N06399:565
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 4 › 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.
The Apostle's aiming to confute the Jewish Notion, is the principal Occasion of those Words in the 13th v. For until the Law, Sin was in the World; but Sin is not imputed, when there is no Law.
As to the Import of that Expression, Even over them that had not sinned after the Similitude of Adam's Transgression, not only is the Thing signified by it, in Dr.T—r's Sense of it, not true; or if it had been true, would have ⟨p. 280⟩been impertinent, as has been shown: But his Interpretation is, otherwise, very much strained & unnatural. According to him, by "sinning after the Similitude of Adam's Transgression," is not meant any Similitude of the Act of sinning, nor of the Command sinned against, nor properly any Circumstance of the Sin; but only the Similitude of a Circumstance of the Command, viz. the Threatening it is attended with. A far-fetched Thing, to be called a Similitude of sinning! Besides, this Expression, in such a Meaning, is only a needless, impertinent, and awkward Repeating over again the same Thing, which, it is supposed, the Apostle had observed in the foregoing Verse, even after he had left it, & had proceeded another Step in the Series of his Discourse, or Chain of Arguing. As thus, in the foregoing Verse, the Apostle had plainly laid down his Argument (as our Author understands it) by which he would prove, Death did not come by personal Sin viz. that Death reigned before any Law, threatening Death for personal Sin, was in Being; so that the Sin th•n committed was against n• Law, threatening Death for personal Sin. Having laid this down, the Apostle leaves this Part of his Argument, & proceeds another Step, Nevertheless Death reigned from Adam to Moses: And then returns, in a strange, unnatural Manner, and repeats that Argument or Assertion again, but only more obscurely than before, in these Words, Even over them that had not sinned after the Similitude of Adam's Transgression, i. e. over them that had not sinned against a Law threatening Death for personal Sin. Which is just the same Thing, as if the Apostle had said, They that sinned before the Law, did not sin against a Law threatening Death for personal Sin; for there was no such Law, for any to sin against, at that Time: Nevertheless Death reigned at that Time, even over such as did not sin against a Law threatening Death for personal Sin.—Which latter Clause adds Nothing to the Premises, and tends Nothing to illustrate what was said before, but rather to obscure and darken it.