Defense of the Synod of Dort, Chapter 5
CHAP. V.
Of the Originall estate of Mankinde.
THE main question here to be discussed is, whether all Infants sinned in Adam, and so be guilty of death, and condemnation naturally, and without mercy in Christ, or not? This I will proue (God willing) against them; answering, and disproving what they bring to the contrary, and that in their own order, as followeth.Pag. 113.
ADVERSARIES.
INfants had no life, nor being, as Adam had, at that time, when God gaue the Law to Adam; and therfore no Law was given unto them; and therfore sinned not, nor were guilty of condemnation.
DEFENCE.
I Grant, that infants had then no life and being, as Adam had, to wit, actuall, and distinct: but affirm, that they had both, after a sort, and as the branches in the root. Odegos (the guide of the blinde, as Rom. 2. 19,) affirms, pag. 114, that mankind was in Adam in bodily substance; they had therfore being in Adam after a sort, namely, so far as they were in him. If they had being in Adam any way, they had life also in him: for nothing in Adam was dead, but all living: their being therefore so far, as it was in him, was a living being.
We reade Hebr. 7. 9, that Levi payed tithes to Melchisedeck in Abraham. But how could this be, might one say, seeing Levi had then no life and being? The Apostle answers, that he was in the loyns of his father Abraham, when Melchisedeck met him. And reason teacheth, that none can doe any act, but he must first be, nor doe it otherwise, then as he is. Levi therefore then had a kind of being, and that living, and reasonable also, as he performed that act of paying tithes. He in Abraham as a particular root: Mankind in Adam, as in a generall root.
2 That Infants had a Law given them, I thus proue. First, the word of God, Gen. 2. 17. In the day, that thou eatest of the tree of knowledge of good, and evill, thou shalt die the death; shew, that whom God threatneth with death, to them he gaue the Law. The punishment Gen. 3. 17. 18. 19, reacheth to all Adams posterity, and so the threatning, and by consequence the Law. Secondly, the Apostle teacheth, Rom. 2. 15, that the Law is written in the hearts of the Gentiles, according to which Law of nature written in their hearts (though they had it not written in tables of stone, as the Iews) they shall be judged at the day of the Lord, v. 15. 16. 17. These Gentiles cannot be imagined to hauehave this Law thus written any other way, then as God in the beginning created Adam, and all mankind in him, after his Image, in righteousnesse and holinesse; in which respect also they are said, to doe by nature the things contained in the Law, having also a naturall conscience in them, which without a Law were vain: VnderUnder which generall Law, binding the reasonable creature to faith and obedience in all things (in disposition before use of discretion, and in act afterwards:) the particular Law, Gen. 2, is conteyned, and to be referred unto it. Thirdly, if infants hauehave reasonable soules, then hauehave they the faculties of understanding and will, though not the actuall use of them, as men hauehave. This understanding cannot be conceived by any to be without all disposition and pronenesse, either to the knowledg of God, or to ignorance, errour, and doubting of him; nor this will to bee without all disposition, and inclination to will according to, or against Gods will. As the yong whelps and cubs, of Lyons, Beares, and Foxes, hauehave in their naturall and sensitiue faculties, a pronenesse and inclination to raven; and every beast pronenesse to the things of its kind, after, actually performed, and practised by them: so hauehave infants necessarily in their reasonable faculties, a disposition, one or other, to understand and will things, specially such as concern God, by reason of the most naturall, necessary, and indossolible relation, between the reasonable creature, and the Creator, and that specially in those most noble faculties.
The objection from Rom. 7. 1, hath in it no colour of truth: for neither are there any such words, that the Law is given (especially onelyonly, which must be added) to them that know it: neither doth the Apostle there intend at all, to shew to whom the Law was given, or not: but onelyonly, that the Christian Church at Rome (specially many of them being Iewes, as appears chap. 16,) to which he wrote, was not ignorant of the Law, whether generall or particular, to which he had reference in that place.
To Deut. 11. 2, besides things answered by Mr. Ainsworth, I adde, that Moses there excludes not onelyonly infants, but many grown men as appears, v. 3. 4. The other two places Matth. 13. 9, and 1 Cor. 10. 15, exclude too many mens of years also, considering how few hauehave ears to hear, or understanding to judg aright of spirituall things.
