The Great Christian Doctrine of Original Sin Defended

followmg Discourse is intended not merely as an answer to any particular Book written against the Doctrine o/* Original Sin, but as a general Defence of that great imfiort’ ant Doctrine, JVevertheless I have in this Defence taken notice of the wain things said against this Doctrine by such of the more noted opfiosers of it, as I have had o/i/iortunity to read; particularly those t%vo late Writers, Dr. Turnbull and Dr. Taylor of Norwich; but esfiecially the latter, in what he has fiublishedin those two Books of his, the first intitled, The Scripture Doctrine of Original Sin proposed to free and candid Examination; the other, his Key to the Apostolic Writings, with a Paraphrase and Notes on the Epistle to the Romans. I have closely attended to Dr. Taylor’s Piece on Original Sin, in all its Parts and have endeavored that no one thing there said, of any consequence in this Controversy, should pass imnO’ ticed, or that any thiyig which has the appearance of an Argutnent, in opposition to this Doctrine, should be left unanswered, I look on the Doctrine as of great Importance; which every Body will doubtless own it is, if it be true. For, if the case be such indeed, that all Mankind are by Nature in a State 0/ total Ruin, both with respect to the moral Evil they are the subjects and the afflictive Evil they are exposed to, the one as the consequence and punishment of the other, then doubtless the great Salvation by Christ stands in direct Relation to this Ruin, as the remedy to the disease; and the whole Gospel, or Doctrine of Salvation, must suppose it; and all real belief or true notion of that Gospel, must be built upon it. Therefore, us I think the. Doctrine is most certainly both true and important, I hope, my attempting a YiwlCdiiiQn of it, will be candidly interpreted; and that what I have done towards its defence will be impartially considered, by all that will give themselves the trouble to read the ensuing Discourse; in which it is designed to examine every ‘y PREFACE.

thing 7natcrial throughout the Doctor’s whole Booky and ?napii, things in that other Book of Dr. Taylor’s, containing his Key and expositioTi en Romans; as also inanij things written in op.- position to this Doctrine by some other modern Authors* And moreover, my discourse being not only intended for an Answer to Dr. Taylor, a7id other op/iosers of the Doctrine of Original Siuy but (as was observed above) for a general defence of that Doctrine; producing the evidence of the truth of the Doctrine, as well as answering objections made against it. ...considering these things, I say, I hope this attempt of mine will not be thought needless, nor be altogether useless, notwithstanding oth-’ er publications on this subject.

I would also hope, that the extetisiveness of the plan of the following treatise will excuse the length of it. And that when it is considered, honu much was absolutely requisite to the full executing of a design formed on such a plan; how much has been written against the Doctrine of Original Sin, and with what plausibility; and how strong the prejudices of many are in favor of what is said in opposition to this Doctrine; and that it cannot be expected, any thing short of a full consideration of almost every argument advanced by the main opposers, especially by this late and specious Writer, Dr. Taylor, will satisfy many readers; and also, how much must unavoidably be said in order to a full handling of the arguments in defence of the Doctrine; and hovj important the Doctrine must be, if true; 1 6ay, when such circumstances as these are considered, I trust, the length of the following discourse will not be thought to exceed what the case really required. However, this 7nust be left to the Judg* ment of the intelligent and candid Reader.

Stockbridge, May 2G, IToT.

Keep reading