its confequences.

its conic

quences.

adultery of their fovereign, or that he, by lying with a woman Fall of Awhom he had reafon to believe to be not the wite but the damı, and fifter of another man, would have incurred all the moral turpitude of that crime, are pofitions which cannot be maintained. Yet he fays, that Abraham had brought upon him and on his kingdom a great fin; though it appears, from comparing the 6th verfe with the 17th and 18th, that he had not been brought under fin in any other fense than as he was made to fuffer for taking Sarah into his houfe. this fenfe," Chrift, though we are fure that he knew no fin, was made fin for us, and numbered with the tranfgref fors," because he fuffered death for us on the crofs; and in this fenfe it is true, that by the disobedience of Adam all mankind were made finners, becaufe, in confequence of his offence, they were by the judgment of God made subject to death.

Fall of A- to comply with that part of the divine law which conflitudam, and ted them receivers of tithes. That all men were feminally in Adam, is granted; and it is likewife granted that they may have derived from him, by ordinary generation, difeafed and enfeebled bodies: but it is as impoffible to believe that moral guilt can be tranfmitted from father to fon by the phyfical act of generation, as to conceive a fcarlet colour to be a cube of marble, or the found of a trumpet a cannon ball. That Adam was as fit a perfon as any other to be entrufted with the good and happiness of his pofterity, may be true; but there is no fitnefs whatever, according to the Arminians, in making the everlating happiness or mifery of a whole race depend upon the conduct of any fallible individual. "That any man fhould fo reprefent me (fays Dr *Doctrine Taylor *), that when he is guilty, I am to be reputed of Original guilty; when he tranfgreffes, I fhall be accountable and puSin, part iii.nifhable for his tranfgreffion; and this before I am born, and confequently before I am in any capacity of knowing, helping, or hindering, what he doth all this every one who ufeth his understanding muft clearly fee to be falfe, unreafonable, and altogether inconfiftent with the truth and goodnefs of God." And that no fuch appointment ever had place, he endeavours to prove, by fhowing that the texts of Scripture upon which is built the do&trine of the Calvinifts refpecting original fin, will each admit of a very different interpretation.

124

The feveral

texts on which this doctrine is built

capa

terpreta

tion.

One of the ftrongest of these texts is Romans v. 19. which we have already quoted, and which our author thus explains. He obferves, that the apoftle was a Jew, familiarly acquainted with the Hebrew tongue; that he wrote ble of a dif- his epiftle as well for the use of his own countrymen refiferent in- ding in Rome, as for the benefit of the Gentile converts; and that though he made ufe of the Greek language, as moft generally understood, he frequently employed Hebrew idioms. Now it is certain that the Hebrew words en and 1, "fin and iniquity," are frequently used in the Old Teftament to fignify fuffering, by a figure of fpeech which puts the effect for the caufe; and it is furely more probable, that in the verfe under confideration, the apoftle ufed the correfponding Greek word dapro in the fame Hebrew fenfe, than that he meant to contradict what he had faid in the former verfe, by teaching that all men were made guilty of an act of difobedience committed thousands of years before the majority of them had any being. In the preceding verfe he fays, "that by the offence of one, judge. ment came upon all men to condemnation." But this can. not be true, if by that offence all men were made finners; for then judgment must have come upon each for his own fhare in the original difobedience. Any one may fee (fays our author) that there is a vaft difference between a man's making himself a finner by his own wicked act, and his being made a finner by the wicked act of another. In the latter cafe, he can be a finner in no other fenfe but as he is a fufferer; juft as Lot would have been made a finner with the Sodomites, had he been confumed in the iniquity $ Gen. xix. of the city ; and as the fubjects of Abimelech would have been made finners, had he, in the integrity of his heart, Gen. xx. committed adultery with Abraham's wife*. That the people of Gerar could have contracted any real gilt from the

15.

