N06399:325
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 2 › Chapter 1 › Section 1
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.
Here also it is worthy to be observed, that Dr. T. P. 128. says, The Cause of every Effect, alone, is chargeable with the Effect it produceth, or which proceedeth from it: And so he argues that if the Effect be bad, the Cause alone is sinful. According to which Reasoning, when the Effect is good, the Cause alone is righteous or virtuous; to the Cause is to be ascribed all the Praise of the good Effect it produceth. And by the same Reasoning it will follow, that if, as Dr. T. says, Adam must choose to be righteous, before he was righteous, and if it be essential to the Nature of Righteousness or moral Rectitude, that it be the Effect of Choice, and hence a Principle of Benevolence can't have moral Rectitude, unless it proceeds from Choice; then not to the Principle of Benevolence, which is the Effect, but to the foregoing Choice alone, is to be ascribed all the Virtue or Righteousness that is in the Case. And so in Stead of all moral Rectitude, in every Part of it, being ⟨p. 144⟩resolved into that single Principle of Benevolence, no moral Rectitude, in any Part of it, is to be resolved into that Principle: But all is to be resolved into the foregoing Choice, which is the Cause.
Here also it is worthy to be observed, that Dr. T. P. 128. says, The Cause of every Effect, alone, is chargeable with the Effect it produceth, or which proceedeth from it: And so he argues that if the Effect be bad, the Cause alone is sinful. According to which Reasoning, when the Effect is good, the Cause alone is righteous or virtuous; to the Cause is to be ascribed all the Praise of the good Effect it produceth. And by the same Reasoning it will follow, that if, as Dr. T. says, Adam must chuse to be righteous, before he was righteous, and if it be essential to the Nature of Righteousness or moral Rectitude, that it be the Effect of Choice, and hence a Principle of Benevolence can't have moral Rectitude, unless it proceeds from Choice; then not to the Principle of Benevolence, which is the Effect, but to the foregoing Choice alone, is to be ascribed all the Virtue or Righteousness that is in the Case. And so in Stead of all moral Rectitude, in every Part of it, being ⟨p. 144⟩resolved into that single Principle of Benevolence, no moral Rectitude, in any Part of it, is to be resolved into that Principle: But all is to be resolved into the foregoing Choice, which is the Cause.