absurd and impossible thing;, for the race of mankind truly to partake of the tin of the first apostasy, so as that this, in reality and propria ety, shall become their sin ; by virtue of a real uaion between the root andbranchesof the world of mankind (truly and prop» crly availing to such a consequence) established by the Author of the whole system of the universe ; to whose establishments are owing all propriety and reality of union, in any pare of that system ; and by virtue of the full consent of the hearts •f Adam's posterity to that first apostasy. And therefore the sin of the apostasy is not theirs, merely because God imfiutet it to them ; but it is truly and profitrly theirs, and on that ground, God imp\iles it to ihem.

By reason of the established union between Adam and his posterity, the case is far otherwise between him and themy than it is between distinct parts or individuals of Adam's race 5 betwixt whom is no such constituted union y as between children and other ancestors. Concerning whom is apparently to be understood that place, Ezek. xviil. 1....20.* Where God reproves the Jews for the use they made of that proverb, The fathers have vaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set en edge J and tells them, that hereafter they shall no more have occasion to use this proverb; and that if a son sees the wickedness ofi his father, and sincerely disafifirovea it and avoids it, and he himself is righteous, he shaU not die for the iniquity of his father ; that all souls, both the soul of the father and the sonii are Aw; and that therefore the son ahallnot bear *^the iniquity of his father, nor the faJher bear the iriiquity of the ion; but the-soul that sinneth, it shall die ; that the right eouf ness of the righteous shall beufion him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be ufion him. The thing denied, is communion in the guilt and punishment of the sins of others, that are distinct parts of Adam's race ; and expressly, in that case, where there is no consent and concurrenccy but a sincere disapproba' tion of the wickedness of ancestors. It is declared, that chili*

♦ Whicb Dr, Taylor illegoe, p. i», n, 5.

yen who are adult and come to act for themselves, who are righteous, and do not approve of, but sincerely condemn the ■wi-; kedness of their fathers-, shall not be punished for their dis. pproved and avoided iniquities. The occasion of what is here said, as well as the design and plain sense, shews, that nothing is here intended in the least degree inconsistent with what has been supposed concerning Adam's posterity's sinning and fallitig in his afiostasy. The occasion is, the people's murmuring at God's methods under the'Mosaic dispen« sation; agreeable to that in Levit, xxvi. S9. « And they that are left of you, shall pine away in their iniquity in their ene^ mies lands; and also in the iniquities of their fathers shall they pine away with them :'* And other parallel places, respecting external judgments, which were the punishments most plain* ly threatened, and chiefly insisted on, under that dispensation, (which was, as it were, an external and carnal covenant) and particularly the people's suffering such terrible judgments at that day, even in Ezekiel's time, for the sins of Manasseh j according to what God says by Jeremiah (Jer. xv. 4.) and agreeable to what is said in that confession, Lam. v, 7. « Our fathers have sinned and are not, and we have borne thwr iniquities."

In what is said here, there is a special respect to the in* troducing of the gospel dispensation ; as is greatly confirmed by conipa'ing this place with Jer. xxxi. 29, 30, 31. Under which dispensation, the righteousness of'God's dealings with mankinil would be miore fially manifested, in the clear revela-tion then to be made of the raQ\.ho^ x>i Xht judgment of God, by which {hejinal state of wickedmen is determined ; which is not according to the behavior ef-their particular «?2ce«ror«-; but every one is dealt with according io-the sin o^his otvn wicked heart, or sinful nature and practice. The affair of de^ rivation of the natural corruption of mankind in general, and of thfir consent to, and participation of, the /irimitive and com* mon apostasy, is not in the least intermeddled with, or touched, by any thing meant or aimed at in the true scope and deiiign ^f this place in Ezekiel,

On ihe whole, if any do not like ihe fihilosofihy, 6r tha metaphysics (as some perhaps may choose to call it) made use of in the foregoing reasonings ; yet I cannot doubt, but that a proper consideration of what is apparent and undeniable in fact., with respect to the d'Cficndence of the state and course of things in this universe on the sovereign constitutions of the supreme Author and Lord of all, who gives none account of any of his ynatters, and nvhose ways are fiast finding out., will be suffi'-ient, with persons of common modesty and sobriety, to stop their mouths from making peremptory decisions against the justice of God, respecting what is so plainly and fully taught in fds holy word, concerning the derivation of a depravity and guilt from Adam to his posterity ; a thing so abundantly confirnifd by what is found in \.\iQ experience oi d\\ mankind in all ages.

This is enough, one would think, forever to silence such bold expressions as these...." If this hz just...\{ ihe scriptures teach such doctrine, &c, then the scriptures are of no use.,.. understanding is no understanding....and. What a God must Ae be, that can thus curse innocent creatures l....ls this \\\y Got), O Christian !" See. &c.

It may not be improper here to add something (by way of supplement to this chapter, in which we have had occasion to say £0 much about the imputation of Adam's sin) concerning the opinions of two divines, of no inconsiderable note among the dissenters in England, relating to a partial imputation of Adam's first sin.

One of them supposes that this sin, though truly imputed to I'SFAN'Ts, so that thereby they are exposed to a proper//ww-ishment, yet is not imputed to them in such a degree^ as that upon this account they should be liable to f/(?mfl/punishment, as Adam himself was, but only to temporal death, or a?wihila-tion ; Adam himself, the immediate actor, being made infinitely more guilty by it, than his posterity. On which I would observe, that to suppose, God imputes not all the guilt of Adam's sin, but only some little part of it, relieves nothing but one's imagination. To think of poor little irfonts bearing $uch torments for Adam's sin, as they sometimes do in this.

'vvdrld, and these torments ending in death and annihilation, may sit easier on the imagination, than to conceive of their suffering eternal misery for it. But it does not at all relieve one's reason. There is no rule of reason that can be supposed to lie against imputing a sin in the whole of it, which was committed by onej to another who did not personally commit it, but what will also lie against its being so imputed and punished in part. For all the reasons (if there are any) lie against the imputation ; not the quantity or degree of nvkat is imputed. If there be any rule of reason, that is strong and good, lying against a proper derivation or communication of guilt, from one that acted, to another that did not act; then it lies at{:ainst all that is of this nature. The force of the reasons brought against imputing Adam's sin to his posterity (if there be any force in them) lies in this, That Adam and his posterity are riot o?ie. But this lies as properly against charging a part of the guilt, as the whole. For Adam's posterity! by not being the same with him, had no more hand in a little of V iiat was done, than in the Avhole. They were as absolute-ly free from being concerned in that act partly^ as they were nvholly. And there is no reason to be brought, why one man's sin cannot be justly reckoned to another's account, who was not then in bcitlg, in the whole of it; but what will as properly lie against its being reckoned to him in any part, so as that he should be subject to any condemnation or punishment on that account. If those reasons are good, all the difference there can be, is this ; that to bring a great punishment oa infants for Adam's sin, is a great act of injustice, and to bring a comparatively small punishment, is a smaller act of injustice, but not, that this is not as truly and demonstrably an act of injustice, as the other.

To illustrate this by an instance something parallel. It is used as an argument why I may not exact from one of my neighbors, what was due to me from another, that he and my debtor are 7iot the same ; and that their concerns, interests and properties are entirely distinct. Now if this argument be good, it lies as truly against my demanding from him a fiart of the debt, as the whole. Indeed it is a ^greater act of

%€2 GRIGINAL SIN.

injustice for me to take from him the -whole of it, than a pattj

but not more truly and certainly an act of injustice.

The other divine thinks there is truly an imputation of Adam's sin, so that infants cannot be looked upon as innocent creatures ; yet seems to think it not agreeable to the perfections of God, to make the state of infants in another world ^orse than a state of nonexistence. But this to me appears ■plainly a giving up that grand point of the imputation of Adam's sin, both in whole and in part. For it supposes it to be not right, for God to bring any evil on a child of Adam, "which is innocent as to personal sin, without paying for it, at balancing it with 5t)orf ; so that still the state of the child shall be v^sgood, as could be demanded in justice, in case of jncre innocence. Which plainly supposes tliat the child is not exposed to any proper punishment at all, or is not at all in elcbt to divine justice, on the account of Adam's sin. For if the child were truly in debt, then surely justice might take something from him nvithout payi7ig for it, or w'whoMX giving that which makes its state as ^ooc^, as mere injiocence could in justice require. If he owes the suffering of some puniahmen4t then there is no need that justice should requite the infant for suffering that punishment; or rnake upforit, by conferring some good, that shall countervail it, and m effect remove and disannul it; so that, on the whole, good and evil shall be at an even balance, yea, so that the scale oigood shall prepon*' <Jerate. Ifit is unjust in a judge to order any quantity of money to be taken from another without paying him again» and fully making it up to him, it must be because he had justly forfeited none at all.

It seems to me pretty manifest that none can, in good consistence with themselves, own a real imputation of the guilt of Adam's f^rst sin to his posterity, without owning that they are justly viewed and treated as sinners, truly guilty and children of wrath on that account; nor unless they allow a just imputation of the whole of the evil of that transgression ; at least all that pertains to the essence of that act, £? a full and complete violation of the covenant which

Cirod had established ; even as much as if each one of man* kind had the like covenant established with him singly, and had by the like direct and full act of rebellion, violated it for himself.

CHAPTER IV.

Wherein several other Objections are consideredi

BR. TAYLOR objects against Adam's posterity's being auppased to come into the world under Zi forfeiture of God's kleasing^ and subject to his curse through nis sin....That at the restoration of the world after the fiood, God pronounced equivalent or greater blessings on Noah and his sons, than he did on Adarn at his creation, when he said, « Be fruitful and multiply, and replenish the earth, and have dominion over the fish of the sea," &c*

To this I answer, in the following remarks.

I. As it has been already shewn, that in the threatening^ denounced for Adam's sin, there was nothmg which appears inconsistent with the cojitinuqnce of this present life for a season, or with the propagating his kind ; so for the like reason, there appears nothing in that threatening, upon the supposition that it reached Adam's posterity, iVjfcwsisrfrzr with their enjoying- the temporal blessings of the present life, as long as this is continued ; even those temporal blessings which God pronounced on Adam at his first creation. For it must be observed, that the blessings which God pronounced on Adam, when he first created him, and before the trial of his obedience^,

*■ S?e p. 3i, &c, S.

;vere not the same with the blessings which were susfiended on his obedience. The blessings thus suspended, were the blessings of er^7-?m////b ; which, if he had maintained his integrity through his trial, would have been pronounced upon. him afterwards ; when God, as his judge, should have given him his reward. God might, indeed, if he had pleased, immediately have deprived him of///e, and of all temfioral blessings given him before. But those blessings pronounced on him beforehand, were not the things, for the obtaining of which his trial was appointed. These were reserved, till the issue of his trial should be seen, and then to be pronounced in the blessed sentence, which would have been passed upon him by his judge, when God came to decree to him his reward for his approved fidelity. The pronouncing these latter blessings on a degenerate race, that had fallen under the threaten" ing denounced, would indeed (without a redemption) have been inconsistent with the constitution which had been established. But the giving them the former kind of blessings, •which were not the things suspended on the trial, or dependent on his fidelity (and these to be continued for a season) was not at all inconsistent therewith.