In

But it may be thought that this interpretation of the words fin and finners, though it might perhaps be admitted in the 19th verfe, cannot be fuppofed to give the apoftle's real meaning, as it would make him employ in the 12th verfe an abfurd argument, which has been already noticed. But it may perhaps be poffible to get quit of the abfurdity, by examining the original text inftead of our translation, The words are, και ούτως εις πανίας ανθρώπους ο θαναίος διπλόιν, εφ ώ παντες ημαρίου, In order to ascertain the real fease of thefe words, the first thing to be done is to discover the antecedent to the relative. Our tranflators feem to con fider it as ufed abfolutely without any antecedent; but this is inaccurate, as it may be queftioned whether the relative was ever used in any language without an antecedent either expreffed or understood. Accordingly, the Calvinift critics, and even many Remonftrants, confider vos avpwɔʊ in the beginning of the verfe as the antecedent to & in the end of it, and tranflate the claufe under confideration thus: “ And fo death hath paffed upon all men, in whom (viz. Adam) all have finned." Gavalos, however, ftands much nearer to than avrou; and being of the fame gender, ought, we think, to be confidered as its real antecedent: but if fo, the claufe under confideration fhould be thus tranflated: "and fo death hath paffed upon all men, unto which (0) all have finned, or, as the Arminians explain it, have fuffered. If this criticism be admitted as juft, mult be considered as standing here under a particular emphafis, denoting the ut most length of the confequences of Adam's fin (P); as if the apoftle had faid, "fo. far have the confequences of Adam's fin extended, and fpread their influence among man. kind, introducing not only a curfe upon the earth, and forrow and toil upon its inhabitants, but even DEATH, UNIVERSAL DEATH, in every part, and in all ages of the world.” His words (fay the Remonftrants) will unquestionably bear this fenfe; and it is furely much more probable that it is their true fenfe, than that an infpired writer fhould have taught a doctrine fubverfive of all our notions of right and wrong, and which, if really embraced, must make us incapable of judging when we are innocent and when guilty.

When the apoftle fays that there is none righteous, no not one, he gives us plainly to understand that he is quoting from the 14th Pfalm; and the queftion to be first anfwered is, In what fense were thefe words ufed by the Pial

mift 3

come guilty, or infufficient for their own juftification before Fall of AGod.

Fall of A- mit? That they were not meant to include all the men and dam, and its core women then living, far lefs all that have ever lived, is plain quences. from the Efth verfe of the fame Pfalm, where we are told that thofe wicked perfons "were in great fear, becaufe God was in the congregation of the righteous." There was then, it feems, a congregation of righteous perfons, in oppofition to thofe called the children of men, of whom alone it is faid that there was none that did good, no not one. The truth is, that the perfons of whom David generally complains in the book of Pfalms, conftituted a strong party difaffected to his perfon and government. That faction he defcribes as proud and oppreffive, as devising mifchief against him, as violent men continually getting together for war. He ftyles them his enemies; and fometimes characterizes them by the appellation which was given to the apoftate defcendants of Cain before the deluge. Thus in the 57th Pfalm, which was compofed when he fled from Saul to the cave in which he fpared that tyrant's life, he complains, "I lie antong them that are fet on fire, even the soNS OF MEN, whofe teeth are pears," &c.; and again, in the 58th Pialm, he fays, "Do ye indeed fpeak righteoufnefs, O congregation? Do ye judge uprightly, O ye ions of men?" By comparing thefe texts with 1 Sam. xxvi. 19. it will appear evident beyond difpute, that by the SONS OF MEN mentioned in them, he meant to characterize thofe enemies who exafperated Saul against him. Now it is well known, that there was a party adhering to the interefts of the house of Saul which continued its enmity to David during the 40 years of his reign, and joined with Abfalom in rebellion against him only eight years before his death. But it is the opinion of the moft juHammond, dicious commentators §, that the 14th Pfalm was compoied during the rebellion of Absalom; and therefore it is furely much more probable, that by the children of men, of whom it is faid there is "one that doth good, no not one," the inspired poet meant to characterize the rebels, than that he fhould have directly contradicted himself in the compafs of two fentences fucceeding each other. Had he indeed known that all the children of men, as defcending from Adam, "are utterly indifpofed, difabled, and made oppofte to all that is fpiritually good, and wholly and continually inclined to all evil," he could not, with the leaft degree of confiftency, have represented the Lord as looking down from heaven upon them, to fee if there were any that did understand and feek after God;" but if by the children of men was meant only the rebel faction, this scenical reprefentation is perfect ly confiftent, as it was natural to fuppofe that there might be in that faction some men of good principles mified by the arts of the rebel chiefs.

