disobedience of the first man Augustine speaks to good purpose Sic ego tibi rectissime dico malum cum quo nascitur homo c. Thus I do most rightly say to thee that the evil with which a man is borne is not of the fruits bodies sexes conjunctions of which goods the Lord is the Author but of the first sin which is to be ascribed to the devil Here he doth distinguish between the work of creation and so God is the Author of all that good that was made in the beginning and the sinfulnesse of nature that he will have to spring only from the devils temptation and the disobedience of the first man Sixthly how can it be saith he that the Father that contributes nothing to the production of the soul should contribute to her pollution and he that did not transmit life how should he transmit his sin Answ Though the Father doth not contribute to the soul in her production yet he doth contribute to the soul in her union with the body So by this account the action of God is terminated in the simple being of the soul The action of the Parent is her being in the body that is in her union with the body But if it be here alledged that a man is principally a man in respect of his soul and therefore if the Parent doth not contribute to the soul he doth not contribute to the being of a man the answer is plaine A man is not a man neither by the soul apart nor by the body apart but by the whole humane nature which doth consist in the union of both we see in ordinary experience as children derive their inheritances priviledges nobility and such like from their Parents so also their Parents miseries infelicities poverty and ignobility do naturally descend In the present case I demand how do they descend will any man be so curious to hold a dispute whether they do descend from the body or the soul of the Parent Or whether is the soul the first seat or receptacle of nobility or ignobility or doth the right to the fathers inheritance descend from the fathers body or the soul In the affaires of this life it is not usual with men to spin out themselves with such philosophical niceties The skilful in the laws conceive it is enough in the general to say that such a Son did come out of the loynes of such a Father Why then should the learned man with whom we have to do be more curious in the conveyance of original sin why should it not be enough for us to say that that which is borne of flesh is flesh Joh. 3.6 Suppose for the manner of the thing we are not able to satisfie the doubt shall we deny the thing because we are not able to explaine every punctilio why by the same reason doth not he himselfe deny the motion of the Sun the ebbing and the flowing of the sea the organizing of the infant in the mothers womb in these and a thousand more the thing is cleare when the manner doth lye in the dark Seventhly saith he If in him we sinned then it were just that in him we should be punished for as the sin is so ought the punishment to be Answ If he will stand to this rule he both doth and will make good that which is asserted by us The disobedience of the first man must be imputed to all his posterity because he is the head the root and the representative of the whole nature But if he thinks this to be a meer non-ens then let him say that the obedience of the second man as the head-root and the representative of the whole nature is a non-ens and a nullity also and so he will raise the Gospel to the foundation thereof Now we come to the third question to enquire whether Adam did debauch our nature by the sentence and the just judgement of God and here he layeth down this for a sure ground He and all his posterity were left in the meer natural estate that is in a state of imperfection in a state that was not sufficiently instructed and furnished with ability in order to a supernatural end whether God had secretly designed mankind Answ In this expression of his we know no such state of meer imperfection which is not also a state of corruption Againe in this expression he seemeth to me to pluck down that natural ability of the will which he endeavours to set up For if a man since the fall is not instructed and furnished with abilities in order to a supernatural end he must come to Christ only for the supply of all Why then doth he raise all this dust against the rigour and severity of our doctrine when he himselfe doth here plainly teach that the will can do nothing without the help of the Spirit He goeth on It cannot be supposed saith he that God did inflict any necessity of sinning upon Adam or his posterity because from that time even unto this day he by new laws had required innocency of life or repentance and holinesse Answ The consequence is not good for now since the fall the Lord doth not give laws in proportion to natural ability but in relation to his own word of promise and his free mercy in the Covenant of grace So far then it is a testimony of divine favour that God will employ us and require more service of us that where we have no strength of our own we may in the sence of our own natural weaknesse go to him for help And whereas he bringeth us speaking in this wise that it is just with God to exact the law of man even where he is unable to keep it because God once made him able but he disabled himselfe True indeed this is an answer given by us but it is not the whole nor the principal part of that answer which may be given For secondly where God doth require subjection to his law man being not able to performe it his demand is not irrational For though man is not subject nor in himselfe can be subject to the law Rom. 8.7 This non-subjection doth not so much arise from the want of judgement will or any other natural faculty as from a perverse sinful habit that doth reside in the faculty That a drunkard cannot stand walk nor performe acts of reason as an other man is not simply for want of ability as from an evil distemper that doth suspend the operations of the faculties so it is in the present case men need no new faculties but they need new habits to set the faculty aright But our third answer is though a man naturally cannot be subject to the law respecting the evil habit that disorders the faculty yet if he go to Christ in the sence of his own misery all ability is to be had from him God is so infinitely gracious that he is ready to help all that come to him A bruised reed he will
