nformity with the received usage; a usage, however, unauthorized by scripture, which nowhere employs the expression, and, in fact, contains no statement in any part of it from which we can fairly infer any degradation, either physical or moral, of Adam's posterity in consequence of his transgression.
In speaking of the introduction of the serpent as an agent and speaker in the transaction, he says, it is generally understood that here was the contrivance and agency of Satan.
But he does not saidedly in opposition to the common notion of original sin, which he justly stigmatizes as, in reality, making God the author of sin. What reason is there, he justly asks, to apprehend so great an alteration made in the nature and powers of man by Adam's transgression?
Let us, then, not be unwilling to consider, whether the consequences of the fall of our first parents be not aggravated by some; and let us be careful not to admit any schemes which are derogatory to God's honour, and which count
the first chapter of Genesis as an historical narrative, or to concede the introduction of death as passing not only upon Adam, but upon all his descendants, as a consequence of his transgression, merely because this hypothesis affords the easiest ecise and distinct statement of our author's views of this part of this subject:
That judgment which was pronounced upon Adam for his sin came upon all men; or, the Judge decreed that the sentence passed upon Adam should as to the things inflicted,Adam should as to the things inflicted, in themselves considered, light upon his posterity.
Just as if a father for some irregularity in his first child should determine to lay a restraint upon him in diet, dress, or diversions, and at the same time should judge it expedient to make it a of the whole controversy, and particularly an acute and unanswerable exposure of the absurdity of the common notion, that Adam was in some sort (as it is expressed in the language of technical theology) the federal head or representative of the whol