Iii. Iv.

III.

“Hereby he incurred death of every kind; not only temporal, but also spiritual and eternal. By losing his original righteousness, he became not only mortal as to his body, but also spiritually dead, dead to God, dead in sin; void of that principle which St. Paul terms, ‘the life of God;’ (Ephesians 4:18) St. John, ‘eternal life abiding in us.’ (1 John 3:15) A creature formed with a capacity of knowing, loving, and serving God, must be either ‘dead in sin,’ or ‘alive to God.’ Adam in his primitive state, was ‘alive to God;’ but after he had sinned, dead in sin, as well as dead in law.” (Page 20.)

“But Dr. Taylor is sure, only temporal death was to be the consequence of his disobedience. ‘For death is the loss of life, and must be understood according to the nature of the life to which it is opposed.’ Most true; and the life to which it is here opposed, the life Adam enjoyed, till lost by sin, was not only bodily life, but that principle of holiness which the Scripture terms, ‘the life of God.’ It was also a title to eternal life. All this, therefore, he lost by sin. And that justly; for ‘death is the’ due ‘wages of sin;’ death, both temporal, spiritual, and eternal.” (Page 21.)

IV.

“Adam’s first sin was the sin of a public person, — one whom God had appointed to represent all his descendants.

“This also has been proved. In one sense, indeed, Adam’s sin was not ours. It was not our personal fault, our actual transgression. But in another sense it was ours; it was the sin of our common representative: And, as such, St. Paul shows it is imputed to us and all his descendants. Hence, —

V.

“All these are from their birth ‘children of wrath;’ void of all righteousness, and propense to sin of all sorts.

“In order to clear and confirm this proposition, I intend, “1. To consider a text which proves original sin in the full extent of it. “2. To explain some other texts, which relate either to the guilt or the corruption we derive from our first parents.

“3. To add some arguments which Dr. Taylor has taken no notice of, or touched but very slightly.

“4. To answer objections.

“And, 1. To consider that text, ‘And were by nature children of wrath, even as others.’ (Ephesians 2:3) In the beginning of the chapter, St. Paul puts the Ephesians in mind of what God had done for them. This led him to observe what they had been before their conversion to God: They had been ‘dead in trespasses and sins;’ but were now ‘quickened,’ made alive to God. They had ‘walked according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that worketh with energy in the children of disobedience.’ ‘Among such,’ saith the Apostle, ‘we all had our conversation in times past;’ the whole time before our conversion; ‘fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature children of wrath, even as others.’ On this I observe, —

“(1.) The persons spoken of are both the believing Ephesians and the Apostle himself. For he says not, ‘Ye were,’ speaking in the second person, as he had done, verses 1, 2; but, ‘We were,’ — plainly with a design the more expressly to include himself. Indeed, had he still spoken in the second person, yet what is here affirmed would have been true of him as well as them. But for the sake of more explicitly including himself, he chose to say, ‘We were;’ — you, Ephesians, who were descended of heathen parents, and I who was born in the visible Church.

“(2.) The ‘wrath’ here spoken of, means either God’s displeasure at sinners, or the punishment which he threatens and inflicts for sin.’ (Pages 25-28.)

“(3.) ‘Children of wrath,’ is an Hebraism, and denotes persons worthy of, or liable to, wrath. And this implies the being sinners; seeing sin only exposes us to God’s displeasure and the dreadful effects of it. “(4.) This charge the Apostle fixes on himself and them, as they had been before their conversion. He does not say, We are, but ‘we were, children of wrath.’ (Page 29.)

“(5.) He speaks of himself and the converted Ephesians as having been so equally with others. There is an emphasis on the words, ‘even as others;’ even as the stubborn Jews and idolatrous Heathens; even as all who are still ‘strangers and enemies ‘to Christ. These are still s children of wrath: ‘But whatever difference there is between us and them, we were once what they are now.

“(6.) He expressly says, ‘We were children of wrath even as others, by nature,’ or, from our birth. He does not say, We became so by education, or by imitation, or by custom in sinning; but, to show us when it is that we commence sinners, by what means we become ‘children of wrath,, whence it is that we are so prone to evil from our infancy and to imitate bad rather than good examples, he says, ‘We were children of wrath by nature;’ we were born fallen creatures; we came into the world sinners, and, as such, liable to wrath, in consequence of the fall of our first father.