10 Suppose all this be granted that Adam was not to beleeve a Saviour because he was not in a lapsed or fallen condition how doth this prove that he was absolutely carnal and destitute of the Spirit He was to beleeve the Father as Lord Creator he was bound to love him to delight in him and how could he possibly do all this but he must have some measure of Spirit Therefore Adam had the Spirit and was a spiritual man before his fall You go on and say whatsoever qualifications the children of God have attained unto in and through Jesus Christ their Lord by remission of sinne or the hope of a resurrection and the attainment of a better life Adam was not capable of To this I answer though the difference may be in circumstances the substance is the same For if you reckon all that Adam had in present possession and all that he might have had if he had stood if you compare his whole state with the state of the Saints with that which they have and that which they shall have you shall finde an excellent correspondence betwixt both For what if Adam was not capable of remission of sinne by Christs blood it is all one if he be made in a state free from sinne What if he was not capable of regeneration because he had no pollution of nature yet he was created with a pure and spiritual nature in original righteousnesse What if he was not capable of the resurrection from the dead because he died not a natural death yet he was capable to eate of the tree of life to keep himself from death and so to live for ever Your whole way of reasoning is meerly fallacious because Adam had not spiritual life every way the same in circumstance therefore he had not the spirit in the substance and being thereof You go on and tell us If men will hold this opinion that righteousnesse and true holinesse is the Image of God which the Lord created man in and is not to be found there residing then it is very requisite that this holinesse and righteousnesse be released But how do you prove that this holinesse and righteousnesse did not reside in Adam If you shall say that he was not capable of such Evangelical holinesse as is set forth in the second Covenant what of all this notwithstanding the difference in circumstance he may have the same in substance Saint Paul saith I delight in the Law of the Lord after the inward man Rom. 7.22 He had the same spiritual delight in the Law by Renovation which Adam had before his fall by Creation where then is the difference Adam had no rebellion no law of the flesh warring against the law of his minde as Saint Paul had There was the same spirit of love in both but in the one it was with the love of the flesh and with conflict with the love of the flesh but the other was absolutely free He did not know by experience what it was to have the flesh rebel against the spirit Because the Law requires entire obedience of bodie and soule inward and outward throughout all the parts of our life because it is spiritual it self and requires that the thoughts words and deeds be spiritual we must necessarily conclude that the first man must be spiritual in a large degree seeing the Law was tempered and proportioned in the beginning to that ability he had But you have another evasion you say that at the Creation Adam was not made conformable to the Image of the Sonne seeing he had no such lawes to be conformable to Here you still harp upon the same string Because Adam was not conformable in the same manner therefore he had not the conformity to the Image of Christ in substance I pray you tell me the meaning of this Scripture Come let us make man after our own Image Is not this the speech of Father Sonne and Holy Ghost You cannot deny it No more can you deny that Adam was made after the Image of Christ as Lord Creator In this point we must necessarily say that Adam had the same Image of God and the same spirit in the general nature of it as the Saints have in the state of Regeneration only the difference lies in some circumstances He might also have the same faith in the general nature of faith though it was impossible for him in that state he stood to have justifying faith Seeing he was absolutely without the guilt of all sin he needed no pardon by Christs blood Suppose all this be granted that Adam was not to beleeve in a Saviour because he was not in a lapsed or fallen condition yet all this doth not prove him to be a carnal man or absolutely destitute of the Spirit before his fall He might beleeve in God the Father as Lord Creator to prevent that misery which should ensue by the fall And to such a kind of faith it is necessary that he should have some measure of spirit Upon this ground also we may conclude him to be spiritual and to have the Spirit before his fall But whereas the Scripture saith That God made man righteous you put off all with this shift That God made Adam without any stain or blemish in the beginning page 13. This we willingly