2. It is no more an evidence of Adam's posterity's being not included in the threatening, denounced for his eating the forbidden fiuit, That they still have the temfiorql blessings of fruitfulness and a dominion ov.er the creatures continued to them, than it is an evidence of Adam's being not included in that threatening himself, that he had these blessings continued to him, was fruitful, and had dominion over the creatures after his fall, equally with his posterity.

3. There is good evidence, that there were blessings implied in the benedictions God pronounced on Noah and his posterity, which were '^.ranted on a neiv foundation ; on the foot of a dispensation diverse from any granti promise or revelation which God gave to Adam, antecedently to his falL even on the foundaiion of the covenant of grace, established in Christ Jesus ; a dispensation, the design of which is to deliver men from the curse tluU caine upon them by Adam's sin, and to brinj^' them to greater bkssings than ever he had-

l^iese blessings were pronounced on Noah and hh seed, on the same foundation whereon afterwards the blessing was pronounced on Abraham and his seed, which included both spiritual and temporal benefits. Noah had his name proplietically given -him by his father iQ!?/?^^/^ because by him and his seed, deliverance should be obtained from the curse which came by Adam's fall. Gen. v. 29. " And he called his name jVoah, (i. e. Rest) saying, This same shall comfort us concerning-our work, and toil of our hands, because of the ground which the Lord hath cursed." Pursuant to the scope and intent of this prophecy (which indeed seems to respect the same thing ■with the prophecy in Gen. iii. 15) are the blessings pronounced on Noah after the flood. There is this evidence of these blessings being conveyed through the channel of the covenant of grace, and by ihe redemption through Jesus Christ, that they were obtained by sacrifice ; or were bestowed as the effect of God's favor to mankind, which was in consequence of-God's s?nelling a sweet savor in the sacrifice which Noah offered. And it is very evident by the epistle to the Hebrews, that the ancient sacrifices never obtained the favor of God, but only by virtue of the relation they had to the sacrifice of Ghrist. Now that Noah and his family had been so 'svonderfullj' saved from the wrath of God, which had destroyed the rest of the world, and the world was as it were restored from a ruined state, there was a proper occasion to point to the great salvation to come by Christ : As it was a common thing for God, on occasion of some great temfioral salvation of his people, or restoration from a low and miserable state, to renew the intimations of the great spiritual restoratioo of the world by Christ's redemption.* God deals with the general-•ty of mankind, in their present state, far diiTerently, on occa-ion of the redemption by Jesus Chrbt, from what he other-ivise would do ; for, being .capable subjects of saving mercy, .hey have a day of patience and grace, and innumerable tem-

* It may be noted that Dr. Taylor liimself signifies it as his mind, that these blessin5s on Noah wfre on the foot of the tcvcnant of gnu, p. 8^, go. <5,i, 92, S.

Vol. VI. ? L

poral blessincjs bestowed on them ; which, as the apostle signifies (Act« xiv. 17) are estimonies of God's reconcileableness to sinful men. to put tliem upon seekirtg after God.

But besidf the sense in which the posterity of Noah in general partake of these blessinj^s of dominion over the crea" (ures, Sec. Noah himself, and all such of his posterity as have obtained like precious faith with that exercised by him in offering his sacrifice which made it a sweet savory and bjr ■which it procured these blessinci;s, have dominion over the creatures, through Christ, in a more excellent stnse than Adam in innocency ; as they are made kings and priests unto God, and reign with Christ, and all things are theirs, by a covenant of grace. They partake with Christ in that dominion " over the beasts of the earth, the fowls of the air, and fishes of the sea," spoken of in the Sth Psalm ; which is by the apostle interpreted of. Christ's dominion over the world. 1 Gor. XV. 27, and Heb. ii. 7. And the time is coming when the greater part of the posterity of Noah, and each of his sons, shall partake of this more honorable and excellent dominion over the creatures, through him " in whom all the families of the earth shall be blessed." Neither is there any need of supposing that these blessings have their most complete accomplishment until many ages after they were ,c,ranted, any more than the blessing on Japhet, expressed in those words, « God shall enlarge Japhet, and he shall dwell in the tents oF Shem."

But that Noah's posterity have such blessings given them through tiie great Redeemer^ who suspends and removes the curse which came through Adam's sin, surely is no argument that they oiiginally, and as they be in their natural state, arc not under the cprse. That men have blessings through f^race^ is no evidence of their being not justly exposed to the curse iby nature, but it rather argues the contrary: For if ;hey did not deserve 'he curse, they would not depend on grace and redemption for the removal of it, and for bringing them into a state of favor with God.

Another ohjrction which our author strenuously urges against the doctrine of Original Sin; is, that it disparages the

divine goodness in giving us our bdiig, which we ought to receive with thankfulness, as a great gift of God's beneficence, and look upon as the first, original, and fundamental fiuic of the divine liberality.*

To this 1 answer, in the following observations.

1. Tliis argument is buiil on the supposed truth of a thing in cH&fiutc, and so is a begging the question. It is built on this suppositioHi that we ase not properly looked upon as «ne with owr Jirst father^ in the state wherein God at first created him, and in his fall from thai state. If we are so, it beoomes the whole race to acknowledge God's great goodness to them, in the state wherein mankind was made at Jirst; in the hafifiy state thty were then iu; and the fair opportunity they liien had of obtaining-fo?2/5r/ne>(/and eternal happiness, and to acknowledge it as an aggravation of their apostasy, and to humble themselves, that they were so ungrate ul as to rebel against theii good Creator. Ceriainiy, we may all do this wi h as much reason, as (yea, much more than) the people of Israel in Daniel's and Nehemiah's times, did with thankfulness acknowled.^e God's great goodness to theirfath-trst many ages before, and in their confessions bewailed, and took shame tu thevnselves, for the sins committed by iheir ya^Aers, notwiihsianding such great goodness. See the ixih chapter of Daniel, and ixth ot Nehemiah.

2. If Dr. Taylor would imply in iiis objection, that it doth not consist with the goodness of God, to give mankind being in a state of misery, what ever was done before by Adam, wlicther he sinned, or did not sin. I reply, if it be justly so ordered, that there should be a posterity of Adam, which must be looked upon as one with him, then it is no more contrary to God's attribute of goodness to give being to his posterity in a state of ponisnment, than ^o continue the being of the sc/nt wicked and guilty person, who has made himself guilty, in a state of punisliment. The giving being, and the continuing being are both alike the work of God's power and will, and both are alike fuudaiiien.al to all blessings of ma.i's present

♦ Page 256, 257, 260, 71.,..74, S.

and future existence. And if it be said, it cannot be juslfy ib' ordered, that there should be a posterity of Adam, which Should be looked upon as one -svith him, this is begi^iy^g the'' question.

3. If our author would have us suppose that if is contrary to the attribute of goodness forGod,inc7?i/ case^hy an immediate act of his power, to cause existence, and to cause new existence, which shall be an exceeding miserable existence, by reason of cxposedness to eteiT.al ruin ; then his own scheme must be supposed co7Jirary to the attribute of God's goodness ; for he supposes that God will raise multitudes from the dead at the last day (which will be giving new existence to their Ijcdics, and lo bodily life and sensej in order only to their suffering eternal dcstruclion.

4. Nolwithstaiiding we are so ;;inful and miserable, as we ?re by nature, yet we may have great reason tn bless God, that he has given us our being under so glorious a dii>pensa^ tion of grace through Jesus Christ ; by which wc have a Iriappy oppbrtunity to be delivered frt»m this sin and misery, and to obtain unspeakable, eternal happiness. And because, through our own wicked inclinations, we are disprscdsota neglect and abuse this mercy, as to fail of final benefit by it, this is no reason why we ought not to be thankful for it, even sccording to our author's own sentiments. " What (says Jie*) if (he tvhote -world ties in ivickedness, and few therefore «hall be saved, have itien no reason to be //lan/cfuly because they are wicked ahd ungrateful, and abuse their being and God's bomVy ? Suppose odr own evil incliyiaficns do withhold lis," [viz. fiom seeking after happiness, which under the light of the gospel we are placed Avithin the nearer and easier reach pf] « suppose the whole Christian world should lie in wickedness, and but few Christians should be saved ; is it therefore certainly true, that we cannot reasonably i/ian^ God for the gospel?" Well, and though \he evil inclinations, which l-inder our seeking and obtaining happiness by so glorious art jidvantnge, are what we are born with, yet if those inclinations'

• P»5<^ 72, 73, S.

M'e our fault or sin, that alters not the case ; and to say, they are not our Sin, is still begging the question. Yea, it will follow from several things asserted by our author, put together, that not'>vithstanding men arfe born in such circumstances, as that they are under a very great imfirobability of ever becom« inpj righteous, yet they may have reasori to be thankful for their being. Thus, particularly, those that were born and lived among Ihe Heathen, before Christ came. For Dr. Taylor asserts, that all men have reason of thankfulness for their being ; and yet he supposes, that the Heathen world, taken as a collective body, were dead in sin, and could not deliver or help themselves, and tnerefore stood in necessity of the Christian dispensation. And not only so, but he supposes, that the Christ/an world is now at length brought to the like deplorable 6nd helpless circumstances, and needs a neio dispensation for itb relief; as I observed before. According to these things, the world in general, not only formerly, but even at this day, are dead in szn, and helpless as to their falvation ; and therefore the generality of them that are born into it, are much more likely to perish, than otherwise, till the new dispensation comes : And yet he supposes, we all have reason to be thankful for our being. Yea, further still, I think, according to our author's doctrine, men may have great reason to be thankful to God for bringing them into a stale, wnich yet, as the case is, is attended with misery, as its certain consequence. As, with respect to God's raising the wicked to life, at the last day ; which, he supposes, is in itself a great benefit, procured by Christ, and the wonderful grace of God through him : And if it be the fruit of God's wonderful grace, surely men ought to be thankful ^orlhdii grace, and praise God for it. Our doctrine of Original Sin, therefore, no more disparages God's goodness in man's formation in the womb, than his doctrine disparages God's goodness in their resurrection from the grave.

Another argument which Dr. Taylor inakes use of, against the doctrine of Original Sin, is what the scripture reveals of the process of the day oi judgment; which represents the •■'ulge as dealing with men dnghj and separately, rendering to

eveii/ man according to /lis deeds, and according to the im« provement he has made of the particular powers and talents God has given him personally.*

But this objection v/ill vanish, if we consider what is the end or design of that public jiid^;ment. Now ihis will not be, that God m&yjlnd out what men are, or what punishm^t or reward is proper for them, or in order to the pussint? a right judgment of these things within himself, which is the end of human trials ; but it is to manifeat what men are, to their own consciences, and lothe woild. As the day of judgment is called the day of the revelation of the righteous judgment of God; in order to this, Cod will make use of evidences, or proofs. But the proper evidences of the wickedness of men's hearts^ (the true seat of all wickedness) bolh as to corruption of nature, and additional pollution and guilt, are men's ivorks.

The special end of God's public judgment will be, to make a proper, perfect, open distinction among men, rightly to state and manifest their difference one from another, in order to that separation and difference in the eternal retribution, that is to follow : And this difference will be made to appear, by their ficrsomd tvorks.