“But, it is affirmed

(i.) That ‘by nature means, by habit or custom.’ I answer, Though the term, nature, with some qualifying expression annexed, is sometimes taken for inveterate custom, yet it is never so taken when put singly, without any such qualifying expression. When, therefore, the Apostle says absolutely, ‘We are children of wrath by nature,’ this, according to the constant sense of the words, Drust mean, We were so from our birth.” (Page 31.)

“It is affirmed,

(ii.) That ‘because the original words stand thus, tekna fusei orghv, children by nature of wrath; therefore, children by nature means only truly and really children of wrath.’ I answer, The consequence is good for nothing: For let the words stand as they will, it is evident that tekna fusei are, children by birth; or, such as are born so, in distinction from those who became such afterward.

“It is affirmed,

(iii.) ‘That fusei, by nature, signifies no more than truly or really.’ I answer, First, It is not allowed, that any good Greek writers ever use the word in this sense. Secondly, Whatever others do, the writers of the New Testament always use it in another sense. So Galatians 2:15: ‘We who are Jews by nature,’ fusei Ioudaioi; that is, We who are born Jews, in contradistinction to proselytes. ‘Ye did service to them which by nature are no gods;’ (Galatians 4:8) mh fusei ousi qeoiv persons or things which are partakers of no divine nature. ‘The Gentiles do by nature the things contained in the law;’ (Romans 2:14) that is, by their own natural powers, without a written law. Neither here, nor anywhere else, does the word fusei signify no more than really or truly.” (Page 32.)

“It remains, then, that the word which we render by nature does really so signify.

“And yet it is allowed, we are not so guilty by nature, as a course of actual sin afterward makes us. But we are, antecedent to that course, ‘children of wrath;’ liable to some degree of wrath and punishment. Here, then, from a plain text, taken in its obvious sense, we have a clear evidence both of what Divines term, original sin imputed, and of original sin inherent. The former is the sin of Adam, so far reckoned ours as to constitute us in some degree guilty; the latter, a want of original righteousness, and a corruption of nature; whence it is, that from our infancy we are averse to what is good, and propense to what is evil.” (Page 33.)

“I am, 2. To explain some other texts which relate either to the guilt or the corruption which we derive from our first parents. “Genesis 5:3: Here the image of Adam, in which he begat a son after his fall, stands opposed to the image of God, in which man was at first created. Moses had said, ‘In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made He him.’ (Verse 1) In this, speaking of Adam as he was after the fall, he does not say, He begat a son in the likeness of God; but, He ‘begat a son in his own likeness, after his image.’ Now, this must refer to Adam, either as a man, or as a good man, or as a mortal, sinful man. But it could not refer to him merely as a man. The inspired writer could not design to inform us, that Adam begat a man, not a lion, or a horse. It could not well refer to him as a good man; for it is not said, Adam begat a son, who at length became pious like himself; but, He ‘begat a son in his own likeness’ It refers to him, therefore, as a mortal, sinful man; giving us to know, that the mortality and corruption contracted by the fall descended from Adam to his son: Adam, a sinner, begat a sinner like himself. And if Seth was thus a sinner by nature, so is every other descendant of Adam.” (Pages 35, 36.) “Dr. Taylor takes no notice of the antithesis between ‘the likeness of God,’ (Verse 1) and ‘the likeness of Adam:’ (Verse 3) On the other hand, he speaks of these two as one; as if Seth had been ‘born’ in the very same image of God wherein Adam was ‘made.’ But this cannot be admitted; because Adam had now lost his original righteousness. It must therefore be ‘the likeness’ of fallen, corrupted Adam which is here intended.

