Part 10

[Sidenote: _Answ. 1._] I answer; This Nature must not, neither can be understood of _Man’s own Nature_, which is corrupt and fallen; but of the _Spiritual Nature_, which proceedeth from the _Seed of God in Man_, as it receiveth a new Visitation of God’s Love, and is quickened by it: Which clearly appears by the following Words, where he saith, [Sidenote: _By what Nature the _Gentiles_ did do the Things of the Law._] _These not having a Law, _(i. e. outwardly)_ are a Law unto themselves; which shews the Work of the Law written in their Hearts_. These Acts of theirs then are an Effect of the Law written in their Hearts; but the Scripture declareth, that the Writing of the Law in the Heart is a Part, yea, and a great Part too, of the New Covenant Dispensation, and so no Consequence nor Part of Man’s Nature.

[Sidenote: _Answ. 2._] _Secondly_, If this Nature here spoken of could be understood of Man’s own Nature, which he hath as he is a Man, then would the Apostle unavoidably contradict himself; since he elsewhere positively declares, [Sidenote: _The natural Man discerneth not_, &c.] _That the natural Man discerneth not the Things of God, nor can_. Now I hope the Law of God is among the Things of God, especially as it is written in the Heart. The Apostle, in the viith Chap. of the same Epistle, saith, Ver. 12. that _the Law is, Holy, Just, and Good_; and Ver. 14. the _Law is Spiritual, but he is Carnal_. Now in what Respect is he Carnal, but as he stands in the Fall unregenerate? Now what Inconsistency would here be, to say, That he is Carnal, and yet not so of his own Nature, seeing it is from his Nature that he is so denominated? We see the Apostle contra-distinguisheth the Law as Spiritual, from Man’s Nature as Carnal and Sinful. Wherefore, as Christ saith, [52]_There can no Grapes be expected from Thorns, nor Figs of Thistles_; so neither can the fulfilling of the Law, which is Spiritual, Holy, and Just, be expected from that Nature which is Corrupt, Fallen, and Unregenerate. Whence we conclude, with good Reason, that the Nature here spoken of, by which the _Gentiles_ are said to have done the _Things contained in the Law_, is not the _common Nature of Men_; [Sidenote: _The _Gentiles_ Spiritual Nature in doing the Law._] but that _Spiritual Nature_ that ariseth from the Works of the righteous and Spiritual Law that is written in the Heart. I confess they of the other Extreme, when they are pressed with this Testimony by the _Socinians_ and _Pelagians_, as well as by us when we use this Scripture, to shew them how some of the _Heathens_, by the _Light of Christ in their Heart, came to be saved, are very far to seek; giving this Answer_, That _there were some Reliques of the heavenly Image left in _Adam_, by which the _Heathens_ could do some good Things_. Which, as it is in itself without Proof, so it contradicts their own Assertions elsewhere, and gives away their Cause. For if these Reliques were of Force to enable them to fulfil the righteous Law of God, it takes away the Necessity of Christ’s coming; or at least leaves them a Way to be saved without him; unless they will say (which is worst of all) _That though they really fulfilled the righteous Law of God, yet God damned them, because of the Want of that particular Knowledge, while he himself with-held all Means of their coming to him from them_; but of this hereafter.

[52] Mat. 7. 16.

§. III. I might also here use another Argument from these Words of the Apostle, 1 _Cor._ ii. where he so positively excludes the natural Man from an Understanding in the Things of God; but because I have spoken of _that Scripture_ in the Beginning of the second Proposition, I will here avoid to repeat what is there mentioned, referring thereunto: [Sidenote: Socinians _exalting the Light of the natural Man._] Yet because the _Socinians_ and others, who exalt the Light of the natural Man, or a natural Light in Man, do object against this Scripture, I shall remove it before I proceed.[53]

[53] Antequam progrediar.

