N06399:104
The great Christian doctrine of original sin defended
The great Christian doctrine of original sin defended; evidences of it's [sic] truth produced, and arguments to the contrary answered. Containing, in particular, a reply to the objections and arguings of Dr. John Taylor, in his book, entitled, "The Scripture-doctrine of original sin proposed to free and candid examination, &c. / By the late Reverend and learned Jonathan Edwards, president of the College of New-Jersey. ; [Thirteen lines of quotations]The great Christian doctrine of original sin defended; evidences of it's [sic] truth produced, and arguments to the contrary answered. Containing, in particular, a reply to the objections and arguings of Dr. John Taylor, in his book, intitled, "The Scripture-doctrine of original sin proposed to free and candid examination, &c. / By the late Reverend and learned Jonathan Edwards, president of the College of New-Jersey. ; [Thirteen lines of quotations]
printed by S. Kneeland, 1758
The great Christian Doctrine of ORIGINAL SIN defended. › Part 1 › Chapter 1 › Section 3
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.
SECT. III.
That Propensity which has been proved to be in the Nature of all Mankind, must be a very evil, depraved and pernicious Propensity; making it manifest that the Soul of Man, as it is by Nature, is in a corrupt, fallen and ruined State: which is the other Part of the Consequence, drawn from the Proposition laid down in the first Section.
That Propensity which has been proved to be in the Nature of all Mankind, must be a very evil, depraved and pernicious Propensity; making it manifest that the Soul of Man, as it is by Nature, is in a corrupt, fallen and ruin'd State: which is the other Part of the Consequence, drawn from the Proposition laid down in the first Section.
THE Question to be considered, in Order to determine whether Man's Nature is not depraved and ruined, is not, Whether he is not inclined to perform as many good Deeds as bad ones? But, Which of these two he preponderates to, in the Frame of his Heart, and State of his Nature, a State of Innocence and Righteousness, and Favour with God; or a State of Sin, Guiltiness and Abhorrence in the Sight of God?—Persevering sinless Righteousness, or else the Guilt of Sin, is the Alternative, the Decision of which depends (as is confessed) according to the Nature and Truth of Things, as they are in themselves, and according to the Rule of Right and of perfect Justice, Man's being approved and accepted of his Maker, and eternally blessed as good; or his being rejected, thrown away and cursed as bad. And therefore the Determination of the Tendency of Man's Heart and Nature with respect to these Terms, is that which is to be looked at, in Order to determine whether his Nature is good or evil, pure or corrupt, sound or ruined. If such be Man's Nature, and state of his Heart, that he has an infallibly effectual Propensity to the latter of those Terms; then it is wholly impertinent, to talk of the innocent and kind Actions, even of Criminals themselves, surpassing their Crimes in Numbers; and of the prevailing Innocence, good Nature, Industry, Felicity and Cheerfulness of the greater Part of Mankind. Let never so many Thousands, or Millions of Acts of Honesty, good Nature &c.