“‘And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.’ (Genesis 6:5) Here Moses, having observed, as the cause of the flood, that ‘God saw that the wickedness of man was great,’ to account for this general wickedness, adds, ‘Every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was evil;’ yea, was ‘only evil,’ and that ‘continually.’ The heart of man is here put for his soul. This God had formed with a marvelous thinking power. But so is his soul debased, that ‘every imagination,’ figment, formation, ‘of the thoughts’ of it, ‘is evil,’ only evil, ‘continually’ evil. Whatever it forms within itself, as a thinking power, is an evil formation. This Moses spoke of the Antediluvians; but we cannot confine it to them. If all their actual wickedness sprung from the evil formations of their corrupt heart; and if consequently they were sinners from the birth, so are all others likewise.” (Page 37.) “‘I will not again curse the ground anymore for man’s sake; for the imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every living thing.’ (Genesis 8:21) I will not be provoked to this by the wickedness of mankind; for they are inclined to sin from their childhood. Was I, therefore, to do this as often as they deserve, I must be continually destroying the earth. The word (rxy) — imagination— (as was observed before) includes the thoughts, affections, inclinations, with everything which the son, as a thinking being, forges and frames within itself. And the word we render youth, includes childhood and infancy, the earliest age of man; the whole time from his birth, or (as others affirm) from his formation in the womb.

“Indeed Dr. Taylor would translate the text, ‘Although the imagination of man’s heart should be evil from his youth.’ But,

(1.) Though the particle (yk) sometimes signifies although; yet for is its common meaning. And we are not to recede from the usual signification of a word without any necessity.

(2.) If we read although it will not at all invalidate our proof. For still the plain meaning of the words would be, ‘I will not send another general flood, although every figment or formation of the heart of every man is evil from his earliest infancy.’” (Page 39.)

“‘Although affliction cometh not forth of the dust; yet man is born to trouble, as the sparks fly upward.’ (Job 5:6, 7) The word which is here rendered affliction, sometimes signifies ‘iniquity.’ For what reason, but to show that these two, ‘sin’ and ‘affliction,’ are inseparable? Sin is the cause of affliction; and affliction, of whatever kind, is the genuine effect of sin. Indeed it is incompatible with the justice and mercy of God to appoint afflictions of any kind for the innocent. If Christ suffered, it was because the sins of others were imputed to him. If, then, every one of the posterity of Adam ‘is born to trouble,’ it must be because he is born a sinner: For man was not originally made to suffer. Nor while he preserved his innocence was he liable to suffering of any kind. Are the angels, or any pure, sinless creatures, liable to any sorrow or affliction? Surely no. But every child of Adam is. And it is in consequence of his sin, that the present life of man is short and affective; of which the very Heathens were deeply sensible. They also saw, that ‘great travail is created for every man, and a heavy yoke is upon the sons of Adam, from the day that they go out of their mother’s womb, till the day that they return to the mother of all things.’” (Page 40.) “‘Vain man would be wise, though man be born like a wild ass’s colt;’ (Job 11:12) in the original, ‘though man be born’ (will be born in every age) ‘the colt of a wild ass.’ Dr. Taylor owns, ‘We are born quite ignorant.’ But this is far from reaching the plain import of the text, in which man, as born into the world, is compared to an animal most remarkably stupid and intractable. And such all the sons of Adam naturally are, particularly with regard to the things of God; from their infancy slow to learn what is good, though impetuously propense to learn and practice what is evil.” (Pages 43, 44.)

“Job 14:4, and Job 15:14 15:14. I join these, because the latter confirms the former. ‘Who can bring a clean thing,’ or person, ‘out of an unclean? Not one.’ This is express. Job had been reflecting on the sorrowful, uncertain, imperfect state of all Adam’s children in the present world. (14:1-3) Then he carries his thoughts to the spring of such a state, the original corruption of man. ‘Who,’ what creature, can make an innocent, righteous person proceed from a parent defiled by sin? ‘Not one.’ Through the whole Scripture we may observe, ‘sin’ is described as ‘uncleanness,’ and a sinner as an unclean thing. On the contrary, holiness is expressed by ‘cleanness’ of heart and hands; and the righteous man is described as clean. Agreeably to which, the text asserts the natural impossibility of any man’s being born clean, guiltless, and sinless, because he proceeds from them who are unclean, guilty, and defiled with sin.

“The Septuagint translate the text, ‘Who shall be clean from filth? Not one; even though his life on earth be a single day.’ And this rendering, though not according to the Hebrew, is followed by all the Fathers; and shows what was the general belief of the Jews be fore Christ came into the world.”

