The Doctrine of Original Sin, Theological treatise · Part 2 · Chapter 3

The Doctrine of Original Sin · Theological treatise · Part 2 · Chapter 3

p. 199CHAP. III.

Observations on various other Places of Scripture, principally of the New Testament, proving the Doctrine of Original Sin.

SECT. I.

Observations on Joh. III. 6. in Connection with some other Passages in the New Testament.

THose Words of Christ, giving a Reason to Nicodemus, why we must be born again, Joh. 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 Flesh here is meant the human Nature in a debased and corrupt State. Yet Dr.T.(P. 144.) thus explains these Words, That which is born of the Flesh, is Flesh; That which is born by natural Descent and Propagation, is a Man consisting of Body and Soul, or the meer Constitution and Powers of a Man, in their natural State. But the constant … of these Terms, Flesh, and Spirit, in other Parts of the New Testament, when thus set in Opposition one to another, and the latter said to be produced by the Spirit of God, p. 200as here; and when speaking of the same Thing, which Christ is here speaking of to Nicodemus, viz. the requisite Qualifications to Salvation, this will fully vindicate the Sense of our Divines. Thus in the 7th & 8th Chapters of Romans, where these Terms Flesh, and Spirit (foreignand foreign) are abundantly repeated, and set in Opposition, as here. So, Chap. vii. 14. The Law is spiritual (foreign) but I am carnal, (foreign) sold under Sin. He can't 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 …y Flesh, dwelleth no good thing. He don't mean to condemn his Frame, as consisting of Body and Soul; and to assert, that in his human Constitution, with the Powers of a Man, dwells no good thing. And when he says in the last Verse of the Chapter, With the Mind I my self serv… the Law of God, but with the Flesh the Law of Sin; He can't mean, 'I my self serve the Law of God; but with my innocent human Constitution, as having the Powers of a Man, I serve the Law of Sin.' And when he says in the next Words, in the Beginning of the 8th Chapter, There is no Condemnation to them—that walk not after the Flesh, but after the Spirit; and ver. 4. The Righteousness of the Law is fulfilled in us, who walk not after the Flesh; He can't mean, 'There is no Condemnation to them that walk not according to the Powers of … Man,' &c. And when he says, ver. 5,& 6. They that … after the Flesh, do mind the things of the Flesh; …nd to be carnally minded is Death; He don't intend, 'They that are according to the human Constitution and the 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,& 8. The carnal (or fleshly) Mind is Enmity against God, and is not subject to the Law of God, nor indeed can be; So that they that are in the Flesh, cannot please God; He can't mean, that to mind the Thi… which are agreable to the Powers and Constitution of a Man (who, as our Author says, is constituted or made right) is Enmity against God; And that a Mind which is p. 201agreable to this right human Constitution, as God hath made it, is not subject to the Law of God, nor indeed can be; and that they who are according to such a Constitution, cannot please God. And when it is said, v. 9. Ye are not in the Flesh, but in the Spirit; the Apostle can't mean, Ye are not in the human Nature, as constituted of Body and Soul, and with the Powers of a Man. 'Tis most manifest, that by the 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 infallible Tendency to Death, and utter Destruction. And it is plain, that here by being and walking after, or according to the Flesh, is meant the same thing as being and walking according to a corrupt and sinful Nature; and to be and walk according to the Spirit, 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; to be spiritually minded, is to be of a virtuous and holy Disposition.

When Christ says, Joh. iii. 6. That which is born of the Flesh, is Flesh, he represents the Flesh not meerly as a Quality; for it would be incongruous, to speak of a Quality as a Thing born: 'tis a Person, or Man, that is born. Therefore Man, as in his whole Nature corrupt, is called Flesh: Which is agreable to other Scripture-Representations, where the corrupt Nature is called the Old Man, the Body of Sin, and the Body of Death. Agreable to this are those Representations in the 7th and 8th Chapters of Romans: there Flesh is figuratively represented as a Person, according to the Apostle's Manner, observed by Mr. Locke, and after him by Dr.T—r; 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 p. 202know 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 this Representation, speaking of the Flesh as a Person: and accordingly in the 6th & 7th Verses, speaks of the Mind of the Flesh, foreign and of the Mind of the Spirit, foreign as if the Flesh and Spirit were two opposite Persons, each having a Mind contrary to the Mind of the other. Dr. T. interprets this Mind of the Flesh, and Mind of the Spirit, as tho' the Flesh and the Spirit were 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 Flesh 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, v. 27. He that searcheth the Hearts, knoweth what is the MIND OF THE SPIRIT, foreign 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, foreign in Col. ii. 18. Vainly puffed up by his fleshly Mind, foreign by the Mind of his Flesh. And this Agent so often called Flesh, represented by the Apostle, as altogether evil, without any good Thing dwelling in it, or belonging to it, yea perfectly contrary to God and his Law, and tending wholly to Death and Ruin, and directly opposite to the Spirit, is what Christ speaks of to Nicodemus as born in the first Birth, as giving a Reason why there is a Necessity of a New-birth, in order to a better Production.

