Paragraphs 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 6.5, 6.6

Well then, do not the Pelagians, and late Anabaptists, Quakers, and Socinians err, who deny, original sin inherent?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Dominicans, Franciscans▪ and Jesuits err, who maintain, the Virgin Mary, not to be conceived in Original sin?

Yes.

Does not lastly, a certain Ring-leader of the Quakers err, who maintains, that to Infants, this Original sin, is not imputed, until by actual sin, they joyn themselves to it?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) From that well known place of Scripture;^b which is the very seat, and foundation of this Doctrine, of Original sin. (2) Because, unless a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God;^c (3) Because, all men by Nature, and birth, are the children of wrath;^d (4) Because, whatever is born of the flesh, is fleshly;^e And who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? Not one:^f (5) Because, all the thoughts, and imaginations of the heart of man (viz. of the natural, and unregenerate man) are evil continually;^g (6) Because, David confesseth, that he was shapen in iniquity; and in sin, did his mother conceive him;^h (7) Because, Infants, that are guilty of no actual transgression, need a remedy against sin, to wit, absolution, by the blood of Christ, a Seal whereof was given, according to Gods institution, under the Law to Infants, namely Circumcision, to which Baptism, under the Gospel succeeds;ⁱ (8) Because, all the Elect, (among which are infants;)^j are redeemed by Christ, and are set at liberty from slavery, freed from the fault, and penal punishment;^k (9) Because, infants, are lyable to death, and other miseries, and calamities, which are the wages, and punishments of sin;^l

Well then, do not the Papists, Socinians, and Arminians err, who maintain, that Concupiscence or Lust, and the first motions thereof, which have not gotten the consent of the Will, are not properly and truely sin?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, they are forbidden by the Moral, and Natural Law, in the tenth Command;ⁿ (2) Because, Paul speaking of himself while unregenerate, calleth concupiscence and lust (of which the controversie is) often times sin and evil;^o (3) Because, it is a great part of the old Man, which we must lay down, and must be mortified;^p

Well then, do not many of the Papists err, who maintain, That all sins are not contrary to the Law of GOD, nor transgressions thereof?

Yes.

Do not all Papists err, Who deny every sin to be mortal, or to deserve Eternal punishment?

Yes.

Lastly, Do not the Socinians err, Who deny that any sin can deserve Eternal punishment?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, all sins deserve Eternal death;^r (2) Because, every sin is a transgression of the law;^s (3) Whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all;^t and therefore he deserves Eternal punishment. (4) Because, those sins of Infirmity and Ignorance, which the Saints are subject to, and which the Papists call Venial sins, will not suffer them to stand in Judgement before GOD, nor can the Saints be justified from them, but by Faith: and therefore in strick Justice; they merit, and deserve Hell;^u (5) Because, GOD commanded Believers under the Law, to offer typical Sacrifices, for making a propitiation for such sins; and Christ did really by his own pretious blood, purge them away, for by no less price, could they be purged, he being made a curse for them, that he might liberate those from the curse of the Law, which they had deserved for such sins, as well as for others.^v (6) Because, every sin is against the supreamest Law-giver, against his Holiness and Goodness, against his Infinite Majesty: and floweth from a Formal or Virtual contempt of GOD; and therefore the least sin, cannot but deserve GODS wrath, and curse eternally;^w 1^x