“‘But since the heavens and stars are represented as not clean, compared to God, may not man also be here termed unclean, only as compared with him?’ I answer,

(1.) The heavens are manifestly compared with God; but man is not in either of these texts. He is here described, not as he is in comparison of God, but as he is absolutely in himself.

(2.) When ‘the heavens’ and man’ are mentioned in the same text, and man is set forth as ‘unclean,’ his ‘uncleanness’ is expressed by his being ‘unrighteous;’ and that always means guilty or sinful. Nor, indeed, is the innocent frailty of mankind ever in Scripture termed ‘uncleanness.”’ (Pages 45,46.)

“‘Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.’ (Psalm 51:5) The Psalmist here confesses, bewails, and condemns himself for his natural corruption, as that which principally gave birth to the horrid sins with which he had been overtaken. ‘Behold!’ He prefixes this to render his confession the more remarkable, and to show the importance of the truth here declared: ‘I was shapen;’ this passive verb denotes somewhat in which neither David nor his parents had any active concern: ‘In’ or with ‘iniquity, and in’ or with ‘sin did my mother conceive me.’ The word which we render ‘conceive,’ signifies properly, to warm, or to cherish by warmth. It does not, therefore, so directly refer to the act of conceiving as to the cherishing what is conceived till the time of its birth. But either way the proof is equally strong for the corruption of mankind from their first existence.” (Pages 47, 48.) “‘The wicked are estranged from the womb: They go astray as soon as they are born, speaking lies.’ ‘They are estranged from the womb;’ (Psalm 58:3, 4) strangers and averse to true, practical religion, from the birth. ‘They go astray as soon as they are born, speaking lies.’ Not that they actually speak lies as soon as they are born; but they naturally incline that; way, and discover that inclination as early as is possible.” (Pages 51, 52.) “‘Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him.’ (Proverbs 22:15) ‘The rod and reproof give wisdom: But a child left to himself bringeth his mother to shame.’ (Proverbs 29:15 29:15) These passages put together are a plain testimony of the inbred corruption of young children. ‘Foolishness,’ in the former, is not barely ‘appetite, or a want of the knowledge attainable by instruction.’ Neither of these deserve that sharp correction. But it is an indisposedness to what is good, and a strong propensity to evil. This ‘foolishness is bound in the heart of a child;’ it is rooted ill his inmost nature. It is, as it were, ‘fastened to him by strong cords;’ so the original word signifies. From this corruption of heart in is very child it is, that the ‘rod of correction’ is necessary to give him ‘wisdom:’ Hence it is, that ‘a child left to himself,’ without correction, ‘brings his mother to shame.’ If a child were born equally inclined to virtue and vice, why should the wise man speak of foolishness, or wickedness, as fastened so closely to his heart? And why should ‘the rod and reproof ‘be so necessary for him?’ These texts, therefore, are another clear proof of the corruption of human nature. “‘Those things which proceed out of the mouth, come from the heart, and they defile the man. For from within, out of the heart, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, murders: — All these things come from, within, and defile the man.’ (Matthew 15:18 19; Mark 7:20-23) Our Lord here teaches, that all evil thoughts, words, and actions, of every kind, flow out of the heart, the soul of man, as being now averse to all good, and inclined to all evil.” (Pages 55, 56.)

“Romans 5:12-19. Let the reader please to read the whole passage very carefully. The Apostle here discourses of Adam and Christ as two representatives or public persons, comparing the ‘sin’ of the one, with the ‘righteousness’ of the other.” (Page 66.) “On this I observe,

“(1.) The ‘one man,’ spoken of throughout, is Adam, the common head of mankind: And to him (not to the devil or Eve) the Apostle ascribes the introduction of ‘sin’ and ‘death.’ The devil was the first sinner, and Eve, seduced by him, sinned before her husband. Yet the Apostle saith, ‘By one man sin entered into the world; through the offense of one many are dead; the judgment was by one to condemnation; death reigned by one. By the offense of one, judgment came upon all men; by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners.’ Now, why should the Apostle lay all this on Adam, whose sin was posterior both to the devil’s and Eve’s, if Adam was not appointed by God the federal head of mankind? In regard to which the Apostle points at him singly, as the type or ‘figure of Him that was to come.’ According to Dr. Taylor’s doctrine, he should rather have said, ‘By the devil sin entered into the world;’ or, ‘Through the disobedience of Eve, many were made sinners.’ But, instead of this he likes on our first father alone, as bringing sin and death on all his posterity.’” (Page 67.)

