The Doctrine of Original Sin, Theological treatise · Part 2 · Chapter 4

The Doctrine of Original Sin · Theological treatise · Part 2 · Chapter 4

p. 238CHAP IV.

Containing Observations on Rom. v. 12,—… to the End.

SECT. I.

Remarks on Dr. T—r's▪ Way of explaining this Text.

THE following Things are worthy to be taken Notice of, concerning our Author's Exposition of this remarkable Passage of the Apostle Paul.

1. He greatly insists that by Death in this Place no more is meant, than that Death which we all die, when this present Life is extinguished, and the Body returns to the Dust; that no more is meant in the 12, 14, 15, and 17th Verses. P. 27. he speaks of it as evidently, clearly and infallibly so, because the Apostle is still discoursing on the same Subject; plainly implying, that it must most infallibly be so, that the Apostle means no more by Death, throughout this Paragraph on the Subject. But as infallible as this is, if we believe what Dr.T. elsewhere says, it must needs be otherwise. He, in P.396, speaking of those Words in the last Verse of the next Chapter, The Wages of Sin is DEATH, but the Gift of God is ETERNAL LIFE, thro' Jesus Christ our Lord, says, Death in this Place is widely different from the Death we now die; as it stands there opposed to eternal Life, which is the Gift of God thro' Jesus Christ, it manifestly signifies eternal Death, the second Death, or that Death which they shall here after die, who live after the Flesh. But Death, in the Conclusion of the Paragraph we are upon in the 5th Chapter, concerning the Death that comes by Adam, and the Life that comes by Christ, in the last v. of the Chapter, is opposed to eternal Life, just in the same Manner p. 239as it is in the last v. of the next Chapter. That as Sin has reigned unto DEATH, even so might Grace reign, thro' Righteousness, unto ETERNAL LIFE, by Jesus Christ our Lord. So that by our Author's own Argument, Death in this Place also is manifestly widely different from the Death we now die, as it stands here opposed to eternal Life thro' Jesus Christ; and signifies eternal Death, the second Death. And yet this is a Part of the same Discourse or Paragraph with that begun in the 12th v. as reckon'd by Dr. T. himself in his Division of Paragraphs, in his Paraphrase and Notes on the Epistle. So that if we will follow him, and admit his Reasonings in the various Parts of his Book, here is manifest Proof, against infallible Evidence! So that 'tis true, the Apostle throughout this whole Passage on the same Subject, by Death, evidently, clearly and infallibly means no more, than that Death we now die, when this Life is extinguished; and yet by Death, in some Part of this Passage, is meant something widely different from the Death we now die, and is MANIFESTLY intended eternal Death, the second Death.

But had our Author been more consistent with himself in his laying of it down as so certain and infallible, that because the Apostle has a special Respect to temporal Death, in the 14th v. Death reigned from Adam to Moses, therefore he means no more in the several consequent Parts of this Passage, yet he is doubtless too confident and positive in this Matter. This is no more evident, clear and infallible, than that Christ meant no more by perishing, in Luke xiii. 5. when he says, I tell you, Nay, but except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish, than such a temporal Death, as came on those that died by the Fall of the Tower of Siloam, spoken of in the preceeding Words of the same Speech: and no more infallible, than that by Life, Christ means no more than this temporal Life, in each Part of that one Sentence, Matt. x. 39. He that findeth his Life, shall lose it; and he that loseth his Life for my Sake, shall find it; because in the first Part p. 240of each Clause he has respect especially to temporal Life.**There are many Places parallel with these, as Joh. xi. 25, 26. I am the Resurrection, and the Life: He that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall be live: and whosoever liveth, and believ…th in me, shall never die. Here both the Words, Life and Death, are used with this Variation; I am the Resurrection, and the Life, meaning spiritual and eternal Life: He that believeth in me, though he were dead, having respect to temporal Death, yet shall be live, with respect to spiritual Life, and the Restoration of the Life of the Body. And whosoever liveth and believeth in me, shall never die, meaning a spiritual and eternal Death. So in Joh. vi. 49, 50. Your Fathers did … in the Wilderness, and are dead, having respect chiefly to …emporal Death. This is the Bread which cometh down from Heaven, that a Man may … thereof, and not die, i. e. by the Loss of spiritual Life, & by eternal Death. (See also …. 5….) And in the next ver. If any Man …t of this Bread, he shall live forever, have eternal Life. So ver. 54. See another like Instance, Joh. v. 24,—29.John 11:25John 11:26John 6:49John 6:50John 5:24

The Truth of the Case with respect to what the Apostle intends by the Word Death in this Place, is this, viz. That the same Thing is meant, as is meant by Death in the foregoing and following Parts of this Epistle, and other Writings of this Apostle, where he speaks of Death as the Consequence of Sin, namely, the Whole of that Death, which He, and the Scripture every where, speaks of as the proper Wages and Punishment of Sin, including Death temporal, spiritual and eternal; tho' in some Parts of this Discourse he has a more special respect to one Part of this Whole, in others to another, as his Argument leads him; without any more Variation, than is common in the same Discourse. That Life which the Scripture speaks of as the Reward of Righteousness, is a Whole containing several Parts, viz. The Life of the Body, Union of Soul and Body, and the most perfect Sensibility, Activity & Felicity of both, which is the chief Thing. In like Manner the Death, which the Scripture speaks of as the Punishment of Sin, is a Whole including the Death of the Body, and the Death of the Soul, and the eternal, sensible, perfect Destruction p. 241and Misery of both. 'Tis this latter Whole, that the Apostle speaks of by the Name of Death in this Discourse, in Rom. v▪ Tho' in some Sentences he has a more special Respect to one Part, in others to another: And this without changing the Signification of the Word. For an having Respect to several Things included in the extensive Signification of the Word, is not the same thing as using the Word in several distinct Significations. As for Instance, the Appellative, Man, or the proper Name of any particular Man, is the Name of a Whole, including the different Parts of Soul & Body. And if any one in speaking of James or John, should say, he was a wise Man, and a beautiful Man; in the former Part of the Sentence, Respect would be had more especially to his Soul, in the latter to his Body, in the Word Man: But yet without any proper Change of the Signification of the Name, to distinct Senses. In Joh. xxi. 7. it is said, Peter was naked, and in the following Part of the same Story 'tis said, Peter was grieved. In the former Proposition, Respect is had especially to his Body, in the latter to his Soul: But yet here is no proper Change of the Meaning of the Name, Peter. And as to the Apostle's Use of the Word Death, in the Passage now under Consideration, on the Supposition that he in the general means the whole of that Death which is the Wages of Sin, there is nothing but what is perfectly natural in supposing, that he, in order to evince, that Death, the proper Punishment of Sin, comes on all Mankind, in Consequence of Adam's Sin, should take Notice of that Part of this Punishment, which is visible in this World, and which every Body therefore sees does in Fact come on all Mankind (as in v. 14.) and from thence should infer, that all Mankind are exposed to the whole of that Death which is the proper Punishment of Sin, whereof that temporal Death which is visible, is a Part, and a visible Image of the whole, and (unless changed by divine Grace) an Introduction to the principal, and infinitely the most dreadful Part.

p. 242II. Dr. T—r's Explanation of this Passage makes wholly insignificant those first Words, By one Man, Sin enter'd into the World, and leaves this Proposition without any Sense or Signification at all. The Apostle had been largely and elaborately representing, how the whole World was full of Sin, in all Parts of it, both among Jews and Gentiles, and all exposed to Death & Condemnation. 'Tis plain, that in these Words he would tell us, how this came to pass, namely, that this sorrowful Event came by one Man, even the first Man. That the World was full of Sin, and full of Death, were two great and notorious Facts, deeply affecting the Interests of Mankind; and they seemed very wonderful Facts, drawing the Attention of the more thinking Part of Mankind every where, who often asked this Question, Whence comes Evil, moral and natural Evil? (The latter chiefly visible in Death.) 'Tis manifest, the Apostle here means to tell us, how these came into the World, and came to prevail in it as they do. But all that is meant, according to Dr. T—r's Interpretation, is, " He begun Transgression." **P. 56.As if all that the Apostle meant, was, to tell us who happen'd to sin first; not how such a Malady came upon the World, or how any one in the World, besides Adam himself, came by such a Distemper. The Words of the Apostle, By one Man Sin entered INTO THE WORLD, and Death by Sin, shew the Design to be, to tell us how these Evils came, as affecting the State of the World; and not only as reaching one Man in the World. If this were not plain enough in itself, the Words immediately following demonstrate it; And so Death passed upon ALL MEN, for that all have sinned. By Sin's being in the World, the Apostle don't mean being in the World only in that one Instance of Adam's first Transgression, but being abroad in the World, among the Inhabitants of the Earth, in a wide Extent and continued Series of Wickedness; as is plain in the first Words of the next Verse, For until the Law, Sin was p. 243IN THE WORLD. And therefore when he gives us an Account how it came to be in the World, or which is the same Thing, how it enter'd into the World, he don't mean only coming in in one Instance.

If the Case were as Dr. T. represents, that the Sin of Adam, either in its Pollution or Punishment, reached none but himself, any more than the Sin of any other Man, it would be no more proper to say, that by one Man Sin enter'd into the World, than if it should be enquired, how Mankind came into America, and there had antiently been a Ship of the Phenicians wreck'd at Sea, and a single Man of the Crew was driven ashore on this Continent, and here died as soon as he reached the Shore, and it should be said, By that one Man Mankind came into America.

And besides, it is not true that by one Man, or by Adam, Sin enter'd into World, in Dr. T—r's Sense: For it was not he, but Eve, that begun Transgression. By one Man Dr. T. understands Adam, as the Figure of Christ. And it is plain, that it was for his Transgression, and not Eve's, that the Sentence of Death was pronounced on Mankind after the Fall, Gen. iii. 19. It appears unreasonable to suppose the Apostle means to include Eve, when he speaks of Adam: for he lays great Stress on it, that it was BY ONE,—repeating it no less than seven Times.