There are two things, with regard to which men will be tried, and openly distinguished by the perfect judgment of God at the last day ; according to the twofold real distinctioji subsisting among mankind, viz. (1.) The difference of state ; thai primary and grand distinction, whereby all mankind are divided into two sorts, the righteous and the wicked. (2,) Th&t secondary distinction, whereby both sorts differ from others in the same general state, in degrees of additional fruits of righteousness and wickedness. Now the judge, in order to manifest both these, will judge men according to their personal works. But to inquire at the day of judgment, whether Adam sinned or no, or whether men are to be luoked upon as one with him, and so partakers in his sin, is what in no res-nect lends to manifest eitlier of these distinctions.

♦Page 65, 66, 111, 5.

t. The,/irst thini^ to be manifested, will be the state, that each man is in, with respect to the grand distinction of the whole world of mankind into righteous 'awCl ivicked; or, in metapliorica! language, wheat and tares ; or, the children of the kingdom of Christ, and the children of the wicked one ; the latter, the head of the apostasy ; but the former, the head of the restoration and recovery. The judt^e, in manifesting tliis, will prove men's hearts by their ivorks, in such as have had opportunity to perform any works in the body. The evil works of the .children of the nvicked one will be the proper Tjianifpstation and evidence or proof of whatever belongs to the general state of such ; and particularly they will prove, that they belong to the kingdom of the great deceiver, and head of the apostasy, as they will demonstrate the exceeding corruption of their nature, and full consent of their hearts to the common apostasy ; and also that their hearts never relinquished the apostasy, by a cordial adherence to Christ, the great restorer. The judge will also make use of the good 'works of the righteous to shew their interest in the redemption of Christ; as thereby will be manifested the sincerity of their hearts in their acceptance of, and adherence to the Redeemer and his righteousness. And in thus proving the state of men's hearts by their actions, the circumstances of those actions must necessarily come into consideration, to manifest the true quality of their actions ; as, each one's talents, opportunities, advantages, light, motives, Sjcc.

2. The other thing to be manifested, will he that secondary distinction^ Vv'herein particular persons, both righteous and wicked, differ from one another, in the degree of secondary good or evil, that is something beside what is common to ail in the sa-me general state : The degree of evil fruit, which is additional to the guilt and corruption of the whole body of apostates and enemies ; and the f/r§-r^c of personal goodness and good fiuit, which is a secondary goodness, with respect to the righteousness and merits of Christ, which belong to all by that sincere faith manifested in all. Of this also each one's works, with their circumstances, opportunities, talents^ &c. will be the proper evidence.

As to the nature and aggravations of the general apostasy by Adam's sin, and also the nature and sufficiency of the redemption by Jesus Christ, the great restorer, though both these will have vast injluence on the eternal state, which men shall be adjudged to, yet neither of ihem will properly belong to the ^/"/o/ men will be the suhjecls of at that day, in order to the manifestation of their state^ wherein they are distinguished cne from another. They will belong to the business of that day no otherwise, than the manifestation of the great truths of religion in general ; as the nature and perfections of God, the dependence ot mankind on God, as iheir creator and preserver, &c. Such truths as these will also have great influence on the eternal state, whlcli men will then be adjudged to, as they aggravate the guilt of man's wickedness, and must be considered in order to a due estimate of Christ's righteousness, and men's personal virtue ; yet, being of general and equal concernment, will not properly belong to the trial ol particular persons.

Another thing urged by our author particularly against the imputation of Adam's sin, is this : " Though, in scripture, action is frequently said to be imfiuted, reckoned., accounted to a person, it is no other than his cnvn act and deed 1"* In the same place he cites a number of places of scripture, wl'.ere these words are used, y/hich he says are all that he can find in the Bible.

But we are no way concerned with this argument at present, any further than it relates to imfiutation of sin, or stiful action. Therefore all that is in the argument, which relates to the present purpose, is this : 'I hat the word is so often ap plied in scripture to signify God's imputing personal sin, but never once to his imputing Adam's sin....5o often .'....How often ?....But twice. There are but two of all those places which he reckons up, that speak of, or so much as have any reference to, God's imputing sin to any person, where there is any evidence that only personal sin is meant ; and they arc J.evit. xvii. 3, 4, and 2 Tim. iv. 16. All therefore the argu-

♦ Pages, &c. 105, S.

meftt comes to, is this : That the word, imfiute, is applied iri scripture, two times, to the case of God's imputing sin, and neither of those times to signify the imputing of Adam's sin, but both times it has reference to personal sin ; therefore Adam's sin is not imputed to i>is posterity. And this is to be noted, that one of these two places, even that in Levit. xvii. 3, 4, does not speak of imputing the act committed, but another not committed. The words are, " What man soever there be of the house of Israel, that killeth an ox or lamb or goat in the camp, or that killeth it out of the camp, and bring-eth it not unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, to offer an offering unto the Lord, before the tabernacle of the Lord, blood shall be imputed unto that man ; he hath shed blood ; that man shall be cut off from among his people, i. e. plainly, murder shall be imputed to him : He shall be put to death for it, and therein punished with the same severity as if he had slain a man. It is plain by Ibai. Ixvi. 3, that in some cases, a shedding the blood of beasts, in an unlawful manner, was imfiutedio them, as if they slew a man.

But whether it be so or not, although in both these places the word, imfiute, be applied to personal sin, and to the very-act done by the person spoken of, and in ten more places ; or although this could be said of all the places, which our author reckons up ; yet that the word, imfmte, is never expressly applied to Adam's sin, does no more argue, that it is not imputed to his posterity, than it argues, that pride, unbelief, lying* theft, oppression, persecution, fornication, adultery, sodomy, perjury, idolatry, and innumerable other particular moral evils, are never imputed to the persons that committed them, or in whom they are ; because the word, impute, though so often used in scripture, is never applied to any of these kinds of wickedness.

I know not what can be said here, except one of these two things : That though these sins are not expressly said to be imputed^ yet other words are used that do as plainly and certainly imply that they are imputed, as if it were said so expressly. Very well, and so I say with respect to the imputation of Adam's sin. The thing meant by the y^Qvd^ impute.

Vol. VI. 3 M

may be as plainly and certainly expressed by usin^ other ■words, as if that word were expressly used ; and 7nore cct' tainly^ because the words used instead of it, may amount to an explanation of this word. And this, I think, is the very case here. Though the word, imfmte, is not used with respect to Adam's sin, yet it is said, ^11 have sinned; which., respecting infants, can be true only of their sinning by his tin. And, it is said. By hia disribediencc many were made sinners ; &nd^ Judgment and condemnation came ufion all by that sin ; and.that, by this means, deaths [the wages of sin] passed on all 7nen, &c. Which phrases amount to full and precise explanations of the word, im/mte ; and therefore do more certainly determine the point really insisted on

Or, perhaps it will be said, With respect to those personal sins forementioned, firide, unbeliefs 8cc. it is no argument, they are not imfiuted to those who are guilty of them, that the very word, imfiutcy is not applied to them ; for the word itself is rarely used ; not one time in a hundred, and perhaps five hundred, of those wherein the thing meant is plainly implied, or may be certainly inferred. Well, and the same also may be replied likewise, with respect to Adam's sin.

It is probable, Dr. Taylor intends an argument against Original Sin, by that which he says in opposition to what R, R. suggests of c/«7rfrfn'a discovering the princiflies ofiniqidty., and seeds of sin, before they are capable of moral action,* \\z. That little children are ?nade patterns of humility, meekness and innocence, in Matth. xviii. 3....1 Cor. xiv. 20, and Psal. cxxxi. £.

But when the utmost is made of this, there can be no shadow of reason, to understand more by these texts, than that Utile children are recommended as patterns in regard of a ?iega'ivc virtue, innocence with respect to the exercises and fruits o? sin, harmlessness as to the hurtful effects of it; and that image of meekness and humility arising from this, in conjunction with a natural tenderness of mind, fear, selfdiffi-dence, yieldablencss, and confidence in parents and others older than themselves. And so, they are recommended n'"

• Paje 77, 78, S.

jjatterns of virtue no more than cloves^ which are an harmless sort of creature, and have an image of ihe virtues of meekness and love. Even according to Dr. Taylor's own doctrine, no more can be made of it than this : For his scheme will not admit of any such thini^ as fiositive virtue, or virtuous disposition, in infants ; he insisting (as was observed before) that viitue must be the fruit of thought and rejection. But there can be no thought and reflection, that produces posiiive virtue, in children, not yet capable of moral action j and it is such children he speaks of. And that little children have a negative virtue, or innocence, in relation to the positive acts and hurtful effects of vice, is no argument that they have not a corrufit nature within them : For let their nature be ever so €o>Tunt, yet surely it is no wonder that they be not guilty of po-ntive wicked action, before they are capable of any moral action at all. A young viper has a naalii^nant nature^ though incapable of doine a malignant action, and at present appearing a harmless creature.

Another objection, which Dr. Taylor and some others offer against this doctrine, is, That it pours contempt upon the human nature.*

But their declaiming on this topic is like addressing the affections and conceits oi children, ratber than rational arguing with men. It seems, this doctrine is not complaisant enough. I am sensible, it is not suited to the taste of some, who are so very delicaw (\.o say no worse) that they can bear noibino; but compliment and flattery. No contempt is by this doctrine cast upon the noble faculties and capacities o^ man's tmture.. or the exalted business, and divine and immortal happiness he is made capable of. And an to speaking ill of man's present 7noral staf.e, I presume, it will not be denied, that shame belongs to them that are truly sinful; and to supsi^^se, thai this is not the native character of mankind, is still but meanly begging the question. If we, as we come into the world, are truly sinful, and consequently miserable, he act*; but ^friendly part to us, who endeavors fully to discover an4

• P3-e 74, 75, 5.

manifest our disease. Whereas, on the contrary, he acts an unfriendly part, who to his utmost hides it from us ; and so, in effect, does what in him lies to prevent our seekintr a remedy from that, which, if not remedied in time, must biing us finally to shame and everlasting contemfit, and end in perfect and remediless destruction hereafter.

Another objrction^ which some have made against this doctrine, much like the former, is, That it tends to beget in us an ill ofiinion of our fellow creatures, and so to promote ill nature and mutual hatred.

To which I would say, If it be truly so, that we all come sinful into the world, then our heartily acknotvledgivg it, tends to X^xoxwolt humility: But our disowning that sin and guilt, which truly belongs to Ub, and endeavoring to persuade our* selves that we are vastly better than in truth we are, tends to a foolish self exaltation and pride. And it is manifest, by reason, experience, and the word of God, that pride is the chief source of all the contention., mutual hatred, and ill nvilly which are so prevalent in the world ; and that nothing so effectually promotes the contrary tempers and deportments, as humility. This doctrine teaches us to think no worse of others, than of ourselves : It teaches us, that we are alt, as we are by nature, cofnpanions in a miserable, helpless condition ; which, under a revelation of the divine mercy, tends to promote mutual compassiom. And nothing has a greater tendency to promote those amiable dispositions of mercy, forbearance, long sutTer-ing, gentleness and foreiyeness, than a sense of our own extreme unworthiness and misery, and the infinite need we have of the divine pity, forbearance and forgiveness, together with a hope of obtaininjj; mercy. If the doctrine, which ieaches that mankind are corrupt by nature, tends to promote ill nvilly why should not Dr. Taylor's doctrine tend to it as much ? For he teaches us, that the generality of mankind are very wicked, having made themselves so by their own free choice, without any necessity ; which is a way of becoming wicked, t^at renders men truly ivorthy oi' resentment; but the other, rot ct all, even according to his own doctrino.