confesse to be true but it is not the whole nor the principal part of truth For uprightnesse in the Scripture-language doth not only signifie a freedome from evil but also a positive habit of righteousnesse and holinesse and in this state did God make man in the beginning But admit that be granted What do you gather from hence you say If those that would have holinesse and righteousnesse to be entituled the Image of God and shall mean by it a condition without sin simply so considered then the whole Creation of God might be said to bear the Image of God page 13. Answ Your consequence will not hold That Adam was without sin at the time of his Creation it was from hence that God made him a holy creature after his own Image That other creatures are without sin is meerly from incapacity seeing they have neither an understanding to know the Law of God nor a will to embrace good or evil therefore they cannot sinne For that speech of yours page 14. It will appear that the Image which Adam did bear wherein he represented God lieth in some other place where none of the creatures are in acapacity to come it being beyond them all Though in the general I do acknowledge this to be a solid truth yet you do not rightly apply it What think you of that saying of our Saviour There are some Eunuches that are so borne from their mothers wombe and there are some made Eunuches of men and there are some that have made themselves Eunuches for the Kingdom of Heaven Mat. 19.12 Here are three sorts of Eunuches but one sort only is so made by grace and the mortifying work of
in the Prophetical Scriptures But the scope of the text is plainly to be taken for a literal ordinary day as we have formerly proved And strange it is that the Lord in the denunciation of judgment should go to the typical and parabolicall expressions used in Daniel and the Revelation and Peters Epistle After this you come to enquire whether Christ by his suffering did not prevent the falling of death upon Adam And you resolve it in the negative For say you either Adam must suffer or the Word of God seeing God had once declared the sentence thou shalt surely dye In case then he should give his Son to prevent the death of Adam there had been a clear contradiction page 119. In the commination there are some things which I do acknowledge to be infallible as the Laws of the Medes and Persians which alter not and therefore to make good the sentence all that are now born into the world after the course of natural generation are borne in the state of spiritual death subject to the miseries of nature and shall inevitably be brought to temporal death at last All these things do hold by vertue of the first sentence yet you must take heed that you go no further because the second man hath all fulnesse of grace to repair the losses brought in by the first By his intervening patience and long-suffering is extended to all the sonnes of men And therefore whatsoever you suggest to the contrary there is indeed and in truth no contradiction between the sentence in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt dye the death and the delay thereof in a qualified sense In some particulars long-suffering may be extended and yet in others there may be a speedy execution of the sentence But you go on seeing God would not have Adam to come near the tree of life therefore he would not have him to be free from death that way page 119. Neither do we maintain that it was the purpose of God to free Adam in that manner that he should not taste of a temporal death He came under the dominion of that death the same day he sinned and the most holy Saints that are must all dye before they can be raised again to set forth the truth and certainty of the Lords commination Yet for all this at present the stroke was stayed by the Mediators blood and long-suffering was extended to men that salvation might be had by the Covenant of grace As for the tree of life it is most true that God did forbid Adam accesse to that tree not absolutely because he would not have him to recover life but because he had provided another way for the restoring of man by Christ the promised seed He would not come to the most extream and final execution of the sentence because his purpose was to have a posterity upon the earth and a seminary for the Church Further you argue there was a necessity for Adam to dye otherwise Christ could not make him alive page 119. Here you mistake the state of the question we agree that Christ did not dye simply to free man that he should not fall into the dust but only to raise him from the dust again It was necessary to fulfill the truth of the commination that Adam should return to dust but it was not necessary that he should return to dust the very same day It was necessary that he should fall under the reign of death and under a necessity of dying the same day he sinned and this to continue to the resurrection of the just Then this mortal shall put on immortality and this corruptible shall put on incorruption 1 Cor. 15.53 The Apostle also saith when he shall change these vile bodies that they may be made like his glorious body Phil. 3.21 All the bodies of the Saints shall be made like the body of Christ as now it is in glory But how did the bodies of the Saints begin to be vile bodies By vile bodies he doth mean these corruptible tabernacles of the soul lyable to diseases and to all the miseries of nature But when did this vilenesse and misery begin seeing they were not made vile by creation They began to be vile bodies the same day that Adam did sin they have been so ever since and they must continue such unto the resurrection and then the bodies of the Saints shall be made conformable to the bodie of Christ in glory Philip. 