&c.

Having thus afcertained the fenfe of the words as origi. nally used by the Pfalmift, the Arminian proceeds to inquire for what purpose they were quoted by the apoftle; and in this inquiry he feems to find nothing difficult. The averfion of the Jews from the admiffion of the Gentiles to the privileges of the gospel, the high opinion which they enter. tained of their own worth and fuperiority to all other nations, and the ftrong perfuafion which they had that a ftrict obedience to their own law was fufficient to justify them before God, are facts univerfally known; but it was the purpofe of the apoftle to prove that all men flood in need of a Redeemer, that Jews as well as Gentiles had been under the dominion of fin, and that the one could not in that refpect claim any fuperiority over the other. He begins his epiftle, therefore, with fhowing the extreme depravity of the Hea then world; and having made good that point, he proceeds to prove, by quotations from the book of Pfalms, Proverbs, and Isaiah, that the Jews were in nowife better than they, that every mouth might be ftopped, and all the world be

dam and

quences.

The next proof brought by the Calvinists in fupport of its confetheir opinion, that all men derive guilt from Adam by or. dinary generation, is that text in which St Paul says that the Ephefians "were by nature children of wrath even as others." To this their opponents reply, that the doctrine of original fin is in this verfe, as in the laft quoted, counteanced only by our tranflation, and not by the original Greek as understood by the ancient fathers of the Christian church, who were greater mafters of that language than we. The words are και ήμεν τίχνα φύσει οργής ; in which it is obvious, that T, though in its original fenfe it fignifies the genuine children of parents by natural generation, cannot be fo underflood here; because no man was ever begotten by, or born of, the abitract notion wrath. It must there. fore be used figuratively; and in other places of fcripture it often denotes a clofe relation to any person or thing. Thus we read of the children of God, of the kingdom, the refurrection, wisdom, light, obedience, and peace; whence it is concluded, that by the children of wrath are meant those who are liable to punishment or rejection. And because there were in thofe days fome children, in a lower and leis proper fenfe, by adoption, and others, in a higher and more proper fenfe, by natural generation, of whom the relation of the latter to their parents was much closer than that of the former; the apoftle tells the Ephcfians, that they were by nature children of wrath, to convince them that they were really liable to it by the ftrictest and closest relation poffible. That the word put here is of the fame im< port with really or truly, and that it does not fignify what we mean by nature in the proper fenfe of that word, the ancient fathers are generally agreed *; and that the mo- * See Ham dern Greeks, who fill fpeak a dialect of the noble lan-mond and guage of their ancestors, understand the word in the fame Whitby on the Text, fenfe, is apparent from their verfion of the text before us. and Suide In the most correct and elegant edition of the New Tefta-on the word ment in their vernacular tongue, the words under confidera-quoistion are thus rendered; και φυσικά ήμασθαν τέκνα οργής ώσαν και Dro, where it is impoffible that puxa can fignify natural, otherwife the apoftle will be made to fay, not that we are by the nature derived from Adam liable to wrath, but that we were naturally begotten by wrath in the abilract! For taking the word us in the fenfe of really or truly, both the ancient and modern Greeks appear indeed to have the authority of St Paul himself; who, writing to Timothy, calls him no TexVOU "his true or genuine fon;" not to fignify that he was the child of the apoftle by natural generation, but that he was clofely related to him in the faith to which St Paul had converted him. That the words TEXva qual ofyns can fignify nothing but truly or really relations to wrath, is ftill farther evident from the ground affigned of that relation. It is not the fin of Adam, or the impurity of natural generation, "but the trefpaffes and fins in which the Ephefians in time past walked, according to the courfe of the world, according to the prince of the power of the air," the spirit that at the time of the apostle's writing "worked in the children of difobedience." Surely no man can fuppofe that the Ephefians at any past time. walked in Adam's trefpafs and fin, or that the prince of the power of the air tempted them to eat the forbidden. fruit.