One thing is particularly observable in that Discourse of the Apostle, in the 7th and 8th of Romans, in which he so often uses the Term Flesh, as opposite to Spirit, which as well as many other things in his Discourse, makes it plain, that by Flesh he means something in itself corrupt and sinful; and that is, that he expresly calls it sinful Flesh, Rom. viii. 3. 'Tis manifest, that by sinful Flesh p. 203he 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, & made a Curse for us.

Flesh and Spirit are opposed one to another in Gal. v. in the same Manner as in the 8th of Romans: And there, by Flesh cannot be meant only the human Nature of Body and Soul, or the meer Constitution and Powers of a Man, as in its natural State, innocent and right. In the 16th v. the Apostle says, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the Lusts of the Flesh: where the Flesh is spoken of as a Thing of an evil Inclination, Desire or Lust. But this is more strongly signified in the next Words; For the Flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the Flesh; and these are contrary one to another. What could have been said more plainly, to shew that what the Apostle means by Flesh, 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 the Flesh as a Person or Agent, desiring, acting, having Lusts, and performing Works. And by Works of the Flesh, and Fruits of the Spirit, which are opposed to each other, from v. 19. to the End, are plainly meant the same as Works of a sinful Nature, and Fruits of a holy renewed Nature. Now the Works of the Flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, Fornication, Uncleanness, Lasciviousness, Idolatry, Witchcraft, Hatred, Variance, Wrath, Strife, Seditions, Heresies, &c.—But the Fruit of the Spirit is Love, Joy, Peace, Long-suffering, Gentleness, Goodness, &c. The Apostle, by Flesh, don't mean 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 only restrained. 1 Cor. v. 5. To deliver such an One to Satan, for the Destruction of the Flesh. We must have p. 204no Mercy on it; we can't be too cruel to it; it must even be crucified. Gal. v. 24. They that are Christ's, have crucified the Flesh, with the Affections and Lusts.

The Apostle John, the same Apostle that writes the Account of what Christ said to Nicodemus, by the Spirit 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 Joh. iii. 23, 24. And that we should love one another, as he gave us Commandment; and he that keepeth his Commandments, dwelleth in him, and he in him: and hereby we know that be abideth in us, by the Spirit that he hath given us. With Chap. iv. 12, 13. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his Love is perfected in us: Hereby know we, that we dwell in him, because he hath given us of his Spirit. The spiritual Principle in us being as it were a Communication of the Spirit of God to us.

And as by foreignis meant a holy Nature, so by the Epithet foreign. spiritual, is meant the same as truly virtuous and holy, Gal. vi. 1. Ye that are spiritual, restore such an one in the Spirit of Meekness. The Apostle refers to what he had just said, in the End of the foregoing Chapter, where he had mentioned Meekness, as a Fruit of the Spirit. And so by carnal, or fleshly, foreign is meant the same as sinful. Rom. vii. 14. The Law is spiritual (i. e. holy) But I am carnal, sold under Sin.

And 'tis evident, that by Flesh, as the Word is used in the New Testament, & opposed to Spirit, when speaking of the Qualifications for eternal Salvation, is not meant only what is now vulgarly called the Sins of the Flesh, consisting in inordinate Appetites of the Body, and their Indulge…e; but the whole Body of Sin, implying those Lusts that are most subtil, and furthest from any Relation to the Body; such as Pride, 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 are mentioned; Idolatry, Witchcraft, Hatred, Variance, Emulations, Wrath, Strife, Seditions, Heresies, Envyings. p. 205So, Pride of Heart is the Effect or Operation of the Flesh. Col. ii. 18. Vainly puffed up by his fleshly Mind: in the Greek, by the Mind of the Flesh. So Pride, Envying, Strife and Division, are spoken of as Works of the Flesh, 1 Cor. iii. 3,4. For ye are yet carnal (foreign fleshly.) For whereas there is Envying, and Strife, and Division, are ye not carnal, and walk as Men? For while one saith, I am of Paul, and another, I am of Apollos, are ye not carnal? Such kind of Lusts don't depend on the Body, or external Senses; for the Devil himself has them in the highest Degree, who has not, nor ever had, any Body or external Senses to gratify.

Here, if it should be enquir'd, how Corruption or Depravity in general, or the Nature of Man as corrupt and sinful, came to be called Flesh; and not only that Corruption which consists in inordinate bodily Appetites? I think, what the Apostle says in the last cited Place, Are ye not carnal, and walk AS MEN? leads us to the true Reason. 'Tis 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 Word Flesh is a Word 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. Matt. xxiv. 22. Except those Days should be shortned, no Flesh should be saved. Luk. iii. 6. All Flesh shall see the Salvation of God. Joh. xvii. 2. Thou hast given him Power over all Flesh. See also Act. ii. 17. Rom. iii.20. 1 Cor. i. 29. Gal. ii. 16. Man's Nature, being left to it self, forsaken of the Spirit of God, as it was when Man fell, and consequently forsaken of divine and holy Principles, of it self became exceeding corrupt, utterly depraved and ruined. And so the Word Flesh, which signifies Man, came to be used to signify Man as he is in himself, in his natural State debased, corrupt and ruin'd. And on the other Hand, the Word Spirit came to be used to signify a divine and holy Principle, or new Nature; because that p. 206is not of Man, but of God, by the Indwelling and vital Influence of his Spirit. And thus to be corrupt, and to be carnal, or fleshly, and to walk as Men, are the same thing with the Apostle. And so in other Parts of the Scripture, to savour the Things that be of Men, and to savour Things which are corrupt, are the same; and Sons of Men, and wicked Men, also are the same, as was observed before. And on the other hand, to savour the Things that be of God, and to receive the Things of the Spirit of 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 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, ruin'd Man, utterly unfit 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 & heavenly Kingdom. 'Tis a Confirmation that this is the true Meaning, that it is not only evidently agreable 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, why 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 &c. in order to Salvation: 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 Corollary from what has been said.