3 Vlt. CHAP. XIV Whether Adam did dye a spiritual death yea or no IN the discovery of this point you observe this method First you shew what spiritual life is Secondly you resolve upon the question For your description of spiritual life though you miserably confound the Scriptures we will take it in the best sense for such a life as hath the Spirit for the cause Gal. 4.19 John 6.63 Col. 33. But you erre in your application when you use such an expression as this that Adam had not such a cup of water in all his foure Rivers You say also that he could not savour the voice of the resurrection from the dead for the goodnesse of a Saviour must be resented by those that are lost but Adam knew no such need page 122. Your argument is fallacious because Adam had not spiritual life in the same way as the Saints now have therefore he had no spiritual life at all He might have ability to love Christ as Lord Creator Further you say that the voice of forgivenesse of sinne was a stranger to him Well let this be admitted it doth not prove the point neither Sicknesse it self was a stranger to Adam before his fall will you inferre then that there were no herbs for medicine and that the Lord did not create the herb of the field with a medicinal vertue So in the like case what if remission of sinne and the way of pardon of sinne by Christs blood was a thing hidden from Adam as being not compatible with his condition will you inforce from hence a want of capacity in him to understand the mystery of salvation by Christ or will you affirme from hence that he was a meere carnal man before his fall Take heed that by these and such like positions you do not reflect upon God himself The Apostle saith the carnal mind is enmity against God for it is not subject to the Law of God neither indeed can be Rom. 8. ver 6 7. If you go to the Original of this enmity or non-subjection and say it did proceed from the fall of Adam you do agree with us But if you go higher and stand upon it that Adam was a meere natural man by the condition of his creation then you will lay the blame upon God that set him in such a state of enmity and whither will you go in the issue if you maintain such positions as these But to make good your assertion you argue The first man is of the earth earthy the
second man is the Lord from heaven So though Adam was the first man a living man yet it was not a living soul that proveth that Adam had a quickned Spirit page 12◠But in this you do miserably soobisticate For though the Apostle doth draw a parallel between both the Adams If you do well ponder the Scripture you shall finde that the parallel doth not stand so much between Adam before his fall as between the first Adam the second after the fall 2ly upon good consideration you shall finde that the Apostle in this Scripture doth not speak so much concerning the Spirit of God in the soules of the Saints as concerning the spirituality of their bodies that shall be at the resurrection It is sown in corruption it is raised in incorruption it is sown in dishonour it is raised in glory it is sown a natural body it is raised a spiritual body There is a natural body and there is aspiritual body 1 Cor. 15.43 44. If then you will needs conclude Adam to be a carnal man before his fall because his body was not made a spiritual body by the same reason you must conclude all the Saints that have ever been since the creation of the world to be carnal men and absolutely destitute of the work of the Spirit For the bodies of the Saints are yet carnal and must abide in their incarnality till the resurrection of the dead But whereas you build so strongly upon that expression the first man Adam was made a living soul the last man Adam was made a quickning Spirit verse 45. This doth not prove the first man to have been meerely carnal or absolutely void of the Spirit before his fall For it is not the scope of the Apostle in this Scripture to speak of the excellency of man made after the image of God but onely of the corruptible state of the body as it standeth in immediate relation to that immortal condition which it shall have at the resurrection of the dead And whereas it is said the second man was a quickning Spirit this is meant principally of the divinity of Christ by and thorough which he will raise the dead So then if you will build upon this ground and argue from hence that the first man was a meere carnal man because he was not a quickning Spirit by the same principle you must conclude that all the Saints living are carnal men For of what one of them may it be affirmed that he is a quickning Spirit who by his power and divinity is able to raise the dead But if you will make a right analogy let us compare the things that ought to be compared First let us consider what the first man was before his fall and what the Saints are as renewed by grace Secondly let us compare what the first man might have been if he had eaten of the tree of life and what the Saints shall be at the resurrection of the dead For the first of these if you speak of the Saints as renewed by grace though their bodies be natural they are spiritual in respect of the inward man The same may be said of Adam before his fall though his body was made of the dust yet by grace and special favour he did carry the image of God For the second if you shall affirme that all the bodies of the Saints shall be made immortal and spiritual at the resurrection consider what the body of Adam might have been if he had continued in his obedience and eaten of the tree