Having thus commented on the principal texts which are cited from the New Teftament to prove the doctrine of original fin, the Arminians treat thofe which are quoted from the Old Teftament, in fupport of the fame doctrine,. with much less ceremony. Thus, when Job fays, “who

dam and it con'equelces.

66

Fall of A- can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? Not one," he is fpeaking, fay they, not of the pravity of our nature, but of its frailty and weakness, of the fhortnefs and mifery of human life. The fentence is proverbial; and as it is ufed only to finify, that nothing can be more perfect than its origiral, it mult, whenever it occurs, be understood accord. ing to the fubject to which it is applied. 'I hat in the place under confideration it refers to our mortality, they think *Scripture plain from the context; and Dr Taylor adds, with fome Doctrine, plaufibility, that if the words refer to the guilt which we are fuppofed to derive from Adam, they will prove too much to ferve the common fcheme of original fin. They will prove that our natural and inherent pravity, fo far far from rendering us fit fubjects of wrath, may be urged as a reafon why God fhould not even bring us into judge. ment; for the patriarch's whole expoftulation runs thus, "Doft thou open thine eyes upon fuch a one, and bringeft me into judgment with thee? Who can bring a clean thing

part ii.

pra.

See his

the word

out of an unclean?"

The other text, quoted from the fame book, they think ftill lefs to the purpofe; for Eliphaz is evidently contrafting the creature with the Creator; in comparison with whom, he might well fay, without alluding to original guilt, "what is man that he should be clean? and he who is born of a woman that he fhould be righteous? Behold he putteth no truft in his faints; yea the heavens are not clean in his fight. How much more abominable and filthy is man, who drinketh iniquity like water?" He does not fay, who derives by birth an iniquitous nature; for he knew well, that as we are born, we are the pure workmanship of God, "whofe hands have fashioned and formed every one of us" but "who drinketh iniquity like water," who maketh himself iniquitous by running headlong into every vicious practice.

Of the text quoted from the fifty-firft pfalm in fupport Uli Su- of the doctrine of original fin, Dr Taylor labours †, by a long and ingenious criticifm, to prove that our tranflators have mistaken the fenfe. The word which they have rendered shapen, he fhews to be used once by Ifaiah, and twice in the book of Proverbs, to fignify brought forth; and that which is rendered conceived me, is never, he fays, employed in fcripture to denote human conception. In this last remark, however, he is contradicted by a great authority, no lefs indeed than that of Mr Parkhurft, who fays, that Lexicon on the LXX conftantly render it by κισσάω Οι εγκισσαω, and the Vulgate generally by concipio. Without taking upon us ton'. to decide between thefe two eminent Hebrew scholars, we Gen. xxx. fhall only obferve, that upon one occafion | it certainly de38,39,40. notes ideas much groffer than thofe which the Pfalmift mult compared have had of his mother's conception; and that there, at leaft, Dr Taylor properly tranflates it incalefcebant, adding, "de hoc vero incalefcendi genere loqui. Davidem nemo fanus exiftimare poteft. Matrem enim incaluiffe, aut ipfum calefecifce co modo quo incalefcerent Jacobi pecudes Regem dicere, prorfus indecorum et abfurdum." He contends, however, that the original force of the word is to be hot, and that it is applied to conception, to refentment, to warmth by which the body is nourished, to idolaters in love with idols, and to the heat of metals. The heat of idolaters, of refentment, and of metals, are evidently foreign to the Pfalmitt's purpofe; and the idea conveyed by the word incalefcere being fet afide for the reafons already affigned, there remains only the warmth by which the body is nourifhed, and of that warmth our author is confident that David fpoke.

with xxxi.

