yt be EA vata! rte DUKE UNIVERSITY DIVINITY SCHOOL LIBRARY B. owd ¥ E DISSERTATIONS ON THE SCRIPTURE ACCOUNT OF THE FALL; anp 1rs CONSEQUENCES, CHARLES CHAUNCY, D.D.- Minifter of the Firft Church in Boston, NEw ENGLAND, L ONDON:. >.) ga 3 eal ee s PRINTED FOR C. DILLY, IN THE POULTRY. MDCCLXXXyY. Pa = On the one man, Adam, in his innocent frate. OSES, ia ie bask oF Genefis, gives ‘us a plain, though concife, account of the creation of the firft man: and it is. from this account, together with fome Scripture-paf- fages which may, feem to allude to it, and not from the principles of mere reafon, that we be- “ome capable of conceiving juftly of the ftate in hich he was originally created. The Mofaic account of man, and his original Yate, I fhall place before the reader in its full iew once for all, that he may be able the more eadily to Bitise of the pertinency of what may be offered as reprefenting its juft contents. It. 3 in thefe words : ; Genesis, Chap, I. " 26. © And God faid, Let us make man in our image, after our likenefs: and let him have | | B . dominion 548332 pa Re over the fh E the f fea, and j fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and ov all the earth, and over every creepi Ted creepeth upon the earth.” pe br 27. * So God created man in his eal in the image of God created he him: male and female created he them.” 28. “ And God bleffed them, and God faid unto them, Be fruitful and multiply, and | if plenith the earth, and fubdue it, and have « minion over the fith of the fea, and over t i fowl of the air, and over every living shige. that moveth upon the earth,” Iadhsiet 29. * And God faid, Behold, I have ven you every herb bearing feed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree in th which is the fruit oF a tree yielding feed: to you it ‘hall be for meat.” gone om ; Genesis, Chap. II. paps a €’ And the Lord formed man of the duft o 6 the ground, and ‘breathed into his noftrils the breath of life: And man became a living foul 8. © And the Lord God planted a gardenéa ward in Eden; and there put he the ia whom he had formed.” ie iW g. * And out of the ground rade ‘Lord God to grow every tree that is pleafan to th fight, and good; for food: the tree of life alfo i the midft of the garden, and the ‘tree of khow- | ledge of good and evil.” nae ee any cer « ae DissERTATION ET 3 41. © And the Lord God took the man; and pec him into the garden’ “to drefs it, er to keep ee tt 16. “And the Lord God ceanaunaed the man, faying, Of every tree of the garden thou _ nayeft freely eat: - 47. But of the tree of the knowledge of good and évil, thou fhale not eat of it; for in the day thou eateft thereof thou fhalt furely die.” #8. “ And thé Lord God faid, it is not good that the man fhould be alone: I will make him an help meet for him.” 19. “ And out of the ground the Lord God formed every bealt of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to fee what he would call them; and whatfoever Adam > yy 4 4 LS, - th ! vu called every living creature, that was the name ~ thereof.” _ 20, ** And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beaft of the field: but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.’* 21. ‘And the Lord God caufed a deep fleep _to fall upon Adam, and he flept: And he took BS of his ribs, arid clofed up the fiefh iat y i; a2. « And the rib, which the Lord God had ss ’ taken from man, — he a woman, and brought ~ her unto the man.’ Ba a3. ‘And 2 348332 SS, Bs enies, ) 4 DISSERTATION ri 23. * And Adam faid, this i is, ities: bone, and flefh of my flefh: “the thal a Ry: woman, becaufe fhe was taken out of man,” wh 24. © Therefore fhall a man leave his father | and his mother, and fhall cleave unto his. rH and they fhall be one fiefh.” ¥ 25. And they were both naked, the t man and his wife; and were not afhamed.” rar | 879? From thefe words of Mofes, the dae things eafily prefent themfelves to obfervation. . 1. The.‘ diftinguifhing language,” in which God is introduced, as fpeaking about the crea- tion of man. He only faid, relative to the other creatures, ‘ let the waters and the earth -bring them forth after their kind :” But, when he was about to make man, he is reprefented as fpeak= ing in a quite different ftyle, “* Let us make. man.” ‘The other creatures, as truly as man, were made by God. | His almighty word, and not any virtue there was in ‘in the waters,” or in “ the earth,” called them into being. . * The waters,” and “ the earth,” are mentioned to point out the elements refpectively proper to thofe. liy-. : ars ae : . eatures ; or to fignify, that thofe of them. by were to live in the waters, were f creating hand of God out of this ‘element . as thofe, who were to live on the earth, were. made out of that; or; could any other reafon be eyes of the command to “ the waters,” and ef 2 er eS a ‘DISSERTATIONI ce the earth,” to bring forth thofe living creatures, it cannot be fuppofed, that they were the pro- ducers of them. God only was the * agent” _ jm their produétion, ‘whatever ufe he might make of thefe elements in bringing them into exift- ence. The peculiar manner, therefore, in which God is introduced as {peaking concerning the creation of man, cannot be defigned to lead us into the _thought, as though he was the maker of man, but not of the other creatures; for he was as truly the Creator of them, as of him: but this diftinguifh- ing form of fpeech was rather intended to point out the “ fuperior excéllency,” of the workman- fhip God was now about to form. He advifes, takes counfel, as it were, with himfelf; having it in view to make a creature of the higheft dig- nity and importance in this lower world, ‘ Let us make man.” Some fuppofe there is, in thefe words, an ap- plication from the “ Father” to thé” « Son,” and to the * Spirit :” as it is faid of the * Son, hs that “ all things were made by him, and with-, out him was not any thing made that was made ;” and of the « Spirit,” that «* he moved upon the face of the waters,” in the beginning of the creation. I will not affirm, there is no -founda- tion for this thought in this mode of diéion: neither would I fay, thofe are miftaken who fup- pole i it only a more aggrandifed manner of {peak~ B 3 ing, ta was now in hand,’ 3 Te naqisng! iisarnc 7 } he efniiy) It. ‘Another thing obvioully contained in the Mofaic account of man is, his §* actual pro~ duction,” Concerning this it is faid, in general, §¢ God created man ;”—-‘* Male and female created he them*,”. If, by the etm ** created, a we ‘underftand that ‘* power,” either as to its pas ture, or manner of exertion, which gaye man his exiftence, we can have no idea of it, nor are ca- pable of having any, in the prefent fate of in- man faculties. The meaning of it, therefore, as ‘to us, can be only this, that God now brought “man into being, not by the inftrumentality of ofecond caufes, operating according to eftablithed ~laws; but by an immediate a&. of his am al- ‘mighty power. 3 The infpired Moles, having fpoken in a sis neral way concerning the ‘creation of man,” 3 Some have ventured to fuggeft, from the manner of Speaking here ufed, that the body of man, upon his firft creatio Was , fo formed as to be both of the * male” and ¢ fem * though afterwards an alteration was effeGed, diving th ki ‘and affigning to each 2 feparate body. Bat this isa nS thas “took rife from fancy only, not from any thing Mofes has faid. Tt is true, he afirms, in this place, that _5¢ God, eated man male and female ;” giving only this general account of mat _ ter. But when he refumes the fubje& in the next. particularly informs us of the “« feparate creation,?- both of | the ‘man and of the woman: of the man, ‘* ont of the sit of * the ground ;” cf the woman, out of ‘arib of the man.” ‘bat, from the beginning, they exifted with opens Properly diftinguifhing their fex. att % * DISSERTATION -|L 7 andvhis being created «male and female,” after fome interruption refumes the fubject, and in- forms us more particularly of what man was formed, feparately- confidered as ** male” and ~ *¢ female.” Of man, that is, the firft man, Adam, he favs, ** God formed him of the duft of the ground, and breathed into his noftrils the breath of life; and man became a living foul.” It is, beyond all difpute, evident from thefe words, that man, the body of man, was made of pre-exifting mat- - ter, here called, “* the duft of the ground.” This, by the wifdom and power of God, was formed into an exquifitely curious compound of organ- ‘jfed parts. But after this formation of * duft” into fo wonderful a machine, it was ftill. dead - ina@tive matter; and fo it remained, till ‘* God | breathed into it the breath of life.” It was upon this, that ** man became a living foul,” It may be worthy of remark here, our Saviour Jefus Chrift, in a difcourfe of his about whom we fhould fear, particularly diftinguifhes between. the ‘* foul’? and « body” of man, Agreeably, “the. writer of the epiftle to the Hebrews {peaks »of God in that ftyle, “¢ the Father of our fpirits.” “And Solomon, in his book, called Ecclefiaftes, “afes that mode of expreffion, « the fpirit of man -Weturneth to God who gave it.” If now, by © the breath of life,” we underftand, as it feems reafonable we fhould, the ‘ foul,” or ‘f {pirit ;” shen, by * God’s breathing it” into the body of B 4 - man, ah —? _ man, it is natural to underftand his’ sii ok ig . a: 5eS oy rk 6 a having firft given it exiftence by” his creating power, to the « duft” he had before organifed =~ into a fuitably adapted body for its reception, in order to its acting, and being atted upon, by it. But, in whatever fenfe we take God’s ** breath= thing into man the breath of life,” it was this exertion of his almighty power that gave’ him «< life ;” that is, conftituted him a being capable of having communication with himfelf, and the” world he “had made, in the way of shine _ enjoyment. Of the formation of the “* ¢ watt”? the firft of the kind, the account is in thefe words: ** And the Lord God caufed a deep fleep to fall upon Adam, and he flept: and he took: one’ of his’ ribs, and clofed the fiefh thereof. And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.” Tt ‘ appears from hence, that the woman, as ala = 4 the man, was made of previoufly exifting mat- ‘ter, though not of the fame form. It pleafed God, « ‘no doubt Sieg wife ends *, to take a a“ rib” out of cal the * Moft commenfators and practical wile upon "hie di x. appear to be of the opinion, and I am ready wisieean es i grounds, that God might chufe to form the woman ‘out of >). fo 3 vib” of the ‘* man,” to make way for the observation that .< immediavly follows upon her being thus farmed; viz that fhe “| was “ bonéof his bone, and flefh of his fleth, Therefore thalf © a man leave his father and his mother, and cleave to sts ‘and they hall be one flefh :”” Herefrom Rey * = 3fek SQeg DPISSERTATION ND 4 nat s body, ‘an@ to work it into’a like curi- fly organifed machine. It is not added, that _ he'then-** breathed into it the breath of life ;” but this ought, in reafon, to be fuppofed : other- fread ie » this’ “rib: was taking out of the man,” and the tone wo hi ce Sb _ he might herefrom defign to lead us into this farther Hi. ee wife it would have been an unperceptive ufelefs figure. ‘It is heré particularly fignified, that while “* fleth clofing again,” he was thrown into a © deep fleep ;” probably, that he might be in- fenfible of any pain: though God might bring it on him as he caufed a * deep fleep” (Dan. viii. 19—26. ) to fall on Daniel and Abraham, when, in. afignal manner, he revealed himielf to them. Perhaps, in this ** deep fleep,” God conveyed to Adam, as clear a perception of what was now tranfacting, as if he had feen it with his eyes; at the fame:time, giving him the proper inftruc- tions’ relative hereto: infomuch that, upon awaking out of this “ found fisep,” he was’ able to all, as founded in nature; being the re-union of man and woman? intimating alfo what tender affection ought to fabGt between man, and wife ; as they are no longer << twain, but one flefh. » To this purpofe is that reafoning of the Apoifle Paul, Eph. v. 28. 31. ‘* So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies: he that loveth his wife, loveth himfelf.—For this caufe fhall a man Jeave his father and his mother, 2od.cleave to his wife; and they two fhall be one filefh.” And butione woman that God made out of the man to be that, in this way, it was fit and proper, and in this way only, that mankind fhould be propagated. To be fure, this is what — our. Saviour has collected herefrom, and plainly taught us}; as may be feen at large, Matt. xix. 4—€. Mark x, 5—1z, : % ¢ to ¥ 10 ©=DISSERTATION Lb to fay of the woman, now brought into being, «* This is bone of my bone, and. flefh of my fieth: fhe fhall be called woman, becaufe fhe was — taken out of man,” Ver. 23. And the words that immediately follow, he might fpeak in confe- quence of a ‘“‘ revelation” he now received from God ; ** therefore fhall a man leave his father and his mother, and fhall cleave to his wife; and. they fhall be one fiefh.” In this way it will be eafy, though extremely difficule in any other, to recon- cile what feems evidently to be here fpoken by Adam, with our Saviour’s declaration, which is exprefs, that it was God that thus fpoke. His words to this purpofe are thefe: ** Have yenot read, that Hz which made them at the begin-~ ning, made them male and female, and sap, For this caufe fhall a man leave his father and mother, and {hall cleave to his wife; and they twain fhall be one fiefh.” Matt. xix. 4, 5. Though Adam {pake thefe words, yet God might, with ftrict propriety and truth, be faid to fpeak them alfo, if Adam fpake them as communicated to him by «* revelation” from God.—But as thefe are matters of comparatively finaller importance, I go on to fay: iA TH. It is further obfervable, that man, ‘in his iil ftate, was made in the * image of God.” So the propofal runs, when God was in con ation about making him: ** Let us make in our image, after our likenefs.” And agre a DISSERTATION L ty hereto is the account given of the matter, after man was actually made: ‘* So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him.” “Some are fo nice as to diftinguifh betwbets s* image” and ‘¢ likenefs ;” taking more into the meaning of the latter than the former. But there does not appear to me to be any juft reafon for’ making this difference. ‘ Image” and 6 Jikenefs,” as here ufed, feem very evidently to import one and the fame thing. The latter is explanatory of the former, Being a word of fimilar meaning, it might be added, and with ftri& propriety, the more clearly and fully to afcértain the fenfe intended to be communicated. This ufe of fynonymous words is common in all - languages, particularly in the Hebrew; multiplied inftances whereof might eafily be given, was there any need of it. I fhall add here, we may the rather think, that thefe words were defigned to convey the fame fenfe; as in the following verfe, where we have the account of man’s creation, the Janguage is this; “* So God created man in “his own image, in the image of God created he him.” If more had been contained in the word fe Jikenefs,” than in the word ‘* image,” it can- — ‘not reafonably be fuppofed that Mofes would have faid “¢ So,” that is, agreeably to the above | _ determination, ‘© God created-man in his own _ image,” wholly leaving’ out. the x iene he had before men foned, UNION HCY Metoe , Bug \\ id nt adbeaaendlll “79 DISSERTATION (had planted.” And thys man might be faid » But the great queftion here is, what are we to’ underftand by this “image of bred teaphione man was created ? o1 ton Whether this is a queftion in- ithele difficult to be anfwered or-not, it has occafioned various oppofite opinions, which have been maintained with warmth, not unmixed with bitternefs and wrath, Some make this ‘* image of God”? on man to confift in his * outward form” his being made, not like the other creatures, but after a model far exceeding theirs... To this purpofe are the following words of a confiderable writer : “«¢ It cannot, I think, be difputed, but that, in a *€ moft obvious fenfe of the words, man’s being “* created in the image of God 7 refer to “‘ the make of his body; and e, that he ‘¢ was formed, not after the any other’ x, *¢.of the living creatures, but was made in a’ “<-pattern higher than they. A more excellent: <* form than theirs. was given to him.—It is an ‘¢ expreffion not unfrequent in the Hebrew ferip-~ : © tures, to fay of things, that they are ** of God,”*” <‘ if they are in quality eminent above others, - ‘© which have no more than common perfections, ‘ «In this manner of fpeaking, trees of a pro- “ digious growth are called, “ trees of God,” ’ ‘<-or ** the trees of the Lord.” © Such were the “* Cedars of Lebanon,” and for that. reafon Ci «© ed © the trees of the Lord,” trees which he a DISSERTATION ft. 13 0, be made in “ the image of God.” ) His « outward: form” was of a different make, far. « more refpectable, fupetior to the make.of all «¢ the other creatures of the world; and accord- << ingly, to {peak fuitably of it, the expreffion is - fed, which, in the language of Mofes’s times, «¢ was commonly faid of any thing that was fo ‘* fuperlatively excellent, as to have nothing like *¢ to, or to be compared with it. No * image” “© of any thing in the world was equal to, or s¢ like, that of man; and therefore man was faid “* to be created in ‘* the image of God.” Thefe are the words-of Dr. Shuckford *, which { cannot but wonder at, as he has juftly merited the character of a learned and really good wri- ter. The mode of diétion he has mentioned, «< trees of God,” and “ trees of the Lord,” as ufed to point out a peculiar excellency in the things fpoken of, do not appear analogous to this, in. which ite is faid, ** in the image of God created he man.” Moft certainly the analog gy can be carried no tla than this, that it was an excellent creature, fingularly fo, that God now made: not that he was this excellent creature, pointing at his ‘¢ external form,” or figure. It would indeed be highly abfurd to give the phrafe this. meaning; there can be no “ corporeal’? likenefs to that God, who is a pure ha "se Ee * Vide his Hiftory of the Creation and Fall of Man. Pp 74s vo 7se rg f "his refem- bi 1% DISSERTATION f. | - refemblance of him in this fenfe, is impofiblé in the nature of the thing itfelf. Accordingly; - when <« bodily” ‘parts; figure, or motion are afcribed to God in’ Scripture, as they fometimes are, they are ever underftood, by all writers of any value, as defcriptions accommodated to human weakneis, and interpreted fo as to confift with that ‘ {pirituality” of the Divine Being; which is effential to him. ie Others, by this ‘* image of God,” fuppofe nothing more is meant than a “ likenefs” of man to God in refpeét of * dominion.” It accord= ingly follows, fay they; immediately. after the confultation about making man in “ the image of God,” and * let him have Dominion Over the fith of the fea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth; and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.” Gen. is 26. In like manhef, man’s actual creation in * God’s image,” and the grant of ‘“* pomInion,”’ are connected with each other. «€ God created man in his own image; and God faid unto him, have pominton.”—The Ap Paul’s arguing is alfo referred to, in iluftration of this fenfe of «* God’s image.” He declares, that “* a man ought not to cover his head ;”” i Cor. xi. 7. and for this reafon, ‘ forafmuch as he is the image of God.” The propriety of his inference is grounded on this, that ma is the image of God in point of * dominion; > or «¢ authority.” ae “ya Tt 5 But | a5 i sid oe DISSERTATION Lig ut neither of thefe proofs carry conviction vith them. . Man, itis true, was no fooner made in vefted with ‘* dominion” over the inferior creatures ; ; but then, this ** dominion’’ was grant- ed to him in confequence of his having been fir created i in ** God’s image,” and in this way fitted for this honour. So the order of the words im= port. We are obvioufly herefrom led to think, that God firft impreffed ‘* his image” on man, and, upon thus dignifying his nature, made him the grant of fovereignty and dominion over the other creatures. It is acknowledged, man, in having ‘‘ dominion,” is © like God,” and may properly. be » faid, in this refpect, to bear hig «© image” in part. But, furely, this is not the whole of that ‘“ likenefs to God,” in which man was created: nor is it reafonable to think, that God would have given him “ dominion”? — oyer the other creatures, making him, in a fenfe, his vifible image and reprefentative, if, he had not previoufly made him in ‘ his image,” in - fome higher and more noble fenfe. He could Ged seal in 2 moral view, have refembled at all, had he not been made after * his image,’ * fo as that he could have been qualified for. that government, which had been put into -hands.—And, as to man’s being confidered byt the Apoftle Paul as ‘ the image of God,” on account of his dominion, no more can be juftly argued from it, than that he refembled him ‘4n this refpe&t; not that he did not in any other. Mt > The 16) DISSERT An10N The Apolile had occafion, at this time, tion his participation of ‘* God’s image’ view of it only. _His words ierefore | to be, as they reafonably cannot be as. an intimation that man was created in in «€ image,” in no other fenfe than chat of his ha «© dominion.” SS : Others ftill make this «© im of 7 man to confift principally, if by iit “oo ‘prefent, actual, perfect likenefs to him in « holi- nefs;"’ meaning hereby, an affemblage ta : morally good qualities, which they fone be adventitious only, not effential to his infomuch that, had he been made witha likenefs to God, he would notwithitandi g | . ¢xifted a man, a creature of the firft or } : rank in this lower creation. They: cor | fpeak of this holinefs as a “ fuper-ir duc quality, which, if loft, or taken away from ma would not deftroy his proper nature as fuch though it would his character in this Special view of i ite , et a : = It is readily acknowledged, ‘ in ee principally, though not wholly, that con- ftituted the “* image of God” in which | nat created. It is conceded alfo, if this holi refs was a mere ‘© {uper-induction” upon 1 Ss ture, which would have been e without it, it was no ways effential to ‘his charaGter as man. He might, though S DISSERTATION L » have retained his rank among the crea- ies. But it muft be faid, at the fame times that the ‘“* image of God” on man, whatever it may be placed in, whether holinefs, or any thing elfe, muft be interpreted in a fenfe that will make it, ‘not merely a quality annexed to his na- ture, but an effential property; as, without this, he could not have exifted that kind or fort of creature it was intended he fhould be, in dif- tin@tion from the other creatures; or have tranf- mitted this kind to any of the individuals that thould proceed from him. ‘Thefe things will be fet in an eafy clear light in what we hall have occafion to fay hereafter, in its proper place. To proceed, therefore. There are yet others who fuppofe, and, asf imagine, upon juft grounds, that ** the image of God” on map, in his creation, confifted in his being endowed with intelletual and moral powers, rendering him capable of attaining to a refemblance of the Deity in knowledge, wifdom, holinefs, and happinefs; and of growing perpe- tually i in this refemblance to the higheft degrees that may be thought attainable by a creature of fuch an order in the fcale of being. « Fr is conceivable, God might have fo made | in “ h age,” as that, the firft moment .