ing the Meaning of a Word backward and forward, in one Paragraph, all about one Thing, and in different Parts of the fame Sentences, coming over and over in quick Repetitions, with a Variety of other fynonymous Words to fix its Signification; befides the continued Ufe of the Word in the former Part of this Chapter, and in all the preceding Part of this Epiftle, and the continued Ufe of it in the next Chapter, and in the next to that, and the 8th Chapter following that, and to the End of the Epiftle; in none of which Places ⚫ it is pretended, but that the Word is ufed in the proper Senfe, by our Author in his Paraphrafe and Notes on the whole Epistle *. But indeed we need go no further than that one ver. 12. What the Apoftle means by Sin, in the jatter Part of the Verfe, is evident with the utmost Plainnefs, by comparing it with the former Part; one Part anfwering to another, and the laft Claufe exegetical of the former. Wherefore, as by one Man Sin entered into the World, and Death by Sin; ana fo Death paffed upon all Men, for that (or, unto which) * Agreeable to this Manner, our Author, in explaining the 7th Chap. of Romans, understands the Pronoun 1, or Me, used by the Apoftle in that one continued Difcourfe, in no less than Six different Senfes. He takes it in the 1ft ver. to fignify the Apostle Paul himself. In the 8, 9, 10, and 11th Verfes, for the People of the Jews, through all Ages, both before and after Mofes, especially the carnal ungodly Part of them. In the 13th ver. for an objecting Jew, entering into a Dialogue with the Apoftle. In the 15, 16, 17, 20th, and latter Part of the 25th ver. it is underflood in two different Senfes, for two I's in the fame Perfon; one, a Man's Reafon; and the other, his Paffions and carnal Appetites. And in the 7th and former Part of the laft Verfe, for Us Chriftians in general; or, for all that enjoy the Word of God, the Law and the Gospel: And thefe different Senfes, the most of them ftrangely intermixed and interchanged backwards and forwards. which) all have finned. Here Sin and Death are spoken of in the former Part, and Sin and Death are fpoken of in the latter Part; the two Parts of the Sentence fo answering one another, that the fame Things are apparently meant by Sin and Death in both Parts, And befides, to interpret finning, here, of falling under the Suffering of Death, is yet the more violent and unreasonable, because the Apostle in this very Place does once and again diftinguish between Sin and Death; plainly speaking of one as the Effect, and the other the Caufe. So in the 21ft Verfe, That as Sin bath reigned unto Death; and in the 12th Verfe, Sin entered into the World, and Death BY Sin. And this plain Diftinction holds through all the Discourse, as between Death and the Offence, ver, 15, and ver. 17. and be tween the Offence and Condemnation, ver. 18. 4. Though we fhould omit the Confideration of the Manner in which the Apostle uses the Words, Sin, finned, &c. in other Places, and in other Parts of this Discourse, yet Dr. T-r's Interpretation of them would be very abfurd. The Cafe ftands thus: According to bis Expofition, we are faid to have finned by an active Verb, as though we had actively finned; yet this is not spoken truly and properly, but it is put figuratively for our becoming Sinners paffively, our being made or conftituted Sinners. Yet again, not that we do truly become Sinners paffively, or are really made Sinners, by any Thing that God does; this alfo is only a figurative or tropical Representa tion; and the Meaning is only, we are condemned, and treated AS IF we were Sinners. Not indeed that we are properly condemned, for God never truly truly condemns the Innocent: But this also is only a figurative Representation of the Thing. It is but as it were condemning; because it is appointing to Death, a terrible Evil, as if it were a Punishment. But then, in Reality, here is no Appointment to a terrible Evil, or any Evil at all; but truly to a Benefit, a great Benefit: And fo, in reprefenting Death as a Punishment or Calamity condemned to, another Figure or Trope is made Ufe of, and an exceeding bold one; for, as we are appointed to it, it is fo far from being an Evil or Punishment, that it is really a Favour, and that of the highest Nature, appointed by mere Grace and Love, though it feems to be a Calamity. Thus we have Tropes and