The Evidence of Original Sin from the Nature of Redemption, in the Procurement of It

According to Dr. Taylor’s scheme, a very great part of mankind are the subjects of Clnist’s redemption, who live and die perfectly innocent who never have had, and never will have any sin charged to their account, and never are either the subjects of, or exposed to fiunishment whatsoever, via. all that die in infancy. They are the subjects of Chnst*8 redewfition as he redeems them from dcatli or as they by his righteousness Xwxsi:, juatijicalion and by his obedience are madv rifhtcoiiSy in the resurrection of the body, in liie sense of Rom. V. 18, 19. A”:d cU mankind arc thus the subjects of Clwisl’s redemption, while they are perfectly guiltless, and to no punishment, as by Christ ‘.liey arc intilled to a resurrection. Though, wiih respect to such persons as have sii rd, he allows it hin name sort by Chiist ai»d his riea’.h. ;hai ihcf ;-»ve saved from sin, and the punishmr-’*’ oi’lr. M

Now let us see whether such a scheme well consists with the scripture account of the redemption by Jesus Christ.

I. The representations of the redemption by Christ, everj|- where in scripture, lead us to suppose, that all whom he came to redeem, are sinners; that his salvation, as to the term fro77i nvhicJi (or the evil to be redeemed from) in all is sin and the deserved fiwiishment of sin. It is natural to suppose, that when he had his name Jesus, or Saviour, jyiven him by Gbd*s special and immediate appointment, the salvation meant by that name should be his salvation in general; and not only a part of his salvation, and with regard only to some of them that he came to save. But this name was given him to signify his savi72g Ms fieofile from their sins Matth. i. 21. And the great doctrine of Christ’s salvation is, that he cajne into the world to save sinners, 1 Tim. i. 15. And that Christ hath once suffered, the just for the unjust, 1 Pet. iii. 18. Iri this was manifested the love of God towards us (towards such in general as have the benefit of God’s love in giving Christ) that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him. Herein is love, that he sent his son to be the prO’ pitiation for our sins, 1 John iv, 9, 10. Many other texts might be mentioned, which seem evidently to suppose, that all who are redeemed by Christ, are saved from sin. We are led by what Christ himself said, to suppose, that if any are - not sinners, they have no need of him as a redeemer, any Tiiore than a well man of a physician, Mark ii. 17. And that men, in order to being the proper subjects of the mercy of God through Christ, must first be in a state of sm, is implied in Cal. iii. y’ “But the scripture hath concludcu all uurier sin, that the promir,p by faith of Jesus Christ miiht be given to them thai believe.” To the same effect is Rom. xi. 32.

These things are greatly confirmed liy the scripture doctrine ot hacrifces. It is abunduntly plain, by both old and New Testament, that they were type:i of Christ’s death, and were for sin, and supposed sin in ihose for whom thty were offered. The apostle supposes, that in order to any having lli£ benefit of the eternal inhcr’nance by Christ, there mu&t of y.ecessity be the death of the fruator and gives that ■•■i*$on Ic it, that without shcddiiir ofbtood there is no rfmhuion Hch. ix. 15, Sec. And Chrisi himself, in rcpitst-nlin; the benefit of his blood, in ilic insiituiion of the Lord’s supper, under the notion of hic blood of a testament calls ii, Thr blood of the AVfy Testament shed for the remi’tision of sinny Mut’h. xxvi. 28. But accordinpj lo the scheme of our author, many have the eternal inheritance by tlic death of the testaloi, who nercr had any need of remission.

II. The scripture represents the redemplion by Christ as a redemption from deserved destruction; and that, not merely as it respects some particulars, but as the fruit of God’^ love to mankind. John iii. 16. “God so loved the ivorldy that he gave his only bep;otten son, that whosoever bcheveih in him should not fierish, but have everlasting life:” Implying;, that otherwise they must perish, or be destroyed: But what necessity of this, if they did not deserve to be destroyed? Now, that the destruction here spoken of, is deserved destruction, is manifest, because it is there compared to the perishing of such of the children of Israel as died by the bite of the fiery serpents, which God, in his wrath, for their rebellion sent amongst them. And the same thini clearly appears by the last verse of the same chapter, <’ He that believeth en the Son, hath everlasting life; and he that believeth not the Son, ihall not see life, but the wrath of God abideHi on him,” or, is left remaining on him: Implying, that all in general are found under the wrath of God, and that they only of all mankind, who are interested in Christ, have this wrath removed and eternal life bestowed; the rest are lift with the nvrath of God still remaining on them. The same is clearly illustrated and confirmed by John v. 24.” He that believeth, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation, but is passed from death to life.** In being passed from death to life is implied, that before, they were all in a state of death; and they are spoken gf as being so by a sentence o( condenmo’ fion; and if it be a just condemnation, it is a dcscicd condemnation.