- he ‘was brought — exiftence, he fhould have deen as © perfe&t” in a@ual knowledge, holinefs, and happinefs, as he ever could have been. And fome feem to think, this was the cafe in fats ‘9 Cc at . eg =a “ie . . ar i 18 DISSERTATION at leaft that man, as he dand-aiscie” the creating hands of God, was \* Bee ftate of “ perfect rectitude;” that is, he had no wrong bias in his nature, no irregular propen- ‘fity, no undue tendency to any immoral thought, word, or action. He was not indeed made “*€ impeccable ;” yet his endowments were fuch, that he might have turned out an intelligent, righteous, holy, and happy being, in the higheft degree of perfection he was originally iFeraned with a capacity for. Ab ithe But for any to fay, that man, upon iss firk exifting, was endowed with knowledge, holinefs, or any other attainable qualities, fo as shat it might be proper to affirm that he was §§ perfe@”’ in them, in any other fenfe than.that whieh) has, been fpecified, would be to fpeak ethe truth, And yet, how common has it been to fpeak thus! Many, who have profefledly ‘wrote upon. this ; fubje&t, have reprefented the ‘firft parents of the human race as created, not fimply with: I pacities ee “aa ae. +7 nee ~S \ DISSERTATION Iii wg {cities for intelle@tual and moral attainments ~ ‘even:to the higheft perfection, but with the very qualities themfelves; infomuch. that, upon their firft-commencing ‘* living fouls,” they poffeffed, not only more knowledge of God, themfelves, ‘and the world they were placed in, and a far higher degree of, actual prefent holinefs than any of their pofterity have ever done fince, after their higheft attainments; but that they were “ per- fect’? jn thofe qualities, in a fenfe analogous to that in which good men, upon the Gofpel-plan of grace, fhall be “ perfect” in them in the -other world. ; "But, furely, fuch an account of “ the image of God” on man is the tranfcript of fancy, and ‘not of what is contained in the facred hiftory of fils creation. » It is-indeed utterly irreconcilable | with a variety of faéts, Mofes has mentioned re« | dative to Adam and Eve in their original ftate. | eel, inftantly upon their creation, they had been . the fubjects of “* actual underftanding”’ in. the . ‘© perfection” that is pretended, it may be afked, — How it came to pafs that Eve was fo ignorant %ofthe faculties proper to the beafis, as to ima- ‘Bie that a ferpent might be naturally’ able to 286 fpeak?”, And yet fhe muft have been thus ignorant, ofMit will be dificult, if poffible, ta -accouht for her not: being ftruck: with furprife, when= he converfed with her in human voice. »We, who are acquainted with the inability of the. inferior creatures to make ufe of words, Miiosg Ol: C2 fhould \ 2 DISSERTATION In fhould be:in danger of being put befide ourfelvess — if fpoke to’ by one of them in the manner. fhe was. And why was our mother Eve unmoved with fear, or aflonifhment, upon fuch - an, OCCa= fion? Perhaps, no good account can be given. of the matter but this, that fhe had not. as yet attained to fo much underftanding relative to qe the inferior creatures, as to know it was unnat ral for them to fpeak. This is an obvious : folu- - tion of any pretended difficulty *. i Na Ie may be faid, in anfwer to what has been offered hag, 4nd in fupport of the a€tual perfe& knowledge of the firft of our race, that the inferior living creatures were “all, brought by God to Adam to fee what he would call. them ;” and 1] that ** he gave names to them all.” Gen. ii. 19, 20. “And what is the inference herefrom ? Not that, furely, which has commonly been ‘made, viz: that Adam mult have been endowed With ** perfe&t” underftandings For a fmall degree of kr would have ferved for all he was now called to, or hind have done. Indeed, if he had ** given names” to “the i ‘Species of creatures, perfeGlly adjufted to their ‘didinguithing nature and properties, and had done it from his own know- dedge relative to them, he muft haye been endowed with. ‘ible confiderable degree. But it is nowhere faid in the Bibl though j it has been faid in other books, that he thus gave tem “names according to their natures. And barely his « giving them names,” is what he might have done, though he, had as yet made but fmall advances in hig knowledge with teferen them, or any thing elfe. Perhaps, the chief thing inten ed by God in bringing the creatures to Ada “© have’ names given to them,” was to teach him the d meaning of ‘words. And it is probable, the moft of what he did in this “matter, was by inflru€tion from God, and not from any innate or acquired knowledge of his own, . 1} Gohl ‘geek Wf | ‘DISSERTATION LE a1 ee be again afked, does it argue any high ee of undeftanding to know, that ** the Frat’ of a tree” is not, in its nature, adapted to we make one wife,” and that it could not be a defirable to eat’’ of it to this end? > And yet, our firft mother was deceived into the belief, that « the fruit” fhe faw growing in Eden upon a certain “tree,” was proper food for her un- derftanding, and “ defirable” to be eat of, that fhe might thereby be ** made wife,” fo as to « Jike God.” Surely, fhe had not as yet made ibe--any great proficiency in the knowledge ‘either ‘of God or of nature! “Thefe are’ fenti- fMents not capable of being entertained by any that have. sodtomay be further afked, was it. poffible the ‘@ ferpent,” or ‘* the Devil,” ufing him as ‘his . inftrument, could have feduced “ Eve” in the sway he did it, if fhe had had mnplanted in her ‘that innate knowledge which has eften been at- tributed “to her? Upon the fuppofition of fuch Knowledge, her being told, that her “ eating” ofthe foroidden tree would “ open her eyes,” ‘and’ make her, “ like God, knowing good and ‘evil,” mauft have appeared to her at once, with- ut. time: for any laboured refiection, abfolutely la fidiculous thing: nor can it-be imagined the ‘eould* have been led afide by fo grofs and glaring an abfurdity. And yet, this was the way, in which fhe was overcome, to take, and eat of the 4 « tree,” concerning which God had faid, ** Thou C 3 fhale a2 DISSERTATION #! fhalt not eat of it;” if we may give: credit to’, her own account of the matter, or to that’ the infpired Paul has given of it. Says the wortian,: *< the ferpent begnilied me, and I did eat.’” Gen. ‘iii. 13. Says the Apoftle Paul, the “ ferpent be=" guiled Eve through his fubtilty.” 2 Cor. xii, 2. It was not fo much any fuppofed agreeablénefs of the forbidden fruit to her ** bodily tafte,” as its imagined aptitude to * make her wife like God,” that gave occafion to her lapfe. And could this have been the cafe, if the had ‘been the fubject of knowledge in that advanced height that is pretended? May it not rather be juftly colleéted from hence, that fhe had attained, as yet, to underftanding but in a fmall degree? In fine, it may be afked, Muft not the “one offence” of the firft parents of mankind appear BE void ingore ae ftrange, if they were made ih ~ ftate of perfectly advanced holinefs as well as i eee By the reprefentation Mofes has given us of the “ trial” they were put to, it’ to fo far as we are able to judge of it, a much k difficult one than that of Abraham, when ‘God called him to ‘ take his only fon Ifaac, and offer him a, burnt-offering to the Lord;” or that of . Noah, the falvation a whofe perfon and family, m when the reft of the world were deftroyed by a univerfal flood, was dependent on fiich a" * faith a ‘in God,” forewarning him of this judgment w yet in diftant futurity, as moved him to bep and go on for an hundred years together, ¥ - DISSERTATLON 23) -of ‘* preparing an ark” for fafety, ace cording to the Divine appointment, and in op- polition to the contemptuous {neerss and-mocking _ _Fidicule, , with which he, was, doubrtlefs, often tempted. by the unbelieving world in that day. And how came it about, Zs thofe ‘ imper- feétly” holy men fhould fo honourably pafs through thofe difficult trials, while the firft of our race, who are reprefented to have been holy even to ‘ perfection,” fhould fail under one that | was. far_more eafy ? “It moft evidently appears | from hence, that man was not in an advanced * ftate of holinefs when he fell. Upon this fup- pofition, it would be inconceivable, that he fhould have eat of the forbidden tree, when he might fo eafily. have refrained herefrom,; and fe- cured himfelf from the threatened death. The plain truth is, -the firtt man, Adam, ase. he came out.of his Maker’s hands, was endowed with nothing more than thofe capacities which are proper to a being of that order in which he was created. The ufe of .thefe powers, , con- ) formably. to the method fettled by the wifdom of God, was, the way, and the..only way, in which he could attain to that * perfection” in refembling the Deity he. was originally formed ‘and defigned for. _ We, the. pofterity of the) firft. man, ea certainly come into exiftence with nothing more than, paked capacities.” And whatever thefe © . capacities now are, whether {trong er weak,:whe- peersicl C 4 ther Zz ais. ele eal > ~ ‘el » a a ake ») ia 4 DISSERTATION We some ther in a, ftate of reCtitude or moral difordery. which may be hereafter confidered 5» 1faysy what ever thefe capacities are, it is by time,-exergife, obfervation, inftruction, and, in thort)/a duetufe ‘of the advantages we are fayoured with, that we ‘© gradually” rife to thofe attainments our capacities were planted in our nature that we might acquire. The fame feems to have been the cafe with our firft father, only with this dif- . ference, we come into the world $* infants)?” - And it is fo ordered by our Maker, undoubtedly for wife and good ends, that the faculties of our minds, as well as the members of our bodies, are naturally weak and feeble at firft; as alfothat they can advance in a flow and gradual way only to.a ftate of maturity. The powers of our fouls, no more than the members of our bodies, ‘come to their proper height till they have for years been gradually growing up to it. But Adam was ‘ made with all his faculties in full ftrength. God created him at once a man; ‘that is, with the powers of aman, not a child, in regard both of his foul and body, Burt ftill ic fhould be remém- bered, time, exercife, experience, and obfervation, ywere neceflary in order to the ‘proper ufe of thefe “powers to the noble ends for which they ‘were igiven: nor could he indeed have made any ule of the powers of his mind, till it had been fut nifhed with the materials herefor; which’ could >be done in no way but by immediate” = od munication from God, or in thar?mechod® . formab ly —=—_ wg DISSERTATION 1 26 formably to which we his childreti' Become por feffed of them. In regard of us, our minds at. Arn are not oily feeble, but void of all the objects of knowledge ; and itis by the intervention of our bodily. or- ‘gans, adapted hereto by the wifdom and power of God, that impreffions from the material world are gradually made on our fenfes, fo as to occa- fion fenfations in our minds as objects to emiplay their exercife; and thefe objects, with the: reflec- tions of our minds on them, and their manner of operation herein, are the inlets to our know- ledge, and the original fource of all our.attain- ments in it: though thefe will be greater or lefs, inproportion to the means, helps, and advantages, ‘we are favoured with in the providence of God, and the good or bad ufe we make of them. Th this fame way, it is reafonable to think, ideas were let gradually into the mind of the firt man, ‘in confequence of which he was enabled: gra- dually to make advances in knowledge, wifdom, holinefs, and all other defirable qualities, Only it fhould be minded here, as man was, upon his firft coming out of the creating hands of , God, in a ftate of total ignorance, and, upon.this account, incapable of the ule of any thing, ‘itis Feafcnable to Snppat that God was his inftruétor . and guide, i in fome fenfe analogous to that in which -parents fir guardians to is children *: vandit Vist Bc teh wR 2 5 ' {wiles * Ttisin fact ins that Adam, foon after his creation, before , tere. had.been time for a multiplied exertion of his faculties, either 26 «8DISSERTATION NM ~ was-owing partly to “ immediate inftruGion from God,” and partly to the intredudtiom of ideas! — into his mind by the medium of his fenfes, and the exercife of his mind with reference to thefe’ objects, that he made all thofe acquitements in’ knowledge and goodnefs he was’ the nec tt ; rT either in thinking or doing, was taken under the i iste guidance of his Maker. His going into the garden 0 Eden was the effect, not of the mere exercife of his reafon, but by dire&tion from God: His Creator ** put him there.” And the defign of his being placed there, namely, ‘10 drefs:it; and to keep it,” was difcovered to him not by epost Divine inftru@ion, It was * the voice of the Lord” not haman inveflization, that informed him it was the bee his Maker that he fhould not eat of fuch a? particular tree iat ; the garden, upon pain of death, I: was, moreover, by imme- diate revelation, and not the fole exercife of his Own POWEIS,, that he came to know that the woman was formed of part of his body; and therefore that “ man and wife’ ‘fhould not be twain, but one fiefh,” and in this re-union propagate t fpecies. In fine, it was by immediate Divine infirv@tion, and not the innate force of his own abilities, that he was. at firt taught the ufe of words, at leaft in thofe inftances feat te ‘Maker fpzke to him. And if man had been obedient in fpecial article wherein he was tricd, he would, in like manner, without all doubt, ‘and in virtue of this rule too which 'God had fettled as the meafure of his conduét towards him, have received from his Creator fii) other inftruétions, as occafions might cal} for them, without which he might, through ‘his prefent.i vinex- perience and want of improvement, have been Jed into he " errors, both in his thoughts and 2étiions. All which ev fhews, that, being newly brought into exiftence, he sists kind of « infantile ftate,” needing the guidance of his Maker, »wnder which it was intended that he fhould grow up, in grefive way, to 4 aQual perfeCion he was.defigned ae DISSERTATION IL. of though, as: it was foon after his creation that-he | againft God, he had probably made but final : “attainments in comparifon- with what he might and would have done, had he continued in his. innocent ftate for any long feries of time. And ‘this, by the way, will, in a good meafure, account for the eafy trjal he was called to; as alfo for the manner in which he was tempted, and his being actually feduced upon being thus tempted, The trial was adapted to one that had made no greater attainments than it may be fup-. ° ‘pofed he had done; fo was the manner of tempt- ation alfo; and it is far from being incredible, that he fhould be overcome by it: whereas, if . men, from their own tmagination, will charac- terife our firft father at the time when he was tried, tempted, and led into fin, as in a ftate of advanced perfection, they will make the whole account of this matter really unintelligible, '* From what has been above offered, it is eafy to perceive, that the way of arguing Dr. Tayloren has gone into to fhow, that * the faculties of «the firft man, Adam, were not fuperior in his . innocent ftate to what they were afterwards, or _ *¢ that they did not exceed the faculties his pofterity» fe have been endowed with fince,” is an infuficient one,: whether the fa& itfelf be true or falfe, as not | . carrying with it reafonable grounds of convic- tiony He has been at the pains particularly to compare: the aéts which Adam performed in his innocent ftate, with thofe men are capable of i Us bg » perform- “e bISSERTATEONT, tin fince ; and fup ppo vofes; “that an one who foberly weighs what he has offere wilh judge, that there is reall y no. rotind in Feve- “¢ Jation for exalting his nature to’a fu] it «beyond that of his polterity.” But’ this’ Juable writer feems not to have’ fufficiently ‘con- fidered, that the aéts of Adam, in’ his innocent ftate, might be below what" his pofterity, arrived — at maturity of judgment and underftanding, “ate capable of; while yet he might have beén en dowed with faculties vaftly fuperior to” theirs. There is no reafon to think “that the’ mind! of Ne Adam, immediately upon his creation, was filled swith all the ideas it was endowed with a capacity to admit; orthat he was, at once, able to apply them to all the ufes they were adapted to ferves whether in reafon or morality.’ * Without all doubt, ideas were to be gradually let’ into ‘his “mind, in a way analogous to that which’ now tikes place; that is to fay, by the iptervention of external nature, and his atrending to the ope- rations of his inner man, And if he had beea created with the capacity of an Angel, it would, in this way, have required time, ufe, and’expe rience, before he could have attained to ‘any . @onfiderable degrees of -attual knowledge.) > Should. it therefore be fuppofed, that nothing . i8 recorded to have been faid or done’ by ovr firft progenitor in his innocent fate,” that exceeds the meafure of underftanding that is common't> his potterity fince the lapfe; ‘nay, thould*it be ' allowed ale = es DISSERTATION 29 ved that his actual knowledge, even before his fll, was much lefs than ours is fince, upon , our, arrival, at maturity of age; it will not follow | \ hence, that his faculties were not larger and pen than.ours. . For it is to be remembered, it.was not a great while before he fell by tranf- greffion, The precife time cannot, as I imagine, be. punctually afcertained; but in general it is evident; from the whole feries of the Mofaic hiftory, that it.was before he could, conformably ‘to the eftablifhed laws of nature, have made any confiderable acquirements either intellectual or — moral. .The powers of his nature-might there-| / fore. have been valtly fuperior.to ours, though / “this. did‘ not appear by the ‘ actual exercife of them”) infomuch, that, had he continued in in- nocency, he might have exceeded the meafure of our prefent attainments, in proportion to the fupe= riority of ‘* Paradife”, beyond the “ earth,” as it now,lies under the ‘‘ curfe of God.” Itis quite eafy to. conceive, that Adam, .before the fall, might be endowed with faculties far more quick . and lively, far more ftrong and penetrating, than ours.are fince the lapfe;, and yet, that his * a&tual knowledge” might be lefs, as few ideas had been let into his mind, and his opportunity to acquire the habit of. making the proper ufe of them had been.but of fhort continuance. For this reafon, the.aéts performed by him, in his innocent ftate, might. not be beyond the capacity of thofe of his pofterity, who have attained to a moderate fhare | CBN Oh of on ae Sind 36 «DISSERTATIONS, RY of underftanding ; while, at the fame. time, “he thight have poffefféd faculties ‘that would have . €nabled him, by ufe and’ exereife; in due’ time to have arrived to vaftly more’ ddalredl deehiee, both of underftanding and holinefs, chan’ any of his pofterity are capable of in their prefent ftate. ~ But, whatever may be the’ truth refpecting the firft man’s faculties in his innocent ftate, whether they were fuperior to the faculties of “his pofterity " fince the lapfe, and in confequente’ of it, or net (which may be confidered’ afterwards), it ig-cers _ tainly more reafonable, as we have feen it tombe more agreeable to the Mofaic hiftory, to fuppofe that\he was made, at firft, rathér with the ‘capa~ cities only for the attainment’ of iptelle@tual and -- moral perfection, than with this perfection, |*as an “ abfolute gift” beftowed on'him*at onceryoe The fuppofition, that man was made at firftwith — capacities only, is analogous to What has ‘taken place, in fact, with refpe&t to every’ individwal - of the human fpecies fince the creation of Adafm - They have all come into exiftencé with’ faculties only, not faculties endowed as ‘they may bed time by due ufe and exercife;” yea, this analogy holds in regard of the ¢¢ pe of grace” that makes _ men * new creatures.” They are firft ‘* hew- born babes,” and gradually grow up to” «© che fall - nefs of the ftature of perfe& men in Chrift Jefasy? ‘And the like analogy extends to all the creatures of God in this lower world that have ee ) . iti is only a vegetative one. It would t . ee “ n> ee “pISSERTATION fh gt ranges i if the firft man had been a contradiction, ~in-his make, to that order which was eftablifhed in, the ie istendike of the world, and has been wniformly continued to this day. {> I will, perhaps, be faid here, might it not have been better in God to have formed man at once inthe fame degree of perfection, it would ” ‘have taken him along time to have acquired. in the -ufe: of implanted faculties only? Would it not have argued much greater goodnefs, if this _ perfedtion had been an “ abfolute gift,” and not be trufted with man, fo as, in any meafure, to fiave been dependent on his care or fidelity in the uwfe. of the powers he w&s endowed with? In fhort; what need wes there of this round-about- way to perfediion, when it might have been com- municated at once without fo much ado? ~Toall which the anfwer is, thefe queitions can, in reafon, be looked upon as nothing more than the refult of mere random conjecture; notwith- ftanding which, man’s being made fo as that he ° might, in a gradual progreflive way, rife to the perfection he was formed capable of attaining to, may be in itfelf the wifeft and beft way in which this perfe€tion could have been communicated. _ Had man been made in as high a degree of intelle€tual. and moral glory at once,.as he was te made ‘capable of attaining gradually to in time, this abfolute gift of God could not have been the oo BN: — fource,of that pleafure, at leaft that fort of plea- Area. which might have refulted from it, had it gan ) ; been, 32 DISSERTATIONS: — been, i in areafonable meafure, an acquifition of ‘ his dwn, Pleafure is naturally connected, by a ' Divine eftablifhment, with the idea of any valu- able quality, as the effet of a due ufe of the faculties we are endowed with, We need only attend to what we perceive within ourfelves to be convinced of this. And it is indeed one of the higheft and nobleft pleafures we are capable of enjoying. But it is certain man could have had no perception of this pleafure, there would have been no foundation for it in his nature, if hevhad been made at once that perfect creature he might ‘ have been by a wife and good improvement of. his implanted powers# If perfection, in all de- firable mental qualities, had been the grant of God to man independently of himfelf, he would have had no reafon for “* felf-approbation’”’, oa this account; nor could he have enjoyed that noble pleafure, which is the natural refult there= from. For this can arife only from a confcious refleGtion on his own activity in the procurement of them. duties Befides, this method of man’s attaining to the . perfection he was made for, affords not only. the moft natural occafion for the various exer e of his implanted powers, but conftantly_ prefen od mott reafonable call for this exereife. ‘There i isy upon this plan, not only full room, - but the the higheft reafon for a uniform, fteady, and “ont | exertion of every faculty of his nature, DISSERTATION f. 43 ~Inethis | ‘way alfo there is a natural and clofe conneation ‘between ‘intelletual and moral im= - provements in every degree, and the proper. reward of them.® For thefe improvements, in all their degrees, in the ptefent view of them, are at once the refult of the due ufe of implanted powers, and the reward of this ufe of them. And; in truth, if man could have been rewarded for thé tight ufe of his faculties, had he been made in that ftate of aCtual perfection ic is here fuppofed he might gradually have attained to, it is not conceivable, if pofiible, that it could have been by any “‘ increafe” of his happinefs. A capacity of rifing in glory, by degrees naturally connected with, and preparatory to, each other, feems to be not only the moft fuitable excitement to a good ufe of implanted faculties, but the moft fit and congruous, if not the only bafis, upon which this ufe of them can be rewarded ; efpecially, if we take into our idea of this re- ward an “ increafe” of real happinefs. It is in - confequence of this progreffive capacity, that we fuppofle, and, as I think, upon juft and folid grounds, that all intelligent moral beings, in all worlds, are continually going’ on, while they fuitably employ and improve their original facul- ties, from one degree of attainment to another and, hereupon, foes one Gegree of happinefs to another, without end. IV. The next thing obfervable is, an account ‘of the rs conftitution,” rule or order, conformably to which MI 34 DESSERT ote which the reft of mankind were to be brought into exiftence. God ‘ bleffed’’ theman and the “woman whom he had created, and faidy Be - fruitful, and multiply, and replenith the earth.’ The words very evidently. contain the eftablith- ment of a law of nature, in. agreement with which God would aé& in the produétion of all the. ‘after-individuals of the human fpecies. They were not to be made, as Adam was, by. an un- related exertion of Divine power; but ina me- diate way, in confequence of the intervention of _ thofe ** fecond caufes” that were now conftituted and-fpecified. Adam and Eve, by the word ae bleffing which God here fpake, were made ca- pable of becoming ‘ many” by a multiplication of the fpecies, or by tranfmitting exiftence to ~ other individuals in their own likenefs. ‘Not ‘that they could do this in virtue of any fkill, will, or power of their own, fimply confidered; but — they were the “ fecondary caufes,” in concur- rence with which, God would exert his efficiency to the production of other creatures of the inne kind. As the words, conftituting Adam aa Eye. in- ftruments, under God, in <4: multiplication of the human race, were directed to them in their own perfons, it may feem as tho’ it was, by their inftrumentality only, that human exiftence could be communicated. But it is the truth of fat, that thofe who proceeded from them were, in the fame way, inftrumental in sconyeying ‘exiflemee — > ‘ rf : 33 i \ DISSERTATION i. 4 to others: and fo it has been ever fince. Thefe| words of bleffing, therefore, were fpoken not only | to Adam and Eve, but virtually, and in reality } of conftruéction, to their children, and children’s children, and fo on throughout all generations. © They contain, in fhort, the eftablifhed law, or method, conformably to which the individuals of the human kind fhould be brought into being, even to the end of time. It may be worthy of fpecial notice here, the creation of the firft man ahd woman in “ the image of God,” that is, their being made intelli- gent(moral beings}, capable, in confequence of a right ufe oF their implanted powers, of refem- bling the Deity in knowledge, holinefs and hap- pinefs, was the GRAND CHARACTERISTIC of their rank ot order. This pointed out the ** diftinc- tion” between them and the other creatures God had made. They were denominated ** man” ‘and ** woman” onthis account. It marked out + ' their proper ‘ difcriminating” kind of exiftence. Accordingly, the word of bleffing, upon which they were enabled to ‘‘ multiply,” muft be inter- preted to mean a multiplication of beings of the «* fame kind” or ** nature” with themfelves; that is, they were now conftituted the mediate inftru- mental conveyers of exiftence to creatures that fhould be; as they themfelves were, intelligent moral agents, having in their nature a “* capacity” of becoming ‘“ vifible images of God:” other- wife, the creatures to whom they conveyed ex- ih D 2 iftence, 36 DISSERTATION L iftence, could not have been of the ** fame rank” or order with themfelves. It is obfervable, God “ faid” to the inferior creatures of every fort, ** Be fruitful and mul- tiply;” hereby eftablifhing a * general law,” agreeably to which, creatures of the fame clals with thofe that were at firft created, might come into being. No provifion ‘was made for their having exiftence in any other way; and, in this way, their exiftence would be of the fame kind with theirs from. whom they fhould proceed. The diftintion of kinds, that took place at firft, has, in this way, and in this way only, been all along upheld, and continues to this:day. The firft man and woman, in common with the other _ creatures of every fort, were, in like manner, - _ conftituted by God the inftrumental tranfmitters of being; but it was their own in kind. It could be that fort of nature only, they had them- felves received from God, as the fpecification of their rank or order among the creatures ; that is to fay, the individuals that fhould proceed from - them muft be endowed, as they were, with intel- lectual and moral faculties, and fach too as would _ infer a “* capacity” in their nature of attaining | to a refemblance of the Divine Being, fo as to be “images” of him. | ~~ ._ Te will, perhaps, be faid here, our firft father . finned before there had been any § multiplica- tion” of the fpecies; and having, “by fin, loft “—i" the , aes he 1 ] ties themfelves, fo as that he poffeffed them in. — ’ y a 4 ~ DISSERTATION(I. the i image of God, he could not tranfmit it to - others, not being himfelf the fubject of i ite " The anfwer is, if by “ God’s image” on the -firft man is meant, as the objection feems to fup- pofe, -not fimply. the i implantation. of faculties in. his nature fitting him to acquire, in a gradual way, an actual perfect. il kenefs to. the Deity -in . knowledge, rigt hteoufnels, and other defirable qualities ; but the fuper-induction of thefe quali- the fame. Manner. er he would have done, if he had OG Se I fay, if this is what is meant By s€ the i i tase ae God” on Adam, it is indif- putably true, that it is not communicated to his pofterity, in the way of natural defcent: nor.was it ever intended that it fhould. In this view- of — “| ARE RENN not But “< * the image of God,” this *° image,’ EIS. a tutes the ** diltinction” other living creatures * Hes confiders it as THE VERY THING that Godt between man and the It was this ESSENTIALLY that * I have faid, and, I think, upon good grounds, that the GRAND DISCRIMINATION Of man from the other creatures, in all their kinds, lies in. this, that he was made with powers : fo far exalted above theirs, as that he is, in his nature, capable of refembling the Deity, more efpecially in his moral glory = whereas their natures are void of this capacity. The Essen- rrat difference does-not.confitt merely, or only, in-his being . at thonlking—- animal, ora thinking. one_fo..as_to ‘* reafon” For the other animals, at leaft fome of them, and ‘* argue,” D 3 give 38 DISSERTATION FE that put the difference between him and them: nor could the firft man, either before or after his fail, give fuch evident proofs of a capacity to think, yea, and to reafon too, that it can he denied upon any other foundation | than this, that, as they do not exift in human fhape, they mutt of courfe be confidered as deftitute of thought; to be fure, of . the power of ranging and conneéting their thoughts fo, as in any meafare to reafon from them, But though they fhould be fuppofed to poffefs this power, it muft, at the fame time, be affirmed, that they do it in fo lowa degree, even in regard of the higheft fpecies of them, that they are naturally incapable of difinguifhidg between moral good and evil, _or of attaining a “ likenefs to.God’’ in any of his’ ¢ moral attributes, wherein principally confifts that §‘ likenefs to hing” an was made with a capacity of rifing to, and in a noble ree of perfeétion. It fhould therefore feem reafonable to oe ESSENTIAL dif- lin@ion between him aed them in ‘* this capacity,” which they are totally deftitute of; efpecially as Mofes, when he would diftinguifh man from the other creatures in all their various kinds, makes no mention of any thing but this, that ** God» created bim in his own image,” while he did not do the like by them, It is obfervable, he nowhere intimates that God made the. other creatures abfolutely without the “ power of thought;” though he does, that he made them without this power, fo as in the exercife of it to attain to a “ likenefs to God,” and therefore that the GRAND Mark of diftinglion between’ them lay in this. It is, perhaps, the ** power of thinking that ESSENTIALLY ’ conftitutes the difference between the creatpres that have “** ani- mal” and ‘ vegetative” life, This power may begin i in fo low a degree, that the “* higheft” of the latter, though totally incapable of thought, may yet ‘approach fo near to the * loweh” of the former, that the difference between them, though ‘teal in nature, may not by us be difcernible: And it may go on gradually rifing i in thefe animals, through an admirable ‘variety of fpecies, till the ** higheft,” in regard at leaft of fome of the indie Se . } 4 DISSERTATION IL 39 “have begot children that would have been the fame rank or order with himfelf, in dif- tinétion from the other creatures, if he had not begot them in the “ image of God,” as this was the original gRaND MaRK OF difcriminating their kind. And this he was capable of doing after his lapfe, as truly as before it, if by “* the image of God, as has been explained, is under- individuals, may fo nearly refemble the ‘‘ leweit” of the human kind, that the difference, in point of mere reafon, may fcarce be perceived ; though fill they essenTiauty differ in this, that the “* lowefi” among men are fo peffeit of the power of - reafon, as to be capable fubjects of a ‘* moral likenefs to the Deity ;” which the ‘* higheft’? among the brutes are not. In like manner, the proper ground of difting tion between man, and » the next order of beings in the line of afcent (fay the anzels) may lie din this; that the capacity of men, as ‘* moral agents,” 3s limited within fuch,a certain fpbere; while that of Angels, though limited 100, is, in fuch a fpecial degree, extended be- yond: theizs; thoogh in fach a manner that the ‘¢ highefi” among men may come fo near to the “ lowett” among the angels, that there may be no other difference than that which is efential to the diiiefion of their order, And, in this way, the wifdom of God may have contrived, that the “ power of thought”’ fhould rife from the ‘* loweft” degree, through a vaft variety of inferior fpecies of beings, to a more noble rank, fo endowed with this power as to be capable of attaining to a «* moral likene‘s to the Deity,” but ftill in the ** loweit” degree. We men may be fuppofed to be this ‘‘ loweft” order of intelli~ _ gent moral beings. And from us, in the afcending line, orders of beings may {till go on rifjag in their faperiority beyond all _It is, perhaps, this rifiag of the creatures, and by ‘the oa. nicely adjufted cae SS that conftitutes that ¢ fallnels” in the univerfe, which leaves no room for 22P or gata. D 4 ftood, bees - Wir 40 DISSERTATRON GE ~~ ftood,-not_a_prefent actual perfec ** likenefsito_ | the Deity” in intelle€tual.and moral qualities, but _ a “*.capacity’? planted in his nature, making this attainable, In this fenfe, it is the real truth of fa&, that the pofterity of Adam come into ex- iftence with ‘* the image of God;” that is, they are born creatures endowed with intelleétual and moral powers, in confequence of which they are, in their nature, creatures capable of being formed to an “ actual refemblance of God,” both in his — intelle€tual and moral. glory; which the other living creatures are not. It is upon this **ca- pacity of nature,” which the human kind, in diftinétion from all the other kinds in this lower world, come into exiftence with, that the GosPEL SCHEME to effect in them an * actual likenefs to God” is EssENTIALLY grounded, It implants no - . * new faculty” in them, Whatever it does, it does upon faculties that have already been commu- of nature. And thefe faculties, let it be remem- " nicated to them, according to the eftablifhed Jaws — bered here, were thus communicated ¢ nakedly as fuch,” without their acquired improvements, Parents do not tranfmit to their children their *¢ attained qualities,” either intellectual or mo- ral *, but like effential capacities only, in ¢on- fequence \ : . ; tree,” and ‘ living eternally:” whereas, it per- feétiy accords with one’s fentiments of what is fit and reafonable to fuppofe, that this tree might _ be called ‘* the tree of life,” as being a vifible ficn, pledge, or aflurance,’ given to man by the <¢ only immortal” being who has < life ih him- felf,” that he alfo, if obedient, fhould “ live for ever.” There is nothing incredible in it, that the incorruptible God fhould, by his almighty word, bring it into effect, that the firft man’s ** cor- ruptible fhould put on incorruption, and his mortal put on immortality :” nor would it be at all ftrange, fhould he give a fign or pledge of what he thus intended to do: though it would be greatly fo, fhould it be faid, that the * fruit of a tree,” abfolutely ‘* corruptible in its own. “nature,” fhould yet have a ‘ natural virtue” in jt, to make that incorruptible, which before, like itfelf, was naturally corruptible alfo. . work And this reafon of the name perfeétly agrees with the ftrict “letter” of Mofes’s hiftory. .For, - Jet it be minded, the © literal fact” related by him ey 4 7) DISSERTATION lL — 47 him is only: this; there was in paradife a tree. called the tree of life. He does not go on, and> give the reafon of this name. This he leaves to his readers. It makes, therefore, no alteration in the fa@i related, whether the reafon of it be, the ‘© natural virtue’’ of the tree to immortalize, or its’ being an appointed fign or token that God would doit. The latter, as truly as the former, agrees with the truth literally related. Nor will it at all effect the propriety, beauty, er force of the fcripture ailufions to this tree, fhould the reafon of its name be taken from its. being a ‘ pledge” of immortality, and not its «¢ natural virtue”’ to make immortal. And the fame may be faid of man’s being driven out of the garden after his lapfe, and not fuffered to come near the “ tree of life.” “It was as proper he fhoujd be expelled; and barred an approach to this tree, upon fuppofition of its being an appointed fign of immortality, as if ic tolls in its own virtue, in any confiftent fenfe, have communicated it. Surely, it could not be the defign of this conduct in God to guard again{t man’s defeating his pleafure, by making it impoffible, in confequence of his eating of | this tree, that he fhould die, when God Had® de- elared that he fhould die. It would be ridicu- loufly abfurd to fuppofe, that the tree of life could have difannulled “ the threatening of God,” had man, after his offence, adtually eat of it.’ -But as by fin he had forfeited that im- iow mortality 7 q 48 DISSERTATION tf. mortality which was the free grant of God ‘uport . his continuing obedient, it was highly fit, in the — reafon of the thing, that he fhould not now be permitted to’** eat ‘of the tree of life,”? whether . it was thus called from its own virtue to immor- talize, or as an appointed fign or pledge that'God would do it: though the latter, as I imagine, appears to be the moft natural and congruous reafon to ground this name upon. eae The other tree, mentioned by its name; is’ ‘¢ the tree of knowledge of good and evil ;” fo called, doubtlefs, as it was ‘* this tree,” in dif -tinction from.all the reft in the garden, which -could have given the firft man and woman an wn“ experimental knowledge” of what was good, rs and what was evil. - ... Some interpreters think, that’ this tree ‘¢ na- turally” produced fruit that was. noxious’ and deadly ; fuch as, upon eating of it, would infec the blood, tranimitting a poifon into it that would certainly, however flowly, bring on death. But it muft be a ftrange fort of poifon, ftrange in its nature, and as ftrangely flow in its ope~ ration, that would permit a man, after he had taken of it, to live: on nine hundred and thirty years, which the Scripture fays, Gen. v. 3. Adam did.—Befides, it does not feem likely, that any b, or the fruit of any tree God had made, fhould, in its proper fenfe, be hurtful and deadly, - til after the introdudtion of fin, and * the eurfe of the ground” thereupon, To be fure, Moles - ! «faye. DISSERTATION 1, 49 fays nothing from whence it may be collected, that the fruit of this tree was of the baneful kind that is pretended. He rather gives us to under- ftand, that man was ‘* made of the duft,” to which ** naturally” he would again return, unlefs God fhould pleafe to prevent it. This he would have done, had man been obedient; and he gave him “ the tree of life” as a ftanding pledge or affurance of it. But man, having finned, for- feited all right to this favour of God, and of courfe became liable to die. So that there was ho need of this ‘* deadly fruit” to poifon his body. It was made of corruptible materials, and would, according to the laws of nature, fall to pieces fooner or later. God’s “* putting Adam into the garden” is now mentioned a fecond time; but with this addition, that he was put there “to drefs it, and to keep it.’ So that he would have had * work to do,” had he abode in innocency; though his work would have been nothing more than a recreating exer- cife. Itis fin, and the * curfe” thereupon, that has changed what, at firft, was only a pleafant amufement, into labour fo heightened as to de- e the name of “ toil” en with «€ ‘ for- y.”— But to proceed : The facred penman, having recorded the ba facts, now comes to give an account of the *€ rule,” or “© law of “tual, ” man was placed under in his innocent ftate. This is contained in thofe words, Gen. ii. 16, ot And the Lord S E 4 God _of the garden shoe dl Part: tree of the knowledge of good and_evil, _ th ~ halt not eat of it; for ia the day shat thou eatett _ thereof thou fhalt furely die’~ a 3 One would think, the ‘“ law of trial” here made known. to, Ad4m was fo plainly e . at leaft as to its general nature, that there cc cou be no reafonable room for miftake. And yet, f ay it has happened, that multitudes have been led to judge and fpeak upon the matter, as though they did nor at all underftand what Mofes has handed to us, in the moft ealy and fignificative language. wwe It is indeed the common opinion, that man in his ofiginal ftate, was under et ’ works,” requiring ‘‘ perfect ob; edie 1e _ whole moral or natural law of God, as the ane = dition of life ;” infomuch, that he w fubjected to death, in cafe of a a -grofs a miftake fhould concn or eafily be accounted for, unlefs w fa general undue attachment to what at Grit 3 fe, not from the facred books of ferip pture, but imagination of fome highly celebrated, how- ever fallible, man, when thinking and w — the fubjett. Not but that this is van Pr) DISSERTATION I gt dnd natural miftake; if confidered in’ connection’ with ‘another that was equally the fruit of fancy; in’thofe who firft féll into it; and this is, that the man Adam came out of the creating hands of God with fuch ** perfetion” of a€tual know- « ledge, wifdom and holinefs, that he was at once’ - © perfedtly” able to didertftid the requirements of the law of nature in every inftance, and *¢ per- fectly” to comply with them. And, it is readily owned, if this had been the cafe in faét, it would be no ways unreafonable to think, that man might have been put under a “ covenant of works,” in the fenfe he is reptefented to have been, But how unnatural would it be, upon man’s being made with faculties fitted for im- provement to “¢ perfection;” to bring him in this “© perfect creature” all at once; before there had been time for hisymaking any confiderable ad- vances towards ite ‘We fhould; in this way, give him a character which, according to the confti- tution of his nature, could not, at prefent, be jaftly applied tohim. ~ Befides; Mofes has given us no fuch unt of the firft man. On the contrary, he ha felated many facts, as has been already obferved; in. confequence of which it moft evidently appears, that, whatever his im- planted powers were, his actual knowledge and holinefs were comparatively fmall. : And it is remarkable, the ‘law of trial? he — reprefents the man Adam to have been placed under, is exatly fuited to the idea he has led E 2 us iy ot ae Speman as 68 RATA * us to entertain of a conformity to the ‘ oe 1 for as yet he knew but v and the original implantation ! ; ; tendency in his nature, to yield obedience to it, | had\not, in any co rable degr e : h Ie might shicgiané: bei aval tied in itfelf, ith vp unfuitable thing, that he fhould, in his »prefent fituation, be placed under ** fuch a covenant of works” as fome. have been pleated to contrive for him. God might know, that a trial’ of this ey kind would have been too hard and eae by what afterwards came into fact have acquitted himfelf with honour failed when tried in one in itfelf, and fo plainly pointed u) not well mifunderftand it; wha have been the confequence, had . enlarged fo as to take in the lay . every inftance, to be firft invefyj practifed, by the fole ftrength ;: his: ety have been fince, informed us, and in words as due and as he could well have ufed, According t DISSERTATION LT 43 account, the rule of God’s condu& towards man was, not what he might have colleéted from the exercife of his reafon, however exalted in its ‘meafure; but what could be known by “ reve lation” only. “He was to ftand or fall, to live or ‘die—How ? By what law? ‘Not by © the law of works,” as requiring perfect, actual, indefectabie, obedience; not by this law, in regard of any ‘one of its precepts: No; but by a “-pofitive law,” in a * fingle inftance,”. that is, a law thac was ‘difcoverable, not by human faculties, though exercifed in the moft perfect manner; but by s© immediate revelation” from heaven. So fpeaks the facred hiftory, Gen, ii, 16, 17, ** Of every tree of the garden thou mayelt freely eat; but of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou fhalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eateft _ thereof, thou fhialt furely die.” The language here is too exprefs to nced any comment, or to admit of difpute. And it is from hence obvious, at the firft glance, that ** faith in God,” and not a “ prin- ‘ciple of mere reafon,” muft have given rife to the © ‘obedience here required, Adam. indeed could | ‘not have obeyed, it would have been an im- poffibility 1 in nature, but from “‘ faith” in the ** re- yelation”_God had made of his mind in. this : matter. ‘This muft have been the governing principle i in his heart. And it was ‘¢ effentially” owing: to the want of this principle, either wholly, ‘or in'a fufficient degree, however it came about, E a that brass git) : ae " 54 DISSERTAT xO8: 1% uM set he sat of the tree,” concernin, firft Lshersi no more vies 'hied ne se have ‘¢ pleafed ae the. real bei .,exercife of ‘* faith; and that he, cou eile . - ’ of-any §* covenant of works” tha before his Japfe, than after it, have fecured the pofleffion and-enjoyment of life, in any way but by “grace through faith.” It is acknowledged, there is an enlargement of grace, and of ;the ob- ject faith, fince the lapfe 5 but ftil], man, in his innocent ftate, would have been ‘ faved by grace,’’ if faved at all, and through the exercife of ‘* faith,” as truly in his innoce ey em his pofterity are in their lapfed one. at § the Jaw of faith’”.took place from the the world, and. was the. ‘f rule? 4God’s. conduct towards even Gane not.a ‘* covenant of works,” as wined. * We. never indeed read, i in into with Adam.) The only covenai t kind” it fpeaks of is the ‘* Sinai” on the Jewith nation. And this i s old’”’ covenant, which is fo ne the ** fecond”: or § new’ covenant, oa will probably be afked here, Was the one man Adam then left at liberty, in his’ origi . ftate, with refpeét to all other works but ee one of §F faith,’ on which his contint s DISSERTATION I. 55 in life was dependent ? ? Was he under no obli- gations to the law of nature,” the law of reafon, which is the’ law of God? And had he violated <¢ this law,” would he not have incurred the dif pleafure of his Maker? The anfwer is obvious. He was, without all doubt, under ftri& indifpenfable obligations tos obey every other command of God, wherein it , fhould be made known to him, as truly-as ** this fpecial”” one; and muft have rendered himfelf obnoxious to the righteous refentments of his God and King, had he expreffed a difregard to any of them. But then, it muft be added, it was moft certainly with a view to his being thus obedient, and in this way efcaping the Divine difpleafure, that God faw fit, in his great wifdom and goodnefs, to place him under this *¢ — rule of trial.” It ought not ‘to be fuppofed, that God would have made a ‘** mere pofitive command,” per- haps, indifferent as to the “* matter” of it, the * rule” of his conduct towards man, merely for the fake of difplaying his authority; or that he did this, as laying greater ftrefs upon obedience to a pofitive precept, than one that was founded on the eternal unchangeable rectitude of his own nature*, To think or fpeak thus, would ‘be grofsly * Thofe who afk, why was Adam’s obedience tried in a merely pofitive inftance? do not confider, “* that an experiment ie ie it could fearce have been made in any of the moral precepts ; E 4 ** which 2% Ld thee, | * ¢ % a DISSERTATION 1. ae ’ murder his wife? How was it poflib to Hei lity ; grofsly to refle& on the : e, rig - holy Governor of the valet He nuft have had fome great and noble defign i . placing — man naiak this particular conftitutior than any other. And in order edinaedipionn juftly of it, let it be obferyed, = 9) hn Man was now but juft brought into exiftence 5 and though he poffefied powers perfectly. fitted for his gradually making the higheft advances, ini to a creature of his rank; yet he had not, at prefent, had time or opportunity for any ‘con- fiderable igcvimbn Under thefe circum- flances, God did not judge it fuitable to leave him to the fole guidance, either of his implanted * faculty of underftanding, er difpofition to. vir- tuous and holy practice. He was rather pleafed to take him under his own care, that héwmight be under the beft advantage, in order to ‘his gradually rifing, in harmony with the conftitution of. his nature, to ‘ that perfeétion™ in ‘aétual _ knowledge, sats and every ches gree qua. 1 (yi « which ‘there was no occafion to violate. ‘For.wbat, fhould ** tempt him to idolatry, or to take God's name in vain, or to, *© when there was no body but he and fhe int #* could he fleal, or what room was there when God had put him in poffefiion of all things? It had “ been in vain to forbid that which could not be done ; andit 6s had not been yirtue to abftain from that towhich the ** no temptation, but from that which invited him wna €* grefs.” Bifhop Patrick, in his note on nab lie 179 ha ; Jagd Saves. | DISSERTATION 1. 