tion subjoined, on what some have supposed, of God's imputing the guilt of Adam's Sin to his Posterity, but in an infinitely less Degree than to Adam himself,

CHAPTER IV.

Wherein several other Objections are considered.

CONCLUSION.

Containing some brief Observations on certain artful Methods, used by Writ

ers who are Adversaries to this Doctrine, in order to prejudice their Readers against it.

OF

ORIGINAL SIN

DEFENDED.

PART I.

Wherein are considered some Evidences of Original Sin from Facts and Events, as found by Observation and Experience, together with Representations and Testimonies of Holy Scripture, and the Confession and Assertions of Opposers.

CHAPTER I.

The Evidence of Original Sin from what appears in Fact of the Sinfulness of Mankind.

SECTION I

All Mankind do constantly, in all Ages, without Fail in any one Instance, run into that moral Evil, which is, in Effect, their own utter and eternal Perdition, in a total Privation of GOD's Favor, and Suffering of his Vengeance and Wrath.

Y

By Original Sin, as the phrase has been most commonly used by divines, is meant the innate, sinful depravity of the heart. But yet, when the doctrine of Original Sin is spok en of, it is vulgarly understood in that latitude, as to include

B

not only the depravity of nature, but the imputation of Adam's first Sin; or in other words, the liableness or exposedness of Adam's posterity, in the divine judgment, to partake of the punishment of that Sin. So far as I know, most of those who have held one of these, have maintained the other; and most of those who have opposed one, have opposed the other; bo h are opposed by the author chiefly attended to in the following discourse, in his book against Original Sin: And it may perhaps appear in our future consideration of the subject, that they are closely connected, and that the arguments which prove the one, establish the other, and that there are no more difficulties attending the allowing of one than the other.

I shall, in the first place, consider this doctrine more especially with regard to the corruption of nature; and as we treat of this, the other will naturally come into consideration, in the prosecution of the discourse, as connected with it.

As all moral qualities, all principles either of virtue or vice, lie in the disposition of the heart, I shall consider whether we have any evidence, that the heart of man is naturally of a corrupt and evil disposition. This is strenuously denied by many late writers, who are enemies to the doctrine of Original Sin; and particularly by Dr. Taylor.

The way we come by the idea of any such thing as disposition or tendency, is by observing what is constant or general in event; especially under a great variety of circumstances; and above all, when the effect or event continues the same through great and various opposition, much and manifold force and means used to the contrary not prevailing to hinder the effect. I do not know, that such a prevalence of effects is denied to be an evidence of prevailing tendency in causes and agents; or that it is expressly denied by the opposers of the doctrine of Original Sin, that if, in the course of events, it universally or generally proves that mankind are actually corrupt, this would be an evidence of a prior, corrupt propensity in the world of mankind; whatever may be said by some, which, if taken with its plain consequences, may seem to imply a denial of this; which may be considered afterwards....But by many the fact is denied; that is, it is denied,

pendent on it, introduced to oppose the natural tendency, and reverse the course of things. But the event that things tend to, according to their own demerit, and according to divine justice, that is the event which they tend to in their own nature, as Dr. Taylor's own words fully imply. "God alone,(says he) can declare whether he will pardon or punish the ungod liness and unrighteousness of mankind, which is in its own nature punishable." Nothing is more precisely according to the truth of things, than divine justice: It weighs things in an even balance: It views and estimates things no other. wise than they are truly in their own nature. Therefore undoubtedly that which implies a tendency to ruin, according to the estimate of divine justice, does indeed imply such a tendency in its own nature.

And then it must be remembered that it is a moral depravity we are speaking of; and therefore when we are considering whether such depravity do not appear by a tendency to a bad effect or issue, it is a moral tendency to such an issue, that is the thing to be taken into the account. A moral tendency or influence is by desert. Then may it be said, man's nature or state is attended with a pernicious or destructive tendency, in a moral sense, when it tends to that which deserves misery and destruction. And therefore it equally shews the moral depravity of the nature of mankind in their present state, whether that nature be universally attended with an effectual tendency to destructive vengeance actually executed, or to their deserving misery and ruin, or their just exposedness to destruction, however that fatal consequence may be prevented by grace, or whatever the actual event be.

One thing more is to be observed here, viz. that the topic mainly insisted on by the opposers of the doctrine of Original Sin, is the justice of God; both in their objections against the imputation of Adam's sin, and also against its being so ordered, that men should come into the world with a corrupt and ruined nature, without having merited the displeasure of their Creator by any personal fault. But the latter is not repugnant to God's justice, if men can be, and actually are, born into the world with a tendency to sin, and to misery and