III. In like Manner this Author brings to Nothing the Sense of the causal Particles, in such Phrases as these, so often repeated, Death BY Sin, v. 12. If THROUGH the Offence of one, many be dead, v. 15. BY one that sinned,—Judgment was BY one to Condemnation, v. 16. BY one Man's Offence, Death reigned BY one, v. 17. BY the Offence of one, Judgment came upon all, &c.v. 18. BY one Man's Disobedience, v. 19. These causal Particles, so dwelt upon, and so variously repeated, unless we make meer Nonsense of the Discourse, signify some Connection and Dependence, by some Sort of Influence of that Sin of one Man, or some Tendency to that Effect which is so often said to come BY it. But according to Dr. T. there can be no real Dependence or Influence in the Case, p. 244of any Sort whatsoever. There is no Connection by any natural Influence of that one Act to make all Mankind mortal. Our Author don't pretend to account for this Effect in any such Manner; but in another most diverse, viz, A gracious Act of God, laying Mankind under A…liction, Toil and Death, from special Favour and Kindness. Nor can there be any Dependence of this Effect on that Transgression of Adam, by any moral Influence, as deserving such a Consequence, or exposing to it on any moral Account: For he supposes, that Mankind are not in this way exposed to the least Degree of Evil. Nor has this Effect any legal Dependence on that Sin, or any Connection by Virtue of any antecedent Constitution, which God had establish'd with Adam: For he insist, that in that Threatning, In the Day thou …atest thou …alt die, there is not a Word said of his Posterity; And Death on Mankind, according to him, can't come by Virtue of that legal Constitution with Adam; because the Sentence by which it came, was after the annulling and abolishing that Constitution. And 'tis manifest, that this Consequence can't be through any Kind of Tendency of that Sin to such an Effect; because the Effect comes only as a Benefit, and is the Fruit of meer Favour: But Sin has no Tendency, either natural or moral, to Benefits and divine Favours, And that Sin of Adam could neither be the efficient Cause, nor the procuring Cause, neither the natural, moral nor legal Cause, nor an exciting and moving Cause, any more than Adam's eating of any other Tree of the Garden. And the only real Relation that the Effect can have to that Sin, is a Relation as to Time, viz. that 'tis after it. And when the Matter is closely examined, the whole amounts to no more than this, That God is pleased, of his meer good▪ Will and Pleasure, to bestow a greater Favour upon us, than he did upon Adam in Innocency, after that Sin of his eating the forbidden Fruit; which Sin we are no more concerned in, than in the Sin of the King of Pegù, or Empero… of China.

p. 245IV. 'Tis altogether inconsistent with the Apostle's Scope, and the Import of what he says, to suppose that the Death which he here speaks of as coming on Mankind by Adam's Sin, comes not as a Punishment, but only as a Fav…ur. It quite makes void the Opposition, in which the Apostle sets the Consequences of Adam's Sin, and the Consequences of the Grace and Righteousness of Christ. They are set in Opposition to each other, as opposite Effects, arising from opposite Causes, throughout the Paragraph. One as the just Consequence of an Offence, the other a free Gift. v.15, 16, 17, 18. Whereas, according to this Scheme, there is no such Opposition in the Case; both are Benefits, and both are free Gifts. A very whol…ome Medicine, to save from …, ordered by a kind Father, or a Shield to preserve from … Enemy, bestowed by a Friend, is as much a free Gift, as pleasant Food. The Death that comes by Adam, is set in Opposition to the Life and Happiness that comes by Christ, as being the Fruit of Sin, and Judgment for Sin; when the latter is the Fruit of divine Grace. v. 15. 17, 20, 21. Whereas according to our Author, both came by Grace: Deat… … on Mankind by the free Kindness and Love of God, much more truly and properly than by Adam's Sin. Dr. T. speaks of it as coming by OCCASION, of Adam's Sin. But as I have observed, it is an Occasion without any Influence.) Yet the proper CAUSE is God's Grace: So … true Cause is wholly good. Which, by the Way, is direc…y …gnant so the Apostle's Doctrine in Rom. vii. 13. Was thou that which is good, made Death unto me? God forbid, … Sin▪ that it might appear Sin, working Death in me … which is good. Where the Apostle utterly rejects any such Suggestion, as thô that which is good were the proper Cause of Death; and signifies, that Sin is the proper Cause, and that which is good, only the Occasion. But according to this Author, the Reverse is true: That which is good in the highest Sense, even the Love of God, and a divine gracious Constitution, is the proper Cause of Death; and Sin, only the Occasion.

p. 246But to return, 'tis plain, that Death by Adam, and Life and Happiness by Christ, are here set in Opposition; the latter being spoken of as good, the other as evil; one as the Effect of Righteousness, the other of an Offence; one the Fruit of Obedience, the other of Disobedience; one as the Fruit of God's Favour, in Consequence of what was pleasing and acceptable to him, but the other the Fruit of his Displeasure, in Consequence of what was displeasing and hateful to him: the latter coming by Justification, the former by the Condemnation of the Subject. But according to the Scheme of our Author, there can be no Opposition in any of these Respects: The Death here spoken of, neither comes as an Evil, nor from an evil Cause; either an evil efficient Cause, or procuring Cause; nor at … as any Testimony of God's Displeasure to the Subject, but as properly the Effect of God's Favour, no less than that which is spoken of as coming by Christ; yea, and as much as that, appointed by an Act of JUSTIFICATION of the Subject; as he understands and explains the Word, Justification: For both are by a Grant of Fav…r, and are Instances of Mercy and Goodness. And he does abundantly insist upon it, that ANY Grant of Favour, ANY Instance of Mercy and Goodness, whereby God delivers and exempts from any Kind of Danger, Suffering or Calamity, or confers ANY Favour, Blessing or Privilege, is called Justification, in the Scripture-Sense and Use of the Word.**Key. §. 342. where 'tis to be observed, that he himself puts the Word ANY in Capital Letters. The same Thing in Substance is often asserted elsewhere. And this indeed is his main Point in what he calls the true Gospel-Scheme.

And over and above all these Things, our Author makes void and destroys the grand and fundamental Opposition of all, to illustrate which is the chief Scope of this whole Passage, viz. That between the first and second Adam, in the Death that comes by one, and the Life and Happiness by the other. For, according to his Doctrine, both come p. 247by Christ, the second Adam; both by his Grace Righteousness and Obedience: the Death, that God sentenced Mankind to in Gen. iii. 19. being a great deal more properly and truly by Christ, than by Adam. For, according to him, that Sentence was not pronounced on the Foot of the Covenant with Adam, because that was abrogated, and entirely set aside, as what was to have no more Effect, before it was pronounced; as he largely insists for many Pages together, P. 389,—395. He says, … …9. This Covenant with Adam was disannul'd immediately after Adam sin'd. Even before God pass'd Sentence upon Adam, Grace was introduced. And in P, 395. He says, The Death that Mankind are the Subjects of now, stands under the Covenant of Grace. And in P. 396. In the Counsel and Appointment of God, it stood in this very Light, even before the Sentence of Death was pronounced upon Adam; and consequently Death is no proper and legal Punishment of S…. And he often insists, that it comes only as a Favour & Benefit: and standing, as he says, under the Covenant of Grace, which is by Christ, therefore is truly one of the Benefits of the new Covenant, which comes by Christ, the second Adam. For he himself … in it, to use his own Words,**Key Chap. x. Title. That all the Grace of the Gospel is dispensed to us IN, BY or THROUGH the Son of God. Nothing is clearer (says he ††Key §. 119.) from the whole Current of Scripture, than that all the Mercy and Love of God, and all the Blessings of the Gospel, from first to last,—are IN, BY and THROUGH Christ, and particularly by his Blood, by the Redemption that is in him.—This (says he) can bear no Dispute among Christians. What then becomes of all this Discourse of the Apostle's about the great Difference and Opposition between Adam and Christ; as Death is by one, and eternal Life & Happiness by the other? This grand Distinction between the two Adams, and all the other Instances of Opposition and p. 248Difference, here insisted on, as between the Effects of Sin and Righteousness, the Consequences of Obedience and Disobedience, of the Offence and the free Gift, Judgment and Grace, Condemnation and Justification, they all come to Nothing: And this whole Discourse of the Apostle's wherein he seems to labour much, as if it were to set forth some very grand and most important Distinctions and Oppositions in the State of Things, as derived from the two great Heads of Mankind, proves nothing but a Multitude of Words without Meaning, or rather an Heap of Incon…i…ences.

V. Our Author's own Doctrine …ntirely makes void what he supposes to be the Apostle's Argument in the 13th and 14th Verses; in these Words, For until the Law Sin was in the World: but Sin is not imputed, where there is no Law. Nevertheless Death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the Similitude of Adam's Transgression.

What he supposes the Apostle would prove here, is, that Death or the Mortality of Mankind comes only by Adam's Sin, and not by Men's personal Sins; and that it is here proved by this Argument, viz. Because there was no Law, threatning Death to Adam's Posterity for personal Sins, before the Law of Moses; but Death or Mortality of Adam's Posterity took Place many Ages before the Law was given; therefore Death could not be by any Law threatning Death for personal Sins, and consequently could be by Nothing but Adam's Sin. **P. 40, 41, 42, 57, and often elsewhere.On this I would observe,

1. That which he supposes the Apostle to take for a Truth in this Argument, viz. That there was no Law of God in Being, by which Men were exposed to Death for personal Sin, during the Time from Adam to Moses, is neither true, nor agreable to this Apostle's own Doctrine.

p. 249First, It is not true. For the Law of Nature, writ… in Men's Hearts, was then in Being, and was a Law by which Men were exposed to Death for personal Sin. That there was a divine Establishment, fixing the Death and Destruction of the … as the Consequences of personal Sin, which was well known before the giving of Moses's Law, is plain by many Passages in the Book of Job; as fully and clearly implying a Connection between such Sin and such a Punishment, as any Passage in the Law of Moses: such as that in Job xxiv.19. Drought and Heat consume the Snow-Waters; so d…th the Grave them that have sinned (compare ver. 20 & 24.) Also Chap. xxxvi. 6. He … not the Life of the Wicked. Chap. xxi. 29,—32. Have ye not asked them that go by the Way? and do ye not know their Tokens? That the Wicked is reserved to the Day of Destruction; They shall be brought forth to the Day of Wrath.—ver. 31. He shall be brought to the Grave.**See also Job iv. 7, 8, 9. Chap. xv. 17,—35. Chap. xviii. …,—21. and xix. 2…. and xx. 4,—8. and ver. 23,—29. Chap. xxi. 16,—18, 20,—26. & xxii. 13,—20. xxvii. 11. to the End. xxxi. 2, 3, 23. xxxiii. 18, 22, 23, 24, 28, 30. xxxiv. 11, 21,—26. xxxvii. 12, 18, 19, 20. & xx…viii. 13, 14.Job 4:7Job 4:8Job 4:9

Secondly, To suppose that there is no Law in Being, by which Men are exposed to Death for personal Sins, where or when the revealed Law of God in or after Moses's Time is not in Being, is contrary to this Apostle's own Doctrine in this Epistle. Rom. ii. 12,14,15. For as many as have sinned without Law (i. e. the … Law) shall perish without Law. But how they … be exposed to die and perish, who have not the Law of Moses, … any reveal'd Law, the Apostle shews us in the 14th & 15th Verses; viz. In that they have the Law of Nature, by which they fall under Sentence to this Punishment. For when the Gentiles which have not the Law, do by Nature the Things contain'd in the Law, these having not the Law, are a Law to themselves; which shew the Work of the p. 250Law written in their Hearts; their Conscience also …earing Witness—Their Conscience not only bore Witness to the Duty prescribed by this Law, but also to the Punishment before spoken of, … that which they who …in'd without Law, were liable to suffer, viz. that they should perish. In which the Apostle is yet more express, Chap. i. 32. speaking more especially of the Heathen, Wh… knowing the Judgment of God, that they which commit such Things are worthy of Death.—Dr. T. often calls the Law the Rule of Right: and this Rule of Right sentenced those Sinners to Death, who were not under the Law of Moses, according to this Author's own …araphra…e of this Verse, in these Words, The Heathen were not ignorant of the Rule of Right, which God has implanted in the human Nature; and which sh…ws that they which commit such Things, are deserving of Death. And he himself supposes Abraham, who lived between Adam and Moses, to be under Law, by which he would have been exposed to Punishment without Hope, were it not for the Promise of Grace,—in his Paraphrase on Rom. iv. 15.