[Sidenote: Object.] They say, _The _Greek_ Word _[Greek: psychikos: ψυχικος]_ ought to be translated _animal_, and not _natural_; else, _say they_, it would have been_ [Greek: physikos: φυσικος]. From which they seek to infer, _that it is only the Animal Man, and not the Rational, that is excluded here from discerning the Things of God_. Which _Shift_, without disputing about the Word, is easily refuted; neither is it any wise consistent with the Scope of the Place. For

[Sidenote: _Answ. 1._] [Sidenote: _The Animal Life is the same with Natural._] _First_, The _Animal Life_ is no other than that which Man hath in common with other living Creatures; for as he is a mere Man, he differs no otherwise from Beasts than by the _Rational Property_. Now the Apostle deduceth his Argument in the foregoing Verses from this _Simile_; That _as the Things of a Man cannot be known but by the Spirit of a Man, so the Things of God no Man knoweth but by the Spirit of God_. But I hope these Men will confess unto me, that the Things of a Man are not known by the _Animal Spirit_ only, _i. e._ by that which he hath in common with the Beasts, but by the _Rational_; so that it must be the _Rational_ that is here understood. Again, the Assumption shews clearly that the Apostle had no such Intent as these Men’s Gloss would make him have, viz. _So the Things of God knoweth no Man, but the Spirit of God_. According to their Judgment he should have said, _The Things of God knoweth no Man by his Animal Spirit, but by his Rational Spirit_: For to say, _The Spirit of God_, here spoken of, is no other than the _Rational Spirit of Man_, would border upon Blasphemy, since they are so often contra-distinguished. Again, going on, he saith not that they are _Rationally_, but _Spiritually discerned_.

[Sidenote: _Answ. 2._] _Secondly_, The Apostle throughout this Chapter shews how the Wisdom of Man is unfit to judge of the Things of God, and ignorant of them. Now I ask these Men, whether a Man be called a _Wise Man_ from his _Animal Property_, or from his _Rational_? [Sidenote: _The Rational Man in the Natural State excluded from discerning the Things of God._] If from his _Rational_, then it is not only the _Animal_, but also the _Rational_, as he is yet in the Natural State, which the Apostle excludes here, and whom he contra-distinguisheth from the Spiritual, Ver. 15. _But the Spiritual Man judgeth all Things._ This cannot be said of any Man merely because _Rational_, or as he is a Man, seeing the Men of the greatest Reason, if we may so esteem Men, whom the Scripture calls _Wise_, as were the _Greeks_ of Old, not only may be, but often are Enemies to the Kingdom of God; while both the _Preaching of Christ_ is said to be _Foolishness with the Wise Men of the World_, and the _Wisdom of the World_ is said to be _Foolishness with God_. Now whether it be any ways probable that either these Wise Men that are said to account the _Gospel Foolishness_, are only so called with respect to their _Animal Property_, and not their _Rational_; or that the _Wisdom_ that is Foolishness with God is not meant of the _Rational_, but only the _Animal Property_, any Rational Man, laying aside Interest, may easily judge.

§. IV. [Sidenote: Infants, _no Sin imputed to them_.] I come now to the other Part, to wit, That _this evil and corrupt Seed is not imputed to Infants, until they actually join with it_. For this there is a Reason given in the End of the Proposition itself, drawn from _Ephes._ ii. For these are _by Nature Children of Wrath, who walk according to the Prince of the Power of the Air, the Spirit that now worketh in the Children of Disobedience_. Here the Apostle gives their evil walking, and not any Thing that is not reduced to act, as a Reason of their being _Children of Wrath_. And this is suitable to the whole Strain of the Gospel, where no Man is ever threatened or judged for what Iniquity he hath not actually wrought: Such indeed as continue in Iniquity, and so do allow the Sins of their Fathers, God will visit the Iniquity of the Fathers upon the Children.

Is it not strange then that Men should entertain an Opinion so absurd in itself, and so cruel and contrary to the Nature as well of God’s Mercy as Justice, concerning which the Scripture is altogether silent? But it is manifest that Man hath invented this Opinion out of Self-love, and from that bitter Root from which all Errors spring; [Sidenote: _The absolute Decree of Election springs from Self-love._] for the most Part of _Protestants_ that hold this, having, as they fancy, the _Absolute Decree of Election_ to secure them and their Children, so as they cannot miss of Salvation, they make no Difficulty to send all others, both Old and Young, to Hell. For whereas Self-love, which is always apt to believe that which it desires, possesseth them with an Hope that their Part is secure, they are not solicitous how they leave their Neighbours, which are the far greater Part of Mankind, in these inextricable Difficulties. The _Papists_ again use this Opinion as an Art to augment the Esteem of their Church, and Reverence of its Sacraments, seeing they pretend it is washed away by Baptism; only in this they appear to be a little more merciful, in that they send not these unbaptized Infants to Hell, but to a certain _Limbus_, concerning which the Scriptures are as silent as of the other. This then is not only not authorized in the Scriptures, but contrary to the express Tenor of them. The Apostle saith plainly, _Rom._ iv. 15. _Where no Law is, there is no Transgression._ And again, v. 13. _But Sin is not imputed, where there is no Law._ [Sidenote: _To Infants there is no Law so no Transgression._] Than which Testimonies there is nothing more positive; since to Infants there is no Law, seeing as such they are utterly uncapable of it; the Law cannot reach any but such as have in some Measure less or more the Exercise of their Understanding, which Infants have not. So that from thence I thus argue:

