N06399:455
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 3 › Section 2
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.
First, that the Apostle means no Universality at all, but only the far greater Part. But if the Words which the Apostle uses, don't most fully and determinately signify an Universality, no Words ever used in the Bible are sufficient to do it. I might challenge any Man to produce any one Paragraph in the Scripture, from the Beginning to the End, where there is such a Repetition and Accumulation of Terms, so strongly and emphatically and carefully to express the most perfect & absolute Universality; or any Place to be compared to it. What Instance is there in the Scripture, or indeed any other Writing, when the Meaning is only the much greater Part, where this Meaning is signified in such a Manner, by repeating such Expressions, They are all,—They are all,—They are all,—,together—every one,—all the World; joined to multiplied negative Terms, to show the Universality to be without Exception; saying, There is no Flesh,—there is none—there is none—there is none—there is none, four times over; besides the Addition of, No, not one,—no, not one,—once and again!
First, that the Apostle means no Universality at all, but only the far greater Part. But if the Words which the Apostle uses, don't most fully and determinately signify an Universality, no Words ever used in the Bible are sufficient to do it. I might challenge any Man to produce any one Paragraph in the Scripture, from the Beginning to the End, where there is such a Repetition and Accumulation of Terms, so strongly and emphatically and carefully to express the most perfect & absolute Universality; or any Place to be compared to it. What Instance is there in the Scripture, or indeed any other Writing, when the Meaning is only the much greater Part, where this Meaning is signified in such a Manner, by repeating such Expressions, They are all,—They are all,—They are all,—,together—every one,—all the World; join'd to multiplied negative Terms, to shew the Universality to be without Exception; saying, There is no Flesh,—there is none—there is none—there is none—there is none, four times over; besides the Addition of, No, not one,—no, not one,—once and again!
Or Secondly, if any Universality at all be allowed, it is only of the collective Bodies spoken of; and these collective Bodies but two, as Dr.T. reckons them, viz. the Jewish Nation, and the Gentile World; supposing the Apostle is here representing each of these Parts of Mankind as being Wicked. But is this the Way of Men's using Language, when speaking of but two Things, to express themselves in universal Terms, of such a Sort, and in such a Manner, and when they mean no more than that the Thing affirmed is predicated of both of them? If a Man speaking of his two Feet as both lame, should say, All my Feet are lame, They are all lame. All together are become weak, None of my Feet are strong, None of them are sound; No, not one; would not he be thought to be lame in his Understanding, as well as his Feet? When the Apostle says, That every Mouth may be stopped, must we suppose, that he speaks only of those two great collective Bodies, figuratively ascribing to each of them a Mouth, and mean that those two Mouths are stopped!