So that in our Author's Way of explaining the Passage before us, the grand Arg…t, which the Apostle insists upon here, to prove his main Point viz. that D…th don't come by Men's personal Sins, but by Adam's Sin, because it came before the Law was given, that threaten'd Death for Personal Sin; I say, this Argument which Dr. T. supposes so clear and strong, **P. 393.is brought to Nothing more than a meer Shadow without Substance; the very Foundation of the Argument having no Truth. To say, there was no such Law actually express'd in any standing Revelation, would be meer Trifling: For it no more appears, that God would not bring temporal Death for personal Sins, without a standing revealed Law threatning it, than that he would not bring eternal Death before there was a revealed Law threatning that: which yet wicked Men that lived in Noah's Time, were exposed to, as appears by p. 2511 Pet. iii. 19, 20. and which Dr. T. supposes all Mankind are exposed to by their personal Sins; and he himself says,**P. 77, 78. Sin in it's own unalterable Nature leads to Death.—Yet, it might be argued with as much Strength of Reason, that God could bring an Men no Punishment at all for any Sin, that was committed from Adam to Moses, because there was no standing revealed Law then extant, threatning any Punishment. It may here be properly observed, that our Author supposes, the shortening of Man's Days, and hastening-of Death, entered into the World by the Sin of the Antedi…vians, in the same Sense as Death and Mortality entered into the World by Adam's Sin. ††P. 68.But where was there any standing revealed Law for that, th… the Event was so universal? If God might bring this on all Mankind, on Occasion of other Men's Sins, for which they deserved Nothing, without a revealed Law, what could there be to hinder God's bringing Death on Men for their personal Sins, for which their own Consciences tell 'em they do deserve Death, without a revealed Law?

2. If it had been so, that from Adam to Moses there had been no Law in Being, of any Kind, revealed or natural by which Men could be properly exposed to temporal Death for personal Sin, yet the Mention of Moses's Law would have been wholly, impertinent, and of no Signification in the Argument, according to our Author's understanding of it. He supposes, what the Apostle would prove, is, that temporal Death, or the Death we now die, comes by Adam; and not by any Law threatening such a Punishment for personal Sin; because this Death prevail'd before the Law of Moses was in Being, which is the only Law threatning Death for personal Sin. And yet he himself supposes, that the Law of Moses, when it was in Being, threatened no such Death for personal Sin. For he abundantly asserts, that the Death which the Law of Moses threatned for personal Sin, was eternal Death, as has been already noted: And he says in express Terms, that p. 252eternal Death is of a Nature widely different from the Death we now die; **P. 396. He says to the like Purpose in his Note on Rom. v. 17.Rom 5:17as was also observed before.

How impertinently therefore does Dr. T. make an inspired Writer argue, when according to him the Apostle would prove, that this Kind of Death did not come by any Law threatening this Kind of Death, because it came before the Existence of a Law threatning another Kind of Death, of a Nature widely different? How is it to the Apostle's Purpose, to fix on that Period, the Time of giving Moses's Law, as if that had been the Period wherein Men began to be threaten'd with this Punishment, for their personal Sins, when in Truth it was no such Thing? And therefore it was no more to his Purpose, to fix on that Period, from Adam to Moses, than from Adam to David, or any other Period whatsoever. Dr. T. holds, that even now, since the Law of Moses has been given, the Mortality of Mankind, or the Death we now die, don't come by that Law; but that it always comes only by Adam. ††This is plain by what he says, P. 38, 40, 53, 393.And if it never comes by that Law, we may be sure it never was threatned in that Law.

3. If we should allow the Argument in Dr. T—r's Sense of it, to prove that Death don't come by personal Sin, yet it will be wholly without Force to prove the main Point, even that it must come by Adam's Sin. For it might come by God's sovereign and gracious Pleasure; as innumerable other divine Benefits do. If it be ordered, agreable to our Author's Supposition, not as a Punishment, nor as a Calamity, but only a Favour, what Necessity of any settled Constitution, or revealed Sentence, in order to the bestowing such a Favour, more than other Favours; and particularly more than that great Benefit, which he says entred into the World by the Sin of the Antediluvians, the shortening Men's Lives so much after the Flood?—Thus the Apostle's arguing, by Dr. T—r's Explanation of it, is turned into meer Trifling, and a vain and impertinent Use of Words, without any real Force or Significance.

p. 253VI. The Apostle here speaks of that great Benefit, which we have by Christ as the A…itype of Adam, under the Notion of a Fruit of GRACE. I don't … that Super-abounding of Grace, wherein the Benefit we have by Christ goes beyond the Damage … by Adam; but that Benefit, with Regard to which Adam was the Figure of him that was to come, and which is as it were the Counterpart of the Suffering by Adam, and which repairs the Loss we have by him. This is here spoken of … the Fruit of the free Grace of God; as appears by v. 1…, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21. This, according to our … the Restoring of Mankind to that Life which they loss in Adam: and he himself supposes this Restoration of Life by Christ to be what Grace does for us, and calls it the Free Gift of God, and the Grace & Favour of the Lawgiver. **P. 39, 40, 70, 148, 393. See also Contents of this Paragraph in Rom. v. In his Notes on the Epistle, and his Note on ver. 15, 16, 17.Rom 5And speaking of this Restoration, he breaks out in Admiration of the unspeakable Ric…s of this … ▪‖‖P. 395.

But it follows from his Doctrine, that there is NO Grace at all in this Benefit, and it is no more … a … Act of Justice, being only a removing of what Mankind suffer, being innocent. Death, as it commonly comes on Mankind, and even on Infants (as has been observed) in an extreme positive Calamity; to bring which on the … innocent, unremedied, and without any thing to … it, we are sufficiently taught, is not … with the Righteousness of the Judge of all the Earth. What Grace therefore, worthy of being so celebrated, would there be in affording Remedy and Relief, after there had been brought on innocent Mankind that which is (as Dr. T. himself represents**69.) the dreadful and universal D… struction of their Nature; being a striking Demonstration how infinitely odious Sin is to God! What Grace in delivering, from such shocking Ruin, them that did not deserve the least Calamity! Our Author says, We could not justly lose Communion with God by Adam's Sin. p. 254††P. 148.If so, then we could not justly lose our Lives, and be an…hil…t…d, after a Course of extreme Pains and Agonies of Body and Mind, without any Restoration; which would be on eternal Loss of Communion with God, and all other Good, besides the positive Suffering. The Apostle, thrô… this Passage, represents the Death, which is the Conseque…c… of Adam's Transgression, as coming in a Way of Judgment and Condemnation for Sin: but Deliverance and Life through Christ, as by Grace, and the free Gift of God. Whereas, on the contrary, by Dr.T—r's Scheme, the Death that comes by Adam, comes by Grace, great Grace; is being a great Benefit, ordered in fatherly Love & Kindness, and on the foot of a Covenant of Grace! But in the Deliverance & Restoration by Christ, there is no Grace at all. So things are turned topsy-turvy, the Apostle's Scope and Scheme intirely inverted and confounded.

VII. Dr. T. explains the Words, Judgment, Condem…ion, Justification, and Righteousness, as used in this … in a very unreasonable Manner.

I will first consider the Sense he puts upon the two for…r, Judgment and Condemnation. He often calls this Condemnation a judicial Act, and a Sentence of Condem…tion▪ But, according to his Scheme, 'tis a judicial … of Condemnation pass'd upon them that are perfectly innocent, and view'd by the Judge, even in his passing the Sentence & condemning them, as having no Guilt of Sin, or Fault at all chargeable upon them; and a judicial Proceeding, passing Sentence arbitrarily, without any Law or Rule of Right, before established: For there was no pre…ding Law or Rule threatning Death, that he, or any one else, ever pretended to have been established, but only this, In the Day that thou …atest thereof, thou shalt surely die. And concerning this, be insists, that there is not a Word said in it of Adam's Posterity. So that the Condemnation spoken of, it a Sentence of Condemnation to Death, for, or in Consequence of the Sin of Adam, without any Law, by which that Sin could be imputed, to bring any such Consequence; contrary to the Apostle's plain p. 255Scope. And not only so, but over and above all this, 'tis a judicial Sentence of Condemnation to that which is no Calamity, nor is considered as such in the Sentence: but 'tis Condemnation to a great Favour!

The Apostle uses the Words, Judgment and Condemnation, in other Places; they are no strange and unusual Terms with him: But never are they used by him in this Sense, or any like it; Nor are they ever used thus any where else in the New-Testament. This Apostle elsewhere in this Epistle to the Roman's is often speaking of Condemnation; using the same or similar Terms & Phrases, as here; but never in the above said Sense. Chap. ii. 1, 2, 3. Six Times in these Verses; also v. 12 & 27. and Chap. iii. 7. Chap. viii. 1 & 3. Chap. xiv. 3, 4. & v. 10. v. 13. v. 22, & 23. This will be plain to every one that casts his Eye on these Places. And if we look into the former Part of this Chapter, the Apostle's Discourse here … it evident, that he is here speaking of a Condemnation, that is no Testimony of Favour to the innocent; but of God's Displeasure, towards those that he is not reconciled to, but looks on as Offenders, Sinners, and Enemies, and … as the Objects of his Wrath, which we are delivered from by Christ; as may be seen in Verses 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 & 11.

And viewing this Discourse it self, in the very Paragraph we are upon, if we may judge any thing by Language and manner of Speaking, there is every thing to lead us to suppose, that the Apostle uses these Words here, as he does elsewhere, properly, and as implying a Supposition of Sin, chargeable on the Subject, and exposing to Punishment. He speaks of Condemnation with reference to Sin, as what comes by Sin, and as a Condemnation to Death, which seems to be a most terrible Evil, and capital Punishment, even in what is temporal and visible; and this in the Way of Judgment and Execution of Justice, in Opposition to Grace or Favour, and Gift or a Benefit coming by Favour. And Sin and Offence, Transgression and Disobedience are, over and over again, spoken of as the Ground of the Condemnation and of the capital Suffering p. 256condemned to,—for ten Verses successively, that is, in every Verse in the whole Paragraph, without missing one.

The Words, Justification and Righteousness, are explained by Dr. T. in a no less unreasonable Manner. He understands Justification in v. 18th, and Righteousness in v. 19th,—in such a Sense, as to suppose 'em to belong to all, and actually to be applied to all Mankind, good and bad, Believers & Unbelievers; to the worst Enemies of God, remaining such, as well as his peculiar Favourites, & many that never had any Sin imputed to 'em; meaning thereby no more than what is fulfilled in an universal Resurrection from the Dead, at the last Day.**So P. 47. 49, 49, 60, 61, 62, and other Places. Now this is a most arbitrary, forced Sense. Th… these Terms are used every where, all over the New Testament, yet nothing like such an Use of 'em is to be found, in any one Instance, thro' all the Writings of the Apostles & Evangelists. The Words, Justify, Justification, and Righteousness, as from God to Men, are never used but to signify a Privilege belonging only to some, and that which is peculiar to distinguished Favourites. This Apostle in particular, above all the other Writers of the new Testament, abounds in the Use of these Terms; so that we have all imaginable Opportunity to understand his Language, and know the Sense in which he uses these Words: But he never elsewhere uses 'em in the Sense supposed here, nor is there any Pretence that he does. Above all, does this Apostle … in the Use of these Terms in this Epistle. JUSTIFICATION is the Subject he had been upon through all the pr…c…ding Part of the Epistle. It was the grand Subject of all the foregoing Chapters, and the preceeding Part of this Chapter; where these Terms are continually repeated. And the Word, Justification, is constantly used to signify something peculiar to Believers, who had been Sinners; implying some Reconciliation and Forgiveness of Sin, and special Privilege in Nearness to God, above the rest of the World. Yea, the Word is constantly used thus, according p. 257to Dr. T—r's own Explanations, in his Paraphrase and Notes on this Epistle. And there is not the least Reason to suppose but that he is still speaking of the same Justification and Righteousness, which he had dwelt upon from the Beginning, to this Place. He speaks of Justification and Righteousness here, just in the same Manner, as he had done in the preceeding Part of the Epistle. He had all along spoken of Justification as standing in Relation to Sin, Disobedience to God, and Offence against God, and so he does here: He had before been speaking of Justification thro' free Grace, and so he does here: He before had been speaking of Justification through Righteousness, as in Christ Jesus, and so he does here.