Another exclamation against this doctrine, is, That it tends to hinder comfort and joij, and to promote melanchohj and gloominess of mind.

To which I shall briefly say, Doubtless, supposing men are really become sinful, and so exposed to the displeasure of God, by whatever means, if they once come to have their eyes opened, and are not very stupid, the reflection on their c;'se will tend to make them sorro'ivful; and it is Jit, it should. Men, with whom this is the case, may well be filled with sorrow, till they are sincerely willing to forsake their sins, and turn to God. But there is nothing in this doctrine, that in the least stands in the way of comfort and exceeding joy, to such as find in their hearts a sincere willingness, wholly to forsake all sin, and give their hearts and whole selves to Christ, and comply with the gospel method of salvation by him.

Another thing objected is, that to make men believe that wickedness belongs to their very nature, tends to encourage thtra in dn, and plainly to lead them to all manner of iniquity ; because they are taught, that sin is 7iatural, and therefore necessary and unavoidable.*

But if'his doctrine, which teaches that sm is natural to us, does also at the same time leach us, that it is never the fetter, or less to be condemned, for its being natural, then it does not at all encourage sin, any more than Dr. Taylor's doctrine encourages wickedness, when it is become inveteratei who teaches, that such as by custom have contracted strong habits of sin, are unable to helfi themselves.-t And is it reasonable to represent it as encouraging a man's boldly neglecting and wilfully continuing in his disease, without seeking a cwj-e, to tell him of his disease, to shew him that his disease is real and very fatal, and what he can never cure himself of; yet withal directing him to a ^rcat fihtjsician, who is sufficient for his restoration ? But for a more particular answer to what is objected against the doctrine of our natural impotence and

* Page 231, and some other places. +See his exposition of Rom. vii. f. 2C5....aao. But especially in his Paraphrase and Notes on the Epistle.

inability, as beinoj an encouragement to go on in sin, and a discouragement to the use of all means for our help, I must for brevity refer the reader to what has be»n largely written on this head in my discourse on the Freedom of the Will.

Our author is pleased to advance another notion, among others, by way of objection against the doctrine of Original Sin ; that if this doctrine be true, it would be unlawful to beget children. He says,* " If natural generation be the means of unavoidably conveying all sin and wickedness irUo the world, \i vc\u^\. itself hQ u sinful and unlawful x.hvci^.''* Now, if there be any force of argument here, it lies in this proposition, ^ Whatsoever is a means or occasion of the certain, infallible existence of sin and wickedness, must itself hz sinful." But I imagine Dr. Taylor had not thoroughly weighed this proposition, nor considered where it would carry him. For God's €ontinui7ig in being the devil, and others that are finally given up to wickedness, will be attended, most certainly and infallibly, with an eternal series of the most hateful and horrid \yick-«dness. But will any be guilty of such vile blasphemy, as to say, therefore God's upholding them in being is itself a sinfui thing ? In the same place our autlior says, « So far as we are generated in sin, it must be a sin to generate." But tjiere is no appearance of evidence in that position, any more than in this : " So far as any is upheld in existence in sin, it is a ain to uphold them in existence." Yea, if there were any reason in the case, it would be strongest in the latter position j for parents, as Dr. Taylor himself observes, are not the authors of the beginning of existence ; whereas, God is truly the author of the continuance of existence. As it is the known "will of God, to continue Satan and mihions of others in beings though the most sure consequence is the continuance of a vast infernal world, full of everlasting hellisH ivickedness ; so it is part of the revealed will of God, that this world of mankind should be continued, and the ^y^ecies firofiagated^ for his own wise and holy purposes ; which will is complied wit!) by the parents joined in lawful 7narriage ; whose children, though

• Page 145.

they come into the world in sin, yet are capable subjects of eternal holiness and happiness ; which infinite benefits for their children, parents have great Teason to encourage a hope of, in the way of giving up their children to God in faith, through a Redeemer, and bringing them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. I think, this may be answer enough to such a cavil.

Another objection is, that the doctrine of Original Sin is no oftener., and vo more plainly spoken of in scripture ; it bC'^ ing, if true, a very important doctrine. Dr. Taylor, in many parts of his book suggests to his readers, that there are very few texts^ in the whole Bible, wherein there is the least ap» pearance of their teaching any such doctrine.

Of this I tftok notice before, but would here say further? That the reader who has perused the preceding defence of this doctrine, must now be left to judge for himself, whether there be any ground for such an allegation ; whether there be not texts in sufficient number,- both in the Old Testament and New, that exhibit undeniable evidence of tl)is great article of Christian divinity ; and whether it be not a doctrine taught in the scripture with g'"eat plainness. I think there are few. If any, doctrines of revelation, taught more plainly and expressly. Indeed, it is taught in an explicit manner more m the New Testament, than in the Old ; which is not to be wondered at; it being thus with respect to all the most important doctrines of revealed religion.

But if it had been so, that this doctrine were rarely taught in scripture ; yet if we find that it is indeed a thing declared to us by God, if there be good evidence of its being held forth to us by any word of his, then what belongs to us, is, tov believe his word, and receive the doctrine which he teaches us, and not, instead of this, to prescribe to him how often he shall speak of it, and to insist upon knowing what reaso?is he has for speaking of it no oftener, before we will receive what he teaches us, or to pretend that he should give us an accounts-why he did not speak of it so plainly as we think he ought to have done, sooner than he did. In this way of proceeding, if it be reasonable, the Sadducees of old, who denied any resur-

rection or future state, mi^'ht have maintained their ca-asv; against Christ, when he blamed them for " not knowing tho scriptures, nor the power of Goci ;" and for not understanding by the scripture that there Wf-uld be a resurrection to spiritual enjoyment, and not to animal life, and sensual gratifications ; and they might have insisted that these doctrines, if true, were very important, and therefore ought to have been spoken of in the scriptures oftener and more explicitly, zm] not that the church of God should be left, till that time, with only a/eiv, o^scwre intimations of that which so infinitely concerned them. And they might with disdain have rejected Christ's argument by way o{ ivference^ from God's calling himself, in the Books of Moses, the God of Abraham^ Isaac and Jacob. For answer, they might have said, that Moses was sent on purpose to teach the people the mind and wilt of God ; and therefore, if these doctrines were true, he ovght in reason arid in truth to have taught them plainly and frequently, and not have left the people to spell out ?o important a doctrine, only from God's saying, that he was the God of Abraham, Sec.

One great end af the scripture is to teach the world what manner of being God is ; about which the world, without revelation, has been so wofully in the dark ; and that God is an infinite being, is a doctrine of great importance, and a doctrine sufficiently taught in the scripture. But yet it appears to me, this doctrine is not taught there, in any measure, with suck expUcitness and precision, as the doctrine of Original Sin ; and the Socinians, who deny God's omnipresence and omniscience, have as much room left them for cavil, as the Pelagians, who deny Original Sin.

Dr. Taylor particularly urges, that Christ says not one word of this doctrine throughout the four gospels j which doctrine, if true, being so iinnportant, and what so nearly concerned the great work of redemption, which he came to work out (as is supposed) one would think, it should have been em" phatically spoken of in everij page of the gospels.*

* Page 2^2, 213.

in reply to this, it may be observed, that by the account given in the four gospels, Christ was continually saying those things which plainly imfiUcd, that all men in their orighial state are sinful and miserable. As, when he declared that " they which are whole, need not a physician, but they which are sick ;* that " he carrte to seek and to save that which was lost ;"t that it was necessary for all to be bor?i again, and to be converted, and that otherwise they could not enter into the kingdom of heaven ;\ and that all were sinners, as well as those whose blood Pilate mingled with their sacrifices, Sec. and that every one nvho did not refient, should perish ;^ withal directing every one to firay to God for forgiveness of sin ;|| using our necessity of forgiveness from God, as an argument with all to forgive the injuries of their neighbors ;1f teaching that earthly parents, though kind to their children, are in themselves evil ;** and signifying, that things carnal and corrufit, are properly the things of men ;tt warning his disci-pies rather to beware of men, than of wild beusts ;^| often representing the world as evil, as wicked in its works, at enmity with (ruth and holiness, and hating him ;§§ yea, and teaching plainly, that all men are extremely and inexpressibly sinful, owing ten thousand talents to their rlivine creditor.||j|

And whether Christ did not plainly teach Nicodemus the doctrine of original total depravity, when he came to hini to know what his doctrine was, must be left to the reader to judge, from what has been already observed on John iii. I..,, 11. And besides, Christ, in the course of his preaching, took the most proper method to convince men of the coi-rupiion of their nature, and to give them an effectual and practical knowledge of it, in application to themselves, in par ticular, by teaching and urging the holy and strict lavj ol God, in its extent and spirituality and dreadful threatenings.. Which, above all things, tends to search the hearts of men,

* Matt.ix. 12. +Matt. xviii, i i,Luke xix. lO. J Matt, xvlii. 3. §Lukexiii. I..,.5. liMatt. vi. i2,Lukexi.4 IMatt. vi. 14, i5,and xviii. 35. *« Matt. vii. 11. ++Matt. xvi. 23. JJ Matt. X. 16, 17. ^^ John vii. 7, viii. 23, xiv, 17, XV. »8, 19. III! Matt, xviii. 21, to the end. Vol. VI. 3 N

and to teach them their inbred, exceedinc^ depravity ; not* merely as a matter cf speculation, bu* by proper conviction* of conscience ; -which is the only knowledge of Original Sin, that con avail to prepare the mind for receiving Christ's redemption ; as a man's sense of bis own sickness preparer him to apply in irood earnest to the physician.

And as to Christ's be-ng no more frequent and particular in mentioning and inculcating this point in a doctrinal manner, it is p'obable one reason to be given for it, is the same that is to be given for his speaking no oftener of God's creat' ivg the world ; which, though so important a doctrine, is scarce ever spoken of in any of Christ's discourses ; and no wonder, seeing this was a matter which the Jews, to whom he confined hi'^ personal min-istry, had all been instructed in from tieir forefathers, and never was called in question among them. And ther&is a great deal of reason, from the ancient Jewish writer?, to- suppose that the doctrine of Original sin had ever been allowed in the ope^n profession of that people ;* though they were generaHy, in that corrupt lime,

* What is found in the more ancient of the Jewish Rabbies, who have wrote since the coming of Christ, is an argument of this. Many tilings of this sort are taken notice of by Stapferus, in his Theo/ogia Polemka before mentioned. Some of these things which are there cited by him in Latin, 1 shall here faithfully give in English, for the sake of the English reader.

"....So Manasseh, concerning Human Frailty, page 129. Gen. viii. 2r. '•^ I iL'ill not ajftx more airse the earth for man's sake; for the appetite of nan is fill from his youih;" that is, from the time when he comes fonh/rom his moth-er^s womb. For at. the. same time that he sucks the breasts, he follows his lust \ and while he is yet an infant, he is under the dominion of anger, envy, hatred, and other vices to which that tender age is obnoxious. Prov xxii. 15. Solomon says, " foolishness is hound to the mind oja. child." Concerning which place, R. Levi Ben Gersom observes thus : '^Fcdlishvess, as it zvere, grows t» him in his very beginning." Concerning this sin, which is common and erig-inal to all men, David said, Psalm li. 5. " Behold, I voas begotten in iniquity, and in iin did my mother icarm me." Upon which place Lben Ezra says thus : " Behold, because of the concupiscence which is innate in the heart of man, it is said, I am begotten in iniquity." And the sense is, that there is implanted in the heart of man, Jctzer harang, an evil figment, from his nativity.

