Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

Time I think this fame Thing will be as ftrong a Fortress for the Deifts, in common with them, as the great Doctrines, fubverted by their Notion of Freedom, are fo plainly and abundantly taught in the Scripture. But I am under no Apprehenfions of any Danger, the Caufe of Christianity, or the Religion of the Reformed is in, from any Poffibility of that Notion's being ever eftablished, or of its being ever evinced that there is not proper, perfect, and manifold Demonftration lying against

it.

But as I faid, it would be needlefs for me to enter into a particular Difquifition of this Point here; from which I fhall eafily be excufed by any Reader who is willing to give himself the Trouble of confulting what I have already written: And as to others, probably they will fcarce be at the Pains of reading the prefent Difcourfe; or at leaft would not, if it fhould be enlarged by a full Confideration of that Controverfy.

I fhall at this Time therefore only take Notice of fome grofs Inconfiftencies that Dr. T. has been guilty of, in his handling this Objection against the Doctrine of Original Sin.

In Places which have been cited, he fays, That Sin must proceed from our own Choice: And that if it does not, it being neceffary to us, it cannot be Sin, it cannot be our Fault, or what we are to blame for: And therefore all our Sin must be chargeable on our Choice, which is the Caufe of Sin: For he says, The Caufe of every Effect is alone chargeable with the Effect it produceth, and which proceedeth from it *. Now here are implied feveral grofs Contradictions. He greatly infifts, that Nothing can be finful, or have the Nature of Sin, but what pro◄ ceeds

* Page 128.

ceeds from our Choice. Nevertheless he fays, "Not "the Effect, but the Caufe alone is chargeable with "Blame." Therefore the Choice, which is the Caufe, is alone blameable, or has the Nature of Sin; and not the Effect of that Choice. Thus Nothing can be finful, but the Effect of Choice; and yet the Effect of Choice never can be finful, but only the Cause, which alone is chargeable with all the Blame.

Again, the Choice, which chufes and produces Sin, or from which Sin proceeds, is itself finful. Not only is this implied in his faying, "The Caufe "alone is chargeable with all the Blame”; but he exprefly speaks of the Choice as faulty*, and calls that Choice wicked, from which Depravity and Corruption proceeds +. Now if the Choice itfelf be Sin, and there be no Sin but what proceeds from a finful Choice, then the finful Choice muft proceed from another antecedent Choice; it must be chosen by a foregoing Act of Will, determining itself to that finful Choice, that fo it may have that which he fpeaks of as abfolutely effential to the Nature of Sin, namely, That it proceeds from our Choice, and does not happen to us neceffarily. But if the finful Choice itfelf proceeds from a foregoing Choice, then alfo that foregoing Choice must be finful; it being the Caufe of Sin, and fo alone chargeable with the Blame. Yet if that foregoing Choice be finful, then neither muft that happen to us neceffarily, but muft likewife proceed from Choice, another Act of Choice preceding that: For we must remember, that "Nothing is finful

but what proceeds from our Choice." And then, for the fame Reason, even this prior Choice, laft mentioned, must also be finful, being chargeable Се withi

Page 190. + Page 200. See alfo p. 216.

with all the Blame of that confequent evil Choice, which was its Effect. And fo we must go back till we come to the very first Volition, the prime or original Act of Choice in the whole Chain. And this, to be fure, must be a finful Choice, because this is the Origin or primitive Cause of all the Train of Evils which follow; and according to our Author, muft therefore be " alone charge"able with all the Blame." And yet fo it is, according to him, this "cannot be finful," because it does not "proceed from our own Choice," or any foregoing Act of our Will; it being, by the Suppofition, the very first Act of Will in the Cafe. And therefore it must be neceffary, as to us, having no Choice of ours to be the Caufe of it.

In p. 232. he says, "Adam's Sin was from his "own difobedient Will; and fo must every Man's “Sin, and all the Sin in the World be, as well as "his." By this, it seems, he must have a "difobedient "Will" before he fins; for the Cause must bẻ before the Effect: And yet that disobedient Will itself is finful; otherwise it could not be called difobedient. But the Question is, How do Men come by the difobedient Will, this Caufe of all the Sin in the World? It must not come neceffarily, without Men's Choice; for if fo, it is not Sin, nor is there any Difobedience in it. Therefore that disobedient Will must also come from a difobedient Will, and fo on, in infinitum. Otherwife it must be supposed, that there is fome Sin in the World, which does not come from a difobedient Will; contrary to our Author's dogmatical Affertions.

In p. 166. S. he fays, " Adam could not fin with"out a finful Inclination." Here he calls that Inclination itself finful, which is the Principle from

whence

whence finful Acts proceed; as elféwhere he speaks of the disobedient Will from whence all Sin comes: And he allows,* that " the Law reaches to all the "latent Principles of Sin," meaning plainly, that it forbids, and threatens Punishment for, thofe latent Principles. Now thefe latent Principles of Sin, thefe finful Inclinations, without which, according to our Author, there can be no finful Act, cannot all proceed from a finful Choice; because that would imply great Contradiction. For, by the Suppofition, they are the Principles from whence a finful Choice comes, and whence all finful Acts of Will proceed; and there can be no finful A& without them. So that the first latent Principles and Inclinations, from whence all finful Acts proceed, are finful; and yet they are not finful, because they do not proceed from a wicked Choice, without which, according to him, "Nothing can "be finful."

66

Dr. T. fpeaking of that Propofition of the Af fembly of Divines, wherein they affert, that Man is by Nature utterly corrupt, &c. + thinks himfelf well warranted by the fuppofed great Evidence of these his contradictory Notions, to fay, "Therefore Sin "is not natural to us; and therefore I fhall not fcruple to fay, this Propofition in the Affembly of "Divines is FALSE." But it may be worthy to be confidered, whether it would not have greatly become him, before he had cloathed himself with fo much Affurance, and proceeded, on the Foundation of thefe his Notions, fo magifterially to charge the Affembly's Propofition with Falfhood, to have taken Care that his own Propofitions, which he has fet in Oppofition to them, fhould be a little

C c 2

more

* Contents of Rom. Chap. vii. in Notes on the Epiftles + Page 125.

more confiftent; that he might not have contradicted himself, while contradicting them; left fome impartial Judges, obferving his Inconfiftence, fhould think they had Warrant to declare with equal Affurance, that "They fhall not fcruple to fay, Dr. "T-r's Doctrine is FALSE."

CHA P. II.

Concerning that Objection against the Doctrine of native Corruption, That to fuppofe Men receive their first Existence in Sin, is to make Him who is the Author of their Being, the Author of their Depravity.

ON

NE Argument against Men's being supposed to be born with finful Depravity, which Dr. T. greatly infifts upon, is, "That this does in Effect "charge Him, who is the Author of our Nature, "who formed us in the Womb, with being the Au"thor of a finful Corruption of Nature; and that "it is highly injurious to the God of our Nature, whofe Hands have formed and fashioned us, to "believe our Nature to be originally corrupted, and "that in the worst Senfe of Corruption *.

66

"

With refpect to this, I would obferve in the first Place, that this Writer, in his handling this grand Objection, fuppofes fomething to belong to the Doctrine objected againft, as maintained by the Divines whom he is oppofing, which does not belong to it, nor does follow from it: As particularly, he fuppofes the Doctrine of Original Sin to imply,

[ocr errors]

Page 137, 187, 188, 189, 256, 258, 260. 143, S. and other Places.

« AnteriorContinuar »