If this criticifm be admitted, the whole verfe will then un thus: "Behold I was born in iniquity, and in fin did my

its confe

quences.

mother nurfe me;" which hath no reference to the ori. Fall of Aginal formation of his conftitution, but is a periphrafis of dam, and his being a finner from the womb, and means nothing more than that he was a great finner, or had contracted early habits of fin. He no more defigned to fignify in this verfe, that by ordinary generation he had a nature conveyed to him which was utterly indifpofed, difabled, and oppofite to all that is fpiritually good, and wholly and continually inclined to evil," than he meant in another to fignify ‡ Pf. Iviii. ftrictly and properly that "the wicked are estranged from 3the womb, and TELL LIES as foon as they are born;" or than Job meant to fignify, that from the moment he Job xxxi came from his mother's womb he had been a guide to the 18. widow and a fuccour to the fatherlefs. All there are hyperbolical forms of expreffion; which, though they appear ftrained, and perhaps extravagant, to the phlegmatic inhabitants of Europe, are perfectly fuited to the warm imaginations of the orientals, and to the genius of eaftern languages. They mean not that Job was born with habits of virtue, that the wicked actually walked, and spoke, and spoke lies from the inftant of their birth, or that the Pfalmift was really hopen in fin and conceived in iniquity. This last sentence, if interpreted literally, would indeed be grofsly im pious: it would make the infpired penman throw the whole load of his iniquity and fin from off himfelf upon him who fhaped and upon her who conceived him; even upon that God "whofe hands had made him and fashioned him, and whom he declares that he will praife for having made him fearfully and wonderfully," and upon that parent who conceived him with forrow, and brought him forth with pain, and to whom the divine law commanded him to render honour and gratitude. "But if, after all (fays Dr Taylor *), you* Scrittura will adhere to the literal fenfe of the text for the common Doctrine, doctrine of original fin, fhew me any good reason why you part ought not to admit the literal fenfe of the text, this is my body, for tranfubftantiation? If you fay, it is abfurd to fuppofe that Chrift fpeaks of his real natural body; I fay, it is likewife abfurd to fuppofe that the Pfalmift fpeaks of his being really and properly shapen in iniquity, and conceived in fin. If you fay, that the tense of the words this is my body may be clearly explained by other texts of feripture where the like forms of fpeech are used; I fay, and have fhewn, that the Pfalmift's fenfe may as clearly and evidently be made out by parallel texts, where you have the like kind of expreflion. If you fay that tranfubftantiation is attended with confequences hurtful to piety, I say that the common doctrine of original fin is attended with confequences equally hurtful; for it is a principle apparently leading to all manner of iniquity to believe that fin is natural to us, that it is interwoven and ingrafted into our very conftitution from our conception and formation in the womb."

ii.

125

strange

Fall of A- ture was fufficient, why should this original taint infect men eam, and rather than the fins of their immediate parents †?"

its confe

quences.

128 Whilft others teject the doctrine.

&c.

ར

The more violent Arminians, on the other hand, deny that we inherit any moral taint whatever from Adam, or that Gill's Bo- the rational powers of our minds are naturally weaker than dy of Divi- his were: Of that wonderful degree of perfection which is nity, book ii. ch. 10, ufually attributed to the first pair, they find no evidence 11. and 13. in fcripture. All that we learn of them, fay they, is, that they fell from a ftate of exquifite happiness by yielding to a temptation lefs powerful by far than fome others which many of their degenerate fons have fuccefsfully refifted. "I leave you to judge (fays Dr Taylor ), whether Jofeph, Scripture when he refifted the folicitations of his miftrefs, and Mofes Do&rine, when he refused to be called the fon of Pharaoh's daughter, choofing rather to fuffer affliction with the people of God than to enjoy the pleafures of fin for a feafon, efteeming the reproach of true religion greater riches than the treasures of Egypt, did not exhibit proofs of regularity of paffions and appetites equal at least to what Adam difplayed in the gar den of Eden. When the three young men mentioned in the book of Daniel fubmitted to be burnt alive in a fiery furnace rather than worship Nebuchadnezzar's golden image; when Daniel himself refolved, rather than conceal the worship of God for one month only of his life, to be torn in pieces by hungry lions; and, to come nearer to our own times, when numbers of men and women, during.the reign of Mary Queen of England, chofe rather to be burnt at a stake than renounce the reformed religion and embrace the errors of popery-furely all these perfons exhibited a virtue, a faith in God, and a steady adherence to what they * believed to be the truth, far fuperior to what Adam difplayed, when his wife gave him of the forbidden fruit, and he did eat." 'If it be faid that thefe perfons were fupported under their trials by the grace of God ftrengthening them, the fame will be faid of Adam. He was undoubtedly fupplied with every aid from the fpirit of grace which was neceffary to enable him to fulfil his duty; for being defigned for more than mere animal life, even for the refined enjoyments of heaven, there is every reason to believe, as we have already obferved, that he was put under the guidance of the Holy Ghost, to train -him for that fupernatural ftate of felicity. These communications of the fpirit would of course be withdrawn when he forfeited his right to thofe privileges, on account of which they were orignally vouchfa'ed to him; but that any pofitive malignity or taint was infufed into his nature, that his mere rational powers were weakened, or his appetites inflamed by the forbidden fruit, there is no evidence to be found in fcripture, or in the known conftitution of things. The attributing of this fuppofed hereditary taint to the noxious qualities of the forbidden fruit, is a whimfical hypothefis, which receives no countenance from any well authenAnd deem ticated fact in natural history. After the numberlefs falfethe phyfical hoods that have been told of the poifon tree of Java (fee Porilluftration son Tree), fomething more would be requifite than the of it whim- common evidence of a lying voyager to give credit to the Lical: qualities of the Indian tree, of which the fruit inftantly turns