For the third head, and that all sinned in Adam, it is so plain from Rom. 5, as they hauehave nothing at all to answer,Vers. 12. though they object the place: onelyonly they bring certain other Scriptures, in such a manner, as if they would disproue one Scripture by another. And indeed what exposition can be given, or evasion found, considering the expressenes of the words? As by one man sinne entred into the world, and death by sinne, so death passed upon all men, for that (or as the originall hath it) in whom all men hauehave sinned. So v. 19, As by one mans disobedience many were made sinners, &c. If they say, as some doe, that all are made sinners by imitation onelyonly, they are clearly confuted; first, by daily experience, in which it is plain, that children comming to some discerning, will lie, filch, and revenge themselvs, though they never heard lie told, &c. It is alas too evident, that they bring this corruption into the world with them. Secondly, by the Apostles words, v. 19, For as by ones mans disobedience many were made sinners; so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. If wee bee made unrighteous onelyonly by imitation of Adams sin, and not by his performing it, as our root naturally; then we are made righteous onelyonly by imitation of Christs righteousnesse, and not by his performing righteousnesse, and fulfilling the Law for us, as our spirituall root, in which wee are grafted by faith.
Lastly, these Adversaries grant, that by Adams sin all his Pag. 117.posterity hauehave weak natures▪ by which when the commandement comes, they cannot obey, and liue▪ but sin, and so die, Rom. 8. 3.Rom. 8. 3. Can they which are accustomed to doe evill▪ doe well? Or will these men never leav their godlesse custom of corrupting the words of the text, for advantaging of an evill cause? For flesh, which the Text hath, they put nature: wheras it is without all question, that by flesh, the Apostle there understands properly, sin and sinfull flesh: as he expresly calleth it, and as is plain in the whole context, v. 1. 2. 4. 5. 6. 7, &c. In all which hee opposeth the flesh to the spirit, and the sinfull life of the one, to the righteous life of the other.
And I would know of these deep Divines, what but sin could possibly make Adams posterity unable to keep the Law? This flesh, or nature, as they will hauehave it, must be contrary to this good and holy Law, and resist it. And is not thatRom. 7. 12. properly sinfull and unholy, which resists, and is contrary toSee Rom. 7. 17. 18, &c. & Gal. 5. 17. that which is good and holy; Lastly, this enemy to the Law of God in a man, must be in his soule. And what else can it be, then a disposition in the understanding, to ignorance and errour, touching God and heavenly things; and an inclination in the will and affections to evill? Which is as properly sinne, as their acts and effects are properly sinfull. Infants therefore bring sin properly into the world with them.
Two things they here object: First, that Christ often accounts children, innocents, as Math. 18. 3. 4, & 19. 14. I answer, first, not as they mean; that is, such as hauehave in them nothing vertuousMat. 18. 4. & ch. 19. 13. 14. Mark. 10. 14. 15. 16. or vitious; good, or evill; but as being humble, and without pride; and such, as unto whom the Kingdom of God, and his blessing did appertain. Secondly, He speaks not of all children, but of those, of, and in the Church.
Their second objection is, that our soules being the subjects of sin, are created of God imediately. But to this objection, they that referrs the soules originall, imediately to Gods supernaturall, and indeed miraculous work, do giuegive divers answers, which these Adversaries should hauehave refuted. Amongst others, Mr. Ainsworths answer is worthy the consideration. But let us consider their proofs for the soules immediate creation. The first is, Act. 17. 26, Of one bloud God made all mankind, &c. But this place makes rather against them; seeing the body alone makes not mankind, but the soule with it, by which specially the man is. The next place is Heb. 12. 9, whence they gather that Adam is the Father of our bodies, and God the Father of our Spirits. But first, the Text neither mentions Adam, nor can agree to him in the state of creation: seeing in that estate there was no use of correction. Secondly, it saith not, the fathers of our bodies, but of our flesh: nor the father ofSee: Com. pub. & private pa. 107 our Spirits, but of Spirits. And the meaning seems unto me (with due respect had to other mens different judgment) onelyonly to be this: that if we giuegive honour to men (our carnall or fleshly fathers) chastening us, as they think good: how much more owe honour to our spirituall father, chastening us for our eternall good? And surely God, in his kinde, is the father of the whole man, not of the soule onelyonly: So is man, in his kinde, the father of the whole man, and not of the body onelyonly. Lastly, seeing the drift of the place, is to shew, that God as a father, chasteneth his sons which he loveth, and on the contrary, that they that are not chastened, are not sons, and soVers. 6. hauehave not God for their Father, I see not how the Apostle can speak of the creation of soules, seeing in that respect, wicked and godly, children and bastards, hauehave God alike their father. The Preacher, ch. 12. 7, speaks of the manner of the creation of the first man Adam onelyonly: but no more proues that our soules or spirits are created by God imediately, then that our bodies are made of dust immediately. That ch. 8. 8, hath no colour of proof in it.