Corol. If by Flesh 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 p. 207understand what has been now supposed, it will not only follow, that Men by Nature are corrupt, but wholly corrupt, without any good Thing. If by Flesh is meant Man's Nature, as he receives it in his first Birth, then therein dwelleth no good Thing; as appears by Rom. vii. 18. 'Tis wholly opposite to God, and to Subjection to his Law, as appears by Rom. …iii. 7, 8. 'Tis 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 Old; as appears by Rom. viii. 7. If there were any thing truly good in the Flesh, or in Man's Nature, or natural Disposition, under a moral View, then it should only be amended; but the Scripture represents as tho' we were to be Enemi…s 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, but putting it off, and putting on the new Man; and seeks not to have the Body of Death made better, but to be deliver'd 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-born) 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. & the Beginning of the third. There the Apostle speaks of the natural Man, and the spiritual Man: where natural and spiritual are oppos'd just in the same Manner, as I have observed carnal and spiritual often are. In Chap. ii. 14,15. he says, The natural Man receiveth not the Things of the Spirit of God: for they are Foolishness unto him; neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual, judgeth all Things. And not only p. 208does the Apostle here oppose natural and spiritual, just as he elsewhere does carnal and spiritual, but his following Discourse evidently shows, that he means the 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 with this, and says, And I, Brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal. Referring manifestly to what he had been saying, in the immediately proceeding Discourse, about spiritual and natural Men, and evidently using the Word, carnal, 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 endeavoured to palm upon us another Sense of this Phrase, and so to deprive us of the clear Instruction the Apostle gives in that 14th ver. concerning the sinful miserable State of Man by Nature. Dr.T. says, by foreign, is meant the animal 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, &c. 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 cc. So the Apostle Jude uses the Word in like Manner, opposing it to spiritual, or having the Spirit, ver. 19. These are they that separate themselves, sensual (foreign) "not having the Spirit." The Vices he had been just speaking of, were chiefly of the more spiritual Kind. v. 16. These are Murmurers, Complainers, walking after their own 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 p. 209calls them carnal; Envying, Strife and Divisions, and saying, I am of Paul, and I of Apollos; and being puffed up for one against another. We have the same Word again, Jam. iii. 14, 15. If y… have bitter Envying and Strife, glory not, and lie not against the Truth: This Wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly, sensual (foreign) 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 … monly intended in the New Testament by Things spiritual, and are doubtless here meant by Things of the Spirit 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 receiveth not the Things of the Spirit of God, is not susceptible of Things of that Kind, neither can be know them, can have no true Sense or Relish of them, or Notion of their real Nature and true Excellency; Because they are spiritually 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, Joh. xiv. 16,17. He shall give you the Spirit of Truth, whom the World cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neitheir knoweth him: But ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

SECT. II.

Observations on Rom. iii. 9,—24.

IF the Scriptures represent all Mankind as wicked in their first State, before they are made Partakers of the p. 210Benefits 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, they find themselves wicked, this proves that they are wicked by Nature; either born wicked, o… …rn with an infallible Disposition to be wicked as soon as possible, if there be any Difference between these; and either of 'em will prove Men to be 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 Scripture-Testimony, that all Mankind in their first State are really of a wicked Character.

To this Purpose is exceeding full, express & abundant that Passage of the Apostle, in Rom. iii. beginning with the 9th v. 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 Chap. v. 16, 17. laid down his Proposition, that none can be saved in any other Way than thro' the Righteousness of God, by Faith in Jesus Christ, he proceeds to prove this Point, by shewing particularly that all are in themselves Wicked, and without any Righteousness of their own. First, 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 no wise; for we have before p. 211proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under Sin: As it is written, There is NONE righteous, NO, NOT ONE; there is NONE that understandeth; there is NONE that …eeketh after God; they are ALL gone out of the Way; they are TOGETHER become unprofitable; there is NONE that doth Good, NO, NOT ONE. 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 & 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 we know, that whatsoever Things the Law saith, 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 Knowledge of Sin. But now the Righteousness of God without 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,& come short of the Glory of God. Being justified freely by his Grace, thro' 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 ben't set forth plainly, expresly 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.

