A27029:416
The Scripture Gospel defended, and Christ, grace, and free justification vindicated against the libertines…
The Scripture Gospel defended, and Christ, grace, and free justification vindicated against the libertines ... in two books : the first, a breviate of fifty controversies about justification ... : the second upon the sudden reviving of antinomianism ... and the re-printing of Dr. Crisp's sermons with additions ... / by Richard Baxter ...
London: printed for Tho. Parkhurst, 1690
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
2. What you say of Adams sin being ours by Covenant Relation, as distinct from Natural Relation, is unsound, and the matter needeth fuller explication, ⟨p. 103⟩which as aforesaid I have attempted in my Disputation of Original Sin. And as unsound is it that Natural Relation brings none but Temporal Evil. It cannot be proved, nor is to be affirmed, that without natural derivation, we derive by mere Covenant the guilt of Adams sin; no nor that Covenant derivation is before the natural, nor yet that it goeth any further, or that we contract any more guilt by Covenant, than we do by nature; but the Law of nature it self and Gods congruous Covenant is that which virtually judgeth us guilty, when natural derivation hath made us guilty (as Dr. Twice oft as aforesaid.)
2. What you say of Adams sin being ours by Covenant Relation, as distinct from Natural Relation, is unsound, and the matter needeth fuller explication, ⟨p. 103⟩which as aforesaid I have attempted in my Disputation of Original Sin. And as unsound is it that Natural Relation brings none but Temporal Evil. It cannot be proved, nor is to be affirmed, that without natural derivation, we derive by meer Covenant the guilt of Adams sin; no nor that Covenant derivation is before the natural, nor yet that it goeth any further, or that we contract any more guilt by Covenant, than we do by nature; but the Law of nature it self and Gods congruous Covenant is that which virtually judgeth us guilty, when natural derivation hath made us guilty (as Dr. Twisse oft as aforesaid.)
Do you mean that guilt resulteth from Gods part of the Covenant, or from Adams, or from his Posterities? Not from ours, for we existed not, and made no such Covenant. Not from Adams part (antecedent to Natural Derivation.) For 1. No man can prove that ever Adam made such a Covenant. 2. Or that God gave him any such power, (much less Command) to bring sin and death on his Posterity by his Consent, or Will, or Contract, further than by the Law of Nature they must derive it from him if he sinned. 3. Not by Gods Covenant act: For, 1. No such Covenant of God can be shown, that made men sinners further than Natural Derivation did. 2. Else God should be the Author of sin, even of all mens Original sin, if his Arbitrary Covenant made them sinners, where nature did not.