And if we look into the former Part of this very Chapter, there we shall find Justification spoken of just in the same Sense as in the rest of the Epistle; which is also supposed by our Author in his Exposition: 'Tis still Justification by Faith, Justification of them that had been Sinners, Justification attended with Reconciliation, Justification peculiar to them that had the Love of God shed abroad in their Hearts. The Apostle's foregoing Discourse on Justification by Grace, through Faith, and what he had so greatly insisted on as the Evidence of the Truth of this Doctrine, even the universal Sinfulness of Mankind in their original State, is plainly what introduces this Discourse in the latter Part of this 5th Chapter; where he shews how all Mankind came to be sinful and miserable, and so to need this Grace of God, and Righteousness of Christ. And therefore we can't without the most absurd Violence, suppose any other than that he is still speak in; of the same Justification.

And as to the universal Expression used in the 18th v. By the Righteousness of one, the free Gift came upon ALL MEN to Justification of Life; 'tis needless here to go into the Controversy between the Remonstrants and Anti-remonstrants, concerning universal Redemption, and their different Interpretations of this Place. If we take the Words even as the Arminians do; yet, in their Sense p. 258of them, the free Gift comes on all Men to Justification only Conditionally, i. e. provided they believe, repent, &c. But in our Author's Sense, it actually comes on all, whether they believe and repent, or not; which certainly can't be infer'd from the universal Expression, as here used. Dr. T. himself supposes, the main Design of the Apostle in this universal Phrase, All Men, is to signify, that the Benefits of Christ shall come on Gentiles, as well as Jews. **P. 60, 61. See also Contents of this Paragraph, in his Notes on the Epistle.And he supposes, that the Many, and the All, here signify the same: But 'tis quite certain, that all the Benefits here spoken of, which the Apostle says are to the many, don't actually come upon all Mankind; as particularly the abounding of Grace, spoken of v. 18th. The Grace of God, and the Gift by Grace, hath abounded unto the many, foreign.

This abounding of Grace our Author explains thus; The rich Overplus of Grace, in erecting a new Dispensation, furnished with a glorious Fund of Light, Means and Motives. But will any pretend, that all Mankind have actually been Partakers of this new Fund of Light,&c? How were the many Millions of Indians, on the American Side of the Globe, Partakers of it, before the Europeans came hither? Yea, Dr. T. himself supposes, all that is meant, is, that it is free for all that are willing to accept of it. ††Id. Ibid.The Agreement between Adam as the Type or Figure of him that was to come, and Christ as the Antitype, appears as full and clear, if we suppose, ALL which are IN CHRIST (to use the common ScripturePhrase) have the Benefit of his Obedience, as ALL that are IN ADAM have the sorrowful Fruit of his Disobedience. The Scripture speaks of Believers as the Seed or Posterity of Christ. (Gal. iii. 29.) They are in Christ by Grace, as Adam's Posterity are in him by Nature: The one are in the first Adam naturally, as the other are in the second Adam spiritually: exactly agreable to the Representation this Apostle makes of the Matter, 1 Cor. xv.45,—49. The spiritual p. 259Seed are those which this Apostle often represents as Christ's Body: And the foreign here spoken of as made righteous by Christ's Obedience, are doubtless the same with the foreign which he speaks of in Chap. xii. 5. We, being many, are one Body; or, We, the many, foreign. And again, 1 Cor. x. 17. foreign. And the same which the Apostle had spoken of in the preceeding Chapter, Rom. iv. 18. compared with Gen. xv. 5.

Dr. T. much insists on that Place, 1 Cor. xv. 21, 22. For since by Man came Death, by Man came also the Resurrection of the Dead: For as in Adam all die, so in Christ shall all be made alive; to confirm his Suppositions, that the Apostle here in the 5th of Romans, speaking of the Death & Condemnation which come by Adam, has respect only to the Death we all die, when this Life ends: And that by the Justification and Life which come by Christ, he has respect only to the general Resurrection at the last Day. But it is observable, that his Argument is wholly built on these two Suppositions, viz. First, that the Resurrection meant by the Apostle, in that Place in the 1 Cor. xv. is the Resurrection of all Mankind, both just and unjust. Secondly, That the Opposite Consequences of Adam's Sin, and Christ's Obedience, spoken of here in Rom. 5th, are the very same, neither more nor less, as are spoken of there. But there are no Grounds for supposing either of these things to be true.

1. There is no Evidence, that the Resurrection there spoken of, is the Resurrection both of the Just & Unjust; but abundant Evidence of the contrary. The Resurrection of the Wicked is seldom mention'd in the New Testament, and rarely included in the Meaning of the Word; it being esteemed not worthy to be called a Rising to Life, being only for a great Increase of the Misery and Darkness of eternal Death: And therefore by the Resurrection is most commonly meant a Rising to Life and Happiness; as may be observed in Matth. xxii. 30. Luk. xx. 35, 36. Joh. vi. 39, 40, 54. Philip. iii. 11. and other Places. The Saints are called the Children of the Resurrection, as p. 260Dr. T. observes in his Note on Rom. viii. 11. And 'tis exceeding evident, that 'tis the Resurrection to Life and Happiness, the Apostle is speaking of in this 1 Cor. xv. 2…, 22. It appears by each of the three foregoing Verses. v. 18. Then they which are fallen asleep IN CHRIST (i. e. the Saints) are perished. v 19. If in this Life only WE (Christians or Apostles) have Hope in Christ, (and have no Resurrection and eternal Life to hope for) we are of all Men most miserable.—v.20.But now is Christ risen from the Dead, and is become the FIRST FRUITS of them that slept. He is the Forerunner and first Fruits only with respect to them that are his; who are to follow him, and partake with him in the Glory and Happiness of his Resurrection: but He is not the first Fruits of them who shall come forth to the Resurrection of Damnation. It also appears by the Verse immediately following. v. 23. But every Man in his own Order; Christ the first Fruits, and afterwards, they that are Christ's, at his Coming. The same is plain by what is said in v. 29, 30, 31, & 32; and by all that is said from the 35th v. to the End of the Chapter, for twenty three Verses together: It there expresly appears, that the Apostle is speaking only of a Rising to Glory, with a glorious Body, as the little Grain that is sown, being quickened, rises a beautiful flourishing Plant. He there speaks of the different Degrees of Glory among them that shall r…se, and compares it to the different Degrees of Glory among the celestial Luminaries. The Resurrection which he treats of, is expresly a being raised in Incorruption, in Glory, in Power, with a spiritual Body, having the Image of the second Man, the spiritual and heavenly Adam; a Resurrection, wherein this corruptible shall put on Incorruption, & this Mortal put on Immortality, and Death be swallowed up in Victory, and the Saints shall gloriously triumph over that last Enemy. Dr. T. himself says that which is in Effect owning, the Resurrection here spoken of, is only of the Righteous: for 'tis expresly a Resurrection foreign and foreign v. 53, and 42. But Dr.T. says▪ These are never attributed to the Wicked, in Scripture. p. 261**Note on Rom. viii. 28.Rom 8:28So that when the Apostle says here, As in Adam all die, so in Christ shall all be made alive; 'tis as much as if he had said, As in Adam we all die, and our Bodies are sown in Corruption, in Dishonour, and in Weakness; so in Christ we all (we Christians, whom I have been all along speaking of) shall be raised in Power, Glory and Incorruption, spiritual and heavenly, conformed to the second Adam. For as we have born the Image of the earthy, we shall also bear the Image of the heavenly.v.49. Which clearly explains and determines his Meaning in v. 21, 22.

2. There is no Evidence, that the Benefit by the second Adam, spoken of in Rom. 5th, is the very same (containing neither more nor less) as the Resurrection spoken of in 1 Cor. xv. It is no Evidence of it, that the Benefit is opposed to the Death that comes by the first Adam, in like Manner in both Places. The Resurrection to eternal Life, th… it be not the whole of that Salvation and Happiness which comes by the second Adam, yet is it that wherein this Salvation is principally obtained. The Time of the Saints glorious Resurrection is often spoken of as the proper Time of the Saints Salvation, The Day of their Redemption, The Time of their Adoption, Glory and Recompence. (As, in Eph. iv. 30. Rom. viii. 23. Luk. xiv. 14. & xxi. 28. 2 Tim. iv. 1, 9. Colos. iii. 4. 1 Thes. i. 7. Heb. ix. 23. 1 Pet. i. 13. & v. 4. 1 Joh. iii. 2. and other Places.) All that Salvation and Happiness which is given before, is only a Prelibation and Earnest of their great Reward. Well therefore may that consummate Salvation bestowed on them be set in Opposition to the Death and Ruin which comes by the first Adam, in like Manner as the whole of their Salvation is opposed to the same in Rom. v.—Dr.T. himself observes ††Note on Rom. viii. 11.Rom 8:11, That the Revival and Resurrection of the Body, is frequently put for our Advancement to eternal Life. It being the highest Part, 'tis often put for the Whole.

p. 262This Notion, as if the Justification, Righteousness and Life spoken of in Rom. 5th, imply'd the Resurrection to …, is not only without Ground from Scripture, but contrary to Reason. For those Things are there spoken of as great Benefits, by the Grace and free Gift of God: but this is the contrary, in the highest Degree possible, being the most consummate and infinite Calamity.—To obviate this, our Author supposes the Resurrection of all to be a great Benefit in it self, thô turned into a Calamity by the Sin and Folly of obstinate Sinners, who abuse God's Goodness. But the far greater Part of Mankind since Adam have never had Opportunity to abu…e this Goodness, it having never been made known to them. Men can't abuse a Kindness, which they never had either in Possession, Promise, Offer, or some Intimation: But a Resurrection is made known only by divine Revelation; which few comparatively have enjoyed. So that as to such wicked Men as die in Lands of Darkness, if their Resurrection comes at all by Christ, it comes, from him and to them, only as a Curse, and not as a Blessing; for it never comes to them at all by any Conveyance, Grant, Promise, or Offer, or any thing by which they can claim it, or know any thing of it, till it comes as an infinite Calamity, past all Remedy.