Dr. T. to take off the Force of the whole, would have us to understand (P. 104—107) that these Passages, quoted from the Psalms, and other Parts of the old Testament, p. 212don't speak of all Mankind, nor of all the Jews; but only of them of whom they were true. He observes, there were many that were innocent and righteous; tho' there were also many, a strong Party, that were wicked, corrupt, &c. 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,—… by the Deeds of the Law NO FLESH can be justified. And he chuses 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 understandeth, &c. But yet the Universality of these Expressions is nothing to his Purpose; because the universal Terms found in 'em have indeed no Reference to any such Universality, as this the Apostle speaks of, nor any thing a-kin to it; they 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 are true. That is, There is none of them righteous, of whom it is true, that they are not righteous; no, not one: There is 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, &c.—Or 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 p. 213of which were wicked,—confirm that Universality which the Apostle would prove, viz. That all Jews and Gentiles, and the whole World were wicked, and every 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 had 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 'em as they are, not because they are 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 Connection, 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 proceeding universal Words of his own Proposition? And yet it will follow from the Things which Dr. T. supposes, that the Universality of the Terms in the last Words, There is none righteous; no, not one, have no Relation at all to that Universality he speaks of in the preceeding Clause, to which they are join'd, All are under Sin: and is no more a Confirmation of it, than if the Words were thus, 'There are some, or there are many 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 to prove what none of the Jews denied, or made the least Doubt of. Even the Pharisees, the most self-righteous p. 214Sect of them, who went furthest in glorying in the Distinction of their Nation from other Nations, as a holy People, knew it, and own'd it: they openly confessed that their Forefathers killed the Prophets, Matth. xxiii. 29, 30, 31. And if the Apostle's Design had been only to refresh their Memories to put 'em in Mind of the antient 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 Nation of the Jews, by this Argument, That what things so ever 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 antient Ages, which were wicked Men; when the Old Testament was full of Passages that asserted this expresly, not only of a strong Party, but of the Nation in general? How much more would it have been to such a Purpose, to have put 'em in Mind of the Wickedness of the People in general, in worshipping the golden Calf, & the Unbelief, Mumuring 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 to 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 Prophets Times. For Dr. T. supposes, the Apostle's Aim is to prove the great Corruption of both p. 215Jews and Gentiles at that Day, when Christ came into the World.**See Key § 275, 278.

In order the more fully to evade the clear & 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. ‖‖P. 102, 104, 117, 119, 120. and Note on Rom. iii. 10—19.Rom 3:10On this 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. But if the Words which the Apostle uses, don't most fully and determinately signify an Universality, no Words ever used in the Bible are sufficient 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 emphatically and carefully to express the most perfect & 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; join'd 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!

p. 216Or 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.T. 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 affirm'd 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 those two great collective Bodies, figuratively ascribing to each of them a Mouth, and mean that those 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 dissaffected Party 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 also the Justification he here treats of, is no other than the Justification of such collective Bodies. For, they are the same he speaks of as guilty and wicked, that he argues cannot be justified by the Works of the Law, by Reason of their being Wicked. Otherwise his Argument is wholly disannul'd. 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. T—r's declared p. 217Opinion. He supposes, the Apostle here, and in other Parts of this Epistle, is speaking of Men's Justification considered only as in their collective Capacity. ††See Note on Rom. iii. 10,—19. and on Chap. v. 11. and on Chap. ix. 30, 31. and on Chap. xi. 31.Rom 3:10But the contrary is most manifest. The 16th and 18th Verses of this third Chapter can't, without the utmost Violence, be understood otherwise than of the Justification of particular Persons. That he might be just, and the Justifier of HIM that believeth in Jesus.—Therefore we conclude that A MAN is justified by Faith, without the Deeds of the Law. So Chap. iv. 5. But to HIM that work…th not, but b… li…veth on him that justifieth the ungodly. HIS Faith is counted for Righteousness. And what the Apostle cites in the 6, 7, & 8th Verses from the Book of Psalms, evidently shews, that he is speaking of the Justification of particular Persons. Even as David also describ…th 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; as in v. 3.4.

And then, it is very plain in that Paragraph of the third Chapter, which we have been upon. that it is the Justification of particular Persons that the Apostle speaks of, by that Place in the Old Testament, which he refers to in v. 20. Therefore by the Deeds of the Law, there shall no Flesh he justified in his Sight. He refers to that in Psal. exliii. Enter not into Judgment with thy Servant; for in thy Sight shall NO MAN 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 'tis further manifest, that the Apostle is here speaking of personal Justification, in-as-much as this Place is evidently parallel with that, Gal. iii. 10,11. For as many as are of the Works of p. 217p. 218the Law, are under the Curse: for it is written, Cursed is EVERY ONE that contin…eth not in all things that are written in the Book … … 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 there, viz. that all are guilty, and exposed to be condemned by the Law; But the same Saying of the Old Testament is cited here in the Beginning of this Discourse in Galatians. (Chap. i. 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, can't be justified by the Law, because another Subject, another collective Body, is condemned by the Law, 'tis plain, the Argument would be quite vain and impertinent. Yet thus the Argument must stand according to Dr. T—r'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 Jewish 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 collective Body, a new Creature, and a new Man, (according to our Author's understanding 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 con…ted: and it does not appear, according to our Author's Scheme, that these Individuals p. 220over corrupt, in every Part. And not only is the total Corruption thus intimated, by …numerating 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, v. 18. There is no Fear of God before their Eyes.—The Expressions also are evidently chosen to denote a most extreme & desperate Wickedness of Heart. An exceeding Depravity is ascribed to every Part: to the Throat, the Scent of an open S…pulchre; to the Tongue and Lips, D…c…it and the Poison of Asps; to the Mouth, Cursing and Bitterness; of their F…t it is said, they are swift to shed Blood: And with regard to the whole Man, 'tis said, Destruction 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 corr…pt; and also extremely and desperately corrupt. And it is plain, 'tis not accidental, that we have here such a Collection of 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 th… Epistle.

