let the mighty man glory in his might, let not the rich man glory in his riches; but let him that glorieth, glory in this, that be understandeth and knoweth me, that I am the Lord which exercifetḥ loving-kindness, judgment, and righteousness in the earth; for in thefe things I delight, faith the Lord. And as God has thus declared himfelf to be a righteous Being, fo he hath likewife declared in the forementioned 18th chapter of Ezekiel, that to charge the guilt of every man's actions upon himself, and not upon another, is agreeable to thefe principles of justice and equity; and confequently to charge the guilt of a perfon's actions upon another, that was no way acceffory to his crime, is to act contrary to thefe principles.

This being obferved, I anfwer, that if St. Paul, or an angel from heaven, fhould preach fuch a doctrine (as the objection fuppofes) as this would be a falfhood in itself, and would be charging the righteous God foolishly; fo we ought not to receive it, nor give the leaft degree of affent to it, Gal. i. 8. but farther, I fay, we are under no ne. ceffity of bringing this cafe to fo defperate an iffue, as to conclude, that either God is unjuft, or elfe that St. Paul hath preached falfe doctrine to the world; because if we treat St. Paul's writings with the fame civility, and give him the fame allowances as we do to the writings of all other men, we fhould fee that St. Paul did not intend to establifh fuch a doctrine, as the objection represents him to have done. For the clearing this point, and St. Paul from this reflection, I will give my fenfe of what he hath faid in this matter, when I have premifed, first, that as God punished Adam's fin in eating the forbidden fruit with death; fo death, or mortality, paffed upon all his pofterity, as a natural confequence of his fin: I fay, as a natural confequence, because as mortality was in

flicted upon Adam, as a juft punishment for his
folly; fo his feed naturally became mortal, as
they were branches fpringing out of a mortal
ftock. Secondly, I premife, that St. Paul was fo
far from fuppofing, that God acts contrary to the
principles of justice and equity in his dealings with
his creatures, that on the contrary, in this very
epiftle, he retorts back fuch a fuppofition, with a
God forbid, and intimates to the Romans, that if
God was unrighteous he would be unfit to judge
the world, as knowing that injuftice and partiali-
ty were very unreafonable in judgment. Thus
in chap. iii. 5, 6. Is God unrighteous, who taketh
vengeance? I speak as a man, God forbid; for then
bow fhall God judge the world? Seeing therefore
St. Paul takes it for granted, that God acts agree-
able to the principles of juftice and equity; and
feeing that to impute the guilt of one perfon's
actions to another, who was no ways acceffory to
his crime, is contrary to these principles, accord-
ing to what God hath declared of this matter by
his Prophet Ezekiel, which St. Paul could not be
ignorant of; from hence, I infer, that if there is
any fenfe to be put upon his words, which is
agreeable to truth, to the defign for which they are..
urged, and to what the Apoftle hath elsewhere
more plainly expreffed upon a like occafion, we
ought in juftice to interpret his words in fuch
a fenfe, and not in a fenfe which is contrary.
thereto.

This being premifed, I obferve, that St. Paul, in the former part of this epiftle (in order to take off the vain and groundlefs conceit of the Jews, who had monopolized the favour and love of God to themselves; and to comfort the believing Gentiles, whom the Jews defpifed as reprobates) he largely and fully proved, that the Jews and Gentiles, in the kingdom of the Meffiah, ftood all M 4

upon

upon a level, in point of acceptance in God's fight, and that there was no room for boafting on either fide; because as the Gentiles had finned against the light of nature, fo had the Jews alfo against the law of Mofes, confequently they were all concluded under fin. And as they were all finners, fo their juftification, or freedom from condemnation, was an act of grace, and not of debt. It was what God's goodness and mercy was pleased to beftow, and not what he in ftrict juftice was obliged to. And as their juftification was an act of grace, and not of debt; fo the prerequifites, or that which made them the suitable objects of this grace of juftification, was faith in and faithfulness to the Meffiah, whom God hath appointed to be the minifter of this grace, both to Few and Gentile. And as God had given his Son to promote the welfare of mankind; fo this was a convincing proof of the greatness and truth of his love, and was a proper ground of hope that he would be every way a fuitable good unto them.

