These are no invented quibbles or sophisms. If God expected of Adam any obedience or duty to him at all, when he first made him, whether it was in reflecting, considering, or any way exerting the faculties he had given him, then God expected he should immediately exercise love and regard to him. For how could it be expected, that Adam should have a strict and perfect regard to God's commands and authority, and his duty to him, when he had no love nor regard to him in his heart, nor could it be expected he should have any? If Adam from the beginning did his duty to God, and had more respect to the will of his Creator than to other things, and as much respect to him as he ought to have · then from the beginning he had a supreme and perfect respect and love to God and if so, he was created with such a principle. There is no avoiding the consequence. Not only external duties, but internal duties, such as summarily consist in love, must be immediately required of Adam, as soon as he existed, if any duty at all was required. For it is most apparently absurd, to talk of a spiritual being, with the faculties of understanding and will, being required to perform external duties, without internal. Dr. Taylor himself observes, that love is the fulfilling of the law, and that all moral rectitude, even every part of it, must be resolved into that single principle. Therefore, if any morally right act at all, reflection, consideration, or any thing else, was required of Adam immediately on his first existence, and was performed as required; then he must, the first moment of his existence, have his heart possessed of that principle of divine love; which implies the whole of moral rectitude in every part of it, according to our author's own doctrine; and so the whole of moral rectitude or righteousness must begin with his existence; which is the thing taught in the doctrine of Original Righteousness.

And let us consider how it could be otherwise, than that Adam was always, in every moment of his existence, obliged to exercise such regard or respect of heart towards every object or thing, as was agreeable to the apparent merit of that object. For instance, would it not at any time have been a becoming thing in Adam, on the exhibition to his mind of God's infinite goodness to him, for him to have exercised answerable gratitude, and the contrary have been unbecoming and odious? And if something had been presented to Adam's view, transcendently amiable in itself, as for instance, the glorious perfection of the divine nature, would it not have become him to love, relish and delight in it? Would not such an object have merited this? And if the view of an object so amiable in itself did not affect his mind with complacence, would it not, according to the plain dictates of our understanding, have shown an unbecoming temper. of mind?

To say that he had not had time, by culture, to form and establish a good disposition or relish, is not what would have taken off the disagreeableness and odiousness of the temper. And if there had been never so much time, I do not see how it could be expected he should improve it aright, in order to obtain a good disposition, if he had not already some good disposition to engage him to it.

That belonging to the will and disposition of the heart, which is in itself either odious or amiable, unbecoming or decent, always would have been Adam's virtue or sin, in any moment of his existence; if there be any such thing as virtue or vice, by which nothing can be meant, but that in our moral disposition and behavior, which is becoming or unbecoming, amiable or odious.

Human nature must be created with some dispositions; a disposition to relish some things as good and amiable, and to be averse to other things as odious and disagreeable; otherwise it must be without any such thing as inclination or

will it must be perfectly indifferent, without preference, without choice or aversion towards any thing as agreeable or disagreeable. But if it had any concreated dispositions at all, they must be either right or wrong, either agreeable or disagreeable to the nature of things. If man had at first the highest relish of those things that were most excellent and beautiful, a disposition to have the quickest and highest delight in those things that were most worthy of it, then his dispositions were morally right and amiable, and never can be decent and excellent in a higher sense. But if he had a disposition to love most those things that were inferior and less worthy, then his dispositions were vicious. And it is evident there can be no medium between these.

II. This notion of Adam's being created without a principle of holiness in his heart, taken with the rest of Dr. Taylor's scheme, is inconsistent with what the history, in the beginning of Genesis, leads us to suppose of the great favors and smiles of heaven, which Adam enjoyed while he remained in innocency. The Mosaic account suggests to us that till Adam sinned he was in happy circumstances, surrounded with testimonies and fruits of God's favor. This is implicitly owned by Dr. Taylor, when he says, page 252, "That in the dispensation our first parents were under before the fall, they were placed in a condition proper to engage their gratitude, love and obedience." But it will follow on our author's principles, that Adam, while in innocency, was placed in far worse circumstances than he was in after his disobedience, and infinitely worse than his posterity are in; under unspeakably greater disadvantages for the avoiding of sin, and the performance of duty. For by his doctrine, Adam's posterity come into the world with their hearts as free from any propensity to sin as he, and he was made as destitute of any propensity to righteousness as they; and yet God, in favor to them, does great things to restrain them from sin, and excite them to virtue, which he never did for Adam in innocency, but laid him, in the highest degree, under contrary disadvantages.