67. lity he was. scape made. beapntle of attain- in, “Bre Poeu ti +1 Ue ‘And'the §° ieedial command” God gave eres was the expedient to this purpofe ; and an ad- mirably well-contrived one: for it was virtually, and in true defign, a command carrying in it fuch language as this, Hearken to my voice, believe what I fay, keep within the reftraint I have Jaid upon you. You will find your account in fo doing. I will, in this, cafe, be your guard and guide, your inftructor and affitt- ant, fg as that you fhall be preferved blamelefs, and attain to an. eftablifhed perfeétion in all acquiremients proper to your nature. ~ But if, through unbelief, you fet yourfelf up: for your ewn director, and follow your own inventions, you fhall foon fee your folly in what you will expofe yourfelf to. . The “* enforcement’. with which the com- mand to Adam was accompanied, obvioufly and neceflarily contains in itall this. If, from ** faith in God,” he had obeyed his voice, and fo long “as he had done fo, he would have had a fure and ~juft claim to the ¢ life’’ that was promifed upon ‘this condition, But what was “ this life?’ We ‘may be fure, it was not merely or fimply his being continued in exiftence, but his poffeffing it in a ftate of favour with God, and to the true purpofés of living. And if fo, then with fuf- ficient reafon to gens that his Maker would have been his never-failing patron and friend ; ¥' j afford- 58 4. affording him, at all times, adn all circum- ftances, protection, inftruétion and help: info- much, that he fhould have advanced, by quick and fafe fteps, in a ‘fpiritual underftanding and godly virtuous practice, till he had been formed to a “ meetnefs” for a confirmed ftate of glory and honour, above the need of being any further under difcipline and trial. Whereas, if, through unbelief of God’s word, he fhould chufe to be his own counfellor and guide, trufting in himfelf and his own abilities, the confequence muft have been, the lofs of God’s favour, and an imme~ diate liablenefs to the threatened death. Nothing fhort of all this will come up to the full meaning of the “* conftitution’” Adam was placed under. And if this was its meaning, it was a moft kind and ample provifion for his beft good. He certainly ftood in need of fuch a teacher and guide, as God here offered himfelf to be, in his prefent unexperienced and unimproved ftate, he would have been in extreme hazard of being betrayed into miftakes, both im judg- ment and practice, if, inftead of the counfel of the all-knowing God, he had had only his own to have depended on for his guidance in the way of truth and holinefs. ‘This ‘* fpecial command of God” may therefore be reafonably looked upon, not only as a ftanding, ftriking call to him to give credit to God’s voice, depending on him, and not on his own unimproved underftanding and rae for the direG&ion of his condu&; but a be . fet free from _all_ jult exce BISSERTATION I, 59 kind and gracious affurance, while he did thus, of God’ s readinefs to be all along prefent with him, to guard him againft evil and danger, and todo sslaskciven cleat be proper, on his part, in. order to his attaining the end of his creation, viz. his rifing to fuch heights 1 in intelleétual and moral improvements, as would make him, in his mea- fure, actually and perfedtly, like to. the bleffed God, and fo prepared for an immortality of glory and, happinefs with him. | The “ rule of trial” our under, yiewed in this poin rit father was placed of light, is, at once, eption.—It was properly adjufted to his real ch aracter ; not being above, nor, below his abilities, which ought, in reafon, to have been the cafe.—And it was a wifely ap- pointed mean to promote both the honour of God and the beft good of man: As it was power- fully adapted, not only to teach him implicitly to believe, and unrefervedly to obey his Maker; but to influence and engage him_ hereto, by threatening, on the one tak certain ruin in cafe-of his following his own counfel in oppa- fition to God’s direction, and promifing, on the other, that, upon hearkening to God’s voice, he fhould be fo conducted in life, under the guar- - dianthip of his Creator, as to make the higheft advances in holinefs and happinefs his. nature was _capable_of,..Whereas, if he is confidered, ac- cording to. the common reprefentation that is made of him, as created with a fund of light in heart equally fufficien -_¥t would be too low f “Deen enfnared and feduced ; a “as! the oe 6o chloe, RTA his underftanding at ance into all truth, 2 aipot! all holy practice » the I be burthened with okoparsbted a] be no. proportic would, in this cafes «e the law of trial,” and §* « the. man to niture.— Nor can if ¢€ valuable end could hav. tained, by putting a dowed wpon fuch a f which, it could not, in r able way, be ‘accounted for, that he fhould, n being tried in fo comparatively inconfidéPablé ‘a matter, Aave any brestcapien nt trial, —Befides “air sabia, upon the bare propofal, ridiculous and abfurd. an dp ‘jd Peg | Men may, if they pleafe, talk at random about this matter ;~firft bringing in man at onte perfect jn intellectual and moral accomplifhments, and then placing him under 4” trial” ven _been too inconfiderable for any of his imp pofterity, arrived at the common neat of underftanding ; yea, a much — one th an fome of them have actually paffed through with honour, though he, with his endowmén s heigt pn Von « ‘ened to perfeétion, was enticed and drawn-afic BOWNe Tz; 6i ; of men muft not be n for the truth of Sc c ovioul led from thence to think of the firit nan,.as made for “* pr ve improvement,” and not that a at once he could have been only in a courfe of time, and in con- fequence of the proper ufe of ‘his implanted faculties) This. is agreeable to what appears, in fa&t, to have been the eftablifhed order of nature from the beginning of the world; and ic has all along uniformly taken place with refpect to all the creatures of all kinds it pleafed God to _ make; efpecially in regard of man, a creature of the firft or baht a And the conftitution he was placed under, fo far as we give credit to the facred books, and do not judge by mere fancy, - was evidently fuited, not to a creature of any exalted degree of prefent actual underftanding, or holinefs; but to one only capable of it, and advancing towards it. And it was under this conftitution, as a mean principally intended herefor, that he was gradually to attain to the perfection of his nature. The fum of what has been faid, under the <> foregoing obfervations, reprefenting the contents of the Mofaic account of the firft man in his innocent ftate, to place it in one view, is. this, /7) that he was made male and female ‘the moft excellent creature in this lower world, poffefing the highett. and nobleft rank &That he was made by an “ immediate” exertion of almighty power, . and ipture. We are very / * co Z i — a = -———— — > ae). en ‘ xy wy ca mente = ¥ * creation: That, upon ing thus made, he was’ — _defigned as a fuitable and powerful mean to g io ~ him againft danger in his egies unioRtar 62 DISSERT and not by God’s agen fecond caufes, operating blifhed courfe or order “the image of God 5” mea ; actual, prefent, perfect likenefs | in ‘knowledge; wifdom, holinefs, but with’ implanted ‘powers perfed to each other, and as perfeétly fitted gradually attaining to this likenefs, irt the hig meafure proper to a being of his rank’ in the’ conttituted the “ head” or “ root” of the human racej from whom, as thefecondary inftrumentak - caufé, like effential powers with his own thould, according to a divinely fet led otha be tranf- mitted to others, and from thofe others, to ow ayia ftill, throughout all generations ; that is inferring a capacity in nature of +t formed to a reiemblance of the moral glory, ig confequence of which they would 7 be individuals of the fame kind that he was, and diftinguifhed from all the other creatures: (In fine, that being made, not perfect at once in atual knowledge or holinefs, of any other intel- Je€tual of moral quality; but with | implanted powers only rendering him capable of gradually | attaining to this petfetion) he was placed by his Maker under a ‘¢ fpecial law or rule,” principally “i the fenfe'of hearing, conveyed into’ Eve’s mind deas intended to be communicated by them, Mofes does not enter upon the queftion, how thefe articulated motions in the air were occafion- ed, whether by the ferpent himfelf, or as actuated by fome fuperior being: And it might, perhaps, have been improper that he fhould.» Eve knew nothing as yet of the exiftence of angels, good or bad: nor did fhe know it was beyond the natural capacity of this ‘ ferpent” to fpeak’ as fhe perceived he did. Probably fhe had, by ob- fervation, been led to think, that fome of the beafts were not endowed with the power of fpeech; but fhe had not been long enough in the world to know, that they were all deftitute of it. And this may be the reafon of that re- mark relative to the ‘* ferpent,” he was “ more fubtle than any of the beafts of the field.”? She might apprehend, he was made fuperior to any of the inferior creatures fhe had had opportunity to know any thing about, in this fpecial refpe& ; that he was endowed with an ability to fpeak, which they were not. Now, upon this repre- fentation of the ftate of Eve’s knowledge, there is an obvious propriety in Mofes’s account of this fa&. For he writes, as it was fit and natural he fhould do, according to the ‘ vifible appear- ance’ of the thing, as well as ‘‘ Eve’s ap- prehenfion” of it, at the time when it hap- pened. Nor is he fingular in this manner of writing. The Apoftle Paul, having occafion to Be 5/3 F 2 Speak ; | SR ae rs a baie. % ON IL» fpeak of Eve’s being eceived, does it acc ing to the then appearanc Seats, «the ferpent begui * faying no- thing of the <«* devil,” though he sib it was he that actuated the ferpent. In like manner, the Apoftle Peter, when fpeaking of Baalim, the fon of Bofor, fays, ‘ the dumb afs, {peaking with man’s voice, forbad the madnefs of the pro- phet ;’’ and yet, he knew, at the fame time, that the afs was only the * inftrument” God made ufe of in the rebuke that was now given. Mo- fes, therefore, may reafonably be looked upon as ** literally” writing a true faé&, when he {peaks ofa “ ferpent” as talking with Eve, though it be fuppofed, at the fame time, that the ferpent was actuated by the <‘ devil,” and did mot fay a word in virtue of any natural power he was en- dowed with, fufficient for the purpofe. — Some are pleafed to give us wonderful accounts of this ferpent ; that he had wings, and could fly: that he was of the firey kind, and made a moft beautiful fhining appearance; and that, being of an erect figure, he could reach and take fruit from the tree, of which our firft parents were not permitted to eat. And they might have gone on, and informed us ftill further, that he was the moft diftinguifhed of all ferpents, and of all other beatts, in: that he was naturally ¢ ca- - pable of managing a difcourfe with art and de- 'fign. But it ought to be remembered, Mofes ! only poms of him as a * ferpent, the moft ‘s bs » tes 4 | DISSERTATION Mt. - 69 ong the beafts;” not faying a word about wings, or beauty, or any other peculiarity. Bp therefore we can depend upon as truth is, that it was a “ ferpent,” in diftinction from all other creatures, that was ufed as the © inftru- ment” in the temptation that feduced the firft of our race. Whatever defcriptions are given of this ferpent, however fine and curious, are the fruit of imagination only, and fhould be carefully diftinguifhed from the truth of fcrip- ture-hiftory. Mofes, having aneree that it was a “ fer- pent” that fpake to Eve, goes on to relate what he faid.' And his firft addrefs to her feems to have been in the guife of an aftonifhed inquirer, <¢ Yea, hath God faid; Ye fhall not eat of every tree of the garden?” Upon Eve’s acknowledg- ing there was one tree, concerning which God had faid, ** Ye fhall not eat of it, nor touch it, left ye die:” the ferpent replies, faying to the woman, ‘* Ye fhall not furely die. For God doth know, that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes fhall be opened; and ye fhall be as Gods, knowing good and evil.” Thefe are the only words Mofes relates to have been fpoken by the ferpent; though others, by imaginary additions, have made him fpeak in the moft artfully delufive manner, . _ After they have introduced the ferpent *¢ play- ing fome of his wily tricks,” and, in the woman "3 a7 taking and eating of the tree fhe was wae PB 3 retrained aon, 2 jo «DISSERTATION iL reftrained from touching, they eereiene binds “€ putting on a more feraphic, or angelical ap pearance,” and addrefling her in fuch Jan- guage as this, ‘“* You fee how the fruit of this <¢ tree has exalted me; fo that from a beat of. ‘* the field I am become a glorious * feraph,” ‘+ and endued not only with fpeech, but with « the knowledge of the Divine Will, which has. “¢ not been fully opened to you by God, himfelf— ** Can God poffibly, do you think, have really ‘€ intended, that you fhould not eat of the fruic << of every tree of the “garden, and of this in ‘* particular, which he himfelf has made and «< planted there? What did he make and place «¢ it there for then ?—You are greatly miftaken, «< The fruit. is not deadly, nor will it kill you, <¢ any more than it has me. — Alas! all that God. “meant, by faythg it would deftroy.you, was, “®€ that. it would change and transform you. Bur *« fo far will it be from. making, you ceafe to “be, thar, in the day you eat of it, it will open, and enlighten your eyes, as it has mine; and « as it has raifed me from a ferpent to a feraph, «‘ endued with fpeech and knowledge ofthe di- «© yine counfels concerning you, fo it fhall like- « wife raife you from being mortals to be Gods 5 ce ‘and, inftead of bringing death on you, make “ you immortal hke the great Creator himfelf; ** giving. you the fame kind of knowledge of *< good and evil that he has. You thal then « * know the way to poffels all the good you en- “J WE: . Nee. 1 a » independently as he 3 and you fhall iow how to avoid death, the threatened evil, which would for ever put an end to all your blifs and felicity. Even difobedience itfelf will €€ not then be able to bring it upon you. In fine, ’ you will find this tree to have the like powers «© to improve and raife your minds, as the tree ‘¢ of life has, to preferve your bodies *.” Surely, this fpeech of the ferpent took rife . chiefly from imagination, not from any thing Mofes has faid to give countenance ta it. The fa&, as he reprefents it, appears, as it ought to do, not fet off with laboured art and ornament, but in a naked, plain, natural drefs. It is little more than a repetition of the words God had fpoken, with abold denial of their trath, in roundly affirming this falfehood, that, inftead of dying, if they eat of this tree, ‘« their eyes fhould be opened ; and they fhould be as Gods, knowing good and evil.” It fhould be remembered here, neither Adam nor Eve had as yet had opportunity for any con- fiderable acquaintance with the ufe or force of words. It would therefore have been below the « fubtlety of the ferpent,” and indeed quite un- natural for him, to have addreffed to the woman in that variety of artful language which has been put into his mouth. Such a manner of fpeak- ing would not have been adjufted to her proper _* Effay on the feveral Difpenfations of God to Mankind, : p> % 6. 43 ‘< y Ee 2 ‘ F4 character. be —_ ee al en 4 Wi Wy go. | DISS RTATION Il. q charatter. eas, Mofes’s account, as it lies in his hiftory, without the imaginary help of others, is contained, as it was proper it fhould be, in a few words, and fuch too as Eve, hav- ing heard before, may be fuppofed to «oh eafily underftoull But however the words, in high the lige: tion was managed, are interpreted, they had their intended and defired effet; for they deceived the woman into the thought, as the hiftory goes on, ¢¢ that the tree was good for food, and to be defired to make one wife.” And fhe accordingly ‘* took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave alfo to her hufband, and he did eat,”’ in dire& oppofition to the exprefs command of God. And in this lay their ** offence,’’ and not fimply in eating of this tree, which might have been an indifferent matter, had not God made it otherwife by interpofing a pofitive declaration of his pleafure, that they * fhould not eat of it,” though they might “* freely, eat of every other tree in the garden.” .-It will poffibly. be faid here,, is it a thing cre- dible, that the all-wife good. God fhould permit the entrance. of fin into the world, as occafioned in the manner that has-been reprefented, by a ‘* temptation’ begun, and carried into effect, by — a ‘‘ ferpent,’” a€tuated, by an “ evil fpiric? ? Can it teafonably be fuppofed, that he would, when he. had created man, have fulfered the devil, before’ he had made any confiderable advances i in Inowledge and experience of the world, to. (a4 “emp ai > ol 4 ~ DISSERTATION Il. 73 ce ip’ him, fo as to bie a into fin; and, in this way, bring ruin upon himfelf ? Is this a fit thought to entertain of that God, who, of his mere goodnefs, had given him exiftence, that he might be happy in the love, fervice, and enjoy- ment of the original fource of all being, and of all good? The anfwer is this: Itis in fact true, that fin and forrow now are, and all along have | been, in the world, however difficult it may be to account for their entrance. And difficult it really is, and vaftly fo, upon the principle of « reafon,” as well as ‘¢ revelation.” The great- eft philofophers, in all ages, have found it a depth they could not fathom. The queftion, therefore, remains unrefolved by them to this day, molev ro xaxovy ** whence came evil?” Ic is not pretended, that the difficulty is removed by what is faid upon the matter in the facred books. It is a difficulty ftill; though not fo - great an one as it was before. It is‘certainly lef= making any ‘‘ confiderable improvements” in a m fened, and not increafed. The difficulty, as peculiar to the Mofaic hif- tory, and as ftated in the above objection, lies in this, that fin, and ruin thereupon, fhould be occafioned by “ temptation” from an * evil fpirit,” and as practifed upon the firft parents of men, before there had been time for their - knowledge, experience, and goodnefs. x Ae lames. “4 DISSERTATION I. _ Asto the f t of this. fuggelted difficulty, man’s being led ‘into fin by ‘* temptation from « an evil fpirit,” I would fay, : Temptation, in general, is the only conceiv- able, it may be, the only poffible way, in which innocent man could have been induced to fin. It would be ftrange, unaccountably fo, if he had finned without any confideration exciting him hereto. But he could not have been excited, without being tempted. To excite to fin, in whatever view it be confidered, is to tempt to it. The. terms, though different, yet carry in them, at leaft in the prefent cafe, one and the fame meaning. To fay, therefore, that our firft fa- — ther could not have been placed in a ftate of ‘ temptation, is, in reality of fenfe, to fay, that he muft have been impeccable; which is the privilege, perhaps, of no creature in virtue of his mere natural powers, however advanced we as ; fuppofe them to be. Befides, the placing man in a ftate wherein he might be tempted, generally confidered, is not a difficulty peculiar to the Scripture. Itis the truth, refpecting all mankind, that they are fent into a world full of temptation; whichis a dif- ficulty, fo far as it is one at all, in point of reafon as well as revelation. And it as much concerns thofe to folve it, who have faith only in the be- ing, perfections, and moral government of God, ‘as thofe who, befides this, have faiths in sa Bible, as a revelation of his will. The i cstey: ichcrefores refent objeétion, lies only in this fpecial circum- ftance of the temptation, its being managed by an evil fpirit.” And why not by an evil fpi- rit, as well as by an evil ‘man, or by a world fo conftituted as to be capable of being a tempta- tion, by its fmiles or “mek It is not at all unphilofophical to fuppofe the exiftence of angels, either good or bad. We may more reafonably think, there are intelligent moral beings of va- rious orders fuperior to ours, than that there.are not, It is indeed the general opinion of ** rea- foners,” that thus it really is. And analogy would lead one to imagine, that there may be, among thefe orders, fome that are evil-as well as good. What relation or connection there is between thefe fuperior intelligences, and us men, we know not with any degree of certainty: but fhould any take upon them to affirm there are none, and that God might not ufe them as in- ftruments in the government of our world, they would fay more than they have any warrant to do. It is no offence againft any dictate of fober reafon, to fuppofe the ee of what the Scrip- ture declares, that the good angels are God’s ** miniftersfent forth to minifterto them who are heirs. of falvation;” and that the evil angels are permitted. by him, as his wifdom fees fit, to <* work in thofe who are already the children of difobedience ;” and in others, in order to tempt them to be fo, . And what difference is there, 1 in _ will be, properly” fpeal ee 76 DISS and of an evil angel? If it comes from the one ¢ fered by God tobe di of the agent that i is ten 1 withftanding, to vn ee fo as that it’ eaking, “his: own fault,” fhould he comply with it, what juft reafon is there for complaint? And what greater reafon’ for it, fhould it be managed by the devil,” than by thofe who are his children? It does ~, appear to make any alteration in the true pees: of the cafe, or its afpect on the moral attributes’ and government of God, whether the former or - the latter are the tempters to evil OOK I may not improperly add here, if it became the wifdom and goodnefs of the all-perfect Be-’ ing, to fuffer our firft parents to be *¢ tempted” in any way whatever [and why not they, § as well as their pofterity ever fince], this, in which Mofes fays it was done, is as’ natural and ‘ra- tional a one as can eafily be imagined, Poffi- | ‘bly, it was the only one, confidering their then fituation, in which their virtue could” have been proved by their having opportunity and occa fion to aét their part well when tempted to the contrary. Inordinancy of appetite could have been no temptation to them; for this had ‘not as. yet any place’ in them. A temper of mind in. clining them to oppofe the authority of ¢ > ISSERT. a foe no temptation to or they were ly void of fuch a di How then ould they have been tet adapted to lead them into an apprehenfion of the command of their Cre ator, that differed from what it really intended? T the method Mofes has re And as to «< Satan’s” being the agent in ehdeavouring thus to delude them, it is as natural as any part of the ftory, and ftrictly apie af. * What other be- ing could have done this? It would be glaringly abfurd to fuppofe fuch a thing of God, or the holy angels. And Adam and Eve, the only in- telligent beings now exifting in our world, could not, in this way, have been tempters to each other, till they had previoufly loft their mmno- cency. Whothen but fome “ evil intelligence,” of fome other clafs of beings, could have acted the part of a tempter tothem? And, as it was in ** man’s voice” that God fpake to them, when he reftrained them, by his command, from ‘¢ eat- *¢ ing’’ of fuch a particular tree in the garden, the way was pointed out, in which it would be moft natural to fuppofe Satan fhould addrefs to them in order to deceive them. It perfectly agrees with his charatter as a fubtle, as well as wicked fpirit, to think that he would fpeak to them in “man’s voice,” as God had done juft *before. Nor is it abfurd to fay, that God might permit this application of Satan to them, any more than it would be to fay, he might permit ; him, 7 DISS! him, in like er, to o tempe i Me y; or fuffer them >¢ tempted in any other way: always provided, that he fo fuperintends and go- verns the temptation, that it fhall be only a proper trial of virtue, a trial adjufted to men’s ftate and characte as, notwith{tand- ing the temptauon, chargeable withi fin, will leave them juftly p, as being themfelves the «+ faulty caufes,” if they are drawn afide to a compliance with the thing they are tempted to. And this leads me to the other branch of the objection, Satan’s being permitted to tempt our firft parents ‘‘ before they had time for any epetidepable, improvements in ae sega experience.” To which I would fay, that it malas no real alteration, in the reafon of the thing, whether their improvements were fmall or great, as hav- ~ ing had a fhorter or longer time for the advances proper to their nature, if the temptation did not exceed their abilities; but was fuch only as they might have overcome, and would have over- come, had it not been their own fault. And this was evidently the truth of the cafe, as Mo- fes has related it. There does not appear any. thing in the temptation beyond the ftrength of the firft man and woman, however unimproved we can reafonably fuppofe them to have been Satan’s addrefs contained little more than a bold, impudent contradiction of what God had faid to ‘them. God had told them, * they fhould die, “« if they eat of the forbidden tree.”