“(2.) ‘The sin, transgression, offense, disobedience,’ here spoken of, was Adam’s eating the forbidden fruit. It is remarkable, that as the Apostle throughout his discourse arraigns one man only, so he ascribes all the mischief done to one single offense of that one man. And as he then stood in that special relation of federal as well as natural head to his descendants, so upon his committing that one sin, this special relation ceased.

“(3.) The ‘all,’ (Verses 12, 18) and the ‘many,’ (Verses 15,19) are all the natural descendants of Adam; equivalent with ‘the world,’ (Verse 12) which means the inhabitants of it.” (Page 69.)

“(4.) The effects of Adam’s sin on his descendants, the Apostle reduces to two heads, sin and death. ‘By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed on all men, for that all have sinned.’ ‘Sin’ sometimes means ‘punishment;’ but not here: ‘Sin’ and ‘death’ are here plainly distinguished. The common translation is therefore right, and gives us the true meaning, of the words. ‘Death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned;’ namely, in or with their first father. And this agrees with the context; the purport of which is, that all have sinned, and are therefore liable to the death originally threatened; which is evident from this: That ‘until the law sin was in the world;’ — in the ages that preceded the law of Moses, all men were sinners in the sight of God: ‘But sin is not imputed where there is no law;’ — none can be sinners in the sight of God if they are not transgressors of some law, for the transgressing of which they are reputed guilty: ‘Nevertheless death reigned’ all the time ‘from Adam to Moses’ over all mankind. Now, if none is liable to death, but for sin; if ‘sin is not imputed where there is no law;’ and if, notwithstanding this, all mankind in all ages have died; infants themselves, who cannot actually sin, not excepted; it is undeniable, that guilt is imputed to all for the sin of Adam. Why else are they liable to that which is inflicted on none but for sin?

“This is the purport of the Apostle’s arguing, (Verses 12-14) which having led him to mention Adam as a figure of Christ, he then draws a parallel between them. The substance of it is this: As through the ‘offense of Adam many are dead,’ as ‘by the disobedience of him many are made sinners;’so through the righteousness or ‘obedience of Christ many are made righteous.’ But how are many dead, or made sinners, through the disobedience of Adam? His first sin so far affects all his descendants as to constitute them guilty, or liable to all that death which was contained in the original threatening.”(Page 72.)

“But Dr. Taylor avers, ‘To be made sinners, means only to be subjected to temporal death.’

“I answer,

“(1.) Whatever it means, the disobedience of Adam had a proper, causal influence upon it; just as the obedience of Christ has upon our being made righteous.

“(2.) What ‘to be made sinners’ means, must be learned from the opposite to it, in the latter part of the verse. Now, allowing the Apostle to be his own interpreter, ‘being made righteous’ is the same with ‘justification.’ (Verse 16) Of this he had treated largely before. And through the whole of his discourse, ‘to be justified’ is to be acquitted from guilt, and ‘accepted of God’ as righteous. Consequently, ‘to be made sinners’ is to be ‘condemned of God,’ or to be ‘children of wrath,’ and that on account of Adam’s sin.” (Page 73.) “‘By man came death: In Adam all die.’ (1 Corinthians 15:21, 22) Let the reader please to bear in mind the whole of the two verses and the context. By ‘man,’ in the twenty-first verse, is meant Adam. The ‘all’ spoken of are all his natural descendants. These ‘all die;’ that is, as his descendants, are liable to death, yea, to death everlasting. That this is the meaning appears hence: That the ‘being made alive,’ to which this dying stands opposed, is not a mere recovery of life, but a blessed resurrection to a glorious immortality. Hence I observe,

(1.) Man was originally immortal as well as righteous. In this primitive slate he was not liable to death.

(2.) Death is constantly ascribed to sin, as the sole and proper cause of it. As it was threatened only for sin, so the sentence was not pronounced till after man had sinned.

(3.) All men are mortal from their birth. As soon as they begin to live they are liable to death, the punishment denounced against sin, and sin only.