VIII. In a peculiar Manner is there an unreasonable Violence used in our Author's Explanation of the Words Sinners and sinned, in the Paragraph before us. He says, These Words, By one Man's Disobedience, many were made Sinners, mean neither more nor less, than that by one Man's Disobedience the Many were made subject to Death, by the judicial Act of God. **P. 30.And he says in the same Place, By Death, most certainly, is meant no other than the Death & Mortality common to all Mankind. And those Words, v. 12. For that all have sinned, he thus explains, All Men became Sinners, as all Mankind are brought into a State of Suffering. ††P. 54. and elsewhere.Here I observe,

p. 2631. The main Thing, by which he justifies such Interpretations, is, that Sin, in various Instances, is used for Suffering, in the old Testament. To which I reply▪ Tho' it be true, that the Word Chattaah, signifies both Sin, and a Sin-offering; and this, and some other Hebrew Words, which signify Sin, Iniquity, & Wickedness, are sometimes put for the Effect or Punishment of Iniquity, by a M… tonymy of the Cause for the Effect; yet it does not appear, that these Words are ever used for enduring Suffering, where the Suffering is not spoken of under any Notion of a Punishment of Sin, or a Fruit of God's Anger for Sin, or of any Imputation of Guilt, or under any Notion of Sin's being at all laid to the Charge of the Sufferer, or the Suffering's being at all of the Nature of any Recompence, Compensation or Satisfaction for Sin. And therefore none of the Instances he mentions, come up to his Purpose. When Let is commanded to leave Sodom, that he might not be consumed in the Iniquity of the City, meaning, in that Fire, which is the Effect and Punishment of the Iniquity of the City; this is quite another Thing, than if that Fire came on the City in general as no Punishment at all, nor as any Fruit of a Charge of Iniquity on the City, or of God's Displeasure for their Sin, but as a Token of God's Favour to the Inhabitants; Which is what is supposed with respect to the Death of Mankind; it being introduced only as a Benefit, on the Foot of a Covenant of Grace. And especially is this quite another Thing, than if, in the Expression used, the Iniquity had been ascribed to Lot; and God, instead of saying, Lest thou be consumed in the Iniquity of the City, had said, Lest thou be consumed in thine Iniquity, or, Lest thou Sin, or be made a Sinner. Whereas, the Expression is such as does expr…ly remove the Iniquity, spoken of, from Lot, and fix it on another Subject, viz. the City. The Place cited by our Author, in Jer. li.—is exactly Parallel. And as to what Abimeleck says to Abraham, What have I offended thee, that thou hast brought on me, and on my Kingdom, a great Sin? 'Tis manifest, Abimeleck was afraid, that God was angry, p. 264for what he had done to Sarah or; would have been angry with him, if he had done what he was about to do, as imputing Sin to him for it: which is a quite different Thing from calling some Calamity, Sin, under no Notion of it's being any Punishment of Sin, nor in the least Degree from God's Displeasure. And so with regard to every Place our Author cites in the Margin, 'tis plain, that what is meant in each of them, is the Punishment of Sin, and not some Suffering which is no Punishment at all. And as to the Instances he mentions in his Supplement, P. 184. the Two that look most favourable to his Design, are those in Gen. xxxi. 39. & 2 Kin. vii. 9.—With respect to the former, where Jacob says, That which was torn of Beasts, A…ochi a…hattenah—Which Dr. T. is pleased to translate, I was the Sinner: but is properly render'd, I expiated it; the Verb in Pihel properly signifying to expiate. And the plain Meaning is I bore the Blame of it, and was obliged to pay for it, as being supposed to be lost thrô my Fault or Neglect. Which is a quite different Thing from Suffering without any Supposition of Fault. And as to the latter Place, where the Lepers say, This Day is a Day of good Tidings, and we hold our Peace: If we tarry till Morning some Mischief will befal us. In the Hebrew, Umetzaanu gnaon;—Iniquity will find us, that is, Some Punishment of our Fault will come upon us. Elsewhere such Phrases are used, as, Your Iniquity will find you out, and the like. But certainly this is a different Thing from suffering without Fault, or Supposition of Fault. And it does not appear, that the Verb in Hiphil, Hirshiang, is ever put for condemn in any other Sense than condemning for Sin, or Guilt, or supposed Guilt, belonging to the Subject condemned. This Word is used, in the Participle of Hiphil, to signify condemning, in Prov. xvii. 15. He that justifieth the Wicked, and he that condemneth the Just, even both are an Abomination to the Lord. This Dr. T. observes, as if it were to his Purpose, when he is endeavouring to shew, that in this Place in the 5th of Romans, the Apostle speaks of God Himself as condemning the just, or perfectly p. 265innocent, in a Parallel-Signification of Terms. Nor is any Instance produced, wherein the Verb, Sin, which is used by the Apostle when he says, All have sinned, is any where used in our Author's Sense, for being brought into a State of Suffering, and that not as a Punishment for Sin, or as any Thing arising from God's Displeasure; much less for being the Subject of what comes only as the Fruit of divine Love, and as a Favour of the HIGHEST NATURE.**P. 303. Nor can any thing like this Sense of the Verb be found in the whole Bible.

2. If there had been any thing like such an Use of the Words, Sin and Sinner, as our Author supposes, in the old Testament, 'tis evident that such as Use of them is quite aliene from the Language of the New Testament. Where can an Instance be produced, of any thing like it, in any one Place, besides what is pretended in this? And particularly, Where else shall we find these Words & Phrases used in such a Sense, in any of this Apostle's Writings? We have enough of his Writings, by which to learn his Language and Way of speaking about Sin, Condemnation, Punishment, Death and Suffering. He wrote much more of the New Testament, than any other Person. He very often has Occasion to speak of Condemnation; but where does he express it by being made Sinners? Especially how far is he elsewhere from using such a Phrase, to signify a being condemned without Guilt, or any Imputation or Supposition of Guilt, or Atonement for Guilt? Vastly more still is it remote from his Language, so to use the Verb Sin, and to say, Man sinneth, or has sinned, tho' hereby meaning Nothing more nor less, than that he, by a judicial Act, is condemned, on the Foot of a Dispensation of Grace, to receive a great Favour! He abundantly uses the Words, Sin and Sinner; his Writings are full of such Terms: but where else does he use them in such a Sense? He has much Occasion in his Epistles to speak of Death, temporal and eternal; He has much Occasion to speak of p. 266Suffering, of all Kinds, in this World, and the World to come: But where does he call those things Sin? and denominate innocent Men Sinners? or say, They have sinned, meaning that they are brought into a State of Suffering? If the Apostle, because he was a Jew, … …o addic…ed to the Hebrew Idiom, as thus is one Paragraph to repeat this particular Hebraism, which, at most, it comparatively rare even in the old Testament, 'tis strange that never any thing like it should appear any where else in his Writings; and especially that he should never fa…l into such a Way of speaking in his Epistle to the Hebrews, written to Jews only, who were most used to the Hebrew Idiom. And why does Christ never use such Language in any of his Speeches, tho' he was born and brought up amongst the Jews, and delivered almost all his Speeches only to Jews?—And why do none of the rest of the Writers of the New Testament ever use it, who were all born and educated Jews (at least all excepting Luke) and some of them wrote especially for the Benefit of the Jews?

'Tis worthy to be observed, what Liberty is taken, and Boldness used with this Apostle; such Words as foreign and Words of the same Root & Signification, are Words abundantly used by him elsewhere in this and other Epistles, and also when speaking, as he is here, of Christ's Redemption & Atonement, and of the general Sinfulness of Mankind, and of the Condemnation of Sinners, & of Justification by Christ, and of Death as the Consequence of Sin, and of Life and Restoration to Life by Christ, as here; yet no where are any of these Words used, but in a Sense very remote from what is supposed here. However, in this Place these Terms must have a distinguished singular Sense found out for them, and annexed to 'em! A new Language must be coin'd for the Apostle, which he is evidently quite unused to, and put into his Mouth on this Occasion, for the sake of evading this clear, precise and abundant Testimony of his, to the Doctrine of original Sin.

p. 2673. The putting such a Sense on the Word, Sin, in this Place, is not only to make the Apostle greatly to disagree with himself in the Language he uses every where else, but also to disagree with himself no less in the Language he uses in this very Passage. He often here used the Word Sin, and other Words plainly of the same Design and Import, such as Transgression, Disobedience, Offence. Nothing can be more evident, than that these are here used as several Names of the same Thing; for they are used in…e… cha…ge…bly, and put one for another; as will be manifest only on the Cast of an Eye on the Place. And these Words are used no less than seventeen Times in this one Paragraph. Perhaps we shall find no Place in the whole Bible, in which the Word, Sin, and other Words synonymous, are used so often in so little Compass: and in all the Instances, in the proper Sense, as signifying moral Evil, and even so understood by Dr. T. himself (as appears by his own Exposition) but only in these two Places; where in the Midst of all, to evade a clear Evidence of the Doctrine of Original Sin, another Meaning must be found out, and it must be supposed that the Apostle uses the Word in a Sense …irely different, signifying something that neither implies nor supposes any moral Evil at all in the Subject.

Here 'tis very remarkable, the Gentleman who so greatly insisted upon it, that the Word, Death, must needs be understood in the same Sense throughout this Paragraph; yea, that it is evidently, clearly and infallibly so, in as much as the Apostle is still discoursing on the same Subject; yet can, without the least Difficulty, suppose the Word, Sin, to be used so differently in the very same Passage, wherein the Apostle is discoursing on the same Thing. Let us take that one Instance in v. 12. Wherefore as by one Man SIN enter'd into the World, and Death by SIN, and so Death passed upon all Men, for that all have SINNED. Here, by Sin, implied in the Word, sinned, in the End of the Sentence, our Author understands something perfectly and altogether diverse from what is meant by the Word Sin, not only in the same Discourse, on the same p. 268Subject, but twice in the former Part of the very same Sentence, of which this latter Part is not only the Conclusion, but the Explication: And also intirely different from the the Use of the Word twice in the next Sentence, wherein the Apostle is still most plainly discoursing on the same Subject, as is not denied: And in the next Sentence to that (v. 14.) the Apostle uses the very same Verb, sinned, and as signifying the committing of moral Evil, as our Author himself understands it. Afterwards (v. 19.) the Apostle uses the Word, Sinners, which our Author supposes to be in somewhat of a different Sense still. So that here is the utmost Violence, of the Kind, that can be conceived of, to make out a Scheme, against the plainest Evidence, in changing the Meaning of a Word, backward and forward, in one Paragraph, all about one Thing, and in different Parts of the same Sentences, coming over and over in quick-Repetitions, with a Variety of other synonymous Words to fix it's Signification; Besides the continued Use of the Word in the former Part of this Chapter, and in all the preceeding Part of this Epistle, and the continued Use of it in the next Chapter, and in the next to that, and the 8th Chapter following that, and to the End of the Epistle; in none of which Places is it pretended, but that the Word is used in the proper Sense, by our Author in his Paraphrase and Notes on the whole Epistle.**Ag…eable to this Manner, our Author in explaining the 7th Chap. of Romans, understands the Pronoun, I, or Me, used by the Apostle in that one continued Discourse, in no less than Six different Senses. He takes it in the 1st ver. to signify the Apostle Paul himself. In the & 9, 10, & 11th Verses, for the People of the Jews, thro' all Ages, both before & after Moses, especially the carnal ungodly Part of 'em. In the 13th ver. for an objecting Jew, entring into a Dialogue with the Apostle. In the 15, 16, 17, 20th, and latter Part of the 25th ver. it is understood in two different Senses, for two I's in the same Person; one, a Man's Reason; and the other, his Passions & carnal Appetites. And in the 7th & former Part of the last Verse, for Us Christians in general; or, for all that enjoy the Word of God, the Law and the Gospel. And these different Senses, the most of 'em, strangely intermixed and interchanged, backwards and forwards.

p. 269But indeed we need go no further than that one v. 12. What the Apostle means by Sin, in the latter Part of the Verse, is evident with the utmost Plainness, by comparing it with the former Part; one Part answering to another, and the last Clause exegetical of the former. Wherefore, as by one Man Sin enter'd into the World, and Death by Sin; and so Death passed upon all Men, for that (or, unto which) all have sinned. Here Sin and Death are spoken of in the former Part, & Sin & Death are spoken of in the latter Part; the two Parts of the Sentence so answering one another, that the same Things are apparently meant by Sin and Death in both Parts.