of life If you would make a right collation between state and stat ethe parallel should runne in these termes But because you stand so strongly upon this expression that the first man is of the earth earthy the second man is the Lord from heaven seeing you will have all this to be applied to Adam before his fall I pray you resolve me this question seeing the Apostle saith as we have born the image of the earthy so shall we bear the image of the heavenly Who are they that bear the image of Adam before his fall I think if you were put to it you could not produce any one instance in all Europe Asia Africa or America that ever stood up after this similitude The scope of the text is onely concerning man after the fall and how the resurrection of the dead doth take away that death which is brought in by the fall In the close of the Chapter you propound this question whether was not Adam to have dyed an eternal death for eating of the forbidden fruit For the clearing of the question let us distinctly set down how the three kinds of death did seize upon Adam and how they come upon all his branches First for spiritual death it is evident that he died this death as soon as he did eat of the forbidden fruit For the temporal death he fell under the reign of it the same day he sinned And for eternal death though according to the truth of the commination Adam and his posterity should have dyed the Lord Christ stepping in did set a stop to the sentence And therefore for the cause of the condemnation of man it is now principally and immediately for the neglect of the grace of God that should lead him to repentance But you adde further I can safely say that if Adam was to have dyed an eternal death and that by the appointment of God then Christ neither would nor could have stept in nay he could not have lifted up his little finger to have helped Adam or his posterity page 125. I answer If God had decreed in his secret purpose that Adam and all his posterity should have dyed the death in such a case Christ neither would nor could have stept in to cross the Decree of God but Sir who is the man that doth maintain that position For my part I take the Decree of God to be one thing and the outward denunciation of judgment to be another For the Decree that cannot be changed but the sentence may recieve alteration according to divers outward circumstances and conditions that may occurre Besides if you should build never so strongly upon the letter of the text we can easily reconcile the truth of the commination in saying that Adam might dy the death the same day he sinned ☞ though the Lord was not pleased presently to inflict death in all its kinds From all which we do conclude if the Lord Christ came to free men from the reign of death Heb. 2.14 15. We may easily gather that Adam brought himself and all his posterity under the dominion of that syrant and so he and all his should have dyed that kind of death if the Lord Christ had not stepped in But you go about to deface this speech in the end of the Chapter for if in case that Christ had not stepped in there had been no recovery this were to exclude all other means and to limit
Great difference is to be made between the will of other sinners and the will of the first man The will of other sinners doth only redundare in personam it doth encrease the habit of sin in their own persons alone the will of the first man did redundare in naturam it did vitiate and deprave the whole nature as we have formerly shewed And yet thirdly whereas he saith that sin doth infect the will not in its natural capacity but in its moral only This expression of his must under favour be taken with a graine of salt We do willingly yield that the will is morally or rather spiritually corrupt because she wents that holinesse that purity and righteousnesse which the law requires yet if we look to the reasons of things the corruption was brought into the will by the fall of Adam They then do not speak improperly that call the corruption of the will pravitatem physicomoralem It is a moral depravation because it is against the rectitude of the moral law it is a natural depravation because it flows from the first man as the root of corruption For the proofe of the latter let us have recourse to that place of the Apostle ye have put off the old man with his deeds and have put on the new man In these words of his there is a direct opposition between the old man and the new By the old man he meaneth the pravity and corruption of nature which though it hath had its being in hundreds thousands and millions of men yet originally all comes out of one root In this regard the whole nature is called by the title of the old man So proportionably the Christ-like disposition though it hath been diffused into infinite persons who have lived in several ages of the Church yet the whole nature doth originally proceed out of one root and therefore in this regard is elegantly called by the title of the new man Secondly the opposition is between 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their being uncloathed and their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their being cloathed upon By this way of expression the Apostle doth insinuate the corrupt disposition of the flesh is that which the soul is cloathed upon which cloathing she had from Adam the root of corruption Now the believing Colossians because they had a living principal within and had begun to put off and did so continue in putting off the old man he speaks of it as a work already done ye have put off the old man with his deeds So likewise the new nature or the Christ-like disposition