(4.) This is the genuine effect of the first sin of our first father. The Apostle does not attribute it to the devil; neither does he say, ‘In Adam and Eve all die.’ But here also he mentions Adam singly. Him he speaks of as ‘a figure of Christ.’ (Verses 45, 47, 48) And here, as the sole author of death to all his natural descendants. ‘In Adam,’ or on account of his fall, ‘all’ of mankind, in every age, ‘die;’ consequently, in him all sinned. With him all fell in his first transgression. That they are all born liable to the legal punishment of sin proves him the federal as well as natural head of mankind; whose sin is so far imputed to all men, that they are born ‘children of wrath,’ and liable to death.” (Pages 74-77.)

“Thus have I considered a large number of texts, which testify of original sin, imputed and inherent. Some are more express than others, of which kind are Job 14:4; Psalm 51:5; Psalms 58:3 58:3; Romans 5:12, etc.; 1 Corinthians 15:22; Ephesians 2:3. That in Ephesians presents us with a direct proof of the entire doctrine Those in Romans and Corinthians relate directly to original sin imputed, and are but consequential proofs of original corruption. The rest refer particularly to this, and are but consequential proofs of original sin imputed.

“And as this doctrine stands impregnable on the basis of Scripture, so it is perfectly agreeable to sound reason; as may appear from a few plain arguments which confirm this scripture doctrine.” (Page 79.)

“(1.) If the first man was by God’s appointment, as has been shown, the federal head of all his descendants, it follows, that when Adam sinned and fell, they all sinned in him, and fell with him. And if they did, they must come into the world both guilty and unclean. “‘But we had no hand in Adam’s sin, and therefore cannot be guilty on account of it.’

“This, ‘We had no hand in it,’ is ambiguous. It means either, ‘We did not actually join therein,’ which no one denies, or, ‘We were wholly unconcerned in it;’ the contrary to which has been fully proved.

“(2.) Since Adam’s posterity are born liable to death, which is the due ‘wages of sin,’ it follows, that they are born sinners. No art can set aside the consequence.

“(3.) Either Christ is the Savior of infants, or he is not; if he is not, how is he ‘the Savior of all men?’ But, if he is, then infants are sinners; for he suffered death for sinners only. He ‘came to seek and save’ only ‘that which was lost;’ to ‘save his people from their sins.’ It follows, that infants are sinners; that they are lost, and, without Christ, are undone for ever.

“(4.) The consequences of the contrary opinion are shockingly absurd: —

“(i.) If original sin is not, either death is not ‘the wages of sin,’ or there is punishment without guilt; God punishes innocent, guiltless creatures. To suppose which is to impute iniquity to the most Holy.” (Page 84.)

“(ii.) If we are not sinners by nature, there are sinful actions without a principle, fruit growing without a root. ‘No; men contract sinful habits by degrees, and then commence sinners.’ But whence is it that they contract those habits so easily and speedily? Whence is it, that, as soon as ever we discover reason, we discover sinful dispositions? The early discoveries of reason prove a principle of reason planted in our nature. In like manner, the early discoveries of sinful dispositions prove those dispositions planted therein.” (Page 85.) “(iii.) If we were not ruined by the first Adam, neither are we recovered by the Second. If the sin of Adam was not imputed to us, neither is the righteousness of Christ.

“(iv.) If we do not derive a corrupt nature from Adam, we do not derive a new nature from Christ.

“(v.) A denial of original sin not only renders baptism needless with regard to infants, but represents a great part of mankind as having no need of Christ, or the grace of the near covenant. I now speak of infants in particular, who, if not ‘guilty before God,’ no more need the merits and grace of the Second Adam than the brutes themselves. “Lastly. A denial of original sin contradicts the main design of the gospel, which is to humble vain man, and to ascribe to God’s free grace, not man’s free will, the whole of his salvation. Nor, indeed, can we let this doctrine go without giving up, at the same time, the greatest part, if not all, of the essential articles of the Christian faith. If we give up this, we cannot defend either justification by the merits of Christ, or the renewal of our natures by his Spirit. Dr. Taylor’s book is not, therefore, subversive of a particular branch, but of the whole scheme, of Christianity.