A27059:104
Two disputations of original sin I. of original sin as from Adam, II. of…
Two disputations of original sin I. of original sin as from Adam, II. of original sin as from our nearer parents : written long ago for a more private use, and now published (with a preface) upon the invitation of Dr. T. Tully / by Richard Baxter.Two disputations of original sin I. of original sin as from Adam, II. of original sin as from our neerer parents : written long ago for a more private use, and now published (with a preface) upon the invitation of Dr. T. Tullie / by Richard Baxter.
London: printed for Robert Gibbs, 1675
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.
Arg. 1. Man was naturally able and disposed to know God to be God, and his God: go. He was naturally able and disposed to love him as God, and his God: which is the sum of his Original Righteousness.
By disposed, I mean morally inclined, and not void of that holy inclination to love God, which is the life of morality, and rectitude of the will.
The Antecedent is undoubted: if the rational nature had not been disposed to know God, it had been blind, deformed, and not fit for the ends of its creation.
The Consequence is proved thus. If the understanding had been disposed to know God, and not the will to love him as God, then the will would have been created lame, and deformed, and unfit for the ends of its creation; and there would have been a disproportion, if not a conflict, between the faculties of the soul: but the Consequent is not to be admitted: go. nor the Antecedent.