HI. It will follow on Dr. Taylor’s scheme, that Christ’s redemption, with regard to a great part of them who arc the subjects of it, is not only a rede/nption from no siriy but from 710 calaviity and so frcm no evil of any kind. For as to deaths which infants are redeemed from, they neVer were subjected to it as a calamity, but purely as a benefit. It cume by no threatening or curse denounced upon or through Adam; the covenant with him being utterly abolished as to all its force and power on mankind (according to our author) before the pronouncinij of the sentence of mortality. Therefore trouble and death could be appointed to innocent mankind no other way than on the foot of another covenant, the covenant of grace; and in this channel they come only as favors not as evils. Therefore they could need no medicine or remedy, for they had no disease. Even death itself, which it is supposed Christ saves them from, is only a medicine; it is preventing physic, and one of the greatest of benefits. It is ridiculous to talk of persons needing a medicine, or a physician to save them from an excellent medicine; or of a remedy from a happy remedy! If it be 5aid, though death be a benefit, yet it is so because Christ changes it, and turns it into a benefit, by procuring a resurrection: I would here ask, What can be meant by turnvig or changing it into a benefit, when it never was otherwise, nor could ever justly be otherwise? In fants could not be brought under death as a calamity; fo? they never deserved it. And it would be only an abuse (be it far froni us, to ascribe such a tiling to God) in any being, to naake the offer to any poor sufferers, of a redeemer fiom some calamliy, which he had brought upon them* without the least d’^^.vr of it on their part.

But it is plain, that death or mortality was not at first bi ought on mankind as a blessing, on the foot of the covenant of grace through Christ; and that Christ and grace do not bring mankind under death, hwi find them under it. 2 Cor. v, 14. “We thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead.” Luke xix. 10. “The Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.” The grace which appears in providing a deliverer from any slate, supposes the subject to be in that stale iirior to that grace and deliverance; and pot that such a state is first introduced by that grace. In ouP

ORIGINAL Slisr. 386

%“uthor*s scheme, there never could be any sentence of dca’.l or condemnaiion that requiics a Saviour from it; btcause the very sentence itself, accordinfij to ilie tiuc mi-aniii of if, implies and makes sure all that good uhich is requisite to abolish and make void the seenpint«; evil to the innocent subject. So thai the scnience itself ia in efiect the deliverer, and there is no need of another deliverer to deliver from that sentence. Dr. Taylor insists upon it, that Nothing comes upon us in consequence of Adam’s sin, in any sensf kind or drcree, inconsistent with the on’i;inal blcasinir pronounced on Adam at his creation; and noihini hut what is perfectly consistent with God’s blessinp;, love and ijoodness, declared to Adam as soon as he came out of his Maker’s hands.”* If the case be so, it is certain there is no evil or cabniiiy at all for Christ to redeem us from; unless things agreeahlr to the divine goodnetis love and blcsaing are things which we ned redemption from.

IV. It will follow, on our author’s principles, not only with respect to inu.nis, but elen adult persons, that redemption is needless, and Christ is dead in vain. Not only is there no need of Christ’s redemption in order to deliverance froni any consequences of Adam’s sin, but also in ordet to peifect /reedom from personal sin, and all its evil consequences. For God has made other surTicient provision fo that, viz. a sufficient fiQivtr and ability in all 7nankind, to do c:.’! fhf:r duty and ivhollij to avoid sin. Yea, this aullvor insisi ujjon it, that “when men have not sufficient fwioer to do their duty, they have no duty to do. We may safely and assuredly conclude, (says he) that mankind in ail parts of the world, have iufficcient power to do the duty which (iod requires of them; jnd that he requires of them tio more than they have suffi^ xient powers to do.”t And in another place. J •’ God has ^iven powers equal to the duty which he expects.” And he expresses a great dislike at R. R’s supposinc;” that our proj)CBsiiies to evil, and temptation?, are too strong to be cffcciwitUy and confitantiy resisted, or that we a:c unavoidably sinful ia

•i». 88,89, S. + P. Ill, 63, 6., S. ;p. ti7,S’ a degree; that our appetites and passions will be breaking out, notwithstanding our everlasting watchfulness.”* These things fully imply that men have in their own natural ability suffi-^ cient means to avoid sii), and to be perfectly free from it; and so, from all the bad consequences of it. And if the means are svfficimt, then theie is no need of more; and therefore there is no need of Christ’s dying, in Order to it. What Dr. Taylor says, in p. 72, ^S, fully implies that it would be unjust in God to give mankind being in such circumstances, as that they would be more likely to sin, so as to be exposed to final misery, than otherwise. Hence then, without Christ and his redemption, and without any grace at all, mere justice makes sufficient firovision for our being free from sin and misery, by our otvn power.