SECT. III.

Observations on Rom. v. 6,—10. and Eph. ii. 3. with the Context, and Rom. vii.

ANother Passage of this Apostle in the 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, p. 221Chap. v. 6,—10. For when we were yet … Strength, in due Time Christ died for the Ungodly. For scarcely for a righteous Man will one die; yet … for a good Man, some would even dare to die. But God commendeth his Love towards us, in that while we were yet Sinners, Christ died for us. Much more than, being now justified by his Blood, we shall be saved from Wrath through him. For if while we were Enemies, we were reconciled to God through the Death of his Sin? 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, Ungodly, Enemies to God, exposed to divine Wrath, and without Strength, without Ability to help themselves, or deliver their Souls from this miserable State.

D.T. 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 G… tiles, 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, … were Names by which the Apostles in their Writings were worst to signify and distinguish the heathen World, in Opposition to the Jews; and that in this Sense these Appellations are to be taken in their Epistles, and in this Place in particular.**P. 114,—120. See also Dr. T.—r's Pharaph. and Notes on the Place. And 'tis observable, that this Way of interpreting these Phrases in the apostolick 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.

'Tis allowed to have been long common and customary among the Jews, in Christ's and the Apostles Days, especi…lly p. 222those 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, Dogs, &c. as Notes of Distinction from themselves, whom they accounted in general (excepting the Publicans and the noto…ously …) as the Friends, special Favourites, 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 has studied the new Testament, and the Epistle to the Romans in particular, so diligently as Dr. T.—should be strong in an Imagination, that the Apostles of Jesus Christ should so far countenance, and do so much to cherish these self-exalting, 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. 'Tis a most unreasonable Imagination, on many Accounts.

1. The whole Gospel-Dispensation is calculated entirely to overthrow & abolish every thing to which this self-distinguishing, self-exalting 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 the Enmity, and break down the Partition-Wall between Jews & Gentiles, and of Twain to make one new Man, so making Peace; to destroy all Dispositions in Nations and particular Persons to despise one another, or to say one to another, Stand by thy self, come not near to me, for I am b…lier than Thou; and to establish the contrary Principles of Humility, mutual Esteem, Honour and Love, and universal Union, in the most firm and perfect Manner.

p. 2232. Christ, when on Earth, set himself, through the Course of his Ministry, to militate against this … Spirit. Practice and Language of the Jews; appearing in such Representations, Names and Epithets so … among them; by which they shew'd 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 allowing the Gentile to … their Neighbour, &c. He condemned the Pharishes for not esteeming themselves Sinners, as well as the Publicans; trusting in themselves that they were righteous, and d… spising others. He militated against these things in his own Treatment of some Gentiles, Publicans and others, which they called Sinners, in what he said on these, Occasions.**Matth. viii. 5,—13. Chap. ix. 9,—13. Chap. xi. 19,—24. Luk. vii. 37, to the End. Chap. xvii. 12,—19. Chap. xix. 1,—10. Matt. xv. 21,—28. Joh. iv. 9, &c. ver. 39, &c. Compare Luk. x. 29, &c.Matt 8:5Luke 7:37Matt 15:21John 4:9Luke 10:29 He opposed these Notions and Manners of the Jews in his Parables; ††Matt. xxi. 28,—…2. Chap. xxii. 1,—10. Luk. xiv. 16,—24. Compare Luk. xiii. 28,29,30.Matt 21:28Luke 14:16Luke 13:28Luke 13:29Luke 13:30and in his Instructions an … how to treat the unbelieving Jews; ‖‖Matt. x. 14, 15.Matt 10:14Matt 10:15and in what he says to Nicodemus about the Necessity of a NewBirth, even for the Jews, as well as the … Gentiles with Regard to their Proselytism, which some of the Jews looked upon as a new Birth; And in Opposition to their Notions of their being the Children of God, because the Children of Abraham, but the Gentiles by Nature Sinners and Children of Wrath, he tells them that even they were Children of the Devil.

p. 224‡‡Joh. viii. 33,—44. It may also be observed, that John the Baptist greatly …radicted the Jews Opinion of Themselves, as being a holy People, and accepted of God, because they were the Children of Abraham, and on that Account better than the Heathen, whom they called Sinners, Enemies, Unclean, &c. in baptizing the 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 your …, We have Abraham to our Father; for I say unto you, that God is able of these Stones, to raise up Children unto Abraham; and teaching the Pharisees that instead of their being a holy Generation and Children of God, as they called themselves, they were a Generation of Vipers.John 8:333. Tho' 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 …, or at least, after the Calling of the Gentiles, begun in the Conversion of Cornelius, they were fully indoctri…ed in this Matter, and effect…ally taught no longer to call the Gentiles Unclean, as a Note of Distinction from the Jews (Act. x. 24.) which was before any of the … Epistles were written.