Sin is imputed to none, where there is no Law.

But to Infants there is no Law:

Therefore Sin is not imputed to them.

The _Proposition_ is the Apostle’s own Words; the _Assumption_ is thus proved:

Those who are under a Physical Impossibility of either hearing, knowing, or understanding any Law, where the Impossibility is not brought upon them by any Act of their own, but is according to the very Order of Nature appointed by God; to such there is no Law.

But Infants are under this Physical Impossibility:

Therefore, _&c._

_Secondly_, What can be more positive than that of _Ezek._ xviii. 20. _The Soul that sinneth, it shall die: The Son shall not bear the Father’s Iniquity?_ For the Prophet here first sheweth what is the Cause of Man’s Eternal Death, which he saith is his _Sinning_; and then, as if he purposed expresly to shut out such an Opinion, he assures us, _The Son shall not bear the Father’s Iniquity_. From which I thus argue:

[Sidenote: _Infants bear not _Adam_’s Transgression._] If the Son bear not the Iniquity of his Father, or of his immediate Parents, far less shall he bear the Iniquity of _Adam_.

But the Son shall not bear the Iniquity of his Father:

_Therefore_, &c.

§. V. Having thus far shewn how absurd this Opinion is, I shall briefly examine the Reasons its Authors bring for it.

[Sidenote: Obj. 1.] _First, _They say, Adam_ was a publick Person, and therefore all Men sinned in him, as being in his Loins_. And for this they allege that of _Rom._ v. 12. _Wherefore as by one Man Sin entered into the World, and Death by Sin; and so Death passed upon all Men, for that all have sinned, _&c._ These last Words, _say they,_ may be translated, In whom all have sinned._

[Sidenote: _Answ._] To this I answer: That _Adam_ is a publick Person is not denied; and that through him there is a Seed of Sin propagated to all Men, which in its own Nature is sinful, and inclines Men to Iniquity; yet it will not follow from thence, that Infants, who join not with this Seed, are guilty. As for these Words in the _Romans_, the Reason of the Guilt there alleged is, _For that all have sinned_. Now no Man is said to sin, unless he actually sin in his own Person; for the _Greek_ Words [Greek: eph' ô: εφ ω] may very well relate to [Greek: thanatos: θανατος], which is the nearest Antecedent; so that they hold forth, how that _Adam_, by his Sin, gave an Entrance to Sin in the World; _And so Death entered by Sin_, [Greek: eph' ô: εφ ω] i. e. _upon which_ [viz. Occasion] or, _in which_ [viz. Death] _all_ others _have sinned_; that is, actually in their own Persons; to wit, all that were capable of sinning: Of which Number that Infants could not be, the Apostle clearly shews by the following Verse, _Sin is not imputed, where there is no Law_: And since, as is above proved, there is no Law to Infants, they cannot be here included.

[Sidenote: Obj. 2.] Their Second Objection is from _Psalm_ li. 5. _Behold I was shapen in Iniquity, and in Sin did my Mother conceive me. Hence, _they say,_ it appears that Infants from their Conception are guilty._

[Sidenote: _Answ._]How they infer this Consequence, for my Part I see not. The Iniquity and Sin here appears to be far more ascribable to the Parents than to the Child. [Sidenote: _Conceived in Sin_ answered.] It is said indeed, _In Sin did my Mother conceive me_; not _my Mother did conceive me a Sinner_. Besides that, so interpreted, contradicts expresly the Scripture before-mentioned in making Children guilty of the Sins of their immediate Parents, (for of _Adam_ there is not here any Mention) contrary to the plain Words, _The Son shall not bear the Father’s Iniquity_.