«• And Manasseh Ben Israel, de Fragil. page 2. " Behold, I was formed in' iniauity, and. in sin kalh my mother u-armed mc." But whether thij be under.-

ORIGINAL SIN. -^3

-very far from a practical conviction of it; and many notions •were then prevalent, especially among the Pharisees, which were indeed inconsistent with it. And though on account ■of these prejudices ihey might need to have this doctrine ex-plained and applied to them, yet it is well known, by all acquainted with taeir Bibles, that Christ, for v/ise reasons, spake

stood concerning the common mother, which was Eve, or whether Davi'd spake only of his own mother, he would signify, that sin is as it were natural, and inseparable in this life. For it is, to be observed, that Eve conceived after the transgression was committed ; and as many as were begotten afterwards, were not brought'forth in a conformity to the rule of right reason, but in conformity to disorderly and lustfiil affecions.'' He adds, " One of the wise men of the Jews, namely, R. Aha, rightly observed, David -would signify-that ;t is impossible, even for pious men who excel in-virtue, never to commit an,- sin." Job also asserts th» samelHing with David, chap. xiv. 4, saying, " Who xvjll give a clean tkingfrom an unclean ? Truly not one.'" Concerning which words Aben Ezra says thus : " The sense is the same with that, / was begotten in iniquity, because man is made out of an unclean thing." Stap-Jerus, Tl'.eolog. Polem. Tom. iii. p 36, 37.

Id. ibid, p 132, &c. ^^So Sal Jarchi adGemaram, Cod. Schabbalh, fol. i^t, p. 2. " And this is not only to be referred to sinners, because all the pofteri-ty of \.\\t first man are in like manner fubjected to all the curses pronounced on him." And Manasseh Ben Israel, i.i his Preface to Human Fraiity, says, " I had a mind to shew by what means it came to pass, that when the fint father *t all had lost his righteousness, \\\i, posterity are begotten liable to Xht same pun-' ishment with him." And Munsterus, on the gospel of Matthew, cites :he foil-owing words from the book called The Bundle of Myrrh: "The blessed Lord faid to tht first man, when ht cursed him, Thorns and thistles shall it brino-Jorlh to thee; and thou shdlt eat the herb of the field. The thing which he means, is, that because of his sin all who should descend from him, should be wicked and perverse, like thorns and thistles, according to that word of the Lord, speaking to the Prophet ; Thorns and irritators are with thee, and thou dwellest amo"g scorpions. And all this is from the serpent, who was the Devi!, Sam-miel, who emitted a mortiferous and corruptive poison into Eve, and became the cause of death to Adam himself, when he ste the fruit. Remarkable is the place quoted in Joseph de Voism, against Afar<m Raymund, p. 471, of Master Menachem Rakanatensis, Sect. Bereschit, from Midrasch Tehillim, which is cited by Hoornbehius, against the Jews, in these words : «' It is no wonder that the sin of Adam and Eve is written and sealed with the kinc's ring;, and to be propagated to all following generations ; because on the day ihjt Adam was created, all things were iinishcd ; so that he stood forth the perfection and completioff of the whole •workmanship of the world ; so whm

more sparingly and obscurely of several of the roost important doctrines of revealed religion, relating to the necessity, grounds, nature, and way of his rcdennption, and the meth-= od of the justification of sinners, while he lived here in the flesh, and left these doctrines to be more plainly and fully opened and inculcated by the Holy Spirit, after his ascension.

he sinned, the whole world sinned, whose sin we bear and suffer. But tbc matter is not thus with respect to tlie sins of his posterity." Thus far Stap-ferus.

Besides these, as Ainszuortkon Gen. vili. 21, observes, " In Bereshith Rabbay (a Hebrew commentary on this place) a Rabbin is said to be asked. When is the evil imagination put into man ? And he answered, From the hour that he i& formid." And in Pool's Synopsis it is added from Grotius, " So Rabbi Salomon interprets Gen. viii. 21. The imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth, of its being evil from the time thai he is taken out of his mother's bowels " Jroi Ezra thus interprets Psalm li. 5. i ivas shapen in iniquity, and in sin did tny mother conceive me ; that evil concupiscence is implanted in the heait from childhood, as if he were forvied in it; and by my mother, he understands Eve, ■who did not bear children till the had sinned. And so Kafvenaki says, How shall I avoid sinnirg ? A/y original jj coriupt, and from tiiince are ihose sins. So Manasseh Ben Israel, from this placf (Psalm li 5) c:>ncludes that not only David, but all miskind, ever since sin was introduced into the world, do shi from their oiiginal. To this purpose is the answer of Rabbi Hakhadosch^ •which there is an account of in the lalmud. From what time does cuncupiscence rule over man ? From the very moment cj his first faimation, orjren his nativity f Anfw. From his formation." YooVs Synops.u\Loc,

On these things 1 observe, there is the greatest reason to suppose that these old Rabbies of the Jewish nation, who gave such heed to the Tradition of the Elders, would never have received this doctrine of Original 6in, had it not been delivered do.wn to them from iht'irforefathers. For it is a doctrine very disagreeable to those practical principles and notions wherein the religion of the unbelieving Jews most fundamcf.tally differs from the religion maintained among Christians; parliculaily ibeir notion oijustification by their own righteousness and privilcgei as the children of Abraham, &c. without standing in need of any satisfaction by the surlcrings of ibe Messiah. On which account the modern Jews do now uiiivei sally reject the doctrine o! Original .^in, and corruption of nature, as Stapferus observes. And it is not at all likely that the ancient Jews, if no such doctrine had been received by tradition from the fathers, would have taken it up from the Christians, whom they had in suth great contempt and enmity ; especially as it is a doctrine so peculiarly agreeable to the Chriitian notion of the spiritual salvation of Jesus and $0 contrary t<i their carr.al notions of the Messiah, and of his salvation and kingdom, 2n,J,

But if after all, Christ did not speak of this doctrine often enough to suit Dr. Taylor, he might be tisked, Why he supposes Christ did no oftener^ and no more plainly teach some of Ms (Dr. Taylor's) doctrines, which he so much insists on ? As, That temporal dealh comes on all mankind by Adam ; and, That it comes on them by him, not as a punishment or

so contrary to their opinion of themselves, and a doctrine, which men in general are so apt to be prejudiced against. And besides, these RaLbies do expressly refer to the opinion of t\\t\r forefathers ; as R. Mjnasseh says, "According to the opinion of the ancients, none are subject to death, but those which have j?nn£(/; For where there is no sin, there h no death."....Si^.pici. Tom. Hi. p. 37, 38.

But we have more direct evidence, that the doctrine of Original Sla was truly a received doctrine among the ancient Jews, even before the coming of Cliri-st. This appears by ancient Jewish writings, which were written before Chiist; as, in ihe apocrypha, a Esdras, iii. 21. " For the first Adam, bearing a wicked heart, transgressed, and was overcome ; and so be all they that are born of him. Thus infirmity was made permanent; and the law also in the heart of the people, with the malignity of the root; so that the good departed away, and the evil abode still."....2 Esdras iv. 30. " For the grain of evil seed hath been sown in the heart of A'*am, from the beginning ; asd how much ungodliness hath it brought up unto this time ? And how m.uch shall it yet bri'.ig torth, till the time of threshing shall come ?" And chap. vii. ^6. " It had been better, not to have given the earth unto Adam ; or else, when it was given him, to have restrained him from sinning ; for whai profit is it,-for men now in this present time, to live in heaviness, and after death, to look for pun shment ? O thou Adam, what hast thou done! For though it was thou that sinned, thou art 7iot fallen alone, hni we all that come ef thee." And we read, Fxcl. xxv. 24. " Of the woman came the beginning of sin, and through her ice all die."

As this doctrine of original corruption was constantly maintained in the chuTch of God from the beginning ; so from thence, in all probability, as weli as from the evidence of it in universal experience, it was, that the wiser Heathen maiutained the like doctrine. Particularly Plato, that great (.hiloso-pher, so distinguished for his veneration of ancien' traditions, and diliircnt inquiries after them. Gale, in his Court of the Gentiles, observes as follows : " Flato says (Gorg. fol. 493.) / have heard from the zvise men, that we are nozu dead, and that the body is but our sepulchre. And in his Timceas Locrus (fol. 1C3) be says. The came ofvitiosily is from cut parents, and frst principles, rather than from ourselves. So that u<e never relinquish those actions, which lead us to follow these primitive blemishes of our first parents. /Vd^o mentions the corrup-•n ci' the zcill. pp.d jpems to Qisov.n znyfree icill to true good ; albeit he al-

calamity, but as a great/at/or, being made a rich benefit, and a fruit of God's abundant grace, by Christ's redcmjition, who came into the world as a second Adam for this end. Surely^ if this were so, it was of vast imfiortance^ that it should be known to the church of God in all ages, who saw death reigning over infants, as well as others. If infants were indeed perfectly i?inocen(, was it not needful, that the design of that which was such a melancholy and awful dispensation to.vards so many millions of innocent creatures, should be known, in order to prevent the Avorst thoughts of God from arising in the minds of the constant spectators of so mysterious and gloomy a dispensation ? But why then sucb a total sile?ice about it, for four thousand years together, and not one word of it in all the Old Testament; nor one word of it in all the Jbitr go.ifiels ; and indeed not one word of it in the whole Bi-Ale, but only as forced and wrung out by Dr. Taylor's arts of criticism and deduction, against the plainest and strongest evidence !

As to the arguments, made use of by many late writers, from the universal moral seii^e, and the rea;>ons they offer from experience, and observation of the nature of mankind, to shew that we are born into the world with principles of vir-

lows some£t'(pt/i'a, or natural dispositions, to civil good, in some great hfr> roes. Socrates asserted the corruption of human nature, or xftKoi- f^^tToc. Gretius affirms, that the philosophers acknowledged, it was connatural to men, to sin."

Seneca (Benef. v. 14) says, «< Wickedness has not its first beginning in ■w'lckcd practice; though by that it is firu exercised and made manifest." And Plutarch (de Sera vindicta) says, " Man does not first become wicked, when he first manijests himself so : But he hath wickedness/ro;» the beginning; and he sheics it as soon as he finds opportunity and ability. As men rightly judge, that the sting is not first engendered in scorpions when they strike, or the poison in vipers when they bite"....Pool's Synops. on Gen. viii. ai.

To which may be subjoined what Juvenal says,

-id mores natura rccurrit

Damnatos,fxa et maturi ncscia." Englished thus, in prose;

Nature, a thing fixed and not knowing how to change, returns to t» vyicV.cd manners. Watts's Ruin and Recovery.

tue ; "With a natural prevailing relish, approbation, and love o£ righteousness, truth, and goodness, and of whatever tends to the public welfare ; with a prevailing natural disposition to dislike, to resent and condemn what is selfish, unjust and immoral ; and a native bent in mankind to mutual benevolence, tender compassion, &c. those who have had such objections against the doctrine of Original Sin, thrown in their way, and-desire to see them particularly considered, I ask leave to refer them to a Treatise on the Xature of true Virtue., lying by me prepared for the press, which may ere long be exhibited: to public view.