4. Of all the Apostles, some were more perfectly … in this Matter, and none so abundant in instructing … in it, as Paul, the great Apostle of the Gentiles. He had Abundance to do in this Matter: None of the Apostles had so much Occasion to exert themselves against … Notion and Language of the Jews, in Opposition to Jewish Teachers, and Judaiting Christians, that strove to keep up the Separation-Wall between Jews and Gentiles, and to exalt the former, and set the latter … ▪

5. This Apostle does especially strive in this Matter in this Epistle to the Romans, above all his other Writings; … himself in a most elaborate Manner, and with his utmost Skill and Power to bring the Jewish Christians off from every thing of this Kind; end…v…ing by all Means, that there might no longer be in them any Remains of these odd 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 p. 225Jews 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 to prove that in common, both Jews and Gentiles, all were desperately wicked, and none righteous, no, not one. He tells them, 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 us without Strength, or any Sufficiency of their own in the Affair of Justification & Redemption: And in the Continuation of the same Discourse, in the 4th Chapter, teaches that all that were justified by Christ, were in themselves ungodly; and that being the Children of Abraham was not peculiar to the Jews. In this 5th Chap. still in Continuation of the same Discourse, on the same Subject and Argument of Justification thro' Christ, and by Faith in him, he speaks of Christ's dying for the Ungodly 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 self-righteous; self-exalting, disdainful Judaizing Teachers, whom he was with all his Might opposing: Countenancing the very same thing in them, which he had been from the Beginning of the Epistle discountenancing, and endeavouring 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 Law of Moses. They made 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 p. 226Sinners in a higher Degree, and more aggravated Manner, and more e…ectually and dreadfully dead in and by Sin, Chap vii. 4,—13. agreable to those Words of Christ, Joh. v. 45.

It can't 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. 'Tis true, that the Apostle here refers to this Distinction, as what was usually made by the self-righteous Jews, between themselves and the Gentiles; but not in such a Manner as to adopt, or favour it; but on the contrary, so at plainly to …hew his Disapprobation of it; q.d. 'Thô we were born Jews, and by Nature are of that People which are wont to make their Boast 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 justified 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 &c. he had countenanced this self-exalting, self-disting…hing, separating Spirit and Custom of the Jews, whereby they treated the 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 the 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 p. 227Sinners and Righteous is here express'd 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 Sinners, Christ died for us. By righteous Men 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 perhaps some might even dare to die for, is meant a Jew? Dr. T. himself don't 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 distinguished from the Jews. The Apostle himself had been labouring abundantly, in the preceeding Part of the Epistle, to prove that the Jews were Sinners in this Sense, namely in Opposition to righteous; That all had sinned, that all were under Sin, 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, don't mean only the Gentiles, is, that he includes himself among them, saying, while WE were Sinners, and when WE were Enemies.

Our Author from Time to Time says, The Apostle, tho' he speaks only of the Gentiles in their Heathen State, yet puts himself with them, because he was the Apostle of the Gentiles. 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, We Children—: Or in a Physician's ranking Himself with his Patients, when talking to them of their Diseases and Cure; saying, We sick Folks.—Paul's being the Apostle of the Gentiles, to save 'em from their Heathenism, is so far from being a p. 228Reason for him to reckon himself among the Heathen, that on the contrary, 'tis 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 Heathenism; and therefore in that Capacity does in a peculiar Manner appear in his Distinction from the Heathen, and in Opposition to the State of Heathenism. For 'tis by the most opposite Qualities only, that he is fitted to be an Apostle of the Heathen, and Recoverer from Heathenism. As the clear Light 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. T—r's appear more violent) the Apostle, in this Epistle, does expresly rank himself with the Jews, when he speaks of them as distinguished from the Gentiles; as in Chap. iii. 9. What then? are WE better than They? That is, are we Jews better than the Gentiles?