129

its confequence..

the wifest man into an idiot: and yet for this fingular story Fall of A. our ingenious author vouchfafes not even that evidence, dam, and flight as it generally is. The inference drawn from the covering used by our firft parents is contradicted by every thing that we know of human nature; forfurely no man, inflamed to the utmost with the fire of animal love, ever turned his eyes from a naked beauty ready and eager to receive him to her embrace. Yet this, it feems, was the behaviour of Adam and Eve in such a state! According to our author, the juice of the forbidden fruit had rendered their carnal appetites violent and independent of reafon; according to the fcripture, they were both naked; and as they were hufband and wife, there was no law prohibiting them from gratifying these inflamed appetites. In fuch circumftances, how did they conduct themselves? One would naturally imagine that they immediately retired to fome fhady grove, and pleafed themfelves in all the foft dalliancies of wedded love. Their conduct, however, was very different. We are told, that "they fewed fig-leaves together, and made themfelves aprons to cover their nakedness :" And this tranfaction is brought as a proof of the impetuotity of their carnal appetites (R). The truth is, that the carnal appetite appears not to be naturally more violent than is neceffary to anfwer the end for which it was implanted in the human conflitution. Among favages the defires of animal love ate generally very moderate; and even in fociety they have not often, unless inflamed by the luxurious arts of civil life, greater ftrength than is requifite to make mankind attend to the continuation of their fpecies. In the decline of empires highly polished, where the difference of rank and opulence is great, and where every man is ambitious of emulating the expence of his immediate fuperiors, early marriages are prevented by the inability of most people to provide for a family in a way fuitable to what each is pleafed to confider as his proper station; and in that ftate of things the violence of animal love will indeed frequently produce great irregularities. But for that ftate of things, as it was, not intended by the Author of nature, it is perhaps unreasonable to suppofe that provifon fhould be made; and yet we believe it will be found, upon due confideration, that if the defires of animal love were lefs violent than they are, the general confequences would be more pernicious to fociety than all the irregularities and vices which thefe defires now accidentally produce; for there would then be no intercourfe between the fexes whatever except in the very highest stations of life. That our conftitution is attended with many fenfual appetites and paffions, which, if fuffered to grow exceffive or irre gular, become finful, is true; and that there is great danger of their becoming exceffive and irregular in a world fo full of temptation as ours is, is alfo true; but there is no evidence that all this is the confequence of Adam's fall, and far lefs that it amounts to a natural propensity to fin. I prefume (fays Dr Taylor), that by a natural propenfity is ing that we meant a neceffary inclination to fin, or that we are necef- have no na. farily finful from the original bent and bias of our natural tural propowers. But this must be falfe; for then we fhould not pensity to

"For 130

be

Maintain

fin.