? Satan tells 4 them, A ve ad f’ a | Se 26 wife, and k as Gods.” This ¢ whole of what he faid. And furely the firft man and woman mutt have been unim- proved beyond all reafonable conception of their charatter, if they were not able to have refifted this temptation. It is indeed a temptation ad- jufted to fmall advances in» knowledge; but thofe fmall advances were abundantly fofiicient to have overcome it. To be fure, there appears nothing in the hiftory, relative either to the temptation, or the abilities of our firft parents, that fhould lead one to think they were tempted above what-they might have borne, withourtbe- ing feduced into fin. Ic appears, I would hope, upon the whole, that the account Mofes has given us of the * fall’ of our firft parents, far from being trifling, ridi- culous, or abfurd, and therefore incredible in “pisseRTA ON I. 79 = they fhould not ieg’ but rather itfelf, is grave, folid, and rational; not juitly liable to the objections that have been raifed againft it, but as unexceptionable as any that can be thought of, and therefore an account that no one need be afhamed to own that he receives, as containing the real truth. It is acknowledged, Mofes has faid “nothing upon the queftion, how could our firft parents have been drawn afide to difobey God, by means of the devil’s temptation, when they might, notwithftanding, have retained their innocency, and were furnifhed with fufficient ability here- i the for ? / re “x difficulty by far that attends the cafe. But he | ee : g% DISS ‘ATION ee for? Neither las e offered any thing to recon- cile God’s ier to fin, with the moral attributes of his nature; which is the greateft may eafily be excufed for his filence upon thefe points, if it be confidered, that he was, in his own proper character as a man,’ unable to give a fatisfactory account of thefe mattets, and that God did not fee fit to inftrué him how to do it ; and for this, among other reafons, becaufe, in the ' prefent ftate of our faculties, we may be inca« pable of .feeing to the bottom of fo great adepth. But then, ic ought to be remembered, thefe are diffitulties not peculiar to revelation. However fin firft came into the world, whether in the way Mofes has related, or any other, the queftions ftill — recur, and in their full force—How came man to ~ fin? How came the infinitely holy and good God — ‘not to prevent the entrance of that into the world, which is fo odious in his fight, and deftruétive in its confequences, when, fo far as we are able to conceive of the matter, he might, with infinite eafe, have done it? And it becomes thofe to eeafe from clamouring againft revelation upon thefe points, who do not find themfelves able, upon the foot of folid reafon, to give a clear and fatisfactory folution of them. For it as truly be- longs to them to do this, as thofe who are be- lievers in Mofes and the prophets, in be Chrift - and his apoftles. : wi il. T bie - PISSERTATION if} sp IL. The other thing. mentioned ‘as worthy of \ fpecial notice is, the ** effeét” that was confe- quent upon the lapfe of our firft parents, bot joo e natural” and * judicial.” * What “ naturally” followed upon theiroffence, 5 - Mofes has handed to us thus. : / Genesis, Chap, III. 7. * And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they, fewed Rerleaves together, and made shepniehves 7 aprons.” +i 8. ** And they heard the voice of the Lord God, walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themfelves from the prefence of the Lord God among the trees of the garden.” ae g. ** And the Lord God called to iti, and faid unto him, Where art thou?” _ to. “ And he faid, I heard thy. voice in the garden: and I was afraid, becaufe I was na- ete 3 and I hid myfelf.” «* And he faid, Who told thee Fe ‘does oat taaies> Haft thou eaten of the tree, whereof I cormmanded thee that thou fhouldeft not eat *” ‘ta. “ And the man faid, The woman whom thou gaveft to be gn mé, fhe gave me of the. tree, and I did eat.’ ot ry. = And. the Lord God faid unto ‘the .wo- | man, What is this that thou hat done 2 And ‘Se G c the . a 82 DISSERTATION Il. | the woman faid, The (erp beguiled me, and 4 . [did eat,”’ . iF The firft thing related as confequent upon the /difobedience of Adam and Eve is, that * their / "eyes were opened ;” not in the fenfe they were '/ told they would be, when the ferpent fpake to A 4 | | 5 them, but in a quite different one. The eyes of / | their underftanding were opened, not to make them ‘* wife and knowing -as Gods,” but to fee themfelves guilty creatures, and, as fuch, ex- \ pofed to the righteous difpleafure of — their Maker. They now knew more than they did — ‘before ; but it was knowledge accompanied with \delf-difapprobation ; arifing from an inward con- {cioufnefs of having tranfgreffed the command -of God, which deferved punifhment, they were at a ‘of how to efcape. “It therefore follows, ‘* they knew that oa were naked.’ If thefe words are interpreted, as they commonly have been, to fignify that they were now affected with ‘ fhame,” being without any “ veftment to cover their bodies,” the mean- ing could not be juftified upon any principle of folid reafon. Why fhould they, in this fenfe, be afhamed of their nakednefs after their fall, any more than before it? If being together without any cover on their bodies was, in the nature of the thing, a juft ground for fhame, they ought \to have been afhamed before their offence in DISSERTATION Il. 33 eating of the forbidden tree. If it was fhameful aid in ifs Own nature, it was fo before as well as after the lapfe. Befides, this fenfe of the word is guite foreign to the purpofe for which it is here inferted. Mofes, therefore, fpeaks of “ fear,”>——, not “ fhame,” as the paffion that was now excited in them. It is accordingly obfervable, he brings in Adam, upon God’s call to him, as faying, ver. 10, ©“ I] was afraid, becaufe I was naked, and I hid myfelf.” Surely, his being “ afraid,” and thereupon * hiding himfelf,” did not arife from this fentiment, that “* his body was naked,” meaning hereby, that it was not “ clothed!” What pertinency is there. in this fenfe of the word to his prefent condition, as a finful, expofed crea- ture? It would have been ridiculous in him to~ have given it as the reafon of his “fear” to come « before God, that he had no clothes on, whenthe | » true and only reafon was, that he had difobeyed | his command, and thereby incurred his difplea- — fare: nor will any other reafon confift with the fcope and circumftances of the ftory, of which: this word is an important part. Perhaps, the phrafe, “‘ they were naked,” may —~ be fairly conftrued, they were in an “ uncovered ftate,” not concealed from the fight, and with- out all'defence or protection againft the refent- — ments of God. A late valuable writer has, I ~ think, very juftly obferved, « that the word we “ render “naked,” befides its moft obvious fig- “Tae nification, is ufed, by a fort of metaphor, in - other fenfes, in many places of the Seitprures.” ae G 2 | He $ DISSERTATION I, ~ He particularly mentions, that in Job, where it is faid, ‘ Hell is [narom] naked before him, and «+ deftruction hath no covering ;” that is, ‘ hell «and deftruétion lie open, not concealed from _ the eye, nor in any way covered from the ven- «‘ seance of God.” This fenfe of the word, as ied by Mofes, is exatly fuited to the character and ftate of the perfons to whom it is applied, and carries in it a pertinent, fignificative, and ftrong meaning. Itis natural to fuppofe the paffion of *€ fear,” i in Adam and Eve, was fet in motion from a ‘fenfe of fin and_ “guilt; efpe Lehee- cially as their eyes told them « they were naked,” that is, in a defencelefs ftate, altogether unco= vered from the fight and ftroke of their Maker, who had threatened them with death, in cafe of difobedience. And no wonder, if their thoughts - yun upon contriving fome method to cover them- felves. “ It is, therefore, added in the next following words, in perfect agreement with what has ‘been offered, ** they fewed fie lame together, ' and ‘© made themfelves. aprons.” Says the above named Author, with great propriety, 8) ithe ** word which we render ‘* leaves” is, im the «text, not ‘ plural,” but ‘* fingular;” and, I «apprehend, that both here, and in fome/other — “ places of Scripture, it fhould be renderedy not “ leaves,” buta * foliature,” or ‘intertwining of <* Jeaves ;” and that the whole paragraphfhould ee Ns thus ,tranflated: ** They wreathed tegether a foliaturé of a hay and made themfelves 10 Bata. 4 ae, DISSERTATION I. 85 &. enwrapments,” z @. they wrapped themfelves. up in them.” What they wanted was to “ hide *‘themfelves from God.” An apron, or cincture © about their waifts would in” nowife anfwer this _*€ purpofe ;—but the cafing themfelves up’ with-- **in boughs full of leaves, to look like’ trees, ** they might imagine would be fufficient to cover | “€ them from the fight of God.” wee It may feem a reflection on the intellectual powers of the firft parents of mankind, to fup- pofe them capable of thinking, that they could conceal themfelves from the fight of God by fo trifling a cover as the beft that could be made _ Of * fig-leaves.’’ But it ought to be confidered, this did not difcover greater weaknefs, than their attempt to ‘ hide themfelves from him among the trees of the garden ;’’ which yet is s exprefsly affirmed of them. It fthould be remembered here, as we pafs along, it is, from this part of the ftory, made evident beyond all difpute, that the advances of our firft parents in knowledge were as yet but {mall. Surely, if they had been that perfectly knowing pair it has been often faid they were, it would be altogether unconceivable, that they ~ thould. have endeavoured, in fuch a poor low way, to have fcreened themfelves from the eye and power of God. It is true, they had now loft their innocence; but nothing is faid that would lead one to think, they had loft their under- | -ftandings too, or that they knew lefs ‘« {pecula- tively” of God now, than they did before. a oi rs. ~s 86 DISSERTATION I The knowledge of their ** heads,?? whatever thae of their “* hearts’ might bes, was much the fame immediately after, that it was) before their ‘* one offence.” They certainly had not attained beyond an ‘* infantile” -kind of know- ledge and experience. And in this view of their character, they might,: as they had loft the suidance of God to follow their own counfels. ; be: fo ignorant before him as, in the hurry jof their thoughts, through guilt and fear, to go into the methods of fafety here {pecified, however foolifh they may appear to thofe who have more knowledge of God and the world. — The plain truth is, ‘* fhame,?’ arifing from — the want, of clothes to cover their . nakednefs, could not be the paffion now working in, their breafts. . They had offended their Creator and God by a prefumptuous act of difobedience, wii hereby, rendering themfelves liable to immediate death. .Their ‘‘ eyes were opened” to fee their. fin and danger. They were, hereupon, inwardly _ . moyed and affected——With what? Surely, not with © * fhame,” .becaufe they had no garment to cover their bodies. What connection has this with — their prefent fate of confcious guilt ? Their z thoughts could not have been employed” upon fo trifling an affair. No; ‘ fear” was the pat fion that alarmed their hearts. And this be" them, in the prefent confufed ftate of their — minds, upon firft providing a “ cover for theit bodies,” .and then upon “ hiding themfelves among the trees in the pattem” that they — might, if poffible, efcape the obfervation of their - es ri ae i DISSERTATION i. 87 their Maker: all which is natural, and juft what might have been expected of perfons ia their cir- cumitances. Tam not infenfible, there is another way, in which fome have endeavoured, while they ex- plain the word “ naked” in its moft obvious fenfe, to give it a proper place, and fignificative force, in the Mofaic ftory. It is by fuppofing, ~ that Adam and Eve, in their innocent ftate, were / “ covered with a robe of glory,” as the badge | er fymbol of their fuperiority and dignity; but | that, being ftripped of it immediately upon their | Japfe, they knew, by feeing themfelves to be “¢ naked,” deprived of this glorious veftment, that they had forfeited the favour of their Maker, and lay expofed to his righteous difpleafure. This, it is acknowledged, will give an important fenfe to the word, and fuch an one as will perfe&ly confift with the whole account of their fall, of which it is a part. And was there fufficient reafon to receive it for truth, that our firft-pa- rents were thus ** covered with a robe of glory,” while innocent, but ‘‘ ftripped” of it after they had finned, I fhould readily fall in with the fenfe that is herefrom put upon the term ‘** naked.” I will not fay, the patrons of this opinion have nothing to offer in vindication of it. Perhaps, - it is rather grounded on plaufible conjectures from certain ‘* modes of fpeech” fometimes to be met with in the Scriptures, than on reafons that will bear a thorough examination. “Mofes ae G 4 does -& ¢ 4 4 88. DISSERTATION Ih. does not feem to countenance it, unlefs from the connected ufe of the word * naked;” beat a we have feen, may be otherwife accounted for, And it is remarkable, he has exprefsly fatd con=— cerning the firft pair, in their innocent fate,’ that « they were both naked,” the man and his Wife, — «* and they were not afhamed*.” It was'noty ‘there! fore, when they were firft created, that they were thus “ clad with glory ;” but afterwards, if at all: of which the facred hiftorian ee made ‘ng men- bis Je ft -* Itis very obvious to remark,” fays one, ** Sotaladina. * tors and commentators came to have a potion of Adam and “* Eve's “« thame” for their “ nakednef.” It bein here o ob- «« ferved, that no fhame attended their being naked” ee they ** eat of the tree, it was concludedy’ that a ** fhame of being “* naked’ entered with fin) into the; world.” . But,” days he, among other things, ‘‘ I apprehend. the truth to be, that this “© verfe was not intended at all to {peak of their being “ naked * as to clothing.” As the word ** naked” has inetaphorical < fenfes in the Old Teftament’s fo-dlfo has the word’ which we * here tranflate ‘‘ afhamed.” (It is, far from fignifying, in, all ** places, being affected” wit h what we call the paffi n of «6 fhame.” It often means being * confounded,” or“ deftro <”'ed.”—And this was Mofes’s meahing in the word here ated; S* a meaping of it perfectly ures with what afterwards ap- peared. to be bis fentiment of man’s fianding perfonally to h¢ar the voice of God. Mofes elfewhere {peaks of it to be no Ors dinary mercy, that aman “¢ fhould hear the’ voice of God and & Jive ;?? and therefore he might here leave us this obférvation & concerning our firft parents, that God fpake to them, and that, although they ftood ‘ naked”, before him, i.e. in 7. © * ‘ ” “© more iniiediaté prefence under ** no coverture,” nigh’ ‘tohim << ¢o “ hear the voice of his words'talking to them,” ae ‘« perienced what Mofes always reputed a very, extrao thing, that ‘ God did talk with man,” and i, na a : confounded,” but “lived.” its - * o e DISSERTATION Il. 89 tion, And I know of no ighe others have to fupply: this defect. 7 fhould now. have procecdedy ‘according. to the method laid out, to confider the ‘* judicial’ confequences of the lapfe, as they refpect the firtt man and woman. But ic will be previoufly pro- per to take fome notice of thofe remarkable i in- tervenine words of Mofes. _ Ver. 14. “ And the Lord God ree unto the — ferpent, Becaufe thou halt done this, thou art curfed above all cattle, and above every beaft of the field: upon thy belly fhalt thou go, and duft fhalr thou eat all the days of thy life.” | 45. ‘And I will put enmity between thee | and the woman, and between thy feed and her _ feed; it fhall bruife thy head, and thou fhale | bruife his heel.” aa It may, be needful juft to fay here, as God knew, though Adam and Eve might not, that i waa the ‘¢ devil,” in the bady of the ‘ ferpent,” and not the ferpent himfelf, that had managed _ the temptation by which they were led into fin; it is noways unnatural or unreafonable to fuppofe, thar it was in reality ‘ the. devil in. the ferpent,’? and not ‘the ferpent him- felf,”” to'whom thefe words are direfted : thoughs © being fpoken in the prefence of the man and the woman, and with a yiew to their attending to theme they are exprefied according to ¢he “‘ appearance” of things, and their <° apprehenfions” concerning git Having obferved shia I go on. a 90 DISSERTATION I, The ¢* ferpent” may be the object of the curfé © pronounced in the former of thefe verfes; though _the words are addreffed to the * devil,” who acted in him: and the * devil,” not the ferpent, his inftrument,in what had been done, may be oie at in the latter. In the firft of thefe verfes, though Satan, hike was invifibly prefent in the body of the ferpent, is the agent really fpoken to; yet the * ferpent,” his inftrument only, may be the more immediate object of the curfe pronounced. As if it had been. faid, not mentioning the ‘ devil,” but the * fer- pent,” and hereby accommodating the language to the ** outward appearance,” thou haft been in- - ftrumental in drawing the man and the woman, whom I had made, into an act of open and dar- ing rebellion againft my authority. Asa token, therefore, of my difpleafure, and to guard againft the like difobedience for the future, I degrade you, the inftrument in this wickednefs, into an , ‘inferior fort of creature. Like alow reptile, you | -fhall hereafter crawl upon your belly, and feed’ upon the duft of the earth; and thus it fhall be with all that fhall derive their exiftence from |, you. Hw deriv There is no difficulty in fuppofing ** fuch ade-. gradation,” with refpect to the power of Al-” mighty God. He could as eafily, by {peaking only a word, alter the kind of any wie wrth give it at firft. ‘ iw gel t9 But it may feem ftrange, as the devil: eiirane a “agent” in the feduction of Adam and Bye, ‘the | ferpaae DISSERTATION? Wir. ot ferpent being nothing more than:the vifible form, or material figure, that'he actuated; I fay, ic may feem ‘ftrange, that the “‘ferpent,” in. this cafes fhould: be treated as though he had been worthyrof blame, when he really was not; or, in other words, that he fhould-be ** curfed’’ for do- ing what he was naturally incapable of doing, and ‘was in fact wholly done by another; efpecially, that he fhould be dealt with in fo fevere a man- ner, being obliged to fuffer ‘* a degradation of his kind,”; infomuch that he, and all that fhould proceed from him, fhould be soe ghend nope feeding upon duft. This I readily acknowledge to be a difficulty, and aigreat one too: nor is it capable of being folved upon the fuppofition, that the “ ferpeat” had ** merited” the difpleafure of God, or that he was reduced to this low ftate as a ** punifhment” for whathe had done; for he was no “ agent” in the cafe, and had really done nothing. It ought to be confidered in a quite different view. And perhaps we may, by one or two fimilar inftances, be led to conceive of it in a manner that will con-" fift with the wifdom, juftice, and goodnefs of the divine government. It is faid, in ver. 23. of this chapter, that God ‘*, curfed the ground.”, Not furely on account of its having deferved to be curfed ; for it was, in the nature of the thing, incapable of fuch defert. But he did this “¢ for man’s fake,” that it might. bean occafion of ** toil and forrow” to him, be- caufe he had finned, And might he not as well ae :) : © curfe 92 -DISSERTATION II. * curfe the ferpent?” Not on. account of any thing he had done to deferve this curfe, but ‘for. man’s fake” alfo, that it might be an oceafion of ‘* benefit” to him, by putting him upon his guard againft fin for the future, as he would now have before his eyes fuch a vifible teftimony of what God would do in refentment of it. The eyil brought upon the ferpeat might be; in a way of» difpenfation, for the good of man. ‘Theend in view here, according to this interpretation, is the reverfe of that intended by the ‘ curfe® brought upon the earth. - And it is remarkable, the curfe of the: earth is fpoken of in that part of the hiitory, which — relates to the ** punilhment” of man; whereas this is mentioned, where God is’ introduced as opening his ‘defiga of ‘* mercy”. towards him. What therefore is here reprefented as a curfe” either to the “* ferpent,” or the * devil” acting in him, ought to be looked upon as, in the fame “proportion, a “* bleffing” to man, of In like manner, it was a law in Ifrael of God’s making, and promulging, that * ifvan ox gore a manor a woman, that they die, the ox fhall be furely toned; and'his Sefh fhall not be eaten.” Exod. xxi. 28. It will not be pretended, ‘that the ox was a moral agent, or that death could be’in- Aigted on him asa ** punifhment” on account of what had happened. No; but the wifdom and - goodnefs of this law lay in this, that it was apro~ _ "per guard upon man’s life, a reafonable provifion 4 for his fafety and fecurity. How? Notfromany tendency it had to make other oxen afraid to gore 2 . fae DISSERTATION Il. 93 mento death; but as it was naturally fuited to put the owners of them upon due care to; guard them againft doing this -mifchief.. The good of men was the great aim of this law. And why might net the “ ferpent,” upon the like good intention, though not for any “ crime’ he could be charged with, bé reduced to a lower ftate of being 3 He was incapable, it is owned, of this degradation, in point of defert: but who can fay it was not wife and fit, with regard to the fafety of man? He might, had not God thus deait with him, have been a creature adapted, in his nature, to be far more mifchievous and hurtful to mans . kind, than he now is: or however this was, his ‘© degradation” in the prefence of Adam and Eve, who thought it was he that had beguiled them into fin, might; at leaft, as to them, be a vifible ex- ample of the difpleafure of God, and ferve as 4 b ftanding, memento” to put them upon their guard againft being again drawn afide by tempta- tion: And» to their “ pofterity,”? who, by after > revelations; knew more of this matter than they did, it might be of great ufe, as it obvioully points out the heinous nature of fin, and what may be expected as the confequence of it, when a . €reature that was nothing more than an * inftru- Ment’ actuated by another in tempting to the» commiuffion of it, was, in the righteous govern- ment of God, for wife:and good ends, deneaaes pea ~ inte a lower kind of being. — or This. ig all L am able to fay in bluse of oe pophiscied eiicultye: If any fhould think i it ine ecm Cclent;” 94 DISSERTATION IL. . cient, I will lay before them, ina brief fummary way, what Dr. Shuckford. has joffered, upon. another plan of interpretation, tojfet this part of the Mofaic hiftory in an eafy andunexceptionable light. Says he, the Hebrew particle, ¢i, rendered in ‘this place, ‘ becaufe,” might have been tranflated “although.” Several inftances, in illuftration of this, he has brought to view; and fome’ others might be added to them. Having obferved this, he confiders this ver. 14. as an apoftrophe de- livered to the ferpent in the prefence of Adam . and Eve, defigned to evince to them, what a folly, as well as crime, they had been guilty of, in being deceived by fo low a feducer. The words are, as if God had faid to the ferpent ; ¢ although” thou haft done this great! mifchief, «‘ yet thou art no lofty and refpeétable creature : «¢ Thou art one of the meaneft of all anirials: <‘ Thou art not raifed to any high form, but art “¢ a mere reptile, and fhall always continue to be ‘¢ fo: upon thy belly thou art madé to go, and € fhalt feed low all the days of thy life in the *< very duft. Adam and Eve had conceived high ¢* notions of the ferpent, ‘* above all the beafts of “< the field; which the Lord had made;” butGod _ «* here reprehends their foolith fancy, and fets be- | ‘* fore them, what their own eyes might have told . * them, that the ferpent was a creature, made ‘ fe only for a very low life, and that no fuch ele- ‘* vation as they imagined could ever hela? to, ; s¢ him,’’ mit Sal . ! feely | DISSERTATION I. 95 I freely own, this would be the beft account I have met with of the meaning of thefe words, ifeit could be well reconciled with the form of diétion here ufed, * curfed art thou’ above all _ cattle—upon thy belly fhalt thou go—and eat duft.”