N05401:279
Misrepresentations corrected, and truth vindicated. In a reply to the Rev. Mr. Solomon Williams's…
Misrepresentations corrected, and truth vindicated. In a reply to the Rev. Mr. Solomon Williams's book, entitled, The true state of the question concerning the qualifications necessary to lawful communion in the Christian sacraments. / By Jonathan Edwards, M.A. Minister of the Gospel at Stockbridge. ; [Five lines of Scripture texts]Misrepresentations corrected, and truth vindicated. In a reply to the Rev. Mr. Solomon Williams's book, intitled, The true state of the question concerning the qualifications necessary to lawful communion in the Christian sacraments. / By Jonathan Edwards, M.A. Minister of the Gospel at Stockbridge. ; [Five lines of Scripture texts]
Boston: printed by S. Kneeland, 1752
Title page typeset from the transcription.
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.
I would now consider the Instances, wherein Mr. W. asserts or suggests that I have begged the Question.
I would now consider the Instances, wherein Mr. W. asserts or suggests that I have begg'd the Question.
In P. 30. d, e. & 31. a, b. he represents the Force of my Reasoning as built on a Supposition, That there is no unsanctified Man, but what knows he has no Desire of Salvation by Christ, no Design to fulfil the Covenant of Grace, but designs to live in Stealing, Lying, Adultery,—or some other known Sin: And then says, Is it not manifest, that such Sort of Reasoning is a mere quibbling with Words, and begging the Question? And so insinuates, that I have thus begged the Question. Whereas, I no where say or suppose this which he speaks of, nor any Thing like it. But on the contrary, often say, what supposes an unsanctified Man may think he is truly godly, and that he has truly upright and gracious Designs and Desires.—Nor does any Argument of mine depend on any such Supposition. Nay, under the Argument he speaks of, I expressly suppose the contrary, viz. That unsanctified Men who visibly enter into Covenant, may be deceived.
In P. 30. d, e. & 31. a, b. he represents the Force of my Reasoning as built on a Supposition, That there is no unsanctified Man, but what knows he has no Desire of Salvation by Christ, no Design to fulfil the Covenant of Grace, but designs to live in Stealing, Lying, Adultery,—or some other known Sin: And then says, Is it not manifest, that such Sort of Reasoning is a meer quibbling with Words, and begging the Question? And so insinuates, that I have thus begged the Question. Whereas, I no where say or suppose this which he speaks of, nor any Thing like it. But on the contrary, often say, what supposes an unsanctified Man may think he is truly godly, and that he has truly upright and gracious Designs and Desires.—Nor does any Argument of mine depend on any such Supposition. Nay, under the Argument he speaks of, I expresly suppose the contrary, viz. That unsanctified Men who visibly enter into Covenant, may be deceived.