N05401:290
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.
Mr. W. again plainly begs the Question in his Reply (P. 127. c. d.) That God's Prohibition is an Argument, that God saw there was no such Tendency for their Conversion. ⟨p. 122⟩His so saying supposes again, that there is no evident Prohibition of unsanctified Persons. In which he again flies to the very Point in Question, and rests the Weight of his Reasoning upon it.
Just in the same Manner, Mr. W. begs the Question in espousing and making use of that Argument, That all in external Covenant, & neither ignorant nor scandalous, are commanded to perform all external Covenant-Duties. Here 'tis supposed, that scandalous Persons (which, according to Mr. W—ms's Scheme, must include all that have not moral Sincerity) tho' in the external Covenant, are expressly, that is, evidently, excepted and forbidden: and that unsanctified Men are not also evidently forbidden; Which is the Point in Question. For if unsanctified Men, tho' in external Covenant, are as evidently forbidden and excepted, as scandalous Men that are in external Covenant, then the Argument touches not one any more than the other. So that the Argument is entirely a Castle in the Air, resting on nothing but it self: The grand Thing to be proved, first taken for granted, and then made an Argument to prove it self!
Just in the same Manner, Mr. W. begs the Question in espousing and making use of that Argument, That all in external Covenant, & neither ignorant nor scandalous, are commanded to perform all external Covenant-Duties. Here 'tis supposed, that scandalous Persons (which, according to Mr. W—ms's Scheme, must include all that have not moral Sincerity) tho' in the external Covenant, are expresly, that is, evidently, excepted and forbidden: and that unsanctified Men are not also evidently forbidden; Which is the Point in Question. For if unsanctified Men, tho' in external Covenant, are as evidently forbidden and excepted, as scandalous Men that are in external Covenant, then the Argument touches not one any more than the other. So that the Argument is entirely a Castle in the Air, resting on nothing but it self: The grand Thing to be proved, first taken for granted, and then made an Argument to prove it self!