is here resembled to a garment with which they were cloathed upon because they had begun and did so continue to put it on by degrees he doth speak of it as a matter already effected ye have put on the new man From all which we gather the pravity of the will though it be in its own nature a moral or rather spiritual obliquity Yet respecting the cause it proceeds from Adam the root of corruption If this truth be not admitted we shall crosse and hinder the very chief designe of the Gospel For the corruption of nature being laid in the first Adam it doth cast us all upon the seeking longing desiring the new nature that is to be had from the second Fourthly saith he to him that considers it it will seem strange and monstrous that a moral obliquity in a single instance should make an universal change in a natural suscipient and in a natural capacity Answ This is no more strange then true we say that Adams disobedience was a moral obliquity and he by that single act of his did cause an universal change in the whole nature of man By it the souls of men come to be cloathed upon with the habit of sin and their bodies with corruption And if he or any man else shall marvel at this they must upon this account wonder at the chiefe foundations of the Gospel For we will not doubt to say in the parallel case as the Lord Christ did humble himselfe to the death of the crosse it was in genere moris a moral obedience he did obey the command of his Father Yet by this one act of his he did make a change not only in a moral but also in a natural suscipient he did a thing by and through which the souls of the Saints may be freed from inward pravity and corruption and their bodies raised from the dead at the last day Phil. 3. ult Fifthly He reasons no man can transmit a good habit a grace or a virtue By natural generation as a great Scholars son cannot be borne with learning c. and how can it be that a naughty quality should be more apt to be disseminated than a good one when it is not in the goodnesse or badnesse of the quality that hinders his dissemination but its being an acquired and superinduced quality that makes it cannot naturally descend Answ We willingly yield that a good quality is as apt to be disseminated as a bad and therefore had Adam stood he had disseminated the image of God to the posterity that did come of him But seeing that he fell by his fall he doth now disseminate Original corruption to all his branches Further though Adam doth disseminate corruption by natural generation mankind is not left under an absolute necessity of perishing as long as a second Adam is prepared to disseminate grace and spiritual life by regeneration Excellent is that speech of Hillary upon the fourty eighth Psalm Quoniam animarum medicus non venit vocare justos c. Because the Physitian of souls came not to call the just but sinners to repentance therefore he ordained that whatsoever was worst in every company should be soonest called Of all men living upon the earth the heathen were the worst yet they were the soonest called Further whereas our Author saith that a great Schollars son cannot be borne with learning and the child of a Judge cannot upon his birth-day give wise sentences the reason is plaine personal priviledges and acquired habits do not naturally descend But with the two Adams the case is far otherwise for they have a nature to communicate to all their branches The first doth communicate it by generation the second by regeneration as we have formerly proved And whereas he argues How can a quality morally bad be directly and regularly transmitted by an action morally good and since that neither God that is the Maker of all doth amisse and the Father that begets sins not and the child that is begotten cannot sin by what conveyance can any positive evil be derived to posterity To this we say that the body and the soul are both the workmanship of God yet both may be made the subject and the seat of sin through the temptation of Sathan and a vitious propagation Neither is the evil any way to be ascribed to the Creatour but to the temptation of Sathan and the
the words of the Apostle Rom. 5.12 by one man sinne entred into the world c. You should finde that all then were in one publick man and sinned in him and this is the reason which the Apostle giveth why death passed universally upon all men because in one all have sinned his one act was the act of all But for more abundant confirmation let us consider the scope of the text The drift of the Apostle is to draw a parallel between both the Adams Frist in those points wherein they do agree Secondly in those wherein they do disagree For the points of agreement the most remarkable to the purpose in hand are these First the two Adams are described as two persons which are the roots to their several and respective posterities The first Adam is a root to all his branches and the second Adam is a root to all branches I marvail then what delusion hath seized upon the Examiners who do positively maintain that the first Adam is not here intended as he was the Father of us all Secondly they are described by the plurality of branches as the first Adam had a multiplicity of branches out of him so the second Adam had a plurality of branches out of him And therefore the Apostle doth elegantly proceed in the collation as by the offence of one many be dead so the gift of grace which is by one man Jesus Christ hath abounded unto many As by one mans offence death reigned by one much more they which receive abundance of grace shall reign in life by one Jesus Christ And so the Apostle doth compare one Adam to one Christ Adam the