N05401:297
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.
These various Kinds of Inconsistence have many of 'em been already observed: And will further appear by a particular Consideration of what he says on several Heads, in what remains.
In my third Argument, I insisted, that it could not be much to God's Honour, for Men to profess the Assent of their Judgment to the true Religion, without pretending to any real Friendship or Love to God in their Hearts. Mr. W. in Opposition, (P. 34. d, e.) speaks of it as an Honour to God, that secret Hypocrites openly declare their Conviction of the Truth of God's Word, &c. as in the Multitude of Subjects is the King's Honour. And yet he himself represents the Matter quite otherwise in his Sermons on CHRIST a King and Witness; there (in P. 87. a.) He has these Words, To promote the Kingdom of Christ, is not to do that which may prevail with Men to make Pretences that they are Christians, or that they own Jesus Christ as their Saviour, and to call him Lord, Lord, when really he is not so.
In Answer to my fourth Argument (P. 35. d.) Mr. W. says, I make a great Misrepresentation of the Matter, in insinuating that according to Mr. S—d's Scheme (which Scheme he declares himself to be of) they who are admitted make a Pretence of NO MORE than moral Sincerity, and common Grace. And yet he insists, that when Philip required a Profession of the Eunuch's Faith, his Question designed NO MORE than an Assent of the Understanding (P. 51. a, b.) which he there distinguishes from saving Faith: And says, that 'tis morally certain that his Enquiry amounted to NO MORE. And yet in his Discourse on the same Head (P. 49. c.) he inveigh's against me for supposing it a Consequence of the Opinion of my Opposers, that the Eunuch, in Order to come to Sacraments, had no Manner of Need to look at any such Qualification in himself as saving Faith.— Certainly the Eunuch in making Answer to Philip's Enquiry, had no Need to look at any more than Philip enquired after. In P. 50. a. he says, It don't seem at all probable, that Philip ENQUIRED ANY THING about the Regeneration or Sanctification of the Eunuch. And yet in the next preceding Sentence, he refers me over to another Judgment, for representing as tho' my Opposers supposed, that it was no Matter whether a Person coming to Gospel-Ordinances had any Grace or not, and had no Manner of Need to enquire any Thing about his Sincerity.