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, A. M.
President of the College in Newjersey.

Matth. ix. 12. They that be whole, need not a Physician; but they that are sick,
Et hæc non tantum ad Peccatores referenda est ; quia in omnibus Maledic
tionibus primi Hominis, omnes ejus Generationes conveniunt ...

R. SAL. JARCHI.
Propter Concupiscentiam, innatam Cordi humano, dicitur, In Iniquitate geni-
tus sum; atque Sensus est. quod a Nativitate implantatum sit Cordi hu-
mano Jetzer harang Figmentum malum....

..Ad Mores Natura recurrit

Damnatos, fixa et mutari nescia.....

....Dociles, imitandis

Turpibus et pravis omnes sumus....

ABEN EZRA.

Juv,

thing material throughout the Doctor's whole Book, and many things in that other Book of Dr. Taylor's, containing his Key and exposition on Romans; as also many things written in opposition to this Doctrine by some other modern Authors. And moreover, my discourse being not only intended for an Answer to Dr. TAYLOR, and other opposers of the Doctrine of Original Sin, 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 other publications on this subject.

I would also hope, that the extensiveness of the plan of the following treatise will excuse the length of it. And that when it is considered, how 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 how important the Doctrine must be, if true; I say, 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 must be left to the Judgment of the intelligent and candid Reader.

STOCKBRIDGE, MAY 26, 1757.

CONTENTS.

PART I.

SOME Evidences of Original Sin from Facts and Events, as

found by observation and experience, Considered.

CHAPTER I.

The Evidence of Original Sin from what appears in Fact of the Sinfulness of

Mankind.

CHAPTER II.

Universal Mortality proves Original Sin; particularly the Death of Infants,
with its various Circumstances.

PART II.

Observations on particular Parts of the Holy Scripture, which

prove the Doctrine of Original Sin.

CHAPTER I.

Observations relating to things contained in the three first Chapters of GINI-

SIS, with reference to the Doctrine of Original Sin.

CHAPTER II..

Observations on other Parts of the Holy Scriptures, chiefly in the Old Testament,

that prove Original Sin.

CHAPTER III.

Observations on various other places of Scripture, principally of the New

Testament, proving the Doctrine of Original Sin.

CHAPTER IV.

Containing Observations on Rom. v. 12, to the end.

PART III.

Observing the Evidence given us, relative to the Doctrine of

Original Sin, in what the Scriptures reveal concerning the

Redemption by CHRIST.

CHAPTER I.

The Evidence of Original Sin from the Nature of Redemption, in the Pro-

curement of it: Which is superceded by Dr. Taylor's Scheme.

CHAPTER II.

The Evidence of the Doctrine of Original Sin from what the Scripture teach-

es concerning the Application of Redemption.

PART IV.

Containing Answers to Objections.

CHAPTER I.

Concerning that Objection, That to suppose Men to be born in Sin, without

their Choice, or any previous act of their own, is to suppose what is in-

consistent with the Nature of Sin. And reflections, shewing the inconsist-

ence of Dr. Taylor's Arguings from this Topic.

CHAPTER II.

Concerning that Objection against the Doctrine of native Corruption, That to

suppose, Men receive their first Existence in Sin, is to make Him who is

the Author of their Being, also the Author of their Depravity.

CHAPTER III.

That great Objection against the Imputation of Adam's Sin to his Posterity con-

sidered, That such Imputation is unjust and unreasonable, inasmuch as

Adam and his Posterity are not one and the same: With a brief Reflec-

tion subjoined, on what some have supposed, of God's imputing the
guilt of Adam's Sin to his Posterity, but in an infinitely less Degree than
to Adam himself.

CHAPTER IV.

Wherein several other Objections are considered.

CONCLUSION.

Containing some brief Observations on certain artful Methods, used by Writ

ers who are Adversaries to this Doctrine, in order to prejudice their Readers
against it,