root of all his branches Christ the root of all his branches Thirdly they are set forth by the passage of the common sap out of each root into its branches respectively And therefore the Apostle speaketh concerning the first Adam by one man sinne entred into the world and death by sinne and death passed over all men The common sap then that passed out of the first man into all his branches is first sinne and then death by sinne By sinne is here principally meant original sinne and all other sinnes that flow from this as the fountain But if further enquiry be made concerning the passage of sin death into all the branches that come of Adam the passage is not all at one and the same instant It is now five thousand six hundred years since the fall of Adam and in all this time original sinne hath been in continual flux and succession As in several generations men come to be born so they actually participate of the sap that comes from the first root The like may be said of the second Adam and of his branches They which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousnesse shall reigne in life by one Jesus Christ ver 17. The sap then that cometh from Christ as the common root is grace and spiritual life this doth flow out of him into all his branches And for the passage thereof it is not all at one time but as men come to receive the gift of righteousnesse and to be born anew they come to the actual fruition thereof For let the death of Christ be never so largely tendred to the lost sonnes of men there is no actual participation of him till he be received by faith The words of the text are most emphatical and significant They which receive abundance of grace and the gift of righteousnesse shall reigne in life As who would say in plainer termes they only shall reign in life by one Jesus Christ who do particularly receive the gift of righteousnesse which is generally offered This is the undoubted meaning of the text And therefore for you to say that we could not sinne in Adam our soules and bodies not being in him how do you answer the scope of the text by the disobedience of one many were made sinners by one man sinne entred into the world Adam is here set forth as the root of all his branches and al the branches were in him as the first publick man What can you or the Examiners say to this 2ly you say that we had no Law in Adam Now where there is no Law there is no transgression if we had received any Law it must have been made known to us but there was none made known to us and therefore there was no Law page 127. To this I rejoyn ☜ if there was no Law given to us in Adam how come we to be guilty of his transgression how come we to bear the burden of his sinne why doth the Apostle speak so plainly by the disobedience of one many were made sinners We must then necessarily come to affirme this for a truth that the Law was given to Adam as a publick man and in him to all his posterity And whereas you say that there was no Law made known to us at that time therefore we had no interest in the Law why do not you infer by the like reason when the second Adam the Lord Jesus Christ suffered death upon the Crosse because at that very time the merit of his death was not made known you had no part or portion in that death which was one thousand six hundred years before you were born If you will be loth to stand to the latter to lose your priviledge by the second Adam I pray you give us leave to maintain the dammage that was brought in by the first Adam And yet further to take away all scruples from tender consciences if it might seem harsh for all the sonnes of men to perish by the disobedience of one man especially when the Law was not made known to them in their own individual persons but in the common root of all mankind let us consider how the second man came as a remedy to free the same miserable sonnes of men from the state of sinne and death especially when they neither thought nor knew any thing concerning the means of their salvation The greatnesse of our misery by Adam doth amplifie and set forth the merrit of Christ in the fulnesse thereof Now then when the Examiners and you both go about to extenuate the misery of the fall you do rob Christ of the glory of his grace You say The branch hath not any thing but what it hath by dependance upon the tree Now it is not so with us for that which we call the Principal part of man his soul or spirit was not dependant upon Adam but had his dependancy from the very same fountain from whence Adam received his even from God himself p. 128. Here I confess there is a great question concerning the manner of the propagation of Original sin and men do wearie themselves very much to find out whether the soul be by infusion or by traduction But I see no cause why we should intangle our selves in that difficultie ☞ For whether the soul be infused or