The Apoftle having fhewn at large, that both Jews and Gentiles ftood upon a level, in point of acceptance in God's fight, and that the Gentiles had the fame ground of glory, and of hope as the Jews, forafmuch as God was the God of the Gentites as well as of the Jews, he farther illustrates this point (in the verfes from whence the objection is taken) by fhewing, that as Adam was the common father of Jew and Gentile, and as his disobedience affected them both, by bringing mortality upon his pofterity; fo Christ was given of God to be a great and univerfal benefit to mankind, by raifing all men from that death, which Adam's fin had fubjected them to, and fo bringing them again into a ftate of life. Thus in chap. v 12. Wherefore, as by one man (Adam) fin entered into the world, and death by fin, and jo death paffed upon all men,

for

for that all have finned (are become mortal) that by the term finned, is meant mortality (the caufe being put for the effect) is plain, not only from the parallel place, 1 Cor. xv. 22. where St. Paul, fpeaking of the fame thing, faith, as in Adam all die, that is, become mortal, for that they actually died in Adam was not true; but it was true that in him they became mortal, or at least the Apostle judged that to be the cafe, as in verfe 21. For fince by man (viz. Adam) came death, or morality, by man (viz. Chrift) came alfo the refurrection from the dead: I fay, it is not only clear from the parallel place in Corinthians, but alfo from St. Paul's difcourfe in this very place: thus, verse 15. For if through the offence of one (viz. Adam) many be dead, here we fee that it is death, and not fin, which the Apostle faith many fell under by Adam's offence, and this is what he undertakes to prove in the 13th and 14th verses, as will appear by and by. And that the caufe is put for the effect fometimes in this very case, see Gen. vii. 4. If thou dost well, fhalt thou not be accepted; but if thou dost not well, fin (or the effect of fin, which is punishment) lieth at the door. As the being accepted of God, was the effect of Abel's well doing; of the being rejected by him, was the effect or punishment of Cain's evil doing. Now for Cain to do evil, was the fame thing as to commit fin, fin and evil in this cafe being the fame thing; and therefore, that which lay at the door, or followed his doing evil, was not fin, but the effect or punishment of fin; and yet God (or the angel which spake in God's name to Cain) calls it fin, putting the caufe for the effect. So in like manner the Apostles puts the term fin, which was the cause, for mortality, which was the effect. That all men have finned in Adem was not true (as I have fhewn) but that all men became mortal by

his fin, was true, or at least the Apostle judged that to be the cafe (as I have fhewn likewife.) What a bardship therefore muft it be to the Apoftle, for us to interpret his words in a fenfe, contrary to the fenfe which he himself gives them in this, and in a parallel place of his writings. And the hardship will be yet greater in denying him the liberty of putting the caufe for the effect, when God had done the fame in the use of the very fame term, as is before fhewn.

If it should be here replied, that it seems a little ftrange that St, Paul fhould ufe the fame term in two different fenfes in the fame verse. I answer, it feems more ftrange, that he fhould affert that which was contrary to truth, and which no way anfwered his prefent defign; for to affert that death paffed upon all men, as an effect or confequence of their own fin, as this was not true, fo it was befide his prefent purpose, which was to fhew, not what was the effect of all men's fin, but on the contrary what was the effect of Adam's fin only. Verse 13, 14% For until the law, fin was in the world, but fin is not imputed where there is no law: Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Mofes, even over them that had not finned after the fimilitude of Adam's tranfgreffion. Here in the 13th verfe the. Apostle (according to the plain and moft obvious fignification of the words) fuppofes and allows three things. First, That from Adam to Mofes, there was no law; this is fully implied in those words [until the law] which naturally fuppofes that, antecedent to that time, there was no law; and in thofe words [where. there is no law] which fuppofes that there was no law in being at the time referred to. Secondly, He allows that fin was committed all that fpace of time. from Adam down to Mofes: this is expreffed in those words, for until the law, fin was in the world. Thirdly, He allows that there can be no guilt contracted