And besides to interpret sinning, here, of falling under the Suffering of Death, is yet the more violent & unreasonable, because the Apostle in this very Place does once and again distinguish between Sin and Death; plainly speaking of one as the Effect, and the other the Cause. So in the 21st v. That as Sin hath reigned unto Death; and in the 12th v. Sin enter'd into the World, and Death BY Sin. And this plain Distinction holds thrô all the Discourse, as between Death and the Offence, v. 15. and v. 17. and between the Offence and Condemnation,v. 18.

4. Thô we should omit the Consideration of the Manner in which the Apostle uses the Words, Sin, sinned, &c. in other Places, and in other Parts of this Discourse, yet Dr. T—r's Interpretation of 'em would be very absurd.

The Case stands thus:—According to his Exposition, we are said to have sinned, by an active Verb, as tho' we had actively sinned; yet this is not spoken truly and properly, but it is put figuratively for our becoming Sinners passively, our being made or constituted Sinners. Yet again, not that we do truly become Sinners passively, or are really made Sinners, by any thing that God does; this also is only a figurative or tropical Representation: And the Meaning is only, we are condemned, and treated AS IF we were Sinners. Not indeed that we are properly condemned; for God never truly condemns the Innocent: But this also is only a figurative Representation of the Thing. It is p. 270but as it were condemning; because it is appointing to Death, a terrible Evil, as if it were … Punishment. But then, in Reality, here is no Appointment to a terrible Evil, or any Evil at all; but truly to a Benefit, a great Benefit: And so, in representing Death as a Punishment, or Calamity condemned to, another Figure or Trope is made use of, and an exceeding bold one; for, as we are appointed to it, it is so far from being an Evil or Punishment, that it is really a Favour, and that of the highest Nature, appointed by meer Grace & Love; tho' it seems to be a Calamity.—Thus we have Tropes and Figures multiplied, one upon the back of another; and all in that one Word, sinned; according to the Manner, as it is supposed, the Apostle uses it. We have a …gurative Representation, not of a Reality, but of a figurative Representation. Neither is this a Representation of a Reality, but of another Thing that still is but a figurative Representation of something else: Yea, even this something else is still but a Figure, and one that is very harsh and far-fetch'd. So that here we have a Figure to represent a Figure, even a Figure of a Figure representing some very remote Figure, which most obscurely represents the Thing intended; if the most terrible Evil can indeed be said at all to represent the contrary Good, of the highest Kind.—And now, what cannot be made of any Place of Scripture, in such a Way of managing it, as this? And is there any Hope of ever deciding any Controversy by the Scripture, in the Way of using such a Licence with the Scripture, in order to force it to a Compliance with our own Schemes? If the Apostle indeed uses Language after so strange a Manner in this Place, 'tis perhaps such an Instance, as not only there is not the like of it in all the Bible besides, but perhaps in no Writing whatsoever.—And this, not in any parabolical, vi…ionary, or prophetic Description, in which difficult and obscure Representations are wont to be made Use of; nor in … dramatic or poetical Representation, in which a great Licence is often taken, and bold Figures are commonly to be expected: But 'tis in a familiar Letter, wherein the p. 271Apostle is delivering Gospel-Instruction, as a Minister of the New-Testament; and wherein, as he professes, he delivers divine Truth without the Vail of antient Figures and Similitudes, and uses great Plainness of Speech. And in a Discourse that is wholly didactic, narrative and arg…mentative; evidently setting himself to explain the Doctrine he is upon, in the Reason and Nature of it, with a great Variety of Expressions, turning it as it were on every Side, to make his Meaning plain, and to fix in his Readers the exact Notion of what he intends.—Dr. T. himself observes, **Pr…f. to Paraph. on Rom.This Apostle takes great Care to guard and explain every Part of his Subject: and I may venture to say, he has left no Part of it unexplained, or unguarded. Never was an Author more exact & cautious in this, than be. Sometimes he writes Notes, on a Sentence liable to Exception, and wanting Explanation.—Now I think, this Care and Exactness of the Apostle no where appears more than in the Place we are upon. Nay, I scarcely know another Instance equal to this, of the Apostle's Care to be well understood, by being very particular, explicit and precise, setting the Matter forth in every Light, going over and over again with his Doctrine, clearly to exhibit, and fully to settle and determine the Thing which he aims at.

SECT. II.

Some Observations on the Connection, Scope and Sense of this remarkable Paragraph in Rom. v.—With some Reflections on the Evidence, which we here have of the Doctrine of Original Sin.

THE Connection of this remarkable Paragraph with the foregoing Discourse in this Epistle, is not obscure and difficult; nor to be sought for at a Distance. It may be plainly seen, only by a general Glance on Things which went before, from the Beginning of the p. 272Epistle: And indeed what is said immediately before in the same Chapter, leads directly to it. The Apostle in the preceeding Part of this Epistle had largely treated of the Sinfulness and Misery of all Mankind, Jews, as well as Gentiles. He had particularly spoken of the Depravity and Ruin of Mankind in their natural State, in the foregoing Part of this Chapter; representing them as being Sinners, Ungodly, Enemies, exposed to divine Wrath, and without Strength.—No Wonder now, this leads him to observe, how this so great & deplorable an Event came to pass; how this universal Sin and Ruin came into the World. And with Regard to the Jews in particular, who, thô they might allow the Doctrine of original Sin in their own Profession, yet were strongly prejudiced against what was implied in it, or evidently following from it, with regard to themselves; in this respect they were prejudiced against the Doctrine of universal Sinfulness, and Exposedness to Wrath by Nature, looking on themselves as by Nature holy and Favourites of God, because they were the Children of Abraham; and with them the Apostle had laboured most in the foregoing Part of the Epistle, to convince them of their being by Nature as sinful, and as much the Children of Wrath, as the Gentiles:—I say, with Regard to them, it was exceeding proper, and what the Apostle's Design most naturally led him to, to take off their Eyes from their Father Abraham, who was their Father in Distinction from other Nations. and direct them to their Father Adam, who was the common Father of Mankind, and equally of Jews and Gentiles. And when he was enter'd on this Doctrine of the Derivation of Sin and Ruin, or Death, to all Mankind from Adam, no Wonder if he thought it needful to be somewhat particular in it, seeing he wrote to Jews and Gentiles; the former of which had been brought up under the Prejudices of a proud Opinion of themselves, as a holy People by Nature, and the latter had been educated in total Ignorance of all Things of this Kind.

p. 273Again, the Apostle had from the Beginning of the Epistle been endeavouring to evince the absolute Dependence of all Mankind on the free Grace of GOD for Salvation, and the Greatness of this Grace; and particularly in the former Part of this Chapter. The Greatness of this Grace he shews especially by two Things. (1) The universal Corruption and Misery of Mankind; as in all the foregoing Chapters, and in the 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 Verses of this Chapter.—(2.) The Greatness of the Benefits which Believers receive, and the Greatness of the Glory they have Hope of. So especially in ver. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, & 11th of this Chapter. And here, in this Place we are upon, from ver. 12, to the End, he is still on the same Design of magnifying the Grace of God, in the same Thing, viz. the Favour, Life and Happiness which Believers in Christ receive; speaking here of the Grace of God, the Gift by Grace, the Abounding of Grace, and the Reign of Grace. And he still sets forth the Freedom and Riches of Grace by the same two Arguments, viz. The universal Sinfulness and Ruin of Mankind, all having sinned, all naturally exposed to Death, Judgment & Condemnation; and the exceeding Greatness of the Benefit received,—being far greater than the Misery which comes by the first Adam,& abounding beyond it. And 'tis by no Means consistent with the Apostle's Scope, to suppose, that the Benefits which we have by Christ as the Antitype of Adam, here mainly insisted on, is without any Grace at all, being only a Restoration to Life, of such as never deserved Death.

Another Thing observable in the Apostle's Scope from the Beginning of the Epistle, is, he endeavours to …hew the Greatness and Absoluteness of the Dependence of all Mankind on the Redemption & Righteousness of CHRIST, for Justification and Life, that he might magnify & exalt the Redeemer: which Design his whole Heart was swallowed up in, and may be looked upon as the main Design of the whole Epistle. And this is what he had been upon in the preceeding Part of this Chapter; inferring it from the same Argument, the utter Sinfulness and Ruin of p. 274all Men. And he is evidently still on the same Thing in this Place, from the 12th v. to the End; speaking of the same Justification and Righteousness, which he had dwelt on before; and not another totally diverse. No Wonder, when the Apostle is treating so fully and largely of our Restoration, Righteousness and Life by Christ, that he is led by it to consider our Fall, Sin, Death and Ruin by Adam; and to observe wherein these two opposite Heads of Mankind agree, and wherein they differ, in the Manner of Conveyance of opposite Influences and Communications from Each.

Thus, if this Place be understood, as it used to be understood by orthodox Divines, the whole stands in a natural, easy and clear Connection with the preceeding Part of the Chapter, and all the former Part of the Epistle; and in a plain Agreement with the express Design of all that the Apostle had been saying; and also in Connection with the Words last before spoken, as introduced by the two immediately preceeding Verses, where he is speaking of our Justification, Reconciliation and Salvation by Christ; which leads the Apostle directly to observe, how, on the contrary, we have Sin and Death by Adam. Taking this Discourse of the Apostle in it's true and plain Sense, there is no Need of great Extent of Learning, or Depth of Criticism, to find out the Connection: But if it be understood in Dr. T—r's Sense, the plain Scope and Connection are wholly lost, and there was truly Need of a Skill in Criticism, and Art of Discerning, beyond, or at least different from that of former Divines, and a Faculty of seeing something afar of, which other Men's Sight could not reach, in order to find out the Connection.

What has been already observed, may suffice to shew the Apostle's general Scope in this Place. But yet there seem to be some other Things, which he has his Eye to, in several Expressions; some particular things in the thenpresent State, Temper and Notions of the Jews, which he also had before spoken of, or had Reference to, in certain Places of the foregoing Part of the Epistle. As particularly, p. 275the Jews had a very superstitious and extravagant Notion of their Law, deliver'd by Moses; as if it were the prime, grand, and indeed only Rule of God's Proceeding with Mankind, as their Judge, both in Men's Justification & Condemnation, or from whence all, both Sin and Righteousness, was imputed; and had no Consideration of the Law of Nature, written in the Hearts of the Gentiles, and of all Mankind. Herein they ascribed infinitely too much to their particular Law, beyond the true Design of it. They made their Boast of the Law; as if their being distinguished from all other Nations by that great Privilege, the giving of the Law, sufficiently made 'em a holy People, and God's Children. This Notion of theirs the Apostle evidently refers to, Chap. ii. 13, 17.—19. and indeed thro' that whole Chapter. They looked on the Law of Moses as intended to be the only Rule & Means of Justification; and as such, trusted in the Works of the Law, especially Circumcision: which appears by the iiid Chapter. But as for the Gentiles, they look'd on them as by Nature Sinners, and Children of Wrath; because born of uncircumcised Parents, and Aliens from their Law, and who themselves did not know, profess and submit to the Law of Moses, become Proselytes, and receive Circumcision. What they esteemed the Sum of their Wickedness and Condemnation was, that they did not turn Jews, and act as Jews. **Here are worthy to be observed the Things which Dr. T. himself says to the same Purpose, Key §. 270, 271. & Preface to Par. on Epist. to Rom. §. 43.This Notion of their's the Apostle has a plain Respect to, and endeavours to convince them of the Falseness of, in Chap. ii. 12,—16. And he has a manifest Regard again to the same Thing here, in the 12, 13, & 14th Verses of Chap. vth. Which may lead us the more clearly to see the true Sense of those Verses; about the Sense of which is the main Controversy, & the Meaning of which being determined, it will settle the Meaning of every other controverted Expressions through the whole Discourse.

p. 276Dr. T. misrepresents the Apostle's Argument in these Verses. (Which, as has been demonstrated, is in his Sense altogether vain and impertinent.) He supposes, the Thing which the Apostle mainly intends to prove, is, that Death or Mortality don't come on Mankind by personal Sin; and that he would prove it by this Medium, that Death reigned when there was no Law in Being, which threatned personal Sin with Death. 'Tis acknowledged, that this is implied, even that Death came into the World by Adam's Sin: yet this is not the main thing the Apostle designs to prove. But his main Point evidently is, that Sin & Guilt and just Exposedness to Death and Ruin came into the World by Adam's Sin; as Righteousness, Justification, and a Title to eternal Life come by Christ. Which Point he confirms by this Consideration. That from the very Time when Adam sin'd, these Things namely, Sin, Guilt and Desert of Ruin, became universal in the World, long before the Law given by Moses to the Jewish Nation had any Being.