Against our fourth and last assertion, that all by Adams sin are guilty of death, Rom. 5. 12, they cavill, that we were not in Pag. 114. 115.Adam to bring any soule to hell for the breach of that commandemant, Thou shalt not eat.
Where, first (to passe by their incongruity of speech) they free Adam himselfe from the guilt of condemnation of which our question is, as well as his posterity, by that his sin; seeing it brought not him himself to hell. But secondly, & for the thing it selfe: They grant, acording to the Scriptures, thatPag. 116. death, as a part of the curse, came over all Adams posterity for his sin: And will they then deny, that eternall death was also due by the same law of justice? Is not the justice of God infinite, and so requiring infinite satisfaction? To what reasonable creature soever, the smallest punishment is due from God; the greatest is due also in rigour of justice. And so the curse (as they grant) extending to Adams generation Pag. 116▪by his sin; eternall condemnation, as the principall part of it, extendeth unto them necessarily, except mercy be shewed them.
Neither will it help our Adversaries, that other creatures die Pag. 116. 122.also; seeing their absolutely mortall condition limits their punishment to this present life: But such is not the estate of infants; but their immortall soules, unto which their bodies at that day are to be reunited, makes the whole capable of a more full declaration of Gods justice, if he deale in severity therof without mercy, as he may. Besides, the Apostle saith, that death passed upon all, for that all hauehave sinned, viz. in thatRom. 5. 12. one man Adam. Doth death come over bruit beasts, because they hauehave sinned in Adam? They are brutish that see not the difference, which these men will not acknowledge. It is said else-where, that in Adam all die. Doe beasts die in Adam, 1 Cor. 15. 22as his posterity doth? As all that are Christs, are in Christ, and made aliue by him; so all Adams posterity were in him, and die in him: Which death also the Apostle makes no lesse, then judgement to condemnation, to wit, if redemption be not obtained:Rom. 5. 16. 21. Pag. 117. to which he opposeth justification, and eternall life. Ioyn herewith, these mens confession, that all mankind by Adams fall are made unable to keep Gods precepts, when he giues them, and so all fall under the wrath of God, and are therfore said to be children of wrath, Eph. 2. 3, and there is sufficient for their conviction, as hath been shewed. But I add, that the Apostle means plainly a further matter, and that all are born children of wrath: for to be so by nature, and to be born so, are the same. We are children of wrath by sin onelyonly: If therefore all be children of wrath by nature, it is by the sin of nature, which we call originall sin, and not by actuall sin onelyonly, as they surmise.
Lastly, I demand whether, if Adam had not sinned, hee should not hauehave transferred to his posterity the Image of God after which he was created, and a pronenesse to keep it. (as notwithstanding sin, he doth some feeble remainders thereof)Rom. 2. 14. 15▪ and therewith right to eternall life? If yea, why not then sin, and the guilt thereof, by proportion, having sinned?
To Ezech. 18, I hauehave formerly answered. He speaks of the sins of immediate parents, not of the first sin of our first father; which was naturall: whereas the other but personall; yea, not onelyonly other mens, but his after sins also. Secondly, it is plain, he speaks of such children, as seeing all their fathers sins, consider, and doe not the like, but doe that which is lawfull, and Ezeeh. 18. 14. 15, &c.right, keeping, and doing all Gods statutes. To such God imputes no sin.
Their affirmation following is strange, that Infants shall Pag. 118. 119.receiv no judgment, because they hauehave done neither good nor evill, according to which all judgment passeth. By this, they should neither be saved, nor damned: for what else is it to receiv judgment of salvation, but to be saved? and so for the contrarie. They doe ignorantly exclude Infants from a state one, or other, for wanting that condition, which is required of men of years onelyonly. They might as probably say, that Infants shall be damned; seeing Christ saith, He that beleevs not shall bee Mark. 16. 16. 2 Thess. 3. 10.damned: or should not eat, because it is said, He that will not work shall not eat.
To the place, Ps. 51. 5, Behold I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceiv me; they answer not directly, but by many Ifs, & ands: chusing many uncertain vanities, rather then one certain truth: which is, that David in this whole context confesseth his transgression and sin. And as men ascend by the stream to the fountain; so doth he in those words to the fountain of all evill. As if he should hauehave said; Lord, I am not onelyonly stayned with, and guiltie of these particular evils; but I am even wholly corrupt by nature from the very womb, and hauehave brought a fountain of sin into the world with me, from whence these particular mischiefs hauehave issued.