CONCLUSION.

On the whole, I observe, There are some other things,. besides arguments, in Dr. Taylor's book, which are calculated to influence the minds, and bias the judgments of some sorts of readers. Here, not to insist on the taking profession, he makes, in many places, of sincerity^ htimility., meekness^ modesty., charity., &c. in his searching after truth ; and freely proposing his thoughts, with the reasons of them, to others ;* nor on his magisterial assurance, appearing on many occa« sions, and the high contemfit he sometimes expresses of the opinions and arguments of very excelleHt divines and fathers in the church of God, who have thought differently from Lim :t J^oth of which things, it is not unlikely, may have a degree of influence on som.e of his readers. (However, that they may have only their just influence, these things might properly be compared together, and set in contrast., one with the other.)....I say, not to dwell on these matters, I would take some notice of another thing, observable in the writings-of Dr. Taylor, and many of the late opposers of the more peculiar doctrinfcs of Christianity, tending (especially yi\\.\\ juvenile and iinivary readers (not a little to abate the force, and

♦ See his Preface, and p. 6, 237, 265, 267, 175; 5. ^ Psge 110, !2^ '5<^. »5»j »59. »6i, 183, 188, 77.-y.

prevent the due effect, of the clearest scripture evidences, iij favor of those important doctrines ; and particuhiily to make void the arguments taken from the writings of the Apostle Paul, in which those doctrines are more plainly and fully revealed, than in any other part of the Bible. What I mean, is this : These gentlemen express a high opinion of this apostle, and that very justly, for his eminent genius, his admirable sagacity, strong powers of reasoning, acquired learning, See They speak of him as a wriier,...of masterly address, of extensive reach, and deep design, every where in his epistles, almost in every word he says. This looks exceeding sfie-cious: It carries a plausil>le appearance of Chrislian zeal, and attachment to the Ho/y Scri/ilures, in such a testimony of high veneration for that great apostle, who was not only the principal instrument of propagating Christianity, but with his own hand wrote so considerable a part of the New Testament, And I am far from determining, with respect at least to some of these writers, that they are not sincere in their declarations, or that all is mere artifice, only to make way for the reception of their own peculiar sentiments. However, it tends greatly to subserve such a purpose ; as much as if it were designedly contrived, with the utmost subtlety, for that end. Hereby their incautious readers are prepared the more easily to be drawn into a belief, that they, and others in their way of thinking, have not rightly understood many of those things in this apostle's writings, which before seemed very/;/amto them ; and they are also prepared, by a prepossession infiivor of these new wnVers, to entertain a favorable thought of the interpretations put by them upon the words and phrases of this apostle ; and to admit in many passages a meaning which before lay entirely out of sight; quite foreign to all that in the view of a common reader seems to be their obvious sense ; and most remote from the expositions agreed in, by those which used to be esteemed the greatest divines, and best commentators. For they must know, that this apostle, being a man of no vulgar understanding, it is nothing strange if his meaning lies very deep ; and no wonder then, if the superficial discerning and observation of vulgar Christii;nsj or indeed

of the hevd of common divines, such as the Westminster Js" semblyy &c. falls vastly short of the apostle's reach, and ire-quently does not enter into the true spirit and design of Paul's epistles. They must understand, that the Jirst reformers^ and preachers and expositors in general, both before and since the reformation, for fifteen or sixteen hundred years past, were too unlearned ■a^A shortftigh'ed, to be capable of penetrating; into the sense, or fit to undertake the makins: cont-ments on the writings of so great a man as this ai^ostle ; of else had dwelt in a cave oi bigotry and superstition, too c;loomy to allow them to use their own understandings with freedom, in reading the scrip'.ure. But at the same time, it must be understood, that there is risen up, now at length in this happy age of light and liberty, a set of men, of a more free and generous turn of mind, a more inquisitive genius, and better discernment. By such insinuations they seek advantage to their Cause ; and thus the most unreasonable and extravagant interpretations of scripture are palliated and recommended : So that, if the simple reader is not very much on his guard, if he does not clearly see with his bwn eyes, or has too much indolence, or too little leisure, thoroughly to examine for himself (as few, alas, are willing to be at the pains of acquainting themselves thoroughly with the apostle's writings, and of comparing one part of them with another, so as to be fully able to judge of these gentleman's glosses and pretences) in this case, he is in danger of being imposed on with delusive appearances ; as he is prepared by this fair pretext of exalting the sagacity of the apostle, and by a parade of learningj criticism, exact version, penetration into the new scope, and discerning of wonderful connexions, together with the airs these writers assume of dictatorial peremptoriness, and contempt of old opinions and old expositions ; I say, ^uch an one is by these things prepared to swallow strange doctrine, as trusting to the superior abilities of these modern interpreters.

But I humbly conceive, their interpretations, particularly of the Apostle Paul's writings, though in some things ingenious, yet in many things concerning these great articles of religion, are exLremtly absurd, and demonstrably disagreea-

Vol. VI. 3 O

ble, in the highest degree, to his real design, to the language he commonly uses, and to the doctrines currently taught in his epistles. Their criticisms, when examined, appear far inore subtle, than solid ; and it seems as if nothing can possibly be strong enough, nothing perspicuous enough, in any composure whatever, to stand before such liberties as these writers indulge : The plainest and most nervous discourse is analyzed and criticised, till it dissolves into nothing, or till it becomes a thing of little significance : The holy scripture is subtilized into a mere mist; or made to evaporate into a thin cloud, that easily puts on any shape, aiid is moved in any direction, with a puff of wind, jusr as the manager pleases. It is not in the nature and power of language, to afford sufficient defence against such an art, so abused ; as, I imagine, a due consideration of some things I have had occasion in the preceding discourse to observe, may abundantly convince us.

But this, with the rest of what I have offered on this subject of Original Sin, must be left to every candid reader to judge of, for himself; and the success of the whole must now be left with God, who knows what is agreeable to his own mind, and is able to make his own truths prevail; however mysterious they may seem to the poor, partial, narrow, and extremely imperfect views of mortals, while looking through a cloudy and delusory medium ; and however disagreeable they may be to the innumerable prejudices of men's hearts : And who has promised, that the gospel of Christ, such as is really his, shall finally be victorious ; and has assured us, that the word which goeth out of his mouth, shall not return to him void, but shall acco?nfilish that which he Jdeascth, and shall firos-per in the thing whereto he sends it. Let Cod arise, and plead his own cause, and glorify his own great name. Ams>%

OBSERVATIONS

UPON

PARTICULAR PASSAGES

OF

S

OBSERVATIONS

UPON PARTICULAR PASSAGES OF

s

Genesis ii, 1,

1 HUS the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them." This argues that the angels belong to the Mosaic creation, who are so often spoken of as God's host, and as the hosts of heaven.

Genesis iv. 23, 24...." And Lamech said unto his wives, Adah and Zillah, I have slain a man to my wounding," &c. The probable design of the Holy Ghost in relating this, is to shew the great increase of the depravity and corruption of the world, or of Cain's posterity and those that adhered to them. This is shewn in the particular instance of Lamech, the chief man of Cain's posterity, in his day. Lamech had been guilty of murdering some man that he had a quarrel with. And he justifies himself in it, and endeavors to satisfy his wives that he shall escape with impunity, from the instance of Cain,, whose life God spared, and even took special care that no man should kill him, making the declaration, that if any man killed him, vengeance should be taken of him seven fold, though the man he slew was his brother, and a righteous aaan; and had done him no injury. But the man he had slain

in ov for his woundinj; (as the words are interpreted by some learned men, See Pool's Synopsis in Loc.) i, e. the man he had slain had injured or wounded him. Therefore, if Cain should be avenged sevenfold, doubtless he seventy and sevenfold. By this speech to his wives, he shews his impenitence and presumption, and great insensibility. When Cain had slain his brother his conscience greatly troubled him. But Lamech with great obduracy shakes off all remorse, and as it were bids defiance to all fear and trouble about the matter.

Genesis iv. 26...." And to Seth, to him also was born a son, and he called his nameEiios. Then men began to call upon the name of the Lord." The right translation probably is, Then began men to call by the name of the Lord, or in the name of the Lord. i. e. Then they began to call themselves, and their children by, or in his name : Signifying that then the people of God, of whom Seth was the principal man, and as it were their head, leader and chief priest, being with his posterity appointed another seed (seed or generation of God) instead of Abel ; I say, then the people of God began openly to separate themselves from the wicked apostate world of the posterity of Cain, and those that joined with them ; and began to appear in a visibly distinct society, being called the children of God, when the other were called the children of men.

The children and posterity were looked upon as being in the name of the F.ather, and upholding his name. See Numb, xxvii. 4....Deut. ix. 14, and xxv. 7....1 Sam.xxiv. 21....2 Sam. xviii. 18....Ruth iv, 5....Job xviii. 17....Isai. xiv. 22....Gen. xlviii. 16, compared with Numb. vi. 27. On the birth of Enos it probably first began to be a custom for parents openly to dedicate their children to God, and call them by his name, and as it were insert them into his name, by bringing them to the place of public worship ; the transaction being personal, by the parents' solemn declaration and covenant, attended with prayer and sacrifice.

Genesis ix, 26...." Blessed be the Lord God of Shem.'* By Jehovah, the God of Shem seems especially meant Jesus Christ, who was of his posterity, and eminently his seed. The

blessing here pronounced on Japhet, is on his posterity.... And the curse of Canaan respects his posterity. Therefore it is reasonable to understand the blessing of Shem to be also on his posterity.

GEhfEsis xxix, 20...." And Jacob served seven years for Rachel, and they seemed unto him but a few days, for the love he had to her." Jacob was a type of Christ, in his obtaining his wife by a servitude, and in his servitude's seeming so light to him, and his going so cheerfully through it, for the love wherewith he loved her. That Jacob might enjoy his beloved Rachel, was the joy set before him ; for which he despised the difficulty of his servitude. So, that Christ might redeem his church and present it to himself a glorious and blessed church, to dwell with him in glory forever, was the joy that was set before him, for which he endured the cross and despised the shame.

Genesis xlv....Joseph's making himself known to his brethren. It is without all doubt that one thing signified by Joseph's being hated of his brethren, with a mortal hatred, their intending to kill him, and selling him to the Gentiles, was the rejection of Christ by the Jews his brethren, his being hated, and envied and slain by them, and delivered up to the Gentiles, See Psal. Ixix. 8....Matth. xx. 19. So Joseph's brethren being brought to repentance, and Joseph's being made known to them, their being reconciled and received •with great joy, represents the future conversion of the Jews, their being brought to repentance after having rejected and crucified Christ, and the great joy and gladness there shall be on that occasion. 'I his affair was much taken notice of by Pharaoh and his servants, and was very pleasing to them. So the coming in of the Jews will be life from the dead lo the Gentiles.