[Sidenote: Obj. 3.] Thirdly, They object, _That the Wages of Sin is Death; and that seeing Children are subject to Diseases and Death, therefore they must be guilty of Sin._

[Sidenote: _Answ._] I answer; That these Things are a Consequence of the Fall, and of Adam’s Sin, is confessed; but that that infers necessarily a Guilt in all others that are subject to them is denied. [Sidenote: _Death the Wages of Sin_ answered.] For though the Whole outward _Creation_ suffered a Decay by _Adam_’s Fall, which groans under Vanity; according to which it is said in _Job_, That _the Heavens are not clean in the Sight of God_; yet will it not from thence follow, that the Herbs, Earth, and Trees are Sinners.

Next, Death, though a Consequent of the Fall, incident to Man’s earthly Nature, is not the Wages of Sin in the Saints, but rather a Sleep, by which they pass from Death to Life; which is so far from being troublesome and painful to them, as all real Punishments for Sin are, that the Apostle counts it Gain: _To me, _saith he,_ to die is Gain_, _Philip._ i. 21.

[Sidenote: Obj. 4.] Some are so foolish as to make an Objection farther, saying, _That if _Adam_’s Sin be not imputed to those who actually have not sinned, then it would follow that all Infants are saved_.

[Sidenote: _Answ._] But we are willing that this supposed Absurdity should be the Consequence of our Doctrine, rather than that which it seems our Adversaries reckon not absurd, though the undoubted and unavoidable Consequence of theirs, _viz._ That _many Infants eternally perish, not for any Sin of their own, but only for _Adam_’s Iniquity;_ where we are willing to let the Controversy stop, commending both to the illuminated Understanding of the _Christian Reader_.

This Error of our Adversaries is both denied and refuted by _Zuinglius,_ that eminent Founder of the _Protestant Churches of Switzerland_, in his Book _De Baptismo_, for which he is anathematized by the Council of _Trent_, in the _Fifth Session_. We shall only add this Information: That we confess then that a Seed of Sin is transmitted to all Men from _Adam_, although imputed to none, until by sinning they actually join with it; in which Seed he gave Occasion to all to sin, and it is the Origin of all evil Actions and Thoughts in Men’s Hearts, [Greek: eph' ô: εφ ω] to wit, [Greek: thanatô: θανατω], as it is in _Rom._ v. i. e. _In which Death all have sinned._ For this Seed of Sin is frequently called _Death_ in the Scripture, and _the Body of Death_; seeing indeed it is a _Death_ to the Life of Righteousness and Holiness: Therefore its Seed and its Product is called the _Old Man_, the _Old Adam_, in which all Sin is; for which cause we use this Name to express this Sin, and not that of _Original Sin_; [Sidenote: _Original Sin no Scripture Phrase._] of which Phrase the Scripture makes no Mention, and under which invented and unscriptural Barbarism this Notion of _Imputed Sin to Infants_ took Place among Christians.

PROPOSITIONS V. & VI.

Concerning the UNIVERSAL REDEMPTION by CHRIST, and also the SAVING and SPIRITUAL LIGHT, wherewith every Man is enlightened.

PROPOSITION V.

[54]God, _out of his Infinite Love_, who delighteth not in the Death of a Sinner, but that all should live and be saved, hath so loved the World, that he hath given his only Son a LIGHT, that whosoever believeth in him shall be saved, _John_ iii. 16. Who enlighteneth EVERY Man that cometh into the World, _John_ i. 9. And maketh manifest all Things that are reproveable, _Ephes._ v. 13. _And teacheth all Temperance, Righteousness, and Godliness; and this _Light_ enlighteneth the Hearts of all, for a Time, in order to Salvation; and this is it which reproves the Sin of all Individuals, and would work out the Salvation of all, if not resisted. Nor is it less _Universal_ than the Seed of Sin, being the Purchase of his Death,_ who tasted Death for every Man. For as in _Adam_ all die, even so in _Christ_ all shall be made alive, 1 _Cor._ xv. 22.

[54] Ezek. 18. 32. & 33. 11.

PROPOSITION VI.