ADVERSARIES.
THeir Answers follow. The first is, that David confesseth that he is made, as Ps. 103. 14, of weak flesh, and unable to resist the Tempter, being dust, &c.
DEFENCE.
DOth mans being made of dust make him unable to resist the Tempter? Then God making Adam of the dust made him unable to resist the Tempter also; which both crosseth the truth, and their own assertion. The Prophet, Psal. 103. 14, speaks of bodily weaknesse and frailtie onelyonly, which is nothing at all to the matter in hand; and which, if it had been greater in David, would hauehave been more advantageable against that sin into which he fell.
Next, for their advantage, they corrupt the Text, Rom. 8,Pag. 119. in saying, Christ came in sinfull flesh: where the Text saith, hee came in the similitude of sinfull flesh. He came in nothing sinfull, but all holy, and pure from sin. So doe they that, 2 Cor. 5. 21, leaving out for us: which shewes, how Christ became sin for us: that is, as our Surety, and lyable to the curse due to our sinns; but not in sinfull flesh, as they erroneously say. Thirdly, they absurdly affirm, that the sin of his mother, whether Hevah, or that bare him, is that sin or punishment layd upon her, which he here confesseth, in saying, I was conceived in sin. David confesseth a sin as evill, wheras all punishments are Gods good work: yea his own sin onelyonly of which he desires forgiuenesse. Neither doe the words here at all agree with those, Gen. 3. 16, as they say. The Reader that will, may see them opened at large by Mr. A…nsworth.
They add, that it is frequent with the Holy Ghost to call punishments Pag. 120.for sins, by the name of sins. But first, not so frequent by a 1000 times, as to call the transgression of the Law sinn: secondly, the phrase in sin: is never taken but properly, as to be in sin, to liue in sin, to continue in sin, to die in sin; and specially to be born in sin; as Ioh. 9. 34, the Pharisees in so judging, followed the errour of the Pythagorean Philosophers: thirdly, where Christ is sayd to bear our sins, it is primarily in regard of the guilt, as he was our Surety. Of what sin of his mother was David guilty?
They unjustly accuse us, as saying, that David sinned in being Pag. 120. 121.born and conceived; or that the very matter and substance wherof David was made, was sin. Vayn are they, in imagining such vain things of us. David was meerly a patient in being born, and sinned not therin; neither yet did his mother sin, either in conceiving or bearing him, though shee conceived and brought him forth in sin. But he having sinned in Adam, as in a generall root, was so conceived and brought forth, by his mother, in sin.
Secondly, it is one thing to be conceived and born in sin, another thing to be made of sin. The former, David affirms of himself; the latter, they vainly impute to us, and refute in us, with many words.
That Infants are under condemnation; that is, naturally guiltyPag. 122. 123. thereof, hath been formerly proved: that actuall faith in Christ is required for their reconciliation to God, doth not follow hereupon. Actuall, I say, for the seed of faith they hauehave, and of all graces: (for but by Gods holy Spirit in them, which carries all graces with it, they cannot be holy; and so not bee glorified, if they be not holy first:) but that hereupon they need actuall faith, is their saying, without proof. Actuall sins indeed require actuall faith: but for sin in disposit on (called originall) why may not faith in disposition suffice, through the mercy of God, for the applying of it?
About the Infants of Sodom and Gomorrah, they discoursePag. 123. marvellously, as first, in ranking them in their deaths with unreasonable creatures in theirs: secondly, in making them not onelyonly innocent, but godly also. The Scriptures teach, that besides the temporary death, those Cities suffer the vengeance of Iude 7.eternall fire. Let them proue children not to hauehave been of those Cities. If God exempted them, or any of them, from that vengeance, it was not for any condition cōmon to them with bruit beasts, as they insinuate, but with respect to Christ; besides whom, the Scriptures acknowledg no other Saviour, nor no other salvation, but by him.
ADVERSARIES.
TO a question moved by themselves, What need InfantsPag. 123. hauehave of Christ, if they be not under condemnation: they answer, that through his redemption they liue, and moue, and hauehave their being, and injoy all other earthly blessings, with resurrection from the dead, and glorification, 1 Cor. 15. 12.
DEFENCE.