The Apostle's Remark, that Sin entred into the World by one Man, who was the Father of the whole human Race, was an Observation which afforded proper Instruction for the Jews, who look'd on themselves an holy People, because they had the Law of Moses, and were the Children of Abraham, an holy Father; while they looked on other Nations as by Nature unholy and Sinners, because they were not Abraham's Children. He leads 'em up to an higher Ancestor than this Patriarch, even to Adam, who being equally the Father of Jews and Gentiles, both alike come from a sinful Father; from whom Guilt and Pollution were derived alike to all Mankind. And this the Apostle proves by an Argument, which of all that could possibly be invented, tended the most briefly and directly to convince the Jews: even by this Reflection, that Death had come equally on all Mankind from Adam's Time, and that the Posterity of Abraham were equally subject to it with the rest of the World. This was apparent in Fact; a Thing they all knew. And the Jews had p. 277always been taught, that Death (which began in the Destruction of the Body, and of this present Life) was the proper Punishment of Sin. This they were taught in Moses's History of Adam, and God's first Threatning of Punishment for Sin, and by the constant Doctrine of the Law and the Prophets; as has been already observed.

And the Apostle's Observation, that Sin was in the World long before the Law was given, and was as universal in the World from the Times of Adam, as it had been among the Heathen since the Law of Moses, this shew'd plainly, that the Jews were quite mistaken in their Notion of their particular Law; and that the Law which is the original and universal Rule of Righteousness and Judgment for all Mankind, was another Law, of far more antient Date, even the Law of Nature; which began as early as the human Nature began, and was established with the first Father of Mankind, and in him with the whole Race: the positive Precept of abstaining from the forbidden Fruit, being given for the Trial of his Compliance with this Law of Nature; of which the main Rule is supream Regard to God and his Will. And the Apostle proves that it must be thus, because, if the Law of Moses had been the highest Rule of Judgment, and if there had not been a superior, prior, divine Rule established, Mankind in general would not have been judged & condemned as Sinners, before that was given (for "Sin is not imputed, when there is no Law") as it is apparent in Fact they were, because Death reigned before that Time, even from the Times of Adam.

It may be observed, the Apostle in this Epistle, & that to the Galatians, endeavours to convince the Jews of these two Things, in Opposition to the Notions and Prejudices they had entertain'd concerning their Law. (1.) That it never was intended to be the Covenant, or Method by which they should actually be justified. (2.) That it was not the highest and universal Rule or Law, by which Mankind in general, and particularly the heathen World, were condemned. And he proves both by similar Arguments. p. 278—He proves, that the Law of Moses was not the Covenant, by which any of Mankind were to obtain Justification, because that Covenant was of older Date, being expresly established in the Time of Abraham, and Abraham himself was justified by it. This Argument the Apostle particularly handles in the iiid Chap. of Galatians, especially in v. 17, 18, 19. And this Argument is also made Use of in the Apostle'sReasonings in the ivth Chap. of this Epistle to the Romans, especially v. 13, 14, 15.—He proves also, that the Law of Moses was not the prime Rule of Judgment, by which Mankind in general, & particularly the heathen World, were condemned. And this he proves also the same Way, viz. by shewing this to be of older Date than that Law, and that it was established with Adam.—Now, these things tended to lead the Jews to right Notions of their Law, not as the intended Method of Justification, nor as the original and universal Rule of Condemnation, but something superadded to both: both being of older Date. Superadded to the latter, to illustrate and confirm it, that the Offence might abound; and superadded to the former, to be as a School-Master, to prepare Men for the Benefits of it, and to magnify divine Grace in it, that this might much more abound.

The chief Occasion of the Obscurity and Difficulty, which seems to attend the Scope and Connexion of the various Clauses in the three first Verses of this Discourse, particularly the 13th & 14th Verses, is, that there are two Things (althô Things closely connected) which the Apostle has in his Eye at once, in which he aims to enlighten them he writes to; which will not be thought at all strange, by them that have been conversant with, and have attended to this Apostle's Writings. He would illustrate the grand Point he had been upon from the Beginning, even Justification thro' Christ's Righteousness alone, by shewing how we are originally in a sinful miserable State, and how we derive this Sin and Misery from Adam, and how we are delivered & justified by Christ as a second Adam.—At the same Time, he would confute those fosolish and p. 279corrupt Notions of the Jews, about their Nation and their Law, that were very inconsistent with these Doctrines.—And he here endeavours to establish, at once, these two Things in Opposition to those Jewish Notions:

(1.) That 'tis our natural Relation to Adam, and not to Abraham, which determines our native moral State; and that therefore the being natural Children of Abraham, will not make us by Nature holy in the Sight of God, since we are the natural Seed of sinful Adam: Nor does the Gentiles being not descended from Abraham, denominate them Sinners, any more than the Jews, seeing both alike are descended from Adam.

(2.) That the Law of Moses is not the prime and general Law and Rule of Judgment for Mankind, to condemn them, and denominate them Sinners; but that the State they are in with regard to a higher, more antient and universal Law, determines Mankind in general to be Sinners in the Sight of God, and liable to be condemned as such. Which Observation is, in many Respects, to the Apostle's Purpose; particularly in this Respect, that if the Jews were convinced, that the Law which was the prime Rule of Condemnation, was given to all, was common to all Mankind, and that all fell under Condemnation thrô the Violation of that Law by the common Father of all, both Jews & Gentiles, then they would be led more easily and naturally to believe, that the Method of Justification, which God had established, also extended equally to all Mankind: And that the Messiah, by whom we have this Justification, is appointed, as Adam was, for a common Head to all, both Jews and Gentiles.

The Apostle's aiming to confute the Jewish Notion, is the principal Occasion of those Words in the 13th v. For until the Law, Sin was in the World; but Sin is not imputed, when there is no Law.

As to the Import of that Expression, Even over them that had not sinned after the Similitude of Adam's Transgression, not only is the Thing signified by it, in Dr.T—r's Sense of it, not true; or if it had been true, would have p. 280been impertinent, as has been shewn: But his Interp…etation is, otherwise, very much strain'd & unnatural. According to him, by "sinning after the Similitude of Adam's Transgression," is not meant any Similitude of the Act of sinning, nor of the Command sinned against, nor properly any Circumstance of the Sin; but only the Similitude of a Circumstance of the Command, viz. the Threatning it is attended with. A far-fetch'd Thing, to be called a Similitude of sinning! Besides, this Expression, in such a Meaning, is only a needless, impertinent, and aukward Repeating over again the same Thing, which, it is supposed, the Apostle had observed in the foregoing Verse, even after he had left it, & had proceeded another Step in the Series of his Discourse, or Chain of Arguing. As thus, in the foregoing Verse, the Apostle had plainly laid down his Argument (as our Author understands it) by which he would prove, Death did not come by personalSin viz. that Death reigned before any Law, threatning Death for personal Sin, was in Being; so that the Sin th…n committed was against n… Law, threatning Death for personal Sin. Having laid this down, the Apostle leaves this Part of his Argument, & proceeds another Step, Nevertheless Death reigned from Adam to Moses: And then returns, in a strange, unnatural Manner, and repeats that Argument or Assertion again, but only more ob…curely than before, in these Words, Even over them that had not sinned after the Similitude of Adam's Transgression, i. e. over them that had not sinned against a Law threatning Death for personal Sin. Which is just the same Thing, as if the Apostle had said, They that sin'd before the Law, did not sin against a Law threatning Death for personal Sin; for there was no such Law, for any to sin against, at that Time: Nevertheless Death reigned at that Time, even over such as did not sin against a Law threatning Death for personal Sin.—Which latter Clause adds Nothing to the Premises, and tends Nothing to illustrate what was said before, but rather to obscure and darken it. The Particle (foreign) even, when prefix'd in this Manner, used to p. 281signify something additional, some Advance in the Sense or Argument; implying, that the Words following express something more, or express the same thing more fully, plainly, or forcibly. But to unite two Clauses by such a Particle, in such a Manner, when there is Nothing besides a flat Repetition, with no superadded Sense or Force, but rather a greater Uncertainty and Obscurity, would be very unusual, and indeed very absurd.

I can see no Reason, why we should be dissatisfied with that Explanation of this Clause, which has more commonly been given, viz. That by them who have not sinned after the Similitude of Adam's Transgression, are meant Infants; who, tho' they have indeed sinned in Adam, yet never sinned as Adam did, by actually transgressing in their own Persons; unless it be, that this Interpretation is too old, and too common. It was well known by those the Apostle wrote to, that vast Numbers had died in Infancy, within that Period which the Apostle speaks of, particularly in the Time of the Deluge: And it would be strange, the Apostle should not have the Case of such Infants in his Mind; even supposing, his Scope were what our Author supposes, and he had only intended to prove that Death did not come on Mankind for their personal Sin. How directly would it have served the Purpose of proving this, to have mention'd so great a Part of Mankind, that are subject to Death, who, all know, never committed any Sin in their own Persons? How much more plain and easy the Proof of the Point by that, than to go round about, as Dr. T. supposes, and bring in a Thing so dark and uncertain, as this, That God never would bring Death on all Mankind for personal Sin (tho' they had personal Sin) without an express revealed Constitution; and then to observe▪ that there was no revealed Constitution of this Nature from Adam to Moses; which also seems a Thing without any plain Evidence; and then to infer, that it must needs be so, that it could come only on Occasion of Adam's Sin, though not for his Sin, or as any Punishment of it; which Inference also is very dark & unintelligible.

p. 282If the Apostle in this Place meant those who never sinned by their personal Act, it is not strange that he should express this by their not sinning after the Similitude of Adam's Transgression. We read of two Ways of Men's being like Adam, or in which a Similitude to him is ascribed to Men: One is a being begotten or born in his Image or Likeness, Gen. v. 3. Another is a transgressing God's Covenant or Law, like him, Hos. vi. 7. They, like Adam [so, in the Heb. & Vulg. Lat.] have transgressed the Covenant. Infants have the former Similitude; but not the latter. And it was very natural, when the Apostle would infer, that Infants become Sinners by that one Act & Offence of Adam, to observe, that they had not renewed the Act of Sin themselves, by any second Instance of a like Sort. And such might be the State of Language among Jews and Christians at that Day, that the Apostle might have no Phrase more aptly to express this Meaning. The Manner in which the Epithets, Personal and Actual, are used and applied now in this Case, is probably of later Date and more modern Use.