_According to which Principle, or _Hypothesis_, all the Objections against the _Universality_ of _Christ’s Death_ are easily solved; neither is it needful to recur to the Ministry of Angels, and those other Miraculous Means which they say God useth to manifest the Doctrine and History of _Christ’s Passion_ unto such, who, living in Parts of the World where the outward Preaching of the Gospel is unknown, have well improved the first and common Grace. For as hence it well follows, that some of the Old _Philosophers_ might have been saved, so also may some, who by Providence are cast into those remote Parts of the World where the Knowledge of the History is wanting, be made Partakers of the Divine Mystery, if they receive, and resist not that Grace, _[55]A Manifestation whereof is given to every Man to profit withal._ This most certain Doctrine being then received, that there is an _Evangelical_ and _Saving Light and Grace in all_, the Universality of the Love and Mercy of God towards Mankind, both in the Death of his Beloved Son, the _Lord Jesus Christ_, and in the Manifestation of the _Light_ in the Heart, is established and confirmed, against all the Objections of such as deny it. Therefore _[56]Christ hath tasted Death for every Man;_ not only for _all Kinds of Men,_ as some vainly talk, but for every Man of all _Kinds_: The Benefit of whose Offering is not only extended to such who have the distinct outward Knowledge of his _Death_ and _Sufferings_, as the same is declared in the Scriptures, but even unto those who are necessarily excluded from the Benefit of this Knowledge by some inevitable Accident; which Knowledge we willingly confess to be very Profitable and Comfortable, but not absolutely Needful unto such from whom God himself hath with-held it; yet they may be made Partakers of the Mystery of his Death, though ignorant of the History, if they suffer his _Seed_ and _Light, enlightening their Hearts,_ to take Place; _in which Light Communion with the Father and the Son is enjoyed;_ so as of wicked Men to become holy, and Lovers of that Power, by whose inward and secret Touches they feel themselves turned from the Evil to the Good, and learn _to do to others as they would be done by,_ in which Christ himself affirms all to be included. As _They_ have then falsely and erroneously Taught, who have denied Christ to have died for all Men; so neither have _They_ sufficiently taught the Truth, who affirming him to have died for all, have added the absolute Necessity of the outward Knowledge thereof, in order to obtain its saving Effect. Among whom the _Remonstrants_ of _Holland_ have been chiefly wanting, and many other Assertors of _Universal Redemption,_ in that they have not placed the Extent of this Salvation in that _Divine_ and _Evangelical Principle of Light and Life_ wherewith _Christ hath enlightened every Man that cometh into the World;_ which is excellently and evidently held forth in these Scriptures_, Gen. vi. 3. Deut. xxx. 14. John i. 7, 8, 9, 16. Rom. x. 8. Titus ii. 11.

[55] 1 Cor. 12. 7.

[56] Heb. 2. 9.

[Sidenote: Absolute Reprobation, _that horrible and blasphemous Doctrine, described_.] Hitherto we have considered Man’s fallen, lost, corrupted, and degenerated Condition. Now it is fit to enquire, _How and by what Means he may come to be freed out of this miserable and depraved Condition_, which in these two Propositions is declared and demonstrated; which I thought meet to place together because of their Affinity, the one being as it were an Explanation of the other.

As for that Doctrine which these Propositions chiefly strike at, to wit, _absolute Reprobation_, according to which some are not afraid to assert, “That God, by an Eternal and Immutable Decree, hath Predestinated to _Eternal Damnation_ the far greater Part of Mankind, not considered as made, much less as fallen, without any Respect to their Disobedience or Sin, but only for the demonstrating of the Glory of his Justice; and that for the bringing this about, he hath appointed these miserable Souls necessarily to walk in their wicked Ways, that so his Justice may lay hold on them: And that God doth therefore not only suffer them to be liable to this Misery in many Parts of the World, by with-holding from them the Preaching of the Gospel and the Knowledge of Christ, but even in those Places where the Gospel is preached, and Salvation by Christ is offered; whom though he publickly invite them, yet he justly condemns for Disobedience, albeit he hath with-held from them all Grace by which they could have laid hold of the Gospel, _viz._ Because he hath, by a secret Will unknown to all Men, ordained and decreed (without any Respect had to their Obedience or Sin) that they shall not obey, and that the Offer of the Gospel shall never prove effectual for their Salvation, but only serve to aggravate and occasion their greater Condemnation.”

I say, as to this horrible and blasphemous Doctrine, our Cause is common with many others, who have both wisely and learnedly, according to Scripture, Reason, and Antiquity, refuted it. Seeing then that so much is said already and so well against this Doctrine, that little can be superadded, except what hath been said already, I shall be short in this Respect; yet, because it lies so in Opposition to my Way, I cannot let it altogether pass.