God, as an instance of his great favor, and fatherly love to man, since the fall, has denied him the ease and pleasures of Paradise, which gratified and allured his senses, and bodily appetites; that he might diminish his temptations to sin. And as a still greater means to restrain from sin, and promote virtue, has subjected him to labor, toil and sorrow in the world; and not only so, but as a means to promote his spiritual and eternal good far beyond this, has doomed him to death and when all this was found insufficient, he, in further prosecution of the designs of his love, shortened men's lives exceedingly, made them twelve or thirteen times shorter than in the first ages. And yet this, with all the innumerable calamities, which God in great favor to mankind has brought on the world, whereby their temptations are so vastly cut short, and the means and inducements to virtue heaped one upon another, to so great a degree, all have proved insufficient, now for so many thousand years together, to restrain from wickedness in any considerable degree; innocent human nature, all along, coming into the world with the same purity and harmless dispositions that our first parents had in Paradise. What vast disadvantages indeed then must Adam and Eve have been in, that had no more in their nature to keep them from sin, or incline them to virtue, than their posterity, and yet were without all those additional and extraordinary means! Not only without such exceeding great means as we now have, when our lives are made so very short, but having vastly less advantages than their antediluvian posterity, who to prevent their being wicked, and to make them good, had so much labor and toil, sweat and sorrow, briers and thorns, with a body gradually decaying and returning to the dust; when our first parents had the extreme disadvantage of being placed in the midst of

so many and exceeding great temptations, not only without toil or sorrow, pain or disease, to humble and mortify them, and a sentence of death to wean them from the world, but in the midst of the most exquisite and alluring sensitive delights, the reverse in every respect, and to the highest degree, of that most gracious state of requisite means, and great advantages, which mankind now enjoy! If mankind now under these vast restraints, and great advantages, are not restrained from general, and as it were universal wickedness, how could it be expected that Adam and Eve, created with no better hearts than men bring into the world now, and destitute of all these advantages, and in the midst of all contrary disadvantages, should escape it?

These things are not agreeable to Moses' account; which represents a happy state of peculiar favors and blessings before the fall, and the curse coming afterwards; but according to this scheme, the curse was before the fall, and the great favors and testimonies of love followed the apostasy. And the curse before the fall must be a curse with a witness, being to so high a degree the reverse of such means, means so necessary for such a creature as innocent man, and in all their multitude and fulness proving too little. Paradise therefore must be a mere delusion! There was indeed a great show of favor, in placing man in the midst of such delights. But this delightful garden it seems, with all its beauty and sweetness, was in its real tendency worse than the apples of Sodom it was but a mere bait (God forbid the blasphemy) the more effectually enticing by its beauty and deliciousness, to Adam's eternal ruin; which might be the more expected to be fatal to him, seeing that he was the first man that ever existed, having no superiority of capacity to his posterity, and wholly without the advantage of the observations, experiences, and improvements of preceding generations, which his posterity have.

I proceed now to take notice of an additional proof of the doctrine we are upon, from another part of the holy Scripture. A very clear text for original righteousness is that in Eccles. vii. 29, "Lo, this only have I found, that God made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions."

It is an observation of no weight which Dr. Taylor makes on this text, that the word man is commonly used to signify mankind in general, or mankind collectively taken. It is true it often signifies the species of mankind; but then it is used to signify the species, with regard to its duration and succession from its beginning, as well as with regard to its extent. The English word mankind is used to signify the species: but what if it be so? Would it be an improper or unintelligible way of speaking, to say, that when God first made mankind, he placed them in a pleasant paradise (meaning in their first parents), but now they live in the midst of briers and thorns? And it is certain, that to speak of God's making mankind in such a meaning, viz., his giving the species an existence in their first parents, at the creation of the world, is agreeable to the Scripture use of such an expresssion. As in Deut. iv. 32, " Since the day that God created man upon the earth." Job xx. 4, " Knowest thou not this of old, since man was placed upon the earth." Isa. xlv. 12, "I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens." Jer. xxvii. 5, " I have made the earth, the man and the beast that are upon the ground, by my great power." All these texts speak of God's making man, by the word man, signifying the species of mankind; and yet they all plainly have respect to God's making man at first, when God made the earth and stretched out the heavens, and created the first parents of mankind. In all these places the same word Adam is used, as here in Ecclesiastes; and in the last of them, used with he emphaticum, as it is here; though Dr. Taylor omits

it, when he tells us, he gives us a catalogue of all the places in Scripture where the word is used. And it argues nothing to the doctor's purpose, that the pronoun they is used. They have sought out many inventions. Which is properly applied to the species, which God made at first upright: God having begun the species with more than one, and it being continued in a multitude. As Christ speaks of the two sexes, in the relation of man and wife, as continued in successive generations. Matth. xix. 4, " He that made them at the beginning, made them male and female;" having reference to Adam and Eve.