And then this Supposition of the Apostle's having the Case of Infants in View, in this Expression, makes it more to his Purpose, to mention Death Reigning before the Law of Moses was given. For the Jews look'd on all Nations, besides themselves, as Sinners, by Virtue of their Law; being made so especially by the Law of Circumcision, given first to Abraham, and compleated by Moses, making the Want of Circumcision a legal Pollution, utterly disqualifying for the Privileges of the Sanctuary. This Law, the Jews supposed, made the very Infants of the Gentiles Sinners, polluted and hateful to God; they being uncircumcis…d, and born of uncircumcised Parents. But the Apostle proves, against these Notions of the Jews, that the Nations of the World don't become Sinners by Nature, and Sinners from Infancy, by Virtue of their Law, in this Manner, but by Adam's Sin: In-as-much as Infants were treated as Sinners long before the Law of Circumci…ion was given, as well as before they had committed actual Sin.

p. 283What has been said, may, as I humbly conceive, lead us to that which is the true Scope & Sense of the Apostle in these three Verses; which I will endeavour more briefly to represent in the following Paraphrase.

12. Wherefore, as by one Man Sin entred into the World, and Death by Sin; and so Death passed upon all Men, for that all have sinned.The Things which I have largely insisted on, viz. the Evil that is in the World, the general Wickedness, Guilt and Ruin of Mankind, and the opposite Good, even Justification & Life, as only by Christ, lead me to observe the Likeness of the Manner, in which they are each of them introduced. For it was by one Man, that the general Corruption and Guilt which I have spoken of, came into the World, and Condemnation & Death by Sin: And this dreadful Punishment and Ruin came on all Mankind, by the great Law of Works, originally established with Mankind in their first Father, and by his one Offence, or Breach of that Law; All thereby becoming Sinners in God's Sight, and exposed to final Destruction.

13. For until the Law Sin was in the World; But Sin is not imputed, when there is not Law."It is manifest, that it was in this Way the World became sinful and guilty: and not in that Way which the Jews suppose, viz. That their Law, given by Moses, is the grand universal Rule of Righteousness & Judgment for Mankind, and that it is by being Gentiles, uncircumcised and Aliens from that Law, that the Nations of the World are constituted Sinners and unclean. For before the Law of Moses was given, Mankind were all look'd upon by the great Judge as Sinners, by Corruption and Guilt derived p. 284from Adam's Violation of the original Law of Works; which shews, that the original, universal Rule of Righteousness is not the Law of Moses; for if so, there would have been no Sin imputed before that was given; because Sin is not imputed, when there is no Law.

14. Nevertheless, Death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the Similitude of Adam's Transgression."But, that at that Time Sin was imputed, and Men were by their Judge reckoned as Sinners, thrô Guilt and Corruption derived from Adam, and condemned for Sin to Death, the proper Punishment of Sin, we have a plain Proof; in that it appears in Fact, all Mankind, during that whole Time which prec…eded the Law of Moses, were subjected to that temporal Death, which is the visible Introduction and Image of that utter Destruction which Sin deserves; not excepting even Infants, who could be Sinners no other Way than by virtue of Adam's Transgression, having never in their own Persons actually …in'd as Adam did; nor could at that Time be made polluted by the Law of Moses, as being uncircumcised, or born of uncircumcised Parents."

Now, by way of Reflection on the whole, I would observe, that though there are two or three Expressions in this Paragraph, Rom. v. 12, &c, the Design of which is attended with some Difficulty and Obscurity, as particularly in the 13th & 14th Verses; yet the Scope and Sense of the Discourse in general is not obscure, but on the contrary very clear and manifest; and so is the particular Doctrine mainly taught in it. The Apostle sets himself p. 285with great Care and Pains to make it plain, and precisely to fix and settle the Point he is upon. And the Discourse is so framed, that one Part of it does greatly clear and fix the Meaning of other Parts; and the Whole is determined by the clear Connection it stands in with other Parts of the Epistle, and by the manifest Drift of all the preceeding Part of it.

The Doctrine of original Sin is not only here taught, but most plainly, explicitly and abundantly taught. This Doctrine is asserted, expresly or implicitly, in almost every Verse; and in some of the Verses several Times. 'Tis fully implied in that first Expression in the 12th v. By one Man Sin entred into the World. Which implies, that Sin became universal in the World; as the Apostle had before largely shewn it was; and not meerly (which would be a trifling insignificant Observation) that one Man, who was made first, sin'd first, before other Men sin'd; or, that it did not so happen that many Men began to sin just together at the same Moment.—The latter Part of the Verse, And Death by Sin, and so Death passed upon all Men, for that (or, if you will, unto which) all have sinned, shews, that in the Eye of the Judge of the World, in Adam's first Sin, all sinned; not only in some Sort, but all sin'd so as to be exposed to that Death, and final Destruction, which is the proper Wages of Sin.—The same Doctrine is taught again twice over in the 14th v. It is there observed, as a Proof of this Doctrine, that Death reigned over them which had not sinned after the Similitude of Adam's Transgression, i. e. by their personal Act; and therefore could be exposed to Death, only by deriving Guilt and Pollution from Adam, in Consequence of his Sin. And 'tis taught again, in those Words, Who is the Figure of him that was to come. The Resemblance lies very much in this Circumstance, viz. our deriving Sin, Guilt and Punishment by Adam's Sin, as we do Righteousness, Justification, and the Reward of Life by Christ's Obedience: for so the Apostle explains himself.—The same Doctrine is expresly taught again, v 1…th. p. 286Through the Offence of one many be dead. And again, twice in the 16th v. It was by one that sinned, i. e. It was by Adam that Guilt and Punishment (before spoken of) came on Mankind: And in these Words, Judgment was by one to Condemnation.—It is again plainly and fully laid down in the 17th v. By one Man's Offence, Death reigned by one. So again in the 18th v. By the Offence of one, Judgment came upon all Men to Condemnation.—Again, very plainly in the 19th v. By one Man's Disobedience, many were made Sinners.

And here is every Thing to determine & fix the Meaning of all important Terms, that the Apostle makes Use of: As, the abundant Use of 'em in all Parts of the New Testament; and especially in this Apostle's Writings, which make up a very great Part of the New Testament: and his repeated Use of 'em in this Epistle in particular, especially in the preceeding Part of the Epistle, which leads to and introduces this Discourse, and in the former Part of this very Chapter; and also, the Light, that one Sentence in this Paragraph casts on another; which fully settles their Meaning: As, with respect to the Words, Justification, Righteousness, and Condemnation; and above all, in regard of the Word, Sin, which is the most important of all, with Relation to the Doctrine and Controversy we are upon. Besides the constant Use of this Term every where else thro' the new Testament, thro' the Epistles of this Apostle, this Epistle in particular, and even the former Part of this Chapter, 'tis often repeated in this very Paragraph, and evidently used in the very Sense, that is denied to belong to it in the End of v. 12th, and v. 19th, th… own'd every where else; and its Meaning is fully determined by the Apostle's varying the Term; using together with it, to signify the same thing, such a Variety of other synonymous Words, such as Offence, Transgression, Disobedience. And further, to put the Matter out of all Controversy, 'tis particularly and expresly, and repeatedly distinguished from that which our Opposers would explain it by, viz. Condemnation, and Death. And what is meant p. 287by Sin's entering into the World, in v. 12th, is determin'd by a like Phrase of Sin's being in the World, in the next Verse.—And that by the Offence of one, so often spoken of here, as bringing Death and Condemnation on all, the Apostle means the Sin of one, derived in it's Guilt and Pollution to Mankind in general, is a Thing which (over and above all that has been already observed) is settled and determined by those Words in the Conclusion of this Discourse. v. 20. Moreover, the Law entred, that the Offence might abound: But where Sin abounded, Grace did much more abound. These Words plainly shew, that the OFFENCE, spoken of so often, and evidently spoken of still in these Words, which was the Offence of one Man, became the Sin of all. For when he says, The Law entred, that the Offence might abound, his Meaning can't be, that the Offence of Adam, meerly as his personally, should abound; but, as it exists in it's derived Guilt, corrupt Influence, and evil Fruits, in the Sin of Mankind in general, even as a Tree in it's Root and Branches.**The Offence, according to Dr. T—r's Explanation, don't abound by the Law at all really and truly, in any Sense; neither the Sin, nor the Punishment. For he says, The Meaning is not, that Men should be made more wicked; but, that Men should be liable to Death for every Transgression.—But after all, they are liable to no more Deaths, nor to any worse Deaths, if they are not more sinful: For they were to have Punishment, according to their Deserts before. Such as died and went into another World before the Law of Moses was given, were punished according to their Deserts; and the Law, when it came, thre…tned no more.

'Tis a Thing that confirms the Certainty of the Proof of the Doctrine of Original Sin, which this Place affords, that the utmost Art cannot pervert it to another Sense. What a Variety of the most artful Methods have been used by the Enemies of this Doctrine, to wrest and darken this Paragraph of holy Writ, which stands so much in their Way, as it were to force the Bible to speak a Language that is agreable to their Mind! How have Expressions been strain'd, p. 288Words & Phrases rack'd! What strange Figures of Speech have been invented, and with violent Hands thrust into the Apostle's Mouth; and then with a bold Countenance and magisterial Airs obtruded on the World, as from him!—But, blessed be God, we have his Words as he delivered them, & the rest of the same Epistle & his other Writings, to compare with them; by which his Meaning stands in too strong and glaring a Light to be hid by any of the a…tificial Mists, which they labour to throw upon it.

'Tis really no less than abusing the Scripture and its Readers, to represent this Paragraph as the most obscure of all the Places of Scripture, that speak of the Consequences of Adam's Sin; and to treat it as if there was Need first to consider other Places as more plain. Whereas, 'tis most manifestly a Place in which these things are declared, beyond all, the most plainly, particularly, precisely and of set Purpose, by that great Apostle, who has most fully explain▪d to us those Doctrines, in general, which relate to the Redemption by Christ, and the Sin and Misery we are redeem'd from.—And it must be now left to the Reader's Judgment, whether the Christian Church has not proceeded reasonably, in looking on this as a Place of Scripture most clearly and fully treating of these things, & in using it's determinate Sense as an Help to settle the Meaning of many other Passages of sacred Writ.

As this Place in general is very plain and full, so the Doctrine of the Corruption of Nature, as derived from Adam, and also the Imputation of his first Sin, are both clearly taught in it. The Imputation of Adam's one Transgression, is indeed most directly & frequently asserted. We are here assured, that by one Man's Sin, Death passed on all; all being adjudged to this Punishment, as having sinned (so it is implied) in that one Man's Sin. And 'tis repented over and over, that all are condemned, many are dead, many made Sinners, &c. by one Man's Offence, by the Disobedience of one, and by one Offence.—And the Doctrine of original Depravity is also here taught, when p. 289the Apostle says, By one Man Sin enter'd into the World; having a plain Respect (as hath been shewn) to that universal Corruption and Wickedness, as well as Guilt, which he had before largely treated of.