——One is naturally led, from this manner of {peaking, to think, that the ferpent was deprived of fomething he before poffeffed, and that the “ curfe” lay in this © deprivation.” The Dr. was fenfible of this difficulty, and in order to _ guard againft it has faid, “ to be ** curfed,” may be «¢ to have fome fignal mifchief or great evil, «< either wifhed to, or inflicted upon the perfon “ curfed. This indeed is the general fignification - “¢ of the word. But it ought to be confidered, «¢ whether it is contrary to the nature of the He- “© brew tongue, to call a thing ‘‘ curfed,” when *¢ fuch circumitances belong to it as are fo ex- “* tremely bad, that it might be deemed as un- « happy a thing, even as a moft fevere curfe, ta «© be under them, though they be not inflicted € as a particular judgment. In this fenfe the <¢ Jews, in our Saviour’s time, called their vul-- €© gar or ‘common people, who, they thought, « could not know thelaw, ‘* curfed.’—It is no «© unnatural way of fpeaking, to fay of poor, bar- «* ren, and unprofitable land, that it 1s ‘* curfed” *© ground, not only when God may have been s¢ pleafed to make: « fruitful land barren for the s* wickednefs of them that dwell therein,” as was particularly the cafe of the earth © thus curfed,” peor our firft parents havine finned; but alfo , “cc when nn" A yi ae eo Le . 96 DISSERTATION QW. - €¢ when the land is very fterile and unfruitful, ‘* though no particular curfe of God has ever been «* denounced againft it. Inthe Hebrew tongue, «¢ we often find things eminently excellent in << their kind, faid therefore to be of God; “* Ce= “¢ dars of Lebanon,” highly flourifhing, to be for <¢ that reafon of God’s planting: fo, on the con- <¢ trary, the word *¢ curfed” may as reafonably be « ufed, as it were in contraft, where God had << piven no appearance of a bleffing. Adam and: ic Eve were thinking highly of the férpent: the _) « defign of what God. now faid, was to fhew them ) ‘¢ that he was a creature deferving their loweft’ ' € notice: They thought him above any beaft of Pa the field which the Lord had made: The words | «¢ here fpoken were to tell them, that he was not <¢ above, but beneath all others; fo ctéeping and <¢ abject, that his make and form might be —— «<< of in terms, as if they were a ** curfe” upon ¢ him.” The reader is left to judge wherein, and how far, the Dr, has removed this difficulty. If he has really done it, I know of no reafon why we may not reft entirely fatisfied with the interpreta- tion he has given us. /~ The words that follow, in ver. 15. “¢ And I will | put enmity between thee and the woman, and be- | tween thy feed and her feed; it fhall bruife thy ‘head, and thou fhale bruife his heel; Thefe. | words, I fay, area continuation of what God faid. to the devil,” now prefent in thebody of the. si he ; and principally relate to his * total over- ‘ DISSERTATION IL. 99 » overthrow,” as the “tempter” and ‘* deftroyer”’ of man, by ** one” who fhould be of ** the feed of the woman:” Though the mode of diétion, conformably to that which had all along been ufed before, is fuch, that neither Adam or Eve may be thought to have had any other than alow and imperfect conception of what was hereby really meant. Not that they had reafon from thefe words then, | or any of-their pofterity fince, to imagine, that’ — the conteft, here fpoken of, between “the fer- pent and his feed,” and the ** woman’s feed,” lay in this, that ferpents would be apt to ** bite men’s heels, and men in return to break their heads.’2—~ It would be a difhonour to Mofes’s' characters confidered only as an hiftorian, to fuppofe he could intend any thing fo low and ridiculous ; efpecially, when writing upon matters of fuch in- terefting importance. And it would equally re- fleé&t upon the underftandings of our firft parents, to think them capable of talding his words in fo contemptible a fenfe. If they did not, by this _ time, begin to fufpect, that fome fuperior agent ‘might have ufed the ferpent in the temptation by which they were overcome; they, doubtlefs, un- derftood what was now delivered by God as im- porting, that there fhould be a conteft, and victory thereupon, in relation to, and agreement with, the main thing in view, their having been ** tempted” ‘and ‘* overcome” by the ferpent; that is to fay, they muft have underftood it as a conteft with the ferpent in his character as a iy H “ tempter” _ 98 DISSERTATION I. “‘ tempter” and “ feducef,” in which charaéters he fhould be conquered, as he. had a them. It ought to be remembered here, thefe sell were directed to the « devil,” invifibly prefent in ' the ferpent, and not to Adam or Eye. There is no neceffity therefore to fuppofe, that they under- “ftood, or that it was intended by God they fhould underftand, the full meaning of them.. It is true, as they were uttered in their hearing, and with a view, doubtlefs, to their receiving comfort from them under their prefent guilty ciapunilianiaiies it may reafonably be expected, they fhould fufii- ciently underftand them for this purpofe. If they underftood them only according to the con- ception they may be fuppofed to have had then of the ferpent, as one that had been the occafion of great damage to them, they would naturally and obvioufly have looked upon them as a kind pro- vifion of God for their fecurity in time to come; it being hereby engaged, that the power of the ferpent, not fimply.as fuch, but as a * tempter” and, ‘* feducer,” ponld be ‘ deftroyed.” By what — ** feed of the woman” this fhould be done, or when, or how, and after what manner, they had perhaps no idea at all. “The real truth is, the words were a declaration from God, fummarily, though obfcurely, pro- mifing, or predicting, the ‘* deftruéction” of the devil, that is, his. power, intereft, and kingdom, | 4) notwithftanding what he had done, by. ** one’? who fhould proceed from “the woman.”, Nat ae 2 ’ fe * MDESSERTATION I. 99 that Adam or Eve underftood much of the thing here promifed and predicted : Though thus much we know they did underftand by it, that it was an - inftance of the “ divine favour” towards them ; and, that their condition, on account of their fin, would not be deplorably fatal, as they had reafon to expect. For, in confequence of thefe words, it became certain to them, that they fhould have *¢ feed 3” which could not have been the cafe, if the “death threatened” had been, as it might have been, immediately inflicted on them. It is accordingly obferved, in ver. 23. that Adam © called his wife Eve, becauie fhe was the mo- ther of all living.” Let it be only fuppofed, as it all along is in the Mofaic hiftory, that Adam and Eve were not as yet fo far advanced in knowledge, but that they apprehended it was the * ferpent,” /ua virtute, that was their tempter, and the whole account will appear juft and natural, The remedy God _ had provided for their help, in their lapfed con- dition, is given in words adapted to the appear- ance of things, and their conceptions of them: nor is there any need'tofuppofe, that they under- ftood, or that it was intended they fhould have underftood, more than is literally contained in "them, confidered, as they ought to be, in con- nection with their guilty ftate, and the way in which they were brought into it. ~ But this is no reafon why we, who are: fa- _ voured with after-revelation, may not know much > more of the meaning of thefe words than they M Ha did ye ck , 100 DISSERTATION i. did, or it was defigned by God that an thould. It is now plain to us, though it was not to them, — that the ‘ devil” was the ** agent,” and the ‘ ferpent” his ¢¢ inftrument only” in the tempta- - _tion by which fin entered into the world, It is Velear to us, though it was not to them, that i© wicked men” are the feed of the devil, as have 5 ing him for their father; and that there now is, land all along has been, a * conteft between him and his feed,” and the ‘ feed of the woman.” It 2? man ;” as being, according to the flefh, ** made \_of a woman,” and bornof her body. In fine, we are at no lofs to fay, though they had not light ~ to fay it, that the * grand work” of Chrift, as 32 the **feed of the woman,” was to **deftroy the ' is now evident to us, though they were ignorant — of it, that ‘* Chrift” was the ** feed of the wo- devil,” that is, his defign as the ‘* tempter” of . men; and that he has been, and now is, carrying on this work, and will carry it on till it is com- pleted: though he has, and will meet with op- pofition herein from the * devil” and eOlis feed.” In confequence of thefe advances in Ledwtedge beyond the firft man and woman, by being ac- ‘guainted with after and more explicit promifes and predictions, together with the explanation of — them in their accomplifhment by Chrift, we are able, with a good degree of certainty, to fay; that the devil, under the name of the ferpent he aCtuated, is principally intended in the words — under x DISSERTATION IL tot under confideration; and that the “ bruifing the — ferpent’s head” by the ‘* woman’s feed” means, | in allufion to the method of killing ferpents by | ftriking at their heads, the ‘* deftruction of the | devil,” by Jefus Chrift; not his being, but his ‘ defign, his work and power, as the tempter and deftroyer of men. We have, in fhort, fufficient © reafon to think, that the plan of grace, the go- - fpel-fcheme of falvation, which has been fince ’ opened to the world, efpecially by the revelation of Jefus Chrift and his Apoftles, was the real truth here fummarily fpoken of. Not that Adam, or his pofterity in former ages, faw thefe things in the light we do, or that God intended they fhould. Perhaps it would not have confifted with | the intermediate fteps in the accomplifhment of this full promife, to have delivered it in a man- ner fo explicit that they might have thus under- ftood it. But this is no argument, that it did not really contain this meaning, or that we may not be rationally and fully convinced that it did; confidering it in connection with the fcheme of providence, as it has fince been opened, more efpecially in the revelation of God to his pro- phets, his Son Jefus Chrift, and the apoftles, and through them to us. We may, in confequence - of thefe advantages, be able very eafily and clearly to perceive, that this was the real intention of God in his promife, or prediction, in the hear- ing of the firft of our race, and that the words in _ which it is delivered are not only capable of this _ H 3 fenfe, G SS 102 DISSERTATION II. fenfe, but as obvioufly and fully expreflive of it as words fummarily could be. And, in truth, it — is with me one of the ftrongeft evidences of the © ancient promifes and predictions, are fo worded, that the fcheme of falvation, as it has been gra~ dually unfolding till thefe laft days, is very ob- . divinity of the Scriptures, that this, and other — vioufly, however comprehenfively, pointed out in them; infomuch, that a fober inquirer can fcarce fail of perceiving, that one and the fame fcheme has been in profecution from the days of ‘ Adam: which fcheme, however dark to former ages, is now, inthe timesof the gofpel, made — . fufficiently known to all men; though the evi- dence is not fo full as it probably will be, when mankind are got ftill further into the accomplifh- ment of the « grand purpofe of God,” generally declared in this original promife to Adam, ~~ Inftead of faying any thing farther to thew, ‘ that this 15th verfe, in the fenfe I have'given it, contains fummarily the gofpel plan of falvation — by Jefus Chrift, I would mention it as worthy of particular notice, that the method here provided for the relief of the firft pair, and their after- — _ pofterity, againft the hurtful confequences of the lapfe, was opened, though, at this time, in ob- — fcure and general terms only, BEFORE the ** fen- tence of condemnation” was pronounced. God ~ did not fee fit to proceed againft man in a “ judi- \ cial” way, till he had previoully given him juft | “reafon to hope, that he might, notwithftanding : a ad = DISSERTATION IL. 103 this procefs, be reinftated in his favour, and the ~ enjoyment of happinefs. It is eafy to perceive, that the’ ** judicial ins tence,” which was ‘¢ confequent’”’ upon this re- medial grace, ought not to be underftood ina ’ fenfe that will render this ‘* grace” null and voids but fo as that they may harmonioufly confift with each other. (And, in this view of the matter, not only our firft parents, but their defeendants alfo throughout all generations, muft be looked on, notwithftanding the lapfe, and the ‘ judi- cial” proceeding of God upon it, as under a di- vine eftablifhment of grace through Chrift, in confequence of which they may “ live,” - though they muft previoufly die, and that ‘forever’ in | the enjoyment of God’s favour.) A moft i import-—~ ant and interefting thought this! The apoftle Paul had it Oey in his view, when he fays, “¢ if through the offence of one, many be dead ; much more the grace of God, by one man Jefus Chrift, hath abounded to many, Rom. v.15. And again, ver. 18. “¢ As by the offence of one, judg- ment came upon all men to condemnation; even fo, by the righteoufnefs of one, the free-gift came upon all men to the juftification of life.” He re- fers likewife to this fame provifion of grace, when he fpeaks of ‘the creature,” the creature man more efpecially, as ** fubje&t to vanity ;” Rom. vill. 20. but “in hope.” Of what? It follows, of being ‘ delivered from the bondage of cor- -. ruption into the glorious liberty of the children © mn H 4 of 104 DISSERTATION IL of God.” The foundation of this ** hope’ was the ‘ promifed feed of the woman to bruife the ferpent’s head ;”" which promife was made BEFORE it pleafed God to ‘* fubject the creature” man to that ‘* vanity,” which is here fpoken of, So that neither the firft man or woman, nor any of their pofterity, are “ irreverfibly” under any doom of God, on account of the firft fins; but notwith- ftanding the utmoft that can be included in the «pronounced fentence” againft Adam and Eve, they are within the reach of God’s favour, and under a ‘* revealed conftitution of mercy,” con- ~ fox reiatsly to which they may finally ¢* inherit eter nal life.” . The way is now clear to ebnGtter the account Mofes has given us of the * judicial? confe- quences of the lapfe. And thefe are diftinétly telated, as lye refpect both the ** man” and the «< woman.’ The hiftery begins with the ** woman,” to whom God ‘ judicially” fays, ver. 16. ‘ F will greatly multiply thy forrow, and thy conception: In forrow fhalt thou bring forth children; and thy defire fhall be to thy hufband, and he fhall rule over thee.” The juft import of thefe words is fo well known to the female fex by unhappy experience, that nothing need be {aid in explana- tion of them, or to fhew that the daughters of Eve, in common with their mother, are Be ig concerned i in them, - git: Fis, | DISSERTATION U. 105 Only, it may be proper for their comfort to remark here, that women-kind may, upon the plan of grace through Chrift, fo behave under the forrows accompanying child-bearing, as to ‘make them turn out in the end an occafion of falvation to them, according to thofe words of — the apoftle Paul, 1 Tim. ii. 15. Notwithftand- | . ing, fhe fhall be faved in child-bearing ; if they | continue in “ faith, and charity, and holinefs \ with fobriety.” a _} Dr. Taylor, in his note on Rom, vii. 5. in fup- - port of an unufual fenfe he had put upon the pre- pofition diz, brings in this verfe as a parallel in- ftance. The apoftle’s words are, Subnoerar de die rexvoloviac, that is, fays the Doétor, “ the fhall be faved under, in the fate of, or notwithftanding the procreation of children; or although the be en- gaged in the procreation of children, in oppofition to a ftate of virginity.” But he has, without all doubt, mifunderftood the true force of the pre- pofition da, in this place, and herefrom given an entirely wrongturntothe apoftle’s thought. If conftrued here, in its ufual and moft proper fenfe, it will prefent us with a far more noble and figni- ficant meaning. I fhould render the paffage thus, ‘© Neverthelefs, fhe fhall be faved [in the full go- {pel fenfe of the word] 4y or through child-bear- ing; that is, as the words that immediately fol- low are, ‘¢ if they continue in faith, charity, and holinefs, with fobriety.” Itis obfervable, “as ‘the woman was firft in the tranfgreffion,” which are 106 DISSERTATION I. are the immediately foregoing wotds, it is ma- tural to fuppofe the apoftle might recur in his thoughts tg the ‘ curfe” pronounced againit the ** woman” herefor, namely, * I will greatly multiply thy forrow, and thy conception: In for- row fhalt thou bring forth children.” Upon which he adds, «* Neverthelefs, notwithftanding, fhe fhall be faved, [in the full gofpel fenfe of the word } dy, through, in confequence of, child-bearing ; if they continue in faith, &c.” As if the apoftle _ manner of it fincé the lapfe, inftead of proving a “curfe,” fhallbe an ‘« occafion” of everlafting falvation toher in heaven, if the does but make a \ wife and good ule of the forrows and dangers fhe is liable to pafs through in this circumftance of life; improving them as a means in order to her -had faid, ‘‘ her bearing of children,” as to the continuing in faith, and a holy, fober conduét of ~ herfelf in life. This text appears to me an in- fpired illuftration of the ‘ way” or * method” in which the ‘¢ curfe upon woman-kind” may, - in confeguence of the grace of God through Jefus Chrift, by being improved wifely as a ** difcipli- nary trial,” be turned into the greateft * bleff- ing,” their falvation in the eternal world. To un- derftand by this ** falvation,” as Mr. Locke, Tay- lor, and moft commentators do, ** being carried fafely through the forrows and dangers of child- bearing,” appears to me to give it a compara- tively low meaning. Befides, it ought to be re- membered, it was not ‘¢ death” in child-bearing — . that DISSERTATION Il. 107 that the woman was fubjected to, but only * for- row.” Had it been “death,” inthe fame fenfe in which it was forrow, there could: not have been a multiplication of the fpecies; there was therefore neither occafion, nor reafon, for the apoftle’s faying, ‘* fhe fhall be faved,” meaning hereby, fhe fhould not in this way fee death. Moreover, this meaning doth not confift with the conditional provifo that follows, “ if they con- tinue in faith, and charity, and holinefs, with fobriety.” For it is true in fact, that infidel” and “ vicious,” as well as ‘* believing” and “© virtuous,” women are, inthis fenfe, “ faved in child-bearing,” and perhaps there is no vifible diftin€&tion between the one and the other. a temper of mind, and behaviour in life, that may be {uited to the circumftances in which God | _ has placed us. — Our trial for another ftate pro-_ I may not improperly ‘add here, though it fhould be thought a little out of place, that the «¢ fufferings,” of whatever kind, the human race are fubjeéted to in confequence of the lapfe, may, in the fame way, be made an “ occafion” of fpi- ritual and eternal good, by parity of reafon. They are equally capable of being improved to the purpofes of “ holinefs;” and, wherein they, are fo, they will equally turn to the ‘¢ falvation” of thofe, who make this wife and good ufe of them. And, in truth, the fpecial work we are i called to in this world of forrow and death is, to _ take occafion, from the evils we futfer, to exhibit | perly oe - ° Sl oe i ‘ , = a? ; - j 108 «=9DISSERTATION I. _ perly lies in the ** occafions” that’ are herefrom given us for the acquirement and exercife of | meeknefs, humility, faith, patience, content- | ment, and refignation to the pleafure of the all- { wife and righteous Governor of the univerfe. And if, upon being tried, it appears that we have made this chriftian improvement of the fufferings we have been called to pafs through, we fhall, in the end, in fpite even of death itfelf, of the mercy : "7 of God, through Jefus the Saviour, be crowned A _- with eternal life. The woman having received her ‘ judicial fentence,” God is now reprefented as pronouncing the man’s; and he does it in the following words: Ver. 17. “And unto Adam he faid, Becaufe thou - \ing, thou fhalt not eat of it: curfed is the ground for thy fake; in forrow fhalt thou eat of it all the _ days of thy life.” . 18. “Thorns alfo and thiftles fhall it bring: | forth to thee; and thou fhale eat the herb of the field.” 1g. Inthe fweat of thy face fhalt thou eat “bread, till thou return to the ground: for out of it waft thou taken; ee duft thou art, and unto \ @uft thou fhalt return.’ The firft part of this fentence contains. God's “ curfing the ‘ground for man’s fakes” that i is, Ah that / haft hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and haft - \ eaten of the tree of which I commanded thee, fay- that it might he an occafion of * toil and forrow., to him an his days,” by its being fpontaneoufly / productive, not of proper food for him, but of| «© thorns and thiftles,” to increafe his labour, and_) give him vexation and trouble. Dr. Taylor, in his fcripture doctrine of origi- ~ nal fin, calls upon. us to obferve here, p. 19. _ DISSERTATION Il, 109 that, “ though the ferpent is * curfed,” and the ~~ “ oround is ‘* curfed,” yet there is no ‘* curfe? ** upon the ‘ man,” peats the fame remark again and again, in his fup- plement; but furely upon infufficient confidera- tion, p. 46—50. ‘“ Was the Lord difpleafed againft the ground? Was he angry againft the earth ?”” Was the earth a capable object of his re- fentment ? What he. now did, moft certainly ter- . minated on man: He was the object in God’s view; and if there was any ‘« curfe” in the cafe, he was the ‘¢ perfon curfed.”. When it is faid to the people of Ifrael, if they would not be obe- dient, * curfed fhall be the fruit of thy iand,” Deut. xxviii. 15. 