Figures multiplied, one upon the back of another; and all in that one Word, finned, according to the Manner, as it is fuppofed, the Apostle ufes it. We have a figurative Reprefentation, not of a Reality, but of a figurative Reprefentation. Neither is this a Reprefentation of a Reality, but of another Thing that ftill is but a figurative Representation of fomething elfe: Yea, even this fomething else is ftill but a Figure, and one that is very harsh and far-fetched. So that here we have a Figure to represent a Figure, even a Figure of a Figure, reprefenting some very remote Figure, which moft obfcurely represents the Thing intended; if the moft terrible Evil can indeed be faid at all to reprefent the contrary Good of the highest Kind. And now, what cannot be made of any Place of Scripture, in fuch a Way of managing it, as this? And is there any Hope of ever deciding any Controverfy by the Scripture, in the Way of using such a Licence with the Scripture, in order to force it to a Compliance with our own Schemes? If the Apoftle indeed ufes Language after fo ftrange a Manner in this Place, Place, it is perhaps fuch an Inftance, as not only there is not the like of it in all the Bible befides, but perhaps in no Writing whatsoever. And this, not in any parabolical, vifionary, or prophetic Defcription, in which difficult and obfcure Reprefentations are wont to be made Use of; nor in a dramatic or poetical Reprefentation, in which a great Licence is often taken, and bold Figures are commonly to be expected: But it is in a familiar Letter, wherein the Apoftle is delivering GofpelInftruction, as a Minifter of the New Teftament; and wherein, as he profeffes, he delivers divine Truth without the Vail of ancient Figures and Similitudes, and ufes great Plainnefs of Speech: And in a Difcourfe that is wholly didactic, nartative, and argumentative; evidently fetting himfelf to explain the Doctrine he is upon, in the Reafon and Nature of it, with a great Variety of Expreffions, turning it as it were on every Side, to make his Meaning plain, and to fix in his Readers the exact Notion of what he intends. Dr. T. himself obferves *, " This Apoftle takes "great Care to guard and explain every Part of "his Subject: And I may venture to fay, he has left no Part of it unexplained or unguarded. "Never was an Author more exact and cautious "in this than he. Sometimes he writes Notes on "a Sentence liable to Exception, and wanting "Explanation." Now I think, this Care and Exactness of the Apostle no where appears more than in the Place we are upon. Nay, I fcarcely know another Inftance equal to this, of the Apoftle's Care to be well understood, by being very particular, explicit, and precife, fetting the Matter forth in every Light, going over and over again with his Doctrine, clearly to exhibit, and fully to fettle and determine the Thing which he aims at, SECT Pref, to Paraph. on Rom. p. 146, 48, . IV. . II SECT. II. " Some Obfervations on the Connection, Scope, and THE HE Connection of this remarkable Paragraph with the foregoing Difcourfe in this Epistle, is not obfcure and difficult, nor to be fought for at a Distance. It may be plainly feen, only by a general Glance on Things which went before, from the Beginning of the Epiftle: And indeed what is faid immediately before in the fame Chapter, leads directly to it. The Apostle in the pres ceding Part of this Epiftle had largely treated of the Sinfulness and Mifery of all Mankind, Jews as well as Gentiles. He had particularly spoken of the Depravity and Ruin of Mankind in their natural State, in the foregoing Part of this Chapter; reprefenting them as being Sinners, Ungodly, Enemies, expofed to divine Wrath, and without Strength. No Wonder now, this leads him to obferve, how this fo great and deplorable an Event came to pafs; how this univerfal Sin and Ruin came into the World. And with Regard to the Jews in particular, who, though they might allow the Doctrine of Original Sin in their own Profeffion, yet were ftrongly prejudiced against what was implied in it, or evidently followed froin it, with regard to themselves; in this refpect they were prejudiced against the Doctrine of univerfal Sinfulness, and Expofednefs to Wrath by Nature, looking on themfelves as by Nature holy, and Favourites of God, because they were the Children of Abraham; and with them the Apotle had laboured |