whether it be traduced or which way soever it be conveyed we must necessarily affirme in the continuall flux of original sinne from father to child each father doth propagate it to his child as Adam did to the whole posterity If this be not a real truth what shall we make of the speech of our Saviour that which is born of the flesh is flesh Joh. 3.6 The Father then doth propagate the corruption of nature to his child as he himself did first receive it by propagation We must needs then yield the truth of the thing though there be some difficulty in the discovery of the manner But that which doth very much satisfie me in this point is the consideration of that speech to Adam and in him to all mankind be fruitful and multiply replenish the earth and subdue it Gen. 1.28 From whence I gather that the propagation of mankind doth chiefly depend upon this promise established in the beginning And therefore suppose that be true which you say that the soul doth come immediately from God the question is whether in matter of generation in matter of union of the soul with the body in matter of propagation of the kind the child doth not depend upon the father as the branch doth upon the root And doth not the Lord continue still to performe that promise that he made in the beginning Surely by what power the earth doth continue to bring forth herbs and every thing doth fructifie according to its kind by the same ordinance blessing and promise of God doth the father beget the child to continue a posterity upon the earth To the right solution of the question then we must give a double answer For if it be demanded in the first place why a man doth generate a man It is from the Ordinance and blessing of God and from that fundamental Law increase and multiply But if it be further inquired why a sinful father doth continue to beget a sinful child the traduction of original sinne is from Adam the common root of the corruption of nature ever since the fall For the fountain being corrupted the corruption doth go down the stream and is in perpetual flux and succession from the Spring head But to make the matter good you go on If the soules and spirits of all that stock that came from Adam should have been lineally derived then they must have returned again to him page 228. This doth not follow for by the like reason why do you not argue concerning the branches and leaves of all the trees and forests in the world because they have their derivation from the root therefore they must return into the root again But you adde further admit say you we had such a being in Adam as the branches had in the tree and produce actions in a natural way being prone thereunto yet that which is to be expected must have been such fruits as were natural to the tree and no other but sinne was no natural fruit but an accident page 129. Indeed if you take nature in its first essence and institution it is good and all sinne is unnatural and accidental but if you take nature in its vicious qualities as it is since the fall then it is depraved in Adam and our immediate parents are so many conduit-pipes of the corruption of nature If this be not so what can be the meaning of our Saviours words that which is born of flesh is flesh This sheweth plainly that Adam is not onely the root of nature but also since the fall a root of the corruption of nature and upon this ground lyes a necessity of regeneration or having a new nature from Christ the second Adam Thirdly you say If we must own all Adams actions sinful as our acts then pray give me leave to appropriate as large a portion in all his good actions For why should I not plead for as much propriety in all his good actions as some will perswade me I have in all his evill actions seeing I was as much in him before the fall as since And then I might say as well that I walked in the Garden and drest it and gave names to all creatures page 129. If this will give you content I know nothing to the contrary but we may affirme that all mankind were in Adam when he walked in the Garden and gave names to all cattell And without question you should have had as great a part in his good actions if he had stood as now you have a share in the evil of that action by which he fell To make this appear in that state as we are now restored by Christ Man hath Lordship and Dominion over the creature If you will fetch this dominion from that great Charter Let them have dominion over the fish of the Sea the fowle of the aire c. Gen. 1.26 Then you must needs conclude that the priviledge which was given to Adam was given to all his posterity Yea in that particular case when the Lord brought all creatures to Adam to see what names he would give them he did bring the creatures to him as to the head of all mankind and he not onely in his own private but in their publick right did give names to all cattell The like may be said of the institution of marriage in the beginning of a mans leaving his father and mother and cleaving to his wife This did not so immediately concern Adam in his own person as all mankind that should come of him in succeeding generations Mat. 19.4 Fourthly you say If all men did sinne in Adam when he did eate the forbiden fruit why might it not as well be said when Adam beleeved I beleeved when Adam repented I repented page 130. I answer the case is not equal for when Adam did eate the forbidden fruit he did this as a publick person as the root of all mankind but when he did believe he did that as a particular member of Christ I may say on the other side when Christ suffered upon the Crosse to satisfie the justice of God this was all one as if Adam and Paul themselves had satisfied the justice of God What Christ did he did for them and when he did it they did it in him and by him The like answer may be given to that question why do not the regenerate propagate grace as well as original sinne The answer is plain piety is not hereditary as original sinne is neither doth holinesse come into us by nature but by grace not generation but regeneration doth intitle us to salvation And therefore in the aforementioned case when Adam did beget Cain in his own likenesse he did not beget him as the sonne of his faith but the sonne of his corrupt nature The same may be said of the natural Progeny of all believers they are born in original sinne as well as the children of Infidels The Jew that was circumcised himself begat one that was