This is a clear Text to prove our universal contagion by sin, yet upon what weak and poor grounds would the Remonstrants oppose it; They therefore by flesh understand, Man simply as man, flesh and blood, begotten in a fleshly and bodily manner, not as sinful and corrupted; as if our Saviours Argument had been, as what is born of man is man, so what is born of the Spirit is spiritual: But this is very unsound: For what Argument would this be to prove Regeneration? Must a man be new born merely because he is a man? Certainly had Adam continued in the state of integrity, there would have been procreation of children, yet then there would not have been a necessity of Regeneration: Our Saviour therefore is giving a reason, why there must be a new birth, and that is from the sinful pollution every one is born in: And whereas the reason they give, why by flesh cannot be meant, wholly sinful, Because (say they) then in the opposition, by Spirit, would be meant wholly spiritual, whereas the Orthodox do acknowledge a conflict with the Spirit, and the flesh abiding in every regenerate man: But to this the Answer is, That the abstract is put for the concrete, spirit for spiritual, so that the Subject in the Proposition [Born of the Spirit] Spirit is the holy Spirit of God; and the Predicate [is made spirit] Spirit is to be understood of that spiritual and heavenly nature wrought in us by him; And although he who is ⟨p. 138⟩made thus spiritual, is not purely and absolutely so, yet the Spirit will in time subdue and wholly conquer the flesh, in which sense Gal. 5. They that are Christs are said to have crucified the flesh with the lusts thereof; Although there be the relics and remainders of it still in the most holy.
This is a clear Text to prove our universal contagion by sinne, yet upon what weak and poor grounds would the Remonstrants oppose it; They therefore by flesh understand, Man simply as man, flesh and blood, begotten in a fleshly and bodily manner, not as sinfull and corrupted; as if our Saviours Argument had been, as what is born of man is man, so what is born of the Spirit is spiritual: But this is very unsound: For what Argument would this be to prove Regeneration? Must a man be new born meerly because he is a man? Certainly had Adam continued in the state of integrity, there would have been procreation of children, yet then there would not have been a necessity of Regeneration: Our Saviour therefore is giving a reason, why there must be a new birth, and that is from the sinfull pollution every one is born in: And whereas the reason they give, why by flesh cannot be meant, wholly sinfull, Because (say they) then in the opposition, by Spirit, would be meant wholly spirituall, whereas the Orthodox do acknowledge a conflict with the Spirit, and the flesh abiding in every regenerate man: But to this the Answer is, That the abstract is put for the concrete, spirit for spiritual, so that the Subject in the Proposition [Born of the Spirit] Spirit is the holy Spirit of God; and the Predicate [is made spirit] Spirit is to be understood of that spiritual and heavenly nature wrought in us by him; And although he who is ⟨p. 138⟩made thus spiritual, is not purely and absolutely so, yet the Spirit will in time subdue and wholly conquer the flesh, in which sense Gal. 5. They that are Christs are said to have crucified the flesh with the lusts thereof; Although there be the reliques and remainders of it still in the most holy.