Deut. viii. 4....« Thy raiment waxed not old upon th.ec, neither did thy foot swell these forty years." This was probably a type of the desirableness of the clothing of the spiritiuU Israel, in their journey through the wilderness of this world towards the heavenly Canaan. The saints' grace or righteousness is often represented as this clothing. fNcither did

thy foot swell] If their feet had swoln they would not have been able to proceed any farther. But the righteous shall be enabled to hold on his way ; and God will keep the feet of his saints, and establish their i^oing?. This seems to be the chief reason why this is remarked, viz. because it was a type. For in itself it seems no very extraordinary thini^, that their foot did not swell. For they lay still most of the time ; and when they travelled it is probable it was not by long journies, but as the women and children could bear.

Deut. xxxii. 2....« My doctrine shall drop as the rain ; my speech shall distil as the dew, as the small r in upon the tender herb, and as the showers upon the grass." God here speaks to the people quite in a different manner from what he did at Mount Sinai, when he spake to them out of the midst of the fire. God's word then was like thunder and lightning and devouring fire, threatening to overbear and consume so frail and lender a creature as man, who is like the grass and flower of the field. God's voice now is gentle. It is heard in pleasant song. Instead ot being like lightning to destroy and consume, it is like the gentle showers, and refreshing dew on the lender grass, revealing, not his wrath, but his great mercy, in a manner adapted to men's tender frame. In thi* song is much of the glorious gospel. Even the warnings and threatenings that are in it, are delivered in an evangelical manner, much in the same way that they were delivered in (he mild language of the glorious Messiah. All the songs of the scripture are the voice of the gospel. The glorious things of the gospel are their foundation and subject matter ; and therefore in them God's word drops as the rain.

Deut. xxxiii. 8...." And of Levi he said. Let thy urirrt and thy thummim be with thy holy one, whom thou didst prove at Massah, and with whom thou didst strive at the wa<« ters of Meribah." Here Chiibt is evidently called Levi's holy one. Aaron, the high priest of that tribe, was Levi's holy one in some sense. But it was not Aaron, but Christ, that ■was tempted at Massah and Meribah (1 Col. x. 9.) Moses also was of that tribe, and might be called their holy one ; but neither wa"» he the person there tempted. Both Mose« and

Aaron rather concurred with the people in temptini^. Numb. XX. 10....13. Christ, the great antitype of Moses and AuioOi the true higli priest, that was the substance and end of all the ancient sacrifices and offerings, and of all the peculiar ministrations of the high priest of the tribe of Levi, according to Jer. xxxiii. 17....22, may well be called Levi's holy one. For it is there represented as the great honor and privilege of Levi, that his priesthood was to be upheld and completed ia Christ. AH the honor and privilege that there ever was in having the priesthood of his tribe, arose from the relation of that priesthood to Christ, the glorious things which he should accomplish by the sacrifice of himself, and the eternal benefits he should procure. Therefore this is properly mentioned in the blessing uttered by Moses with respect to this tribe. The priestliood was not a vain thing, but of unspeakable value, as it stood in relation to the priesthood of Christ, and was to be brought to its infinitely glorious and interesting effect in him. It was by the Urim and the Thummim that the high priest was especially furnished to make intercession for the people, and to reveal the mind and will of God to them. The Urim and Thummin had their principal importance, as they were typical, and represented the perfection, and merit, the light, and glory, there are in Christ.

2 Sam. xv.... Absalom seems to have been a type of antichrist. He was the son of Uavid ; as the man of sin was originally a Christian bishop, one of the ministers of the gospel* who in a peculiar manner are Christ's sons. Absalotn was David's so" by Maacah, daughter of the king of Geshur, the ©nly wife that he had that was a Gentile. So Popery is ai mixture of Christianity wifh Heathenism. Absalom wa-; the 3on of a Heathen mother, or one thai had been a Heathen. So the Papistical church is the daughter of old Heathen Rome. Absalom usurped his father's authority over his kingdom, his city Jerusalem, and over hi'^ house. So tne pope usurps the authority of Christ, sets himself up to be kirtg in his kingdom, and takes possession cf the church, the true spiritual Jerusalem, sitting in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. ALsalom was a person of great beat> Vol. VL 3 P

ty, and was admired, and praised by the people for his beiauty^. So it has been \vi*h the pope. Whereas Christ appeared in a mean and low condition, without any external splendor, and Vfhen the people saw him, there was no beauty in him where* fore they should desire him ; antichrist appears in great ex* ternal pomp and glory, decked with gold and silver and precious stones, fine linen and scarlet, which all the world has admired and wonrlered after, saying, Who is like unto the beast ? Absalom cloaked his rebellion and usurpation with a pretence of relieion. Like antichrist, he said to his father, chap. XV. ver. 7, 8, " Let me go and pay my vow which I have vowed," Sec, Absalom drove David, and those that adhered to him, out of Jerusalem. So antichrist casts out of the church all the true, and faithful followers of Christ. Da-•vid went away into the wilderness, and all his faithful subjects •went with him, wherever he went. Which is agreeable to WVat is represented to be the spirit and practice of the true followers of Christ in the time of antichrist, Rev. xix. 4, •'These are they which foUov/ the Lamb whithersoever he goeth."

1 Kjngs xix. 19, 20.:.." So he departed thence and found Elisha," ike. The truth wih respect to v/hat is related in these verses probably was thus. Elijah was directed by the Spirit of God to cast his mantle upon Elisha. Bui Elijah had rot the design of God fully made known to him ; supposing it to be intended as a sign that Elisha should be prophet after him, agreeable to what God had said to him at Mount Sinai. But God hud a-fariher meaning in it, which was intimated by his Spirit, which went with Elijah's n-antle as it passed over to EUsha ; viz. that he should immtdiately forsake tdl, and devote himself to the performance of the business of a prophet. Elisha, suImposing that Elijah had this design of God made knowp to him, and had been directed to cast his mantle on him, with this view, has at first some reluctance, and desires of Elijali that, by his prayers, he would obtain leave of God for him to go first and kiss his father and mother. Elijah, surprised ai this request, as was natural, supposing him thus igiiorant, says, Go back } for what have I done that should

iainder it ? However, Elisha, who understood the mind of God, soon recovers from his reluctance, and went no further back than his oxen ; and took them and the instruments, and offered up all to God, signifying by this action, his full con* sent to make a sacrifice of ali his wotldly possessions to the ^reat and infiniiely important concerns of his ministry.

2 Chhon. V. 12, 13, 14.....Vhen the priests and Levites were as one to make one sound, in praising God with singing and instruments of music, saying. He is good, for his mercy «ndurelh forever, then the glory of the Lord came and filled the house. So, when it shall come to that in the latter days, that the ministers of the gospel shall generally be united in preaching the true doctrines of it, those doctrines that are in a peculiar manner evangelical, by which is manifested the glory of God's e'ernal mercy ; free, sovereign, and immutable grace, through Christ Jesus, and shall be umied in affections and act in union, as fellow laborers and fellow helpers, then shall the glory of God remarkably appear ; the Spirit of God, as a spirit of light, holiness and joy, shall descend from heav» en in a very new and glorious manner, and remark.ible success attend the preaching of the gospel eveiy wae: e; and then shall be the proper commencement of the church's rest, peace and glory upon earih. The .peaieful reign of Sol )mon, in the possesiiion of unparalleled wisdom, riches and glory, after the militant and tumultuous reign of David, is evidently typical of the peaceful, joyous, and glorious reign of Christ in the latter day : And God's dwelling in the temple, as the set» tied place of his rest, after removing to and fro in a tabernacle, is typical of the glorious manner of his dwelling with his churcn in the latter day, as compared with preceding times. Te largeness of the temple compared with the tabernacle, represents ihe vast increase of the cimrch ; and the cloud of glory filling the temple, represents the filling of the whole eartli with God's glory.

PsAL. Ixxxii. 8...." Arise, O God, judge the earth, for thou shalt inherit all nations." The design of these words, in their conn xion with the foregoing verses, confirms, that the prince."? ef Israel are there called Gods, and sons of God, with refey-

ence to Christ, the true King of Israel, and as bein.^ types of him. The three verses in their connexion import thus much, ....God has given theae firinces and judges the name of Gods or sons of God, as they are exalted to the place of kings a7id sav iours of his fieofilc, ivho are God's heritage or kingdom^ but they die like men ; ivhcreby it afifiears^ that they arc no Gods^ nor are the true sons cf God ,- hut mere men, and no more than images and shadows of him. But oh I that he toho is truhj God, who is indeed the Son of God, the true king, judge and saviour of God's fieo/ile, the antitype of these, would come and reign, not only over the land of Israel, but over the whole earth ; when God's Israel shall fill the earth, and all nations shall be God's fieojile. It is observable that when it is said in this verse, " Aiist:, O God," the word God is Elohim, the same that is used verse 6th, " I have said ye are Godu" They were called Elohim ; but Christ is the true Elohim ; just as the manna in the wilderness was called bread, but Christ is the true bread from heaven.

Psalms Ixxiii. 4....« There are no bands ir their death." In the original the words arc, " Ein, chartzabbuth Lenio-tham," which might more properly have been rendered, their death hath no bands ; the Hebrew of the Latin verb sum, with the prefix iamed, being used for have. The meaning seems to be, that they appear to be at liberty from death, as though they were out of his reach. Their death is here represented as a person that is indeed their enemy, or an officer of vengeance, that they greatly deserve to be delivered up to, and that has a commission against them, and would fain seize them, and make them his prisoners, but has no bands to bind them. 'I'hey live long, and live without the fears of death, ^vhich arc, as it were, the band> of death. That this is the meaning is confirmed by the following words of the sentence. *' But their strength is firm."

Jer. xxxi. 32...." Not according to the covenant which I made with their fathers, in the day that I took them by tlie hand to bring them out of the land of Es^ypt." That covenant was, as it were, founded in the redemption out of Egypt. Therefore when God made it Avith the people, he prefaced it

thus: « I am the Lord thy God which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, and out of the house of bondage." It is hence natural to suppose, that the covenant of which the prophet here speaks, would not be one founded on that redemption ; but on some other, far better, and more glorious redemption.

Zech. xiv. 4...." And his feet shall stand that day upon the Mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem, on the east, and the Mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof towards the east, and towards the west, and there shall be a very great valley," &c. The mountains were round about .Terusaleni like a wall; of which Mount Olivet was the chief. This, stood on the east, between Jerubalem and the greatest Gentile nations ; those nations that were the most malignant and formi* dable enenaes of Israel. The dividing of this mountain under the feet of Zion*s Redeemer, and making such a wide valley or plain on the east of Jerusalem, whereby there would be an easy access for the Gentile nations, signifies the breaking down of the partition wall between the church of God, and those that were without, and afar off; and that remarkable rsmoving of obstacles signified by God's causing that every mountain and hill should be brought low ; and the drying up of the river Euphrates, that the way of the kings of the east nnighi be prepared. The tTiountain's being thus divided, by Cv.rist's treading on it, significantly and beautifully represents the ease with which, in the exercise of his sovereign and mighty power, he overcomes the strongest and proudest ene-m.ies that oppose the salvation of his elect; agreeably to what is said in the fourth chapter of this book, verse 7th. » Who art thou, O great mountain ! Before Zerubbabel thou shalt become a plain." And chap. viii. 6. « Thus saith the Lord of Hosts, if it be marvellous in the eyes of the remnant of this people in these days, should it also be marvellous in my eyes, saith the Lord of Hosts ?" The opening made through the mountains here is represented as very wide, to signify the abundant grace, and free and open access for vast multitudes ; agreeably to Isai. Ix. 1 1, and Rev. xxi. 25.