18. would any one be led to think, the land indeed-was curfed, but no curfe was hereby intended to fall on that people? It would be fhockingly abfurd to put fuch a con- ftrudtion on the words ; but not lefs fo, in the text before us; efpecially, as the ‘‘ man” is named,— and it is exprefsly faid, that it was ‘‘for his fake,” that is, on his account, in confideration of his offence, and as a teftimony of the*Divine dif- piealiane acainft it, that ‘ the earth was curfed,” ~ that. ( or the ** woman.” He re- > a Ah 4 \ | i i : 1% DISSERTATION if. | ’ that is, made an “ occafion” of toil and forrow to him all his days. © ~ But fays the Doétor, * forrow, labour, and death, are not inflited under the notion of a 4 4 curfe,” p. 19. And -again, though thefe are © “‘ confequences of Adam’s fin, they are really a “benefit,” p. 21. It is readily owned, in agreement with what has been before obferved, that thofe * evils,” upon the foot of grace through Chrift, the promifed feed, are capable of being improved ‘~fo as to turn out in the end for good. And fo are all the judgments of God wherewith he vifits , the fins of men. But do thofe teftimonies of his vengeance lofe their nature as ‘* judgments” on his part, and “ real evils’? on theirs, becaufe they may be an * occafion” of that repentance which — 2 fhall iffue in falvation? When God threatened the Jewifh nation, in cafe they would not do his commandments, with famine, the peftilence, thé fword, and a difperfion into all parts of the earth, did he threaten them with a benefit? And when thofe threatnings were for their fins carried into execution, did he inflict a blefting on them? When he threatened, in particular, that, if they were difobedient, ‘* they fhould be curfed in the field,” Deut. xxviii. 16. did he hereby intend that the “© Geld fhould be curfed,? but that he meant thereby a ** real benefit” to them? This is what the Dottor fays, not virtually and conftruétively, but in‘direct words, in however ftrange a 8 it ar make the er appear. " Befides, DISSERTATION Il. ots Befides what has been already faid, it ought to be remembered, God was now denouncing againft ‘man that ‘judgment to condemnation,” which, in its confequences, has deeply affected the whole human race ; rendering their life on earth, a life of toil, trouble, and forrow. And fhall this be thought a “* condemnation to a bleffing?” Can it reafonably be looked upon in this light? When God faid to Adam, ‘in the day thou eateft there- of, thou fhalt furely die ;” did he mean to guard him againft difobedience by threatening him with a benefit? And yet, this he muft have meant, if the ** judgment” that faftened on him the ap- pendages, forerunners, and occafions of death, was a condemnation toa benefit. The Scripture no where fpeaks any thing like this; but always confiders the matter under the notion of a “ con- demnation” to that which was in itfelfa “ real and great evil.” And this it might be, though we allow, atthe fame time, that it was capable, of the mercy of God through Chritt, of Being an “ occafion” of good in the end. The undoubted truth is, this ‘* curfe of the-~ ground,” in confequence of which man became fubjected to a life of toil and forrow, till he fhould return to duft, was a “ judicial” teftimony of - God’s difpleafure againft the fin he had commic- ted; and ought therefore to be confidered as a ‘* curfe” that terminated on~**-him n,” and. not on the ground, which was. dead ‘and ~ “unperceptive -matter. This is OF idea obFioully: and certainly TREO! : con- : XY oF LON a THE pRoPeRT Ne ¥ on Sf, ;ARY. OF UNI Oa “HE use Le 3 “aw oY. “¢} a : —~ "man’s fake; _ fitted to be an occafion of thofe « labours and DISSERTA TLON oil. crv to.us by what Mofes has faid,. It would e to make him {peak in a manner never be re heard of, to fuppofe he was telling us, t , upon man’s fin, and God’s condemning him, for it, he was really ** bleffing” him, by infliing 9 on. him that which was Sb to his advantage, adins fi “The “ earth” then was‘ curfed” by God, for ” or, asa. * curfe to him,’? by. rind tows,”. which would fubjeé& him toa ftate of fu fering all his days. “ It is an obvious deduction he hences.that the ‘¢ earth,” by being “ curfed,”. mutt have pafied under fome confiderable change for: the worfe. It could not become a means of * toil, forrow, and vanity” to man, if it had not been changed into a {late very different from thatit was in before his fall; that is, a ftate lefs. fitted to give him pleafure, and more adapted to yield him pain and grief. Had the original ftate of the earth been "whew it is at prefent, there would have ~ been no need of a “ curfe” from God, in order to its <‘ bringing forth thorns and thiftles,” that i it might be an occafion of toil and trouble. And as the earth was ‘ curfed” by God upon this ex- prefs defign, that it might be adapted to be the productive caufe of labour and grief, it muft fol- low from: heace, that its condition before the lapfe was not the fame it has been fince. fit was, what intelligible meaning can be pits wep the curfe ? * Piste y aad DISSERTATION If. 13 tis the truth of fact, that the conftitution of the earth is now fuch, £0 fitted to be the occa- fional caufe of “toil and forrow” in innumerable Ways and kinds, that there is no fuch thing as living in the world, but under fuffering circum- ftances, in a lefs or greater degree. And was this the ftate of the earth when God created the firft_ of our race? Mofes declares the contrary; afcrib- ing it to their “ fin,” and the “curfe” thereby - brought upon the earth, that it has been fo changed as to be the occafion of their * labour and forrow.” And the Scripture, in other places, gives us the fame account. The apoftle Paui declares, that “* the creature,’’ Rom. viii. 20. emi- nently the creature man, ‘ was made fubject to vanity; not willingly, but by reafon of him who fubjeéted him ;” that is, in confequence of the «¢ curfe,” which altered the earth from what it was in its former ftate. So, when the apoftle John fays, in his defcription of the happy ftate of good men in the refurrection-world, that ‘ there thalt_ be no curfe there,” Rev. xxii.3. the propriety of his remark is evidently grounded on thofe occa- __ ‘ fions of forrow, mankind at prefent are fubjeéted to, by reafon of the “‘ curfe’’ that is on the earth: and if the “*curfe” had not made a vaft change in the earth for the worfe, how fhall we account for thofe paffages in the facred books, which fpeak of the ftate of good men in the other world, under the emblem of a ‘* paradifaic” one? Our Saviour faid to the thief on the crofs, “This I | Sa 4 )6D SSERTATWON 1 day fhalt thou be wich mein, paradife.” . The apoftle Paul fays of himfelf,,** Iwas caught up.to paradife.?, And in the book ef the Revelations, the promife ‘to him that overcometh,” is, <¢,he fhall.eat of the tree of life in the midft of the pa- radife of God.” The happy, ftate deferibed, in thefe texts, under the refemblance of paradife,” is much greater than can be enjoyed .on_, this earth, as it is now conftituted; and confequently, the “ ancient paradife,” from whence the allufion is borrowed, muft have been greatly different from our earth in its prefent condition, The *¢ ancient paradife,” it is true,.was a particul {pot of the earth, felected by God for the. habita- tion of man in innocency; but there. is no reafon to think, there was any effential difference be- tween this fpot of the earth, and the earth in com- mon. To be fure, if the reft of the earth, i n that day, was fimilar to the earth in, this, act ‘cure : from God, in order to its being an occafion of “ Jabour and fotrow,” was quite needlefs: merely an expulfion from * paradife” would, in this c cale, have anfwered all the ends of the * curfe.” So that it fhould feem a point beyond all reafonable controverfy, that this earth of out’s, by, reafon of the “curfe” upon it for Adam’s fin, is fo chan; ed from what it was before, as to be adapted to give rife to that *¢ toil and trouble,” which man hag git fince been fubje&ed to. .. Mr. Whifton, in his. theory of the earthy fup- pofes, and very probably, as I imagine, that. the external ! DISSERTATION Wi fg external ftate of nature was quite» ifferent « be- fore” ‘the fall, from what it has been <¢ fince :” that’ the feafons wete then equable, or: gently and gradually diftinguifhed from each other, without thofe extremes of heat and cold,-and fud- den-changes of them from one to the other we aré now fubjected to, and to our great difadvan- tage: ‘that the earth was betrer adapted then to the purpofes of vegetation; producing many fpe- cies of trees, plants, herbs, and flowers, we know nothing of at prefent; advancing thofe we are ftill acquaifted with to a far more noble degree of. -perfection ;. and not invigorating the feeds which now grow into thorns and thiftles, or elfe meli- orating their juices fo as to alter their nature from what it is now, and in this way rendering that & toil” sneedlefs which is, oceafioned, by them: That the air was clear, purey fubtle, tranfparent, and perfectly fitted for refpiration, and its other ufes, whether in the animal or vegetable king- dom, without thofe grofs fteams, chialasiens, and, heterogeneous mixtures of various kinds, which are the occafion of numberlefs pernicious and fatal effects, which take place, either fenfibly or infenfibly, in our prefent world; and, in a word, that the conftitution of things was then fuch, as naturally tended, ;conformably to fettled connections, to make this earth a * paradifaic” one, in oppofition to that “ vanity, toil, and for- set row,” ending in ** death,” the “ curfe” has fince ) epee it to be an occafion of to all its inhabit- ‘ei 2 eo Se ’ r j » ‘ee > 116 “DISSERTATION th ants, in confequence of the lapfe of the ond mat Adam. ~ .T will not affirm, that the * mechibigat eau affigned by this learned theorift for ‘the differ ent ftate, of things “ before” and “ fince”” the fall, are thofe God was pleafed, in fact, t to cO= operate with, in order to their produétion ; “but this I will venture to fay, that the ftate of things he has reprefented, as what might be owi thefe “* caufes,” is both intelligible, and oving upon the ftricteft philofophical reafoning 5 ‘and that we have therefrom a juft account, how the «< curfe,” the Scripture fpeaks of, might come upon the earth in confequence of the fin of t firt parents of men, and change it” ‘from | its former ftate, making it, in the natural courfe of _ things, the pbesien of that * vanity, toil and forrow,” we are now fubjected to, and ren , groan to be delivered from. And that the * earth” has been really « hy changed,” to whatever caufe it is ae whether the immediate power of God, or his ~ power concurring with fecond caufes, . cis, he. have feen above, the plain meaning of whi fes has faid in his hiftory of the fall. And t »fup- pofition of fuch a‘ change” in the fate of na- ture, will beft account for what we meet with, de- feriptive of a former ‘* golden-age,” im _ ps writers, who lived in different parts of the he world See the teftimonies. produced to this | purpc by ‘Mr. Whifton, and Dr, Burnett, in their: - theories of | pISSERT ATION Th ny a earth 5 ; as alfo what has been more largely ed upon this head by the author of Cyrus, in his, principles of natural and revealed religion. It is not eafy to conceive, how the notion of a ; former “ golden-age,” fo-agreeable in the main _ to the idea we are naturally led, from the Mofaic ftory, to form of the “ paradifaic” ftate of the earth, fhould fo generally. prevail in fo many dif- ferent parts of the world, unlefs there had been fome foundation for it in the truthof fact. In this cafe, it might have been handed dowt by tradition from the beginning ; and the tradition, ‘upon this point, would perhaps have been more — particular and perfeét, had it not been for thofe “*€ conflagrations of books” which have -happen- “ed, at one time and another, to the great regret of all lovers, efpecially of ancient learning. ~, The other part of the ¢¢ judicial feritence” paf- ed upon the “man” is, “duftthouart, andunto | duft thou fhalt return.” The thing meant, to fpeak concifely and plainly, is this, that he fhould § die,” as it wasi‘‘ threatened” he thould, * he | was difobedient to the voice of God. _ _ But the important queftion is, What are we to underftand by this < death ?” ine F ‘To which I would fay, there is no warrant, as “it. appears to me, from any thing” Mofes has re- lated, to include more in: its meaning, than the of! of ‘that life, wich the’ whole enjoyment de- ‘pendent on it, which he had juft ‘received from : God,’ and would not have been deprived of, had | F3 he 4. 118) DE SSR’! ATA On Ww - hévabftained from eating of sthe forbidden *tteew Phisy: 'as.I apprehend, is thevfenfe inewhich thet | words death” is to be taken ine the *¢ original) threatening: ” This is its fenfey%as éxplained’and) ' Wluftrated sin the “:fentence of condemnation” | ‘And'this*isvits | fenfe alfo, when this fentence.is SS Pee a Spoken of. as “* carried‘into execution.) Thatiwe may the more readily take in a clear idea oft what ‘may! berofferéd upon this: i pi matter; “let ‘it beobferved, * emetic 1: “)SThe body of man, though fdeisee by the: wifs dom of Godout of the duft of the ground ‘into a curioufly organifed figure, was ftill, dead, fenfe> lefs, inactive’ matter, till ic pleafed God to ‘infpire irwith “life.” So the account runs, GenJil. 9. $@And the*Liord’God foriried man of the duft of the groundj*and breathed into ‘his: noftrils‘the breath of ‘life; and man becdine a living “foul.” Whether we underftand, by ‘God’s © breathin into man the breath of lifes? the infafion of what. / wevcall the “ foul,” or * fpirit;” or whatever elfe can be fuppofed to be intendéd-by it, it was'this difplay of divine power that gave him ** life,” that is, ,conftitured him a being capable of com- -\ munication with the world he had made ina way of perception and enjoyment. Itis accordingly added in the words that immediately follow, ‘ver. 85-9.‘ And the Lord God planted a gardén eaftward in Eden, and there put he the madi -whotn he had formed. And out of the grou the Lord Ged to sini every tree that isla $25 to DISSERTATION! IL ceafing to be any more this active animating prin- ciple in the body, gives the true and proper notion / ofdeath. This accordingly isthe thing meant by_ . the * death’’ with which Adam was threatened. It ~ was, that he fhould lofe that principle which ani- “mated his body, and made him capable of percep- tion and enjoyment; infomuch, that he fhould be the fame fenfelefs matter he was beforeGod'breath- _ ‘ed into him the breath of life. It is not eafily con-~ ¢eivable howAdam could have thought of death in ‘any other light: neither can we, if, difengaging ourfelves from all previous biafles, we keep to she fingle force of the word as ufed by Mofes. » And we fhall have confirmed reafon to under- ner the word ‘* death” in this fenfe, if we turn our attention to the « judicial fentence,” which ‘God paffed upon Adam in confequence of his lapfe. It runs in that ftrain, Gen. iil. 19. ‘ till ‘thou return to the ground ; for out of it waft thou “taken ; OF duft thou art, and unto duft thou fhale ‘return.’ None will deny, that thefe words bear an evident reference to the before recited account “of man’s formation, and confequently, when it is “here declared, Gen. ii. 19. that “he thouldre- “turn to duft out of which he was taken,” we are “dire@ly | led to conceive of his punifhment as con- ‘fitting i in this, hamely, ** his reduction to unor- ganifed unanimated duft,” or, in other words, «© his ceafing to be that living creature” God had him, and becoming as incapable of per- oxen ception oe, ‘argued, if it be obferved yet further, that - thing the Jews, for whofe inftruétion ‘the’h 124 DISSERTATION geption, ashe was before his)< orgapiled. uf rag animated with a principle of liffey igo.) oo sy fines The. idea, we have given of this «% ” isfats ors ftrengthened from the, § -emecepion’) eh the 24 Age > ae bi «all the days that Kean lived a5 ae and thirty years, and he died ;’ ” that i is, ai pe ong ee him to. The « death’ 4 he ‘is here have fuffered, is plainly oppofed to the m3 * life” : he had enjoyed, which was a life ‘here on 1 earth 3 confequently, there i is no reafon to. think, ¢ oa td --. more is meant by this « death” than the “ “ priv fe i? tion ‘of that life he had, for many years, been ‘ 1OW SE poffefion ag ‘Itmay add fome weight to what has been abdve *¢ deitruétion of life here on earth” was the ¢ of the fall was more immediately ‘wrote, “could ; underftand by this word * death.’”® For though ‘it is very frequently ufed by Mofes, and as ie ing to denote a * threatened penalty,” a never fignifies. more than “a period to the | ‘prefen life: The texts to this purpofe are very | rous. Thus, when Abimelech gave it in ¢ cha fying, Gen. xvi, 2, “he that toucheth t DISSERTATION I 125 or"is' wife, fhall furely be put to death ;” the ; 7 in the original, are the fame as in the which diiarded the law givento Adam in pare life. So in Exod. xxi. 12. 15, 16, 17, where it is ordained, that the perfons guilty of the crimes there ‘fpecified, ** fhall furely die,”. the original words are ftill the fame; as alfo in Levit. KK. 2. 9, 10, 11, 12, 13.15. and in other places, af- moft beyond number ; in all which places, the « death” threatened, is that punifhment which was to be inflicted by the civil magiftrate, and therefore can mean nothing more than “ the lofs of Jife here on earth ;” for the power of man is confined within thofe limits. How then fhould the Jews underftand, by the original threatening, any. more than «€ the deftruétion of that life et, was at, prefent enjoyed?” This isthe meaning of the word death” elfewhere in the writings of Mofes ;. and from hence they muft have been led to conclude,-.when it was told Adam, “ he fhould die,” if he eat.of the forbidden tree; thar the shine ocaat was, shat he fhould ceafe.to continue im ‘ aliving creature.” And more than this we have AQ warrant from Mofes, or any other of the facred writers, to include in the ;primitive threatening, exprefied in thefe words, <‘ thou fhalt furely die.” Phe he plain.truth is, man_is 2 compoun nd of “« OF 2 3 matter,” rf and am animating. prin- - eb tae fale eo is i: clofe and intimate a a relat ion, uni ion, or 2 con- eh 260 «=©6DISSERTATION Th, conneétion, that the ‘body is/a mere ufelefs mas chine, only as it is aétuated by the foul; neither can the foul, conformably to ‘the prefent Jaws oF nature, exert itfelf but ‘by the body as its inftru- ment. This is our frame. Thus!we are con~ ftituted Jiving agents, beings capable of “percep- tion in the world God has placed usin.) ‘Now «¢-death” is the deftruction—of what?* Not of the exiftence either of foul or body; but ofthe “re- _ lation” ‘there is between them, and their fube — fervient fitnefs” to influence each other to the purpofes of life; or, in other words, **death” is the deftruCtion of that “« mode of exiftence” with _ which, in conformity to fettled laws, perception and life are conneéted by the God of nature. _ And this deftruction” is the thing meant!!in the law given to Adam, and’tis the urmoft it can reafonably be explained to means*- 9 © hh The “ foul,” itis true, or, what I mean here- by, the ‘ animating principle” in man, being, as I fuppofe, a fpiritual immaterial fubftance, ‘res mains ‘ undiffolved’? after its difanion from the body ; but it may ftill, in virtue of this difunion, » be unfitted for thofe exertions wherein confift the © idea, and benefit of life. Some * {pecial mode of exiftence” may be neceflary even for ** fpirits,’” at leaft fuch fpirits as our’s are, ‘in order to their being in a ftate of * actual” life. Perhaps the foul, though it is immaterial and “indiffoluble, may be fo affected in its ** manner of exiftence” | he ; ee * ; ‘ rid: > a - “ee an hs ‘ ~— “i = a Wa . - ‘ “ - - J " — —— - a DISSERTATION If ray- by.death; as-to be hereby ‘as’ truly difqua- lified.as the body, though not in- the’ fame way, for the proper functions and operations: of lifes:And had it not been for the “ promife through Chrift,”’ which took place immediately after the lapfe, the foul would have exifted in ite feparaté ftate without “actual” life, as truly as the body, though in a different way. ' Neither Mofes, nor any of the infpired writers, do setae us fo think otherwife of the matter. ‘Thus much, indeed, we are certainly taught, if not by Mofes, yet by fome ‘of the other facred penmen; that both ** foul” and “* body,” notwith- ftanding’ “* death,” the penalty of the law put into’execution according to its full meaning, are ftill:capable of being again related to each other, and sof becoming the ‘fame percipient indivi- duals’? they were before the infliction of death. Tevis upon this ‘‘ capacity” that the * gofpel feheme»of redemption” is effentially grounded. Je does not fet afide the threatened death, in res gardyof any one thing included in it; but fup- _ pofes its full execution, conformably to the true Meaning of the law, and takes place in confe- quence thereof. ‘* Death,”’ whatever the Script- ture means by it, whether refpecting the foul or body, is actually infli&ted upon every fon and «daughter of Adam? nor do any of them partake’ of that ** reftoration” which is oppofed to thisdeath, till they have really fuffered it, And yc this ee, OS = 4 x Tea 7" + 128 DASSERTATION at, i! this is a ftrong confirmation of the idea we hails given of death, the fanétion of the law man was _ originally under, viz. that it means nothing more than the deftruction of that * mode of exiftence,” — with which life is connected by the eftablifhment of God. In this view of the matters it is eafy to conceive how thofe who fuffer. death, may, by the wifdom and power of God, be brought back again to life. Nothing more is neceffary in order to it, but their being reftored to their. former mode of exiftence, or to one analogous to it; 5-hich, perhaps, ' is the precife idea of the ita ‘Fection. j oa a ° 4 ian . athe) e, a4 { rh 44 4444 oa rae <9 Ei ; 132 We OS29 2 J j ’ eur ; + oh a N Lae) {ay he ; » «foun! ate , (UVa Re PAP. | : a8 mo A : — oe ¥ ‘ : +, “aa sh oA ‘ie *. / DISSERTATION ATE. Of the Pofterity of the one man a as deriving exiftence from him, notin bis. INNOCENT, Jut LAPSED fate. T is an undifputed truth, among thofé who have faith in the Scriptures as a_ revelation from God, not only that the human race de- fcended from Adam as their firft progenitor, but that exiftence was communicated.to them in his LAPSED ftate; in confequence of which they have all along been, now are, and in all coming gene- rations will be, fubjected to a variety of evils, grievous in their nature, and abfolutely unavoid- able, by the all-wife, righteous, and holy appoint- ment of God, Whar thefe are, wecan learn from the Sacred Books only; to which, therefore, we muft repair, if we would know, with any degree of certainty, wherein, and in what fenfe, we are fufferers by means of the offence of the one man, our com- mon father. The apoftle Paul is, of all the facred writers, the moft explicit, and particular, in fpeaking of K the 430 DISSERTATION ML. the ORIGINAL Lapse, and of its confequences as extending to the whole human kind. Noone can read his Epiftles, and not at onee perceive, that, in his view, the gofpel {cheme of mercy ftands in clofe connection with the unhappy ftate mankind univerfally are brought into; by means.of th ¢ lapfe of our firft crccanitnt No intelligible meaning can be put upon the following paffages in his Epiftle to the Corinthians and the Romans, ‘upon any other fuppofition: ‘¢ Since by man came death, by man alfo' came the refurreétion from the dead, For as in, Adam all die, even fo in Chrift fhall all be made alive. By one man, fin entered into the world, and death by fin; and » fo death hath paffed upon all men, for that all men have'finned. As by the offence of one, jude- ment ‘came upon all men to condemnation; even fo, by the righteoufnefs of one, the free gift came upon all men to the juftification of life” The commentators, and other writers, I have had opportunity to confult, have evidently taken . either too much, or'too little; into his meaning, in what he has faid with reference to our partici- pation in ‘Adam’s lapfe; and by this means, big have all, in’ their turns, as it appears to me, made him fpeak, either abfurdly; or, at beft, leis clearly and pertinently, thanthey might otherwife have done. WDET ‘Thofe who interpret him, when he fans} that, “ by the difobedience of one,” the one man Adam, ‘* many were made finners,” as defigning to DISSERTATION III. 138 to fuggelty that his FAULT was.made theirs, or that they really sinnep when he eat of the for- bidden tree, do, without all doubt, apply a fenfe to his words that is grofsly abfurd; may I not fay, impoffible to be true? For fin, which is a moral irregularity, ftands in neceffary connection, with the agent who commits jit, and muft therefore, in the nature of things, be PERsonaL.) One man - may be a SuFFERER, in confequence of ‘the fin of another; but one man cannot be cuitty of ano- ther man’s fin. Sin, as.it effentially fuppofes moral agency, is, at all times, and in all worlds, confined to the agent that omits fome action he