Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

speaks of the Gentilism of those that he wrote to; or speaks of them with reference to their distinction from the Jews? So everywhere in this same epistle; as in chap. i. 12, 13, where the distinction is made just in the same manner as here, by the change of the person, and by the distinguishing particle, also, "That we should be to the praise of his glory who first trusted in Christ (the first believers in Christ being of the Jews, before the Gentiles were called), in whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation." And in all the following part of this second chapter, as ver. 11, 17, 19, and 22, in which last verse the same distinguishing particle again is used: "In whom ye also are builded together for a habitation of God through the Spirit." See also the following chapters: chap. iii. 6, and iv. 17. And not only in this epistle, but constantly in other epistles; as Rom. i. 12, 13; chap. xi. 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 28, 30, 31; chap. xv. 15, 16; 1 Cor. xii. 2; Gal. iv. 8; Col. i. 27; chap ü. 13; 1 Thess. i. 5, 6,9; chap. ii. 13, 14, 15, 16.

Though I am far from thinking our author's exposition of the 7th chapter of Romans to be in any wise agreeable to the true sense of the apostle, yet it is needless here to stand particularly to examine it: because the doctrine of Original Sin may be argued not the less strongly, though we should allow the thing wherein he mainly differs from such as he opposes in his interpretation, viz., that the apostle does not speak in his own name, or to represent the state of a true Christian, but as representing the state of the Jews under the law. For even on this supposition, the drift of the place will prove, that every one who is under the law, and with equal reason every one of mankind, is carnal, sold under sin, in his first state, and till delivered by Christ. For it is plain, that the apostle's design is to show the insufficiency of the law to give life to any one whatsoever. This appears by what he says when he comes to draw his conclusion, in the continuation of this discourse; chap. viii. 3,* "For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh; God sending his own Son," &c. Our author supposes this here spoken of, viz., "That the law cannot give life, because it is weak through the flesh," is true with respect to every one of mankind. And when the apostle gives this reason, In that it is weak through the flesh, it is plain, that by the flesh, which here he opposes to the Spirit, he means the same thing which, in the preceding part of the same discourse, in the foregoing chapter, he had called by the name flesh, ver. 5, 14, 18; and the law of the members, ver. 23; and the body of death, ver. 24. Which is the thing that through this chapter he insists on as the grand hinderance and reason why the law could not give life, just as he does in his conclusion, chap. viii. 3. Which in this last place, is given as a reason why the law cannot give life to any of mankind. And it being the same reason of the same thing, spoken of in the same discourse, in the former part of it; as appears, because this last place is the conclusion, of which that former part is the premises: and inasmuch as the reason there given is being in the flesh, and a being carnal, sold under sin: therefore, taking the whole of the apostle's discourse, this is justly understood to be a reason, why the law cannot give life to any of mankind; and consequently, that all mankind are in the flesh, and are carnal, sold under sin, and so remain till delivered by Christ and consequently, all mankind in their first or original state are very sinful; which was the thing to be proved.

Dr. Taylor himself reckons this a part of the same discourse or paragraph, in the division he makes of the epistle, in his paraphrase and notes upon it. † See Note on Rom. v. 20.

[blocks in formation]
[graphic]

CHAPTER IV.

CONTAINING OBSERVATIONS ON ROMANS V. 12, TO THE END.

SECTION I.

Remarks on Dr. Taylor's way of explaining this Text.

THE following things are worthy to be taken notice of, concerning our author's exposition of this remarkable passage of the Apostle Paul.

1. He greatly insists, that by death in this place no more is meant, than that death which we all die, when this present life is extinguished, and the body returns to the dust; that no more is meant in the 12th, 14th, 15th, and 17th verses. Page 27, he speaks of it as evidently, clearly, and infallibly so, because the apostle is still discoursing on the same subject; plainly implying, that it must most infallibly be so, that the apostle means no more by death, throughout this paragraph on the subject. But as infallible as this is, if we believe what Dr. Taylor elsewhere says, it must needs be otherwise. He, in p. 120, S., speaking of those words in the last verse of the next chapter, "The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life, through Jesus Christ our Lord," says, " Death in this place is widely different from the death we now die; as it stands there opposed to eternal life, which is the gift of God through Jesus Christ, it manifestly signifies eternal death, the second death, or that death which they shall hereafter die, who live after the flesh." But death (in the conclusion of the paragraph we are upon in the 5th chapter, concerning the death that comes by Adam) and the life that comes by Christ, in the last verse of the chapter, is opposed to eternal life just in the same manner as it is in the last verse of the next chapter: "That as sin has reigned unto death, even so might grace reign, through righteousness, unto eternal life, by Jesus Christ our Lord." So that by our author's own argument, death in this place also is manifestly widely different from the death we now die, as it stands here opposed to eternal life, through Jesus Christ; and signifies eternal death, the second death. And yet this is a part of the same discourse or paragraph with that begun in the 12th verse, as reckoned by Dr. Taylor himself in his division of paragraphs, in his paraphrase and notes on the epistle. So that if we will follow him, and admit his reasonings in the various parts of his book, here is manifest proof against infallible evidence! So that it is true, the apostle throughout this whole passage on the same subject, by death, evidently, clearly, and infallibly means no more than that death we now die, when this life is extinguished; and yet by death, in some part of this passage, is meant something widely different from the death we now die, and is manifestly intended eternal death, the second death.

