Christ, consisting in the superior virtue and efficacy of his performances :-And this again supplies a further confirmation of the claim of the Gentiles to the benefits of the Gospel salvation : for if the effects of Adam's transgression extended to all universally; surely we shall not dare to limit the effects of Christ's merits to a part of mankind only.

And hence we may perceive the reason, why St. Paul puts the first advantageous difference, in Ver. 15, in this form & yap T τε ἑνος παραπτώματι, "for if by the offence of one:" perceiving the confirmation it afforded to his preceding argument, for the claim of the Gentiles; and resolving to make use of it; it was natural and proper to put it in this form ει γαρ πολλῳ μαλλον; "for if-much more, &c."

The second advantageous difference consists, in the triumph of mercy over judgment; and is set down in the 16th Verse:

Ver. 16. To μev yap xpiμa: "for the judgment was by one to condemnation, &c."

The judgment was from one offence to condemnation; but mercy, working backward, to undo the evil of sin, operated so graciously as not only to do away the effect of Adam's original offence, but also of all the many offences, and actual sins, of all mankind.

Ver. 17. την περίσσειαν της χάριτος.

"The surplusage of favour: so Tεpoσa signifies." Mr. Locke. "The redundant grace." Taylor.

Why Taylor should wish to render it so, is very evident. "What is that Grace and Gift, which have abounded beyond the consequences of Adam's offence; and which, therefore, have no relation to that offence, or its consequences upon us? I answer, It seems clear to me, that it is all the Grace, or the blessings of the Gospel, besides restoration to life. For restoration to life is the only part of Gospel Grace, that corresponds to Death; which Death is the only consequent of Adam's sin, which the Apostle takes into the comparison. Had he known and believed, that by Adam's one offence, the whole nature of all mankind was corrupted and made sinful; that all our actual sins do proceed from such supposed corruption of our nature; and that all men by Adam's offence lost communion with God, were brought under his wrath and curse, and made liable to the pains of hell for ever; had the Apostle, I say, known all this, it is evident from the nature of things, that he must have brought these supposed consequences into the comparison. But then, observe, the offence, and its consequences, would have been just of the same extent with the Gift, and the blessings included in it; and so the Apostle could have found no overplus of Grace, abounding beyond the Offence." (Taylor, Notes upon Romans, p. 286.)

In opposition to this, we observe, first, That Tεplocela does not signify "surplusage," but "abundance," and it denotes here, the immense goodness of God, "the exceeding riches of his grace, in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus." (Eph. ii. 7.) Schleusner v. Teplota: "abundantia, copia, omne quod summum est in aliquo rerum genere." Rom. v. 17. ryv repioveiav της χάριτος, pro την χαριν την περισσοτεραν ; summum, gravissimum, et luculentissimum Dei beneficium." Idem v. περισσεύω, quente aus, cum accus. personæ, notat, abunde contingo. Rom.

"se

v. 15. Es tas moldus etepioσevσe, abundantissime contigit omnibus." Taylor's argument, therefore, against the doctrine of Original Sin, would fail, even supposing that according to the Orthodox opinion there were no abounding of the free-gift above and beyond the offence.-But,

2dly. We observe, That even according to the Orthodox doctrine there is an abounding of the free-gift over the offence.— The consequences of the offence were, Condemnation and Death brought upon all mankind. These, I say, are all the consequences of the offence, which the Apostle contemplates in this place. If then "the Gift by grace" cancelled that sentence of condemnation, and released us from the obligation of Eternal death, it is, we say, equal to the offence and its consequences.But it did more than this;-it put us into the capacity of an eternally happy and glorious life, infinitely excelling the state of man in Paradise: therefore the grace does in fact abound beyond the offence, and leaves a great excess on the side of the free-gift. So that in every way Taylor's argument comes to nothing.

Ver. 18. εις δικαιωσιν ζωης.

Mr. Locke paraphrases the 18th Verse in this manner : "Therefore as by one offence, viz. Adam's eating the forbidden fruit, all men fell under the condemnation of death; so by one act of righteousness, viz. Christ's obedience to death upon the cross, all men are restored to life."

In his Notes he says; By dikawals Cwns, "Justification of life," which are the words of the text, is not meant that righte

ousness by faith which is to eternal life. For eternal life is no where in sacred Scripture mentioned as the portion of all men, but only of the saints."

But, though not in the event, yet in the design of God, eternal life is the portion of all believers: and this is what the Apostle means, when he says, in this 18th Verse, "by the righteousness of one the free-gift came upon all men unto justification of life."

It was by no means convenient for Mr. Locke's system, that the term "Justification" should at all appear in this comparison. For if on Christ's side there stood "Justification," which means Absolution from guilt; then on Adam's side there would naturally have stood "Guilt and Condemnation" brought upon all mankind; which Mr. Locke's system rejected.

But if the Reader considers, that the present comparison is an Inference from the preceding proofs, he will easily perceive that dikaiwors Cons must necessarily be taken for justification to the hope of eternal life. For the justification spoken of in the comparison, must needs be the same that has been treated of in the preceding argument: but the justification treated of in the four first Chapters, is justification in baptism, or the forgiveness of all past sins, in order to our admission to a state of grace and salvation; and this, we know, is in order to eternal life: Consequently, the words dikaworę wns, "justification of life," must mean that righteousness by faith which is to eternal life.

It is easy to perceive, how much Verse 21, where "righteousness unto eternal life" is expressly mentioned, must have

T

stood in Mr. Locke's way, in this interpretation. But this stumbling-block he removes, by enclosing Verses 20 and 21, in a division by themselves; (Sect. VI. No. 2.) How properly or probably, let every one judge.

With respect to Mr. Locke's general interpretation of the comparison betwixt Adam and Christ, (in which Taylor agrees with him ;) I would ask; Whether it be easy to believe, (unless the mind be previously warp'd by prejudice) that a comparison, instituted with such formality, and so particularly insisted on by the Apostle, is all to end in this; As by Adam's offence all men became mortal, so by Christ's obedience shall all be restored to life again?

Ver. 19. dikaιoi karasa≈noovrai: “shall be made righteous."

Although this is expressed in the future time, yet it is to be understood of our first justification: our final justification is spoken of in Ver. 21, which connects immediately with this 19th Verse; Verse 20 being brought in by way of parenthesis.—The reason why the Apostle expresses this in the future, is because he means to turn this comparison to a confirmation of his preceding arguments for the extension of the Gospel salvation to the Gentiles; as before in Ver. 15.

Ver. 20. voμos de mapɛionλdev “the law entered."

This Verse comes in, by way of parenthesis, in answer to a tacit objection of the Jew:-If, as you represent the matter, justification, and acceptance to the hope of eternal life, is entirely by Christ; to what purpose then the Law? re av o voμos; as it is