fhould have done, or does one he fhould not have done; and cannot be transferred, any more than moral agency itfelf. There. can be no reafonable room, one would think, for difpute upon this head, where common fenfe is allowed its proper exercife. Nay, even in the cafe of a LEGAL RE- PRESENTATIVE, who acts in the behalf of others, the aét of the reprefentative, morally confidered, is PERSONAL. The confequences of it only, whe- ther good or bad, extend to thofe he reprefents. So that, fhould it be even allowed, that Adam was the CONSTITUTED REPRESENTATIVE of his pofterity, it would not follow herefrom, that they _ were guilty of his fin; but only that they might be /ufferers in confequence of it. Thofe alfo who reprefent the apoitle Paul to have taught, that mankind come into exiftence MORALLY CORRUPT Creatures, as having derived K 2 from 132 DISSERTATION If. — from their firft father a pofitively sinFuL NATURE, are equally miftaken in the fenfe they put upon _ his words, For Adam was no more than the me- dium, or inftrument, by or through whom God communicated to men the nature they have, fimply — as it comes from him; for which reafon, it thould feem an impoffibility, that it fhould be stnrut ; becaufe it is precifely, as derived to them, that © nature, which God, through Adam, conveyed to them, without the intervention of any chine of their own. - Te is true, they may come into being with ani- _ mal tendencies, which may prove the occafion of " their finning themfelves; yea, they may have thefe. tendencies in fuch a degree, as that the danger. may be great, exceeding great, left they fhould hereby be enticed, and drawn afide; nay, further, ’ thefe animal tendencies may be converted into SINFUL PRINCIPLES of action, as indeed, God knows, they too often are in faét. But as they exift in our conftitution, upon our firft entrance into the world, it cannot be thought they fhould — be MORALLY coRRuPT, becaufe they are fuch, and only fuch, as the great Creator was pleafed to give us, previous to any agency of our own. ~ On the other hand, thofe who fpeak of man- kind as fubjected indeed to mortality, by 1 means of - Adam’s lapfe, but (till deriving from him the like perfection of nature which he had while innocent, alike fitting them for a life of conformity to the law of God; I fay, thofe wha exhibit fuch an account of: the DISSERTATION Uk 135. the conftitution of human nature fince the lapfe, do as evidently put a wrong fenfe on the apoftle Paul’s writings; lofing fight of that grace which he defigns to exalt, at leaft, in one of its eminent branches, and putting it out of their power to give that force to his reafoning, in many places, which it juftly carries with it. Two things, with refpe& to the ftate of man- kind, fince the lapfe of the one man Adam, and in confequence of it, appear very obvious to an attentive unprejudiced mind, upon reading the New Teftament books, efpecially the Epittles of St. Paul. One relates to their fubjection univer- fally to a life of vanity and forrow, ending in death. The others, to fuch imperfection of nature as renders it impoffible, upon she foot of mere law, that they fhould attain to a righteoufnefs that could avail to their juftification before God. The eight firft chapters of the Epiftle to the Romans are effentially grounded on this reprefentation of ~ _the ftate of Adam’s pofterity fince the lapfe. The thread of reafoning is not only perplexed, but its ftrength deftroyed, upon any other fuppofition; it being the main defign of the Apoftle to thew, that the grace of God, through Jefus Chrift, is as truly intended for the help of our nature brought into a difadvantageous ftate in confequence of the lapfe, as to affect our deliverance from the vanity © and mortality to which we have been fubjected. And it is this thought, and this only, that will | ive connection to his difcourfe, and force to the K 3 * arguments BC 1344 DISSERTATION Mt, arguments he has largely infifted on; as we may” afterwards have occafion to make abundantly evi- ~ dent. ' In order therefore to our entertaining ajuft idea of the true ftate of mankind fince the lapfe, we fhall be diftin&t in confidering both the mortality, and imperfeétion of nature, to which we are uni- verfally fubjected: endeavouring, at’ the fame time, to give fuch an account of each as may fit eafy on the mind, and filence the objeétions that would’ reprefent either of them as unreafonable - and abfurd, difhonorary to God, or unjutt to man. Only before I proceed, I would interpofe an important thought, which it would be highly ex- pedient we fhould heedfully attend to, through the whole of what may follow. It is this: the MOMENT Adam eat of the forbidden tree, he be- came liable to the threatened death, and had it not been for the difplay of grace, he would 1mme- piaTeLy have been deprived of life; in which cafe he could not have had pofterity. And canit be imagined, that grace would have fufpended the operation of the threatening, and continued him in life fo as to have pofterity, unlefs it had been the intention of God, that they fhould be dealt with, as he himfelf was, in a way, not of rigorous juftice, but of gracious mercy. It ought not to be fuppofed ; nor will the fuppofition at all I confitt with the exprefs declarations of Scripture u u the points “Tt is obfervable, the fentence of « con- _ demnation DISSERTATION Ill is demnation occafioned by the lapfe, is {poken of as POSTERIOR to the promife of aSaviour. God firft declared, that ‘* the feed of the woman fhould bruife the ferpent’s head” and after this pro= nounced the fentence, ** duft thou art, and unto duft thou fhalt return.” . This promife, without all.doubt, was intended as a remedy againft the difadvantages which Adam had brought upon himfelf, and confequently upon his pofterity, by means of his “* one offence;’’ and, in virtue of it, they were all placed under a di/penfation of grace; that is, put into fuch a ftate, as that, through “¢ the feed of the woman,” it became poffible for them to be as happy as Adam would have been, had he -continued-in innocency; which could not have been the cafe, but by a new eftablifhment upon the foot of grace. The apoftle Paul certainly viewed the matter in this light. Hence, in the 8th chapter of his Epiftle to the Romans, ver. 20. he declares, that ‘‘the creature [by which phrafe he moft certainly includes mankind} was made fubjet to yanity [er camds] in HOPE.” Of what? Tt follows in the next verfe, ** that [fo the particle or: fhould have been rendered here, as it is in hundreds of places elfewhere] the creature itfelf; alfo’ [xas aurnn xriosc, the felf-fame creature that had been fubjeGted to vanity] fhall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God; which could not be, it would have been impoffible, but upon a new plan of grace. He very obvioufly leads us oe ~~ 4 into — 136 DISSERTATION IW. into the fame way of thinking upon the matter, — in his 5th chapter, 18th verfe, where he fays, ‘as. by the offence of one, judgment came upon all. men to condemnation; even fo, by the righteouf=. nefs of one, the free gift came ‘upon all men to the juftification of life.” And again, ver. 19. «¢ as by one man’s difobedience, many were made fmners; fo by the obedience of one, many fhall: be made righteous.” Thefe texts, in their proper place, will be largely confidered and’ explained.. It may, at prefent, without faying any thing upon’ them, be left with thofe, to affign any intelligible: meaning to them, who fuppofe, that the pofterity: of Adam will be dealt with in a way of rigorous: juftice, and not upon the gofpel-fcheme of grace. (The plain truth is, the whole human race, in confequence of a divine conftitution, occafioned’ by. the obedience of the one man Jefus Chrift, are as certainly under the advantage of a deliver- ance from death, as they were fubjected to it in confequence of a counter-conttitution, occafioned by the offence of the one man Adam. Deliverance from the power of the grave, is ABSOLUTELY and UNCONDITIONALLY the grant of grace to mankind : without diftin€tion, or exception.} It is no more. \ connected with their own agency, than was the” doom to fuffer death ; but, be their nation, condi- tién, or moral character what it may, they fhallas furely ** come forth from their graves,” as they» ' went down into them. There can be no’ ‘room for difpute here; if it is a revealed troth, thar. pare : 7 ? » f a3 ce | oy . fs ” DISSERTATION IIL. = ig7 there thall be a untversat refurreCtion from the dead, And let it be added here; the Scripture is as exprefs and peremptory in affirming, thatit is ** in Chrift that all are made alive, as that itis in Adam all die.” It muft therefore be afcribed to grace, difperfed through the one man Jefus Chrift, that the human kind will be delivered from death: It would-otherwife have everlattingly reigned over them. - For, being once dead, they muft have been for ever dead, if grace had not interpofed to reftore them to life. And as the pofterity of Adam came into being under an abfolute declaration from the omnipotent God, that they fhall be raifed from death to life; fo it is made certain to them, that this life, upon anew eftablifhment of heaven, May be a glo- rioufly happy one. We are accordingly affured, by the infpired Paul, the advantage by Chrift has exceeded, reached beyond, the damage by Adam, particularly in this .refpect, that whereas ‘ the judgment was by one offence to condemnation, the free gift is of many offences unto juftification ;” the undoubted meaning of which, at leaft in part, is, that mankind may, in confequence of the advan- tage they are placed under by means of Chrift, ob- tain the gift of pardoning mercy, notwithftanding their perfonal fins, however Many they may have been. And that they might be prepared, not ‘only, for the beftowment of this gift, but the en- joyment of an eternal reign in happy life after death, provifion has been made, through the pro- mifed * i138 DISSERTATION Itt. mifed * feed of the woman;” for the deftruétion of the »prevalence: of fin in) them, and the ini- plantation of that ‘¢ incorruptible feed,” which fhall fpring up in all thofe fruits of righteoufnefs which are to the praife of the glory of God, This: was the great thing defigned in the original pro- mife, putting the race of men:univerfally under a new ftate of trial for an eternal happy life after death; and this alfo was the aim of God in the va- rious difpenfations, at various times, he faw fit to put any of the fons of men under. And this, in fpe- cial, was the grand view of God in the difpenfation erected fince the coming of Chrift, and commonly called, by way of eminence, the Gofpel-difpenfa- tion. In this adminiftration of the law of grace, with Jefus Chrift at its head, we are affured, that «© God is not willing that any fhould perith, but that all fhould come to repentance ;” that * who- foever will, may come, and partake freely of the water of life;” and that if any donot ** comé to Chrift that they may have life,” a life of com- plete happinefs in heaven, it is becaufe they *¢ will not:” for which reafon the faule will be their own, and not chargeable on Adam, or any elfe, if they mifs of falvation, and fuffer the fecond death. ButI may not enlarge any farther here. To return: 3 I. The firft thing propofed to be confidered was, the fubjection of mankind univerfally to bEATH, through the lapfe of our firlt father, _ Adam. ee ee DISSERTATION Ill: = 139 Adam. There is no room for difpute as to the fa&t itfelf, the fubjeCtion of the whole human race to the ftroke of death: nor will it be difputed by thofe who pay regard to the books of‘ facred Scripture, that this fubjection to death is owing - to a divine conftitution, occafioned by the lapfe of the one man Adam. This is an effential article in the apoftle Paul’s argument, in Rom. v. from the 12th to the 2oth verfe; and again in chap. viii. from the 23d to the 29th verfe. And yet again in his firft Epiftle to the Corinthians, chap. xv. the 26th and 27th verfes. But what are we to underftand by this peatH ? and how do Adam’s poferity, through his lapfe, become aniver/aily fubjected to it? Thefe are the only proper queftions here, and they are too important not to be particularly and diftindly anfwered. In anfwer to the firft of thefe queftions, Poe have faid, that the evil meant by the death to which Adam was doomed, and which confe- ~ quentially comes upon his pofterity, is not only the reduction of that admirably contrived maz- chine, the body, to its primitive duft, but the entire deftruction of its animating principle, called, by Mofes, ‘* the breath of life.” This was the fentiment of the great Mr. Locke; and it - has been adopted by many others, in their wri- tings upon this fubject. But the Scripture, as it a tome, contains nothing in it that gives amebd: countenance 140 DISSERTATION wits countenance to fuch an idea of the otigidally threatened death. Far from this, one of the effential ftrokes in the fcheme of redemption it reveals, feems wholly irreconeilable herewith. What I mean is, that the produétion of beings; after annihilation, is a quite different thing from that REsuRRECTION which is the grand obje& of the * hope fet before us” in the ** gofpel of the bleffed God.” For, as an excellent writer rea- fons, when a being has once ceafed to exift, it can never exift more the same individual think- ing being. A new one may be produced exactly like the former; but it will not be the same with that which had an end put to its exiftence. After there hath been a gap, a feparating fpace, nothing can poflibly unite the being exifting before, and that which exifts after, intoone. And this alone, to thofe who believe a refurrection, may be in- ftead of a thoufand arguments to prove, that the animating principle in man does not, by death, totally ceafe to be. For in this cafe, inftead of a RESURRECTION, there would be the pro- duétion of a new confcious principle, which would conftitute a pirFERENT individual agent, having no intereft in the good or bad conduct of that which exifted before; though, perhaps, it might refemble it as nearly as one being can another. It is true, that mop of exiftence is deftroyed by death, _which would have put a period to all poffibility of perception, or.exertion , in DISSERTATION II. rat. in any fhape for ever, had it not been for the in- terpofition of grace, through Cnrift. This has Jaid a new foundation for perception and enjoy- ment after death, if not before, in confequence of a resurrection; by which the Scripture means the putting together again the bodily ma- chine, and animating it with that confcious prin- ciple, which had not been turned out of exift- ence, but remained in fuch a ftate as to be capable of conftituting the same individual per- fon it was before the coming on of death. Others are pleafed to affirm, and with great pofitivenets, that the TORMENTS OF HELL-FIRE FOR*EVER@are included in the death: threatened againft-Adam’ s ‘* one offence,” and that all his pofterity, on account.of this one act of difobe- idience, are expofed to, and may juftly have in- “fli€ted upon them, thefe torments.~ But it is, in - true reafon, an incredible thing, that the children of the firft man, throughout all generations, " fhould, becaufe he committed an ac of fin, be fubjeted to NEVER-CEASING MISERY. (Can it. be fuppofed, in confiftency with that common faculty by which mankind are enabled to diftin- guifh between truth and falfehood, right and wrong, that the infinitely juft and good God -fhould fend millions that die before they come to a capacity of moral agency, as is the cafe of all infants,‘the moment they leave this world, to the place of ** weeping, and wailing, and gnafh- ing of teeth for ever,”* and for no other fault than =e Oe aiptrkt , 142 DISSERTATION-Ht, than that their firft father, thoufands of years : before they had exiftence, ‘* eat of a tree,” con- cerning which God had faid, ‘¢ thou:fhalt not eat — of it?”) The thought only of fuch a procedure in God, is fhocking to the human mind! It con- tradiés all the natural notions we have both of . juftice and benevolence. It is indeed a moft injurious reflection on the ‘* Father of Mercies,” unfit to be believed, and impoffible to be true. Nor is there any thing in the writings, either of . the apoftle Paul, or of the other penmen of the facred books, that lead to fuch a ftrange thought; though they have all faid enough to convince all that need’ to. be convinced, that it is no where contained in the Bible. It is eminently worthy of our ih here, that the apoftle Paul, in the 5th chapter of his Fpiftle to the Romans, the 12th verfe, exprefsly affures us, that THAT DEATH, be it what it may, which entered into the world through the lapfe of the one man Adam, HAS PASSED UPON ALL men. What he means is, not merely, or only, that all men are liable to this death, but that it really, and in fact, comes upon them. That which certainly fhall be, he here {peaks of, as though it actually had been. If now, ETERNAL MISERY, 1n a future ftate, is one thing included in the DEaTH with which the original law was . guarded, THIS MISERY muft, in evest, and FacT, - be fuffered by atu Adam’s pofterity, as well as himfelf; for the peatH, with which his lapfe was 4 DISSERTATION IIL 143 was threatened, if we may believe the ’apoftle Paul, HATH PASSED UPON ALL, MEN; thatis, they all, in EyENT and Fact, doreally! fuffer it. But it would directly contradict the whole Scripture- — account of REDEMPTION to fay, that all men are, or fhall be, eternally miferable in the other: _ world.. The exact truth is, the redemption by Jefus Chrift does not fuperfede the execution of the original threatening, but is grafted on it, and takes rife from it. The pofterity of Adam aut pig in confequence of his lapfe,, according to the true meaning of the.death threatened: but if this death included in it ETERNAL MISERY, it would be impoffible they fhould both fuffer it, and be » redeemed from it. . It. is further obfervable, ¢* the fire prepared for the devil and his angels,” or, what means the fame thing, the punifhment the wicked fhall FINALLY fuffer, is never fpoken of, in the Bible, as inflicted upon any, till mankind untvErsaLiy have been delivered from THaT DEATH which has paffed upon them, in confequence of the one lapfe of the one man Adam. Hence we always read of the FINAL MISERY as POSTERIOR to the general judgment, which will not commence till after the GENERAL RESURRECTION. Now, if none of the fons or daughters of Adam will be con- demned to FinaL miseERy, till after they have been delivered from the pzatH which comes upon them in confequence of his lapfe, it is ime polfible THIS MISERY fhould be included in Turs 4 DEATH i ug DISSER TA TIO Naty DEATH: efpecially if it be confide that,this vmifery will not be inflicted upon 1 DINDISGRIs MINATELY, and UNIVERSALLY, | vas is, the. ‘cafe’ with refpec& to the death that: comes .through Adam’s lapfe. This ‘¢ paffes upon.all, without " _ diftinction, or difcrimination: _ whereas, shina mifery will be fuffered by chofe only. who, PERSONALLY finned. ( It is accordingly: obiel able, in all the accounts we have of the procefs of the general judgment, mankind are. con- demned /eparately and individually; and this, not for the lap/e by Adam, but for their own perfonal ~ fins.) It will then be ‘ rendered to men _ac- » cording to the deeds done in the body,;? and their condemnation will be lighter, or heavier, in proportion to the number, .and aggravating circumftances, of the fins AF have eerie in their own perfons. . Having thus faid what is not the meaning of the DEATH we are all fubjected to, ‘through. the Tapfe of the one man Adam, 1t will be. more eafy to afcertain its true and proper fenfe. . We cannot indeed well miftake its juft and fall im- port, if, inftead of giving {cope to. inragination, we clofely confine ourfelves to what the Bible fays upon the matter. For it is at once obvi that the term, DEATH, when ufed with reference to the pofterity of Adam, confidered fi imply as fuch, cannot contain more in. its meaning, than js included in it when ufed with. tefere nce. dam himfelf. Now, the word, DEATH H, as | DISSERTATION ih 143” been already. proved at large, ‘not only in the ‘theatening denounced againft Adam in cafe of ‘ difobedience,’ but in the judicial fentence after his lapfe, means the deftru€tion of that mode of exiffence upon which life was dependent; or, in other words, the capacity. for perception and enjoyment. Only it fiowld be particularly remembered here, the holy God, inftead of turning Adam INSTANTLY out of life, as he had a right to do, _ in virtue of the threatening, upon es, one act of " difobedience, he only turned him out of paradife, fubjecting him, in the room of that happy life he might have enjoyed, had he not finned, to alife . of toil, labour, and forrow, that would gradually, - but certainly, terminate in death. The fentence of condemnation, recorded Gen. ili. 17, 18, 195 is clearly and fully expreffive of this. The words run thus: ‘* And unto Adam he faid, becaufe thou haft eatén of the tree of which I command- éd thee, faying, thou fhalt not eat of it; curfed is the ground for thy fake. In forrow fhalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life. Thorns alfo .and thiftles thall it bring forth to thee; and thou fhalt eat of the herb of the field. In the fweat of thy face fhalt thou eat bread, till thou return to the ground ; for out of it waft thou taken : for duft thou’ art, and unto duft fhalt thou return.” It is abundantly evident, from this’ condemnatory fentence of God, not only that ic was for “dam's fa that the: earth was cutfed; but that ‘it’ was 5 ate i 5 curfed 46... DISSERTATION Me - curfed la has been largely. illuftratec — Special, defign, namely, that he n fubjected to. a life of labour. and. fone ‘fhould return to his original duft. siegho |: ‘This now leads us into a clear and juft idea of ; f the real ‘circumftances of his pofterity, i confe- quence of his lapfe, We come into exiftence, and live on this earth, not as it was in. its priftine ftate, but as it now lies under the cu, hela that is, adapted to render life, as. long, as, it, _Jafts, a fcene of labour, vanity, and forrow, It . is both feen and felt, by unhappy crpsicateabt the world we inhabit is fuch, in its prefent ft as that i it is impoffible for any fon or pikes ae Adam. to poffefs life in it, but in ‘fuffering, cir~ | cumftances, in-a lefs or greater degree. As the ‘ Scripture fpeaks, ‘* man that is born of awoman - is of few days, and full of trouble,” _And again, ‘she is born to trouble asthe fparks Aly, wp- P wards, ? “And fuch, in truth, are the inconye- niencies and trials, fuch the labours and forrows we, are all fubjeéted to, by the very conftitution of the earth we live upon, fo various jim their kind and unavoidable:in their, nature, sthat, the prefent ftate of exiftence may be confidered asa — fcene of vanity, suffering, and deaths, and the longer we, any of us,. continue in it the more ! thoroughly we are convinced, that this isareal re- c prefentation of the cafe. - Some, , perha el mare. evil than they enjoy. “good s Be ay! any en- » joy, more. good. than they fuffer cl oa ina . bag... ; — fmall — DISSERTATION. ty fmall degree. The fame earth that is fitted’to - Bive us pleafure, is fitted alfo to give us pains ‘and évery convenience is fo attended with fome oppofite i inconvenience, that it is hard to fay, in many cafes, on which fide the balance turns. At the beft, our condition here is fo chequered with interchangeable good and evil, that we may all take to ourfelves words, and fay, with ac-' curate truth, ‘ vanity of vanities, all is vanity, and vexation of fpirit.” . This was not the ftate in which God created ‘the fir? of our race. The Scripture, inftead of fuggefting thar ic was, is particular and exprefs in declaring, that it was owing to the difobedi- ence of the one man Adam, in the fpecial article . wherein he was tried, and the curse of God “thereby brought on the earth, that death entered Gato the world, with its forerunners and ap- ~“pendages, in all their tormenting forms, and has reigned ever fince, and even over thofe, who -onever © finned after the fimilitude of his tranf-- y greffion;” which naturally leads to the other: propofed queftion, “How, or in what fenfe, does the lapfe of: Adan fubje& his pofterity to thefe difadvan- » tages, fignified \by death? The anfwer whereto . > as’ plainly this : a >) | Adam, having “