No less impertinent, and also very unfair, is his criticism on the word jashar, translated upright. Because the word sometimes signifies right, he would from thence infer, that it does not properly signify a moral rectitude, even when used to express the character of moral agents. He might as well insist, that the English word upright, sometimes, and in its most original meaning, signifies right up, or in an erect posture, therefore it does not properly signify any moral character, when applied to moral agents; and indeed less unreasonably; for it is known, that in the Hebrew language, in a peculiar manner, most words used to signify moral and spiritual things, are taken from things external and natural. The word jashar is used, as applied to moral agents, or to the words and actions of such (if I have not misreckoned*), about a hundred and ten times in Scripture; and about a hundred of them, without all dispute, to signify virtue, or moral rectitude (though Dr. Taylor is pleased to say, the word does not generally signify a moral character), and for the most part it signifies true virtue, or virtue in such a sense, as distinguishes it from all false appearances of virtue, or what is only virtue in some respects, but not truly so in the sight of God. It is used at least eighty times in this sense: and scarce any word can be found in the Hebrew language more significant of this. It is thus used constantly in Solomon's writings (where it is often found), when used to express a character or property of moral agents. And it is beyond all controversy, that he uses it in this place, in the 7th of Ecelesiastes, to signify a moral rectitude, or character of real virtue and integrity. For the wise man, in this context, is speaking of men with respect to their moral character, inquiring into the corruption and depravity of mankind (as is confessed p. 184), and he here declares, he had not found more than one among a thousand of the right stamp, truly and thoroughly virtuous and upright; which appeared a strange thing! But in this text he clears God, and lays the blame on man man was not made thus at first. He was made of the right stamp, altogether good in his kind (as all other things were), truly and thoroughly virtuous, as he ought to be; but they have sought out many inventions. Which last expression signifies things sinful, or morally evil; as is confessed, p. 185. And this expression, used to signify those moral evils he found in man,which he sets in opposition to the uprightness man was made in, shows, that by uprightness he means the most true and sincere goodness. The word rendered inventions, most naturally and aptly signifies the subtle devices, and crooked and deceitful ways of hypocrites, wherein they are of a character contrary to men of simplicity and godly sincerity; who, though wise in that which is good, are simple concerning evil. Thus the same wise man, in Prov. xii. 2, sets a truly good man in opposition to a man of wicked devices, whom God will condemn. Solomon had occasion to observe many who put on an artful disguise and fair show of goodness; but on searching thoroughly, he found very few truly upright. As he says, Prov. xx. 6, "Most men will proclaim every one his own goodness: but a

• Making use of Buxford's Concordance, which, according to the author's professed design, directs to all the places where the word is used.

faithful man who can find ?" So that it is exceeding plain, that by uprightness, in this place in Ecclesiastes, Solomon means true moral goodness.

What our author urges concerning many inventions being spoken of, whereas Adam's eating the forbidden fruit was but one invention, is of as little weight as the rest of what he says on this text. For the many lusts and corruptions of mankind, appearing in innumerable ways of sinning, are all the consequence of that sin. The great corruption men are fallen into by the original apostasy, appears in the multitude of wicked ways they are inclined to. And therefore these are properly mentioned as the fruits and evidences of the greatness of that apostasy and corruption.

SECTION II.

Concerning the kind of Death, threatened to our first Parents, if they should eat of the Forbidden Fruit.

DR. TAYLOR, in his observations on the three first chapters of Genesis, says, p. 7, "The threatening to man, in case of transgression was, that he should surely die. Death is the losing of life. Death is opposed to life, and must be understood according to the nature of that life, to which it is opposed. Now the death here threatened can, with any certainty, be opposed only to the life God gave Adam, when he created him, verse 7. Any thing besides this, must be pure conjecture, without solid foundation."

To this I would say, it is true, death is opposed to life, and must be understood according to the nature of that life, to which it is opposed: but does it therefore follow, that nothing can be meant by it but the loss of life? Misery is opposed to happiness, and sorrow is in Scripture often opposed to joy; but can we conclude from thence, that nothing is meant in Scripture by sorrow, but the loss of joy? Or that there is no more in misery, than the loss or absence of happiness? And if it be so, that the death threatened to Adam can, with certainty, be opposed only to the life given to Adam, when God created him; I think, a state of perfect, perpetual and hopeless misery is properly opposed to that state Adam was in, when God created him. For I suppose it will not be denied, that the life Adam had, was truly a happy life; happy in perfect innocency, in the favor of his Maker, surrounded with the happy fruits and testimonies of his love: and I think it has been proved, that he also was happy in a state of perfect righteousness. And nothing is more manifest, than that it is agreeable to a very common acceptation of the word life, in Scripture, that it be understood as signifying a state of excellent and happy existence. Now that which is most opposite to that life and state Adam was created in, is a state of total, confirmed wickedness, and perfect hopeless misery, under the divine displeasure and curse; not excluding temporal death, or the destruction of the body, as an introduction to it.

And besides, that which is much more evident, than any thing Dr. Taylor says on this head, is this, viz., that the death, which was to come on Adam, as the punishment of his disobedience, was opposed to that life, which he would have had as the reward of his obedience in case he had not sinned. Obedience and disobedience are contraries: and the threatenings and promises, that are sanctions of a law, are set in direct opposition: and the promised rewards and threatened punishments, are what are most properly taken as each other's opposites. But none will deny, that the life which would have been Adam's reward,