If all mankind, in all parts of the world, have such sufficient power to do their whole duty, without being sinful in any de» gree, then they have sufficient power to obtain righteousness by the law; and then, according to the Apostle Paul, Christ is dead in vain. Gal. ii. 21. “If righteousness come by the law, Christ is dead in vain ;*...h» »o/^8, without the article, bij laip, or the rule of right action, as our author explains the phrase. t And according to the sense in which he explains this very place, “It would have frustrated or rendered useless the grace of God, if Christ died to accomplish what was or might have been effected by law itself, without his death.”| So that it most clearly follows from his own doctrine, that Christ is dtad in vain and the grace of God is nselesst The same apostle says, *’ If there had been a“4aw which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law,” Gal. iii. 21; i. e. (still according to Dr. Taylor’s own sense) iftherewasa law that man, in his present slate, had sijfficitnt p(nver perfectly to fulfil. For Dr. Taylor supposes the reason why the law could not give life, to be, “not because it was weak in itself, but through the weakness of our flesh, and the infirmity of the human nature in the present stale. “§

P. 68, S. + Pref. to Par. on Rom p. 143, 38. % Note on Rom, V, 20, p. 297. Ibid.

But he says, “We are under a. mild dispcnsalion of (frorr, makini allowance for our infirniilics.”* By our irifirniiUcHy viQ may upon good grounds suppose hu means ihni iuGrmity of human nature which he gives as the reason why the law cannot give life. But what grace is there in miking that allowance for our infirmities, which justice itself faccordinjj; to his doctrine) most absfplutcly requires, as he supposes divine justice exactly proportions our duly to our ability?

Again, If it be said, that although Christ’s redemption was not necessary to preserve men from hcgimiinr to sin, and getting into a course of sin, becuuse they have suflkient power in themselves to avoid it; yet it may 1)6 necessary to deliver men, after they have by their own Ojlly brouglu themselves under the domimon of evil appetites and passions. f I answer, if it be so, that men need deliverance fiom ihoso habits and passions, which are become too strong for them, yet that deliverance, on our author’s principles, would be no salvation from sin. For, the exercise of passions which are too strong for us, and which we cannot overcome, is necessary y and he strongly urges that a ucccssaiy evil can be no moral evil. It is true, it is the eject of evil, as it is the ejjrct of a bad practice, while the man remained at liberty, and had power to have avoided it. But then, according to Dr. Taylor, that evil cau.^c alone is sin; and hot so, the necessary ej’tcf g Tov he says expressly, The cause cf every eflect is ahne chargeable with the effect it pioduceih, or which proceedeth from it. “I And as to thnt sin which was the causr the man needed no Saviour from that, having had sufficient fiovjrr in himself to have avoided it. So that it follows, by our author’s scheme, that none of mankind, nr ixlier infants nor adult persons, neither the more nor less vicious, neither Jews nor Gentiles, neither Heathens nor Christians, ever did or ever could stand in any need of a Saviour; and that, whh res()cci to ally the truth is, Christ is dead in vain.

Po 92, S. t See p. 228, ami als.> what he says of the hclpleM itatc

of the Heatheo, in Par. and Note* on Rom. vii. and beginning ol Chap. vl;:.

If any should say, Although all mankind in all ages have sufficient ability to do their whole duly, and so may by their own power enjoy perfect freedom from sin, yet God for esaif that they would siriy and that after they had sinned, they Mould need Christ’s death; I answer, it is plain by what the apostle says in those places which were just now mentioned, Gal. ii. 21, and iii. 21, that God would have esteemed it needless to iive his Son to die for men, unless there had been a prior impossibility of their having righteousness by law; and that, if there had been a law which could have given life, this other way by the death of Christ would not have been provided. And this appears to be agreeable to our author’s own sense of things, by his words which have been cited, wherein he says, “It would h&vefrusti-ated or rendered useless the grace of God, if Christ died to accomplish what, was or might have been effected by law itself, without his death.”

V. It will follow on Dr. Taylor’s scheme, not only that Christ’s redemption is needless for the saving from sin, or its consequences, but also that it does no good that way, has no tendency to any diminution of sin in the world. For as to any infusion of virtue or holiness into the heart, by divine power through Christ or his redemption, it is altogether inconsistent with this author’s notions. With him, hiivrought virtue, if there were any such thing, would be no virtue; not being the effect of our own will, choice and design, but only of a sovereign act of God’s power.* And therefore, all that Christ does to increase virtue, is only increasing our talents, our light, advantages, means and motives, as lie often explains the niatter.f But sin is not at all diminished. For he says, Our duty must be measured by cur taUmts; as, a child that has lehs talents, lias less duty, and therefore must be no more exposed to commit sin, than he that has greater talents, because he that has greater talents, has moie duty required, in exact proportion, t If so, he that has but one talent, has as much

See p3p;es 18o, 245, 250. + In p. 44, 50, and innumerable other

places. % See p. 834, 61, 64... 70, S.

itdvantage to perform that one degree of duty which is required of him, as he that hasvr talents, to perform %five degrees of duly, and is no more exposed lo fail of it. And that man’s guilty who sins against greater advanta^es, means and motives, is greater in proportion to his talents, t And therefore it will follow, on Dr. Taylor’s principles, that men stand no b«tter chance have no more eligible or valuable probability of freedom from sin and punishment, or of contracting but little guilt, or of performing required dui, with the great advantages and talents implied in Christ’s redemption, than without them; when all things are computed, and put into the balances together, the numbers, degrees and aggravations of sin exposed to, degrees of duty required, 8cc So that men have no redemption from sin, and no new means of performing duty, that arc valuable or worth any thing at all. And thus the great redemption by Christ in every respect comes tfy nothing, with regard both to infants and adult persons.