But had our author been more consistent with himself in his laying of it down as so certain and infallible, that because the apostle has a special respect to temporal death, in the 14th verse, Death reigned from Adam to Moses, therefore he means no more in the several consequent parts of this passage, yet he is doubtless too confident and positive in this matter. This is no more evident, clear, and infallible, than that Christ meant no more by perishing, in Luke xiii 5, when he says, "I tell you, Nay, but except ye repent, ye shall all likewise

[ocr errors]

perish;" than such a temporal death, as came on those that died by the fall of the tower of Siloam, spoken of in the preceding words of the same speech; and no more infallible, than that by life, Christ means no more than this temporal life, in each part of that one sentence, Matth. x. 39, "He that findeth his life shall lose it; and he that loseth his life for my sake, shall find it," because in the first part of each clause, he has respect especially to temporal life.*

The truth of the case, with respect to what the apostle intends by the word death in this place, is this, viz., that the same thing is meant, that is meant by death in the foregoing and following parts of this epistle, and other writings of this apostle, where he speaks of death as the consequence of sin, viz., the whole of that death, which he, and the Scripture everywhere, speaks of as the proper wages and punishment of sin, including death, temporal, spiritual, and eternal; though in some parts of this discourse he has a more special respect to one part of this whole, in others to another, as his argument leads him; without any more variation than is common in the same discourse. That life, which the Scripture speaks of as the reward of righteousness, is a whole, containing several parts, viz., the life of the body, union of soul and body, and the most perfect sensibility, activity, and felicity of both, which is the chief thing. In like manner the death, which the Scripture speaks of as the punishment of sin, is a whole, including the death of the body, and the death of the soul, and the eternal, sensible, perfect destruction and misery of both. It is this latter whole, that the apostle speaks of by the name of death in this discourse, in Rom. v., though in some sentences he has a more special respect to one part, in others to another: and this, without changing the signification of the word. For a having respect to several things included in the extensive signification of the word, is not the same thing as using the word in several distinct significations. As for instance, the appellative, man, or the proper name of any particular man, is the name of a whole, including the different parts of soul and body. And if any one in speaking of James or John, should say, he was a wise man, and a beautiful man; in the former part of the sentence, respect would be had more especially to his soul, in the latter to his body, in the word man: but yet without any proper change of the signification of the name to distinct senses. In John xxi. 7, it is said, Peter was naked, and in the following part of the same story it is said, Peter was grieved. In the former proposition, respect is had especially to his body, in the latter to his soul: but yet here is no proper change of the meaning of the name, Peter. And as to the apostle's use of the word death, in the passage now under consideration, on the supposition that he in general means the whole of that death, which is the wages of sin, there is nothing but what is perfectly natural in supposing that he, in order to evince, that death, the propper punishment of sin, comes on all mankind, in consequence of Adam's sin, should take notice of that part of this punishment, which is visible in this world, and which every body therefore sees, does in fact come on all mankind (as in

* There are many places parallel with these, as John xi. 25, 26, "I am the resurrection and the life: Le that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet he shall live: and whosoever liveth, and believeth in me, shall never die." Here both the words, life and death, are used with this variation: "I am the res urrection and the life," meaning spiritual and eternal life: "He that believeth in me, though he were dead," having respect to temporal death, "yet shall he live," with respect to spiritual life, and the restora tion of the life of the body." And whosoever liveth and believeth in me, shall never die," meaning a spiritual and eternal death. So in John vi. 49, 50, "Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead," having respect chiefly to temporal death. "This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die," i. e., by the loss of spiritual life, and by eternal death. (See also ver. 58.) And in the next verse, "If any man eat of this bread, he shall live forever," have eternal ife. So ver. 54. See another like instance, John v. 24-29

[ocr errors]
[graphic]

ver. 14), and from thence should infer, that all mankind are exposed to the whole of that death which is the proper punishment of sin, whereof that temporal death which is visible, is a part, and a visible image of the whole, and (unless changed by divine grace) an introduction to the principal, and infinitely the most dreadful part.