It can't justly be alledged in Opposition to this, that the Apostle Peter puts himself with the Heathen. 1 Pet. iv. 3. For the Time past of OUR Life may suffice US to have wrought the Will of the Gentiles; when WE walked in Lasciviousness, Lusts, Excess of Wine, Reviling, Banquetings, & abominable Idolatries. For the Apostle Peter (who by the Way was not an Apostle of the Gentiles) here don't speak of himself 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 Heathen, who now were all one Body, of which Body he was a Member. 'Tis 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 WE our selves (i.e. We p. 229of the Christian Church) sometimes also were foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers Lusts and Pleasures, (some one Lust and Pleasure, others another) living in M… lice, Envy, hateful and hating one another,&c. There is Nothing in this but what is very natural. That the Apostle, speaking to the Christian Church, and of that Church, confessing it's former Sins, should speak of himself as one of that Society, and yet mention some Sins that he personally had not been guilty of, & among others, heathenish Idolatry, is quite a different Thing from what it would have been for the Apostle, expresly distinguishing those of the Christians which had been Heathen, from those which had been Jews, to have ranked himself with the former, tho' 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, WE have greatly corrupted our selves, & provoked God by our Deism, our Blasphemy, our profane Swearing, our Lasciviousness, our Venality, &c. speaking in the first Person plural, tho' h… himself never had been a Deist, and perhaps none of his Hearers, and they might also have been generally free from other Sins he mention'd; 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 apostatized from Christianity to Deism, and had long been in such a State, 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, We foolish blind Infidels &c. 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, p. 230is 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, dead in Sin, and as quickened, and raised up from such a State of Death, in a most marvellous Display of the free and rich Grace and Love, and exceeding Greatness of the Power of God, &c.

With respect to those Words foreign We were by Nature Children of Wrath, Dr. T. says (P.112, 113, 114.) The Apostle means no more by this, than truly or really Children of Wrath; using 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: To express this we say, he is by Nature a Child. In which 'tis own'd, 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 metaphorically. The Instance he produces as parallel, to confirm his supposed metaphorical Sense of the Phrase, as meaning only truly, really or properly Children of Wrath, viz. the Apostle Paul's calling Timothy his own Son in the Faith, foreign is so far from confirming his Sense, that it is rather directly against it. For doubtless the Apostle uses the Word foreign in it's original Signification here, meaning his begotten Son; foreign being the Adjective from foreign Off spring, or the Verb foreign 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 new Testament, one natural, and the other spiritual; one being the first Generation, the other Regeneration; the one a being begotten as to the human Nature, the other a being begotten p. 231in the Faith, begotten in Christ, or as to one's Christianity. The Apostle expresly signifies which of these he means in this Place, Timothy my begotten Son in the Faith, in the same Manner as he says to the Corinthians, 1 Cor. iv. 15. In Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the Gospel. To say, the Apostle uses the Word, foreign in Eph. ii. 3. only as signifying real, true and proper, is a most arbitrary Interpretation, having nothing to warrant it in the whole Bible. The Word foreign is no where used in this Sense in the New-Testament.**The following are all the Places where the Word is used. Rom. i. 26. and ii. 14. and ver. 17. and xi. 21. and ver. 24. twice in that Verse. 1 Cor. xi. 14. Gal. ii. 15. and iv. 8. Jam. iii. 7. twice in that Verse. and 2 Pet. i. 4.Rom 1:261 Cor 11:14Gal 2:15Jas 3:72 Pet 1:4

Another Thing which our Author alledges to evade the Force of this, is, that the Word render'd Nature, sometimes signifies Habit contracted by Custom, or an acquired Nature. But this is not the proper Meaning of the Word. And it is plain, the Word in its common Use, in the new Testament, signifies what we properly express in English by the Word Nature. There is but one Place where there can be the least Pretext for supposing it to be used otherwise; and that is 1 Cor. xi. 14. Doth not even Nature it self 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, foreign Nature IT SELF, shews that the Apostle don't 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 'tis Custom that makes any outward-Action or Word a Sign or Signification of any thing: But Nature it self, Nature in its proper Sense, teaches, that it is a Shame for a Man to appear with the established Signs of the female Sex, and with Significations of Inferiority, &c. As Nature it self shews it to be a Shame for a Father to bow down or kneel to his own Child or Servant, or for p. 232Men to bow to an Ido…, because bowing down is by Custom an established Token or Sign of Subjection & Submission: Such a Sight therefore would be unnatural, shocking to a Man's very Nature. So Nature would teach, that 'tis a Shame for a Woman to use such and such lascivious Words or Gestures; tho' it be Custom, that establishes the unclean Signification of those Gestures and Sounds.

'Tis particularly unnatural and unreasonable, to understand the Phrase, foreign in this Place, any otherwise than in the proper Sense, on the following Accounts. 1. It may be observed, that both the Words, foreign & foreign in their original Signification, have Reference to the Birth or Generation. So the Word. foreign which comes from foreign 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 foreign comes from foreign which signifies to bring forth Children.—2. As tho' the Apostle took Care by the Word used here, to signify what we are by Birth, he changes the Word he used before for Children. In the preceeding Verse he used foreign speaking of the Children of Disobedience;—but here foreign which is a Word derived, as was now observed, from foreign to bring forth a Child, and more properly signifies a begotten or born Child.—3. 'Tis 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, foreign 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 Favour with God by Nature, and born Children of Wrath.—4. 'Tis 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 p. 233by 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 different their State is by Grace; saying, v. 5. By Grace ye are saved; repeating it again v. 8. By Grace ye are saved; But if, by being Children of Wrath by Nature, were meant no more than only their being really and truly Children of Wrath, as Dr. T. 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 properly in a State of Salvation.