Matth. xii. 30. " He that is not with me is against me." The true reason of Clirisi's making this observation

in this place, where he is reprovincc the Pharisees for

.saying* tliat he cast out de\ils by Beelzebub, is this

These Pharisees had, till now, appeared to exercise that kind of piucience, falsely so called, which is comtnonly to be seen amon^ those, Wiio count ibeniselves wise and ^reat men, and think it becomes then) to let matters of relit3;ion much alone» and not to appear forward and zealous, or give out their thoughts freely. When, in view of the miracles which Christ •wrought, the multitude were affected, and some appeared zealous to follow him ; when the esteem ;hat he gained among the people was so great that they apprehended themselves m danger of having their glory eclipsed, and of losing the respect of the people, and their authority over themj the Phaiisees could keep silence no longer. They openly shewed what was in their hearts before ; a fixed enmity against Christ, and that truly they never had been indifferent as they appeared.

Heb. X. 3r...." For ye^ a little while, and he that should come, will come, and will not tarry," It cannot be justly inferred from these Avords, that the apostle expected Chiist's last coming to judgment in that generation. All that could reasonably be understood by them is, that the time of their sufferings was short, and it would be but a little season before they would be wholly delivered from all their enemies, and should receive the recompense of the reward they hoped for. This appears by the context and also by the obvious meaning of the place referred to in the Old Testament. If this and the next verse be compared with Hab. ii. 2, 3, 4, it will be manifest that the apostle refers to what is there said. 'I he vision is for an appointed time, but in the end it shall speak and not lie, though ittarry, wait tor it, because it will surely come, it will not tarry. Behold his soul which is lifted up is not upright in him ; but the just shall live by his faith. The thing that it is there said will come and will not tarry, is God's people's deliverance from the oppression of their enemies, especially from the Babylonish captivity ; as appears by the context.

loHN V. 27- " And hath given him authority to execute judg-rnen', also, because lie is the Son of Man." Chiist is the more fitted to be the judj^e of men, for his being himself a man, one of the same race, havinf^ the san^e faculties, senses and organs, living in the same world, under the same law, and in the midst of the same temptations. It tends to confirm the faith of the saints that their near kinsman and elder brother performed obedience for them, and wrought out the righteousness that they depend upon for justification in the judgment, and also suffered from the same unrighteous enemies ; this tends to encourage and confirm thci' faith that he li^ill vindicate them in the judgment, and plead their righteous cause against their unrighteous enemies.

Rom. viii 23,..." And not only they, but ourselves alsoj, t^hich have the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adop.ion, to wit, the fedemption of cur body." The apostle had been representing, in the preceding verses, that the whole creation was, as it were, in a state of travail, to bring to the birth, i. e. to bring the children of God into u state of liberty, happiness and glory. This in verse l^, he calls the manifestation of the sons of God, alluding to children's being brought forth to the light when they are born* Tliis was to have its highest fulfilment at the resurrection, when they shall be born froin the grave, and manifested in the most public manner in the proper glory of God's chi-dren, and shall receive the most public testimonies of God's fatherly love. Even, in this present state, Christians, by receiving the spirit, wiiich is a filial spirit, a spiiit of adoption, are brought forth, as the sons of God, and have the liberty and privileges of God's children in part. Yet it is bu' in part. They have only the first fruits of the spirit of adoption ; and they themselves therefore join with the creation around them, groaning within themselves, wailing for the most glorious, the ultimate and perfect manifestation of the sons of God, when they shall be born from the grave.

Ephes. i, 18...." The glory of his inheritance in the saints.'-It appears to me the true sense of this passat^e is, his inherit-^ onu- in luaven. In the Greek it is, » toio- «7ie«<r, which might

fe4 OBSERVATIONS UPON

have been literally translated in the holy places ; which if we suppose the apostle means htavcn, would have been very agreeable to his way of speaking;. In the next verse but one, where he evidently means in heaven, he expresses it thus, ev tnov^etnoK;, in the high. So in chap. ii. 6, 3, 10. In Heb. i. 3, he expresses it thus-, t* v-^nMif, in the high. The same is expressed in Luke ii. 14, tt t4»?oi?r ir> the highest. If it may thus be called the heavenly, the high, and the higl.est, it may as properly be called the holy. The iand of Canaan was called the holy land, and the city Jerusalem the holy city ; mount Zion the holy mountain, and the temple the holy place. And heaven is eminently the holy land, the holy city, mountain and temple.

Rom. 7, 25.»..« With the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin." This Mr. Locke paraphrases thus : " To comfort myself therefore, as that state requires, for my deliverance from death, I myself, with full purpose, and sincere endeavors of mind, give up myself to obey the law of God ; though my carnal inclinations are enslaved, and have a constant tendency to sin. This is all 1 can do, and this Is all, 1 being under grace, that is required of me, and through Christ will be accepted." In iiis notes he observes, " I myself is in the original, At/ro; ey«, i e. (says Mr. Locke) I the man, with all my full resolution of mind. Avroq and eyu might both have been spared, if nothing more had been meant here than the nominative case to JouAeuw," see note, verse 20. He observes again on the words, " o» ^t\t» eya, I would not, I in the Greek is very emphatical, as is obvious, and denotes the man, in that part wherein he is chiefly to be counted himself, and therefore with the like emphasis, verse 35, is called Auto? tyu, " I my own self." The apostle would doubtless intimate that when he, the saint, was himself, and acted himself, he served the law of God ; and when he served the law of sin, he was as it were not himself, but ltd captive by an enemy. That is agreeable to verses 17, 20, and 22. These things plainly shew that the apostle speaks in the name of a saint, and not in the name of a wicked man.

tHEOLOGICAL QUESTIONS.

1. JTlOW does it appear that something has existed from eiermty ?

2. How does it appear that this earth and the visible system are ndt from eternity ?

3. How does it appear that the existence of man is derived and dependent ?

4. How do you prove the natural perfections of Gnd, viz. his intelligence, infinite power, foreknowledge and immutability ?

5. How do you prove his moral perfections, that he is a friend of virtue, or absolutely holy, true, just and good?

6. How do you prove that the scriptures are a revelation from God ? And what are the evidences, internal and external?

7. How do you prove the divine mission of Christ ?

8. How do you prove the divinity of Christ ?

9. Howr do you prove the personality and divinity of the Holy Ghost ?

10. How do you prove that the persons in the Trinity are one C^od ?

11. Whence arose the manichean notion of two gods, and how is it confuted ?

12. Whence arose the polytheism of the Pagans, and how confuted ?

13. Whence was it that the knowledge of the one true God, in which Noah was instructed, was not preserved among his posterity in all ages ?

14. Why are not mankind in all ages (their internal fac-talties and external advantae;es being sufficient) united in right sentiments of the one true God ?

15. Were the moral character of God and the moral law understood and loved, would there be any objections against revealed religion ?

16. What is the true idea of God's decrees ?

17. How do you prove absolute and particular election?

18. Did God decree the existence of sin ?

19. Why did God decree sin ?

20. In what sense did he introduce sin into the universe I

21. How do you reconcile this with the holiness and goodT nessof God ?

22. What is necessary to constitute a moral agent ? 93. Are men moral and free agents ?

24. What is the difference between natural and moral power and inability ?

25. How is absolute moral necessity, or inability, consistent with the free agency of men ?

26. How is the doctrine of universal, absolute decrees, consistent with the free agency of men ?

27. How do you prove an universal and special providence ?

28. What is the covenant of redemption ?

29. If man was created in original righteousness, how is that consistent with moral agency ? It being said that a necessary holiness is no holiness.

30. What was the constitution under which Adam in in-nocency was placed ?

31. Was Adam under the same necessity of falling that •we are of sinning ;

32. Are all intelligencies bound to love God supremely, sinners and devils ?

33. Is the law holy, just and good, and how is it proved ?

34. Are ihcy, who are under its curse, bound to delight in it?

35. How great is the demerit of sin?

36. Are the torments of hell eternal ?

37. How do you reconcile them with the justice and infinite goodness of God ?

38. How do you reconcile them with those texts which say Christ died for all men, that God will not that any should perish ?

39. How docs it appear that human nature is originally-depraved ?

40. Whence comes that depravity ?

41. How is it proved to be total ?

42. What is the covenant of grace ?

43. Are the law and gospel inconsistent with each other ?

44. Why was an atonement, and one so precious as the blood of Christ necessary ?

45. In what manner did Christ atone for sin ?

46. To whom doth it belong to provide an atonement, God, or the sinner ?

47. Did Christ redeem all men alike, elect and nonelect ?

48. Can the offer of the gospel be made in sincerity to the nonelect ?

49. How is redemption applied ?

50. What is the office of the Holy Ghost in the work of redemption ?

51. What is regeneration ?

52. Whence arises the necessity of it ?

53. What is true love to God ?

54. What is true benevolence to men ?

55. What is true repentance, and how distinguished from legal ?

56. What is true faith?

57. What is pardon and justification ? What is their foundation, and what is the influence of faith therein ?

58. How are full satisfaction and free pardon consistent ?

59. Is the sinner forgiven before he repents?

60. Is sanctifying grace needful at all to any man, unless with respect to that which is his duty, and in neglect of which he would be without excuse ?

61. What is the sum of man's duty, and what the effect produced by the sanctifying influence of the Holy Spirit ?

62. Can that holy volition in us, which is the effect of divine power, be wholly our act, or our duty ?

63. How is it proved that unbelief is sin, and that all errors in moral matters are of a criminal nature ?

64. Will the wicked Heathens, Jews, infidels, and error-jsts of every kind, be without excuse at the day of judgment ?

65. What is the essence of true virtue, or holiness ? «„

66. Is there no virtue in the exercise of natural conscience, the moral sense, natural compassion and generosity ?

67. Is not selflove the root of all vii tue ?

68. Do not the unregenerate desire to be regenerated, and can they not properly pray for regenerating grace ?

69. Do they not desire the heavenly happiness ?

70. What is the utmost the unregenerate do in the use of the means of grace ?

71. Is any duty done by them therein ?

72. Do they grow better in the use of means ?

73. To what are they to be exhorted ?

74. What is the real advantage of the assiduous use of means to the unregenerate ?

75. How do you prove that the institution of the Sabbath is of perpetual obligation ?

76. How is it that the Sabbath is changed from the seventh to the first day of the week ?

77. How do you prove that public worship is to be celebrated on the Sabbath ?

78. What is the foundation of the duty of prayer, since God is omniscient and immutable ?

79. How do you prove that family prayer is a duty ?

80. To whom are the promises of the gospel made, to the regenerate, or unregenerate ?

81. Are no encouragements given to the unregenezate ?

82. How do you prove the saints' pRrseverance ?

83. What is the nature of a Christian church ?

84. Who are fit for communion therein ?

85. What is the nature and import of baptism ?

86. How do you prove infant baptism ?

87. W^hat is the nature of the Lord's Supper ?

88. What are the rules and end of church discipline ?

89. What is the character of a good minister oi Christ ?

90. In what does the happiness of heaven consist ?

END OF THE SIXTH VOLUME.