Cheraw gazette. [volume] (Cheraw, S.C.) 1835-1838, 1837-04-19

with the same nature, in kind, rs that wit
which Adam was created.
According to this view Of the subject
Adam was not created holy, nor is there
as can see, any real conncxion betweel
the sin of Adam, and that of his posteri
ty. This position, therefore, entirely sub
verts the doctrine of original sin. Besides
If this position be true, infants are IN NJ
sense sinners, and do not need to be borl
again, nor to be redeemed by the blood O
Christ.
3. DR.. Taylor maintains, contrary TO my
belief, that the on y reason that the poster
ty Of Adam do not exhibit the same mora
character which Adam exhibited, is moi
that they have different nature, but that
they arc placed in different circumstances.
This, if mistake moi, is the precise
ground uniformly taken, in con;rovcrtins
the doctrine Of original sin; and it seems
to me to be intimately connected with those
systems of belief, which entirely discard
the doctrines of grace. Indeed, if the de-
prayity of man is owing solely TO the Cir.
cums.ances in which he is placed, it would
seem that no other remedy would be need
cd for it, but a change of circumstances.
Consequently man does not need radical
change of heart by the power Of the Holy
Spirit.
6. Dr.. Taylor and differ in regard to
the nature Of scl(ishncss. According to
him, sclfshncss does not consist in making
our own happiness our Ultimate end, but in
love of the world, or in prcierring the world
to God, as our portion or chief good.
This regard as one of the most dam
gerous parts of DR.. Taylor's system; for
it affects the very essence Of rcligion-the
very nature of holiness. According TO
him, sclf.love, O: the desire Of happiness S
the grand principle BY which every moral
being, whether sinful or holy, is actnatcd.
All have the same ultimate end. "Of all
specific voluntary action, the happiness OF
the agent, in some form, is the Ultimate
end" According TO this statement, the
distinction of moral character which ex-
ISIS among men, does not arise from the
fact, that they have different ultimate ends,
but fror, the fact, that they adopt different
means to obtain the same ultimate end.
The reason that one is holy, and another
sinful, is, tho one seeks his own happiness
by choosing God rs his portion or chief
good; the o.her seeks his own happiness
by choosing the world as his portion or
chief good. Both have supreme regard
to their own happiness. Consequently
there is no radical distinction between holi-
ness and sin. Both may be traced TO the
same principle Of action. cannot but
say, what honestly believe, that the rell-
zion which is in accordance with this theo.
ry, is selfish, and Of course, spurious
religion.
Bcs;dcs-accordng to this theory. de-
praviry consists in ignorance; and all that
is necessary to eiitc;;ho conversion Of SIM
ncrS, is, to cnlishten them as TO the bcS.
means Of securing their highest happiness.
therefore, by the agency Of
the Holy Spirit cannot be necessary.
8. DR.. Taylor maintains, contrary TO
MY belief, that sinners may so resist the
grace Of God as to render it impossible for
God to convert them.
9. DR.. Taylor maintains, contrary 10
my belief, that antcccdcnt to regeneration,
the selfish principle is suspended in the SIM
ncr's heart, that he ceases to sin, and uses
the means Of regeneration, with motives
which arc neither right nor wrong.
have made the foregoing extracts for
the purpose Of enabling you to sec at a
single glance the prominent points on
which the New Haven divines differ from
their brethren. That after all which they
have said, they should now claim, that there
is no difference, or at least no important diff
ference between them and their brethren,
is truly surprising. DR.. Tyler (3.) clo-
ses his remarks with the following observa-
,ions Oh this point.
This pamphlet, as observed, closed the
controversy between DR.. Tyler and DR..
Taylor. Although DR.. Taylor had given
to the controversy so serious an aspect by
charging upon his opponent the most BIAS
phcmous errors, and although DR.. Tyler
called upon him in this pamphlet. to rctract
his charges or substantiatc them; yet he
has not dcigned to do either. Meanwhile
the watch word of the party for the last
three or four years, has been, mo differ
cnce. f4.)
Yours very atlcctonately