II. Dr. Taylor's explanation of this passage makes wholly insignificant those first words, " By one man sin entered into the world," and leaves this proposition without any sense or signification at all. The apostle had been largely and elaborately representing, how the whole world was full of sin, in all parts of it, both among the Jews and Gentiles, and all exposed to death and condemnation. It is plain, that in these words he would tell us how this came to pass, viz., that this sorrowful event came by one man, even the first man. That the world was full of sin, and full of death, were two great and notorious facts, deeply affecting the interests of mankind; and they seemed very wonderful facts, drawing the attention of the more thinking part of mankind everywhere, who often asked this question, Whence comes evil, moral and natural evil? (the latter chiefly visible in death.) It is manifest the apostle here means to tell us, how these came into the world, and came to prevail in it as they do. But all that is meant, according to Dr. Taylor's interpretation, is, " He begun transgression." ."* As if all that the apostle meant, was, to tell us who happened to sin first; not how such a malady came upon the world, or how any one in the world, besides Adam himself, came by such a distemper. The words of the apostle," By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin," show the design to be, to tell us how these evils came, as affecting the state of the world; and not only as reaching one man in the world. If this were not plain enough in itself, the words immediately following demonstrate it: "And so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned." By sin's being in the world, the apostle does not mean being in the world only in that one instance of Adam's first transgression, but being abroad in the world, among the inhabitants of the earth, in a wide extent, and continued series of wickedness; as is plain in the first words of the next verse, "For until the law, sin was in the world." And therefore when he gives us an account how it came to be in the world, or, which is the same thing, how it entered into the world, he does not mean only coming in, in one instance.

If the case were as Dr. Taylor represents, that the sin of Adam, either in its pollution or punishment, reached none but himself, any more than the sin of any other man, it would be no more proper to say, that by one man sin entered into the world, than if it should be inquired, how mankind came into America, and there had anciently been a ship of the Phenicians wrecked at sea, and a single man of the crew was driven ashore on this continent, and here died as soon as he reached the shore, it should be said, by that one man mankind came into America.

4

And besides, it is not true, that by one man, or by Adam, sin entered into the world, in Dr. Taylor's sense; for it was not he, but Eve, that begun transgression. By one man Dr. Taylor understands Adam, as the figure of Christ. And it is plain that it was for his transgression, and not Eve's, that the sentence. of death was pronounced on mankind after the fall, Gen. iii. 19. It appears unreasonable to suppose the apostle means to include Eve, when he speaks of Adam; for he lays great stress on it, that it was by one, repeating it several

times.

*Page 56

[ocr errors]

III. In like manner this author brings to nothing the sense of the causal particles, in such phrases as these, so often repeated; "Death by sin," verse 12. "If through the offence of one, many be dead," verse 15. "By one that sinned-Judgment was by one to condemnation," verse 16. "By one man's offence, death reigned by one," verse 17. By the offence of one, judgment came upon all," &c., verse 18. "By one man's disobedience," verse 19. These causal particles, so dwelt upon, and so variously repeated, unless we make mere nonsense of the discourse, signify some connection and dependence, by some sort of influence of that sin of one man, or some tendency to that effect, which is so often said to come by it. But according to Dr. Taylor, there can be no real dependence or influence in the case of any sort whatsoever. There is no connection by any natural influence of that one act to make all mankind mortal. Our author does not pretend to account for this effect in any such manner, but in another most diverse, viz., a gracious act of God, laying mankind under affliction, toil and death, from special favor and kindness. Nor can there be any dependence of this effect on that transgression of Adam, by any moral influence, as deserving such a consequence, or exposing to it on any moral account, for he supposes that mankind are not in this way exposed to the least degree of evil. Nor has this effect any legal dependence on that sin, or any connection by virtue of any antecedent constitution, which God had established with Adam; for he insists that in that threatening, In the day thou eatest thou shalt die, there is not a word said of his posterity, page 8. And death on mankind, according to him, cannot come by virtue of that legal constitution with Adam; because the sentence by which it came, was after the annulling and abolishing that constitution, page 113, S. And it is manifest that this consequence cannot be through any kind of tendency of that sin to such an effect, because the effect comes only as a benefit, and is the fruit of mere favor; but sin has no tendency, either natural or moral, to benefits and divine favors. And thus that sin of Adam could neither be the efficient cause nor the procuring cause, neither the natural, moral, nor legal cause, nor an exciting and moving cause, any more than Adam's eating of any other tree of the garden. And the only real relation that the effect can have to that sin, is a relation as to time, viz., that it is after it. And when the matter is closely examined, the whole amounts to no more than this, that God is pleased, of his mere good will and pleasure, to bestow a greater favor upon us, than he did upon Adam in innocency, after that sin of his eating the forbidden fruit; which sin we are no more concerned in, than in the sin of the king of Pegu, or emperor China.

of

IV. It is altogether inconsistent with the apostle's scope, and the import of what he says, to suppose that the death which he here speaks of, as coming on mankind by Adam's sin, comes not as a punishment, but only as a favor. It quite makes void the opposition, in which the apostle sets the consequences of Adam's sin, and the consequences of the grace and righteousness of Christ. They are set in opposition to each other, as opposite effects, arising from opposite causes, throughout the paragraph: one as the just consequence of an offence, the other a free gift, verses 15-18. Whereas, according to this scheme, there is no such opposition in the case; both are benefits, and both are free gifts. A very wholesome medicine to save from perishing, ordered by a kind father, or a shield to preserve from an enemy, bestowed by a friend, is as much a free gift as pleasant food. The death that comes by Adam, is set in opposi tion to the life and happiness that comes by Christ, as being the fruit of sin, and judgment for sin; when the latter is the fruit of divine grace, verses 15,

« AnteriorContinuar »