THus they make Christ and Infants amends. But how proue they, that by Christs redemption they liue, moue, &c? The Scripture Act. 17, to which they hauehave reference is meant of the naturall life of all, by Gods work of creationMath. 10. 28. Hebr. 9. 26, &c. Eph. 1. 6. 1 Tim. 2. 6. Tit. 2. 14. Gal. 3. 13. 1 Cor. 15. 45 and providence (which is nothing but continuation of creation) and nothing at all to Christ as Redeemer. The redemption for which Christ came is from sin, and so from the curse due for sin, as the Scriptures every where testifie. The first Adam was made a living soule, the last Adam a quickning spirit. We hauehave therfore our naturall life, motion, and being (common to Heathens with Christians) by the first Adam; our spirituall, and glorious life, by the second.
Lastly, the Apostle saying, 1 Cor. 15. 22, In Christ shall all be made aliue, speaks onelyonly of all beleevers, as is evident, v. 14. 17. 18. 19, who hauehave Christ for the first fruits, and are Christs, v. 20. 23. Are any Christs but Christians? Is not the lump and the first fruits one? Men should hauehave risen again, though Christ had never come, or been promised; but to condemnation: Our resurrection, onelyonly in regard of the glory of it, is from Christs glorious resurrection. And if Infants hauehave glorification from Christ, then they hauehave the pardon of sinne from Christ also, 1 Cor. 15. 17. 23, and therewith his Spirit dwelling in them for sanctifying and quickning them, Rom. 8. 9. 10. 11. These men divide Chrst, making him a King to some for glorification, to whom hee is not a Priest for redemption1 Cor. 1. 13. by his bloud.
Next, to a question by themselvs moved, How wee must Pag. 126.hauehave the Son, they answer, by keeping his commandements; forgetting faith, by which alone we receiv Christ: from whichIoh. 1. 12. 1 Tim. 1. 5. Act. 15. 9. followeth louelove, purity of heart, and obedience. Which faith hath more properly the consideration of a condition, as a hand to receiv a promise; then of an act of obedience to a commandment.
It is true (being rightly understood) which they add, thatPag. 127. repentance is of all sin: to wit, particularly of all sins known; and generally of sins unknown. For, Who can understand his Psal. 19. 13.errours? Cleanse thou me from secret faults, said he, that observed, and knew his wayes better then either these men, or I. Doe they think nothing amisse slips from them, in thought, word, or deed, or ever hath done, whereof they doe not, or hauehave not repented particularly? Is their knowledge so perfect as they need not pray for further enlightning, as Eph. 1. 17. 18? Are they certain they are ignorant of, and erre in nothing in the Scriptures, written for their bearning? This their bookRom. 15. 4. sufficiently reproues their Pharisaicall dream of perfection.
Where speaking of Idolatry they affirm, that God cannot bee Pag. 128.worshipped after a false manner, they expresly contradict the2 Chr. 32. 17. Scripture, saying, The people did sacrifice still in the high places, yet unto the Lord their God onelyonly. Here was worshipping the true God, and him onelyonly, and yet after a false manner in a respect. The same the Apostle teacheth the Athenians, The God whom Act. 17. 23you ignorantly worship, declare I unto you. When Papists direct their prayers to God, the maker of the world, and father of Iesus Christ, hoping the rather to be heard by means of the Virgin Maries intercession, who doubts but they worship the true God, but in a false manner? Neither doth Deut. 18. 20, proue the sin one, of speaking in the name of a false God, and speaking falsehood in the name of a true God, but divers; though both deserving death.
Next, they in their wilde order, come to treat of Faith: Pag. 128.where they affirm, that no man can hauehave faith to justification, before he hauehave repented. If they had sayd, that no man hath the grace or habit of faith before the grace of repentance, it had been true: (God, by the spirit of regeneration, infusing the habits of all graces at once:) But that the act and exercise of faith in beleeving, is before our repenting, appears both by Scripture and common sense. We liue the life of Christ (wherofGal. 2. 20. Act. 15. 9. Rom. 4. 5. our repenting is a part) by the faith of the Sonne of God. God purifieth the heart by faith: and justifies the ungodly by his faith. In all which it is plain, that faith hath the preheminence and first work. So 2 Cor. 7. 10, Godly sorrow workes repentance. Repentance then presupposeth godly sorrow. Godly sorrow, or whatsoever is truely godly, must needs please God, which without Heb. 11. 6. Rom. 14. 23.faith no man can doe; but even every thing is sin. Faith working that which worketh repentance, must goe before it. Secondly, godly sorrow is not onelyonly for the fear of punishment (for so the devils are sorrie) but for the offence of God specially. Now none can be sorrie for his offending God, except he louelove God; nor louelove him, except he know first that he bee loved of him in Christ, in which faith consisteth. We beleev therefore, before we repent, in the truth of the thing, and order of causes; though we can hardly discern this order in our own sense.