If we take these Words with the Context, the whole abundantly 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 &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 themselve…, but is wholly from divine Grace, all the Gift of God, and his Workmanship, the Effect of his Power, and free and wonderful Love: None of our good Works are primarily from ourselves, but with respect to 'em all, we are God's Workmanship, created unto good Works, 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 of God. Therefore the Apostle compares the Work of God, in forming Christians to true Virtue and Holiness, not only to a new Creation, but a Resurrection, or raising from the Dead. v. …. You hath he quicken'd, who were dead in Trespasses and Sins. And again v. 5. Even when we were dead in Sins, hath he quicken'd us together with Christ. In speaking of Christians being quicken'd with Christ, 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 Power towards Christian Converts, in their Conversion, p. 234agreable to the Operation of his mighty Power, when he raised Christ from the dead. So that it is plain by every thing in this Discourse, the Apostle would signify that by 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 Work of his great, almighty and exceeding excellent Power. I think, there can be need of Nothing but reading the Chapter, and minding what is read, to convince all who have common Understanding, of this; whatever any of the most subtil Criticks have done, or even can do, to twist, rack, perplex & pervert the Words and Phrases here used.

Dr. T. here again insists, that the Apostle speaks only of the Gentiles in their heathen State, when he speaks of those that were dead in Sin, and by Nature Children of Wrath; and that tho' he seems to include himself among these, saying, WE 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 been already observed, there are some things which make it peculiarly unreasonable to understand it so here. 'Tis true, the greater Part of the Church of Ephesus 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 express'd. After he had told the Ephesians, who had been generally Heathen, that they had been dead in Sin, and had walk'd according to the Course of this World, &c. v. 1, and 2. he makes a Distinction, and says, Among whom WE ALSO had our Conversation, &c. and were by Nature Children of Wrath. EVEN 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 p. 235first Person, in a most manifest Distinction, Among whom WE ALSO, that is, we Jews, as well as ye Gentiles. Not only changing the Person, but adding a Particle of Distinction, Also; which would be Nonsense, if he meant the 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 entertain'd 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 Wrath, 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. Thô Wickedness was supposed by the Jews 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 Observers 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 reckon'd among the Children of Disobedience, and Children of Wrath.

And then besides, if the Apostle chuses to put himself among the Gentiles, because he was the Apostle of the Gentiles, I would ask, why he don't do so in the 11th v. of the same Chapter, where he speaks of their Gentile State expresly? Remember that YE being in time past Gentiles in the Flesh.—Why does he here make a Distinction between the Gentiles and himself? Why did he not say, Let us remember, that we being in past Time Gentiles? And why does the same Apostle, even universally, make the same Distinction, speaking either in the second p. 236or third Person, and never in the first, where he expresly speaks of the Gentilism of those that he wrote to; or speaks of 'em with Reference to their Distinction from 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 distinguishing Particle, Also, That WE should be to the Praise of his Glory who first trusted in Christ [the first Bel…evers 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 v. 11, 17, 19. and 22. In which last Verse the same distinguishing Particle again is used; In whom YOU ALSO are builded together for an Habitation of God thro' the Spirit. See also in the following Chapters; Chap. iii. 6. and iv. 17. And not only in this Epistle, but constantly in other Epistles: as, Rom. i. 12, 13. Chap. xi. 13, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 28, 30, 30, 31. Chap. xv. 15, 16. 1 Cor. xii. 2. Gal. iv. 8. Col. i. 27. Chap. ii. 13. 1 The…. i. 5, 6, 9. Chap. ii. 13, 14, 15, 16.

Tho' I am far from thinking our Author's Exposition of the 7th Chap. of Romans to be in any wise agreable 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, tho' we should allow the Thing wherein he mainly differs from such as he opposes in his Interpretation, viz. That the Apostle don't 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 deliver'd by Christ. For, tis 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 p. 237Discourse; Chap. viii. 3.**Dr. T. himself reckons this a Part of the same Discourse or Paragraph, in the Division he makes of the Epistle, in his Paraphrase and Notes upon it. For what the Law could not do, in that it was weak through the Flesh; 'God, sending his own Son, &c. Our Author supposes, this here spoken of, viz. "that the Law can't give Life, because it is weak through the Flesh," is true with respect to every one of Mankind. ††See Note on Rom. v. 20.Rom 5:20And when the Apostle gives this Reason, In that it is weak thro' the Flesh, 'tis plain, that by the Flesh, which here he opposes to the Spirit, he means the same Thing which in the preceeding Part of the same Discourse, in the foregoing Chapter, he had called by the Name Flesh, v. 5, 14, 18. and the Law of the Members, v. 23. and the Body of Death. v. 23. 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. Which in this last Place, is given as a Reason why the Law can't give Life to any of Mankind. And it being the same Reason, of the same Thing, spoken of in the same 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 inasmuch as the Reason there given is being in the Flesh, and a being carnal, sold under Sin. Therefore taking the whole of the Apostle's Discourse, this is justly understood to be a Reason why the Law can't give Life to any of Mankind; and consequently, that all Mankind are in the Flesh, and are carnal, sold under Sin, and so remain till deliver'd by Christ: And consequently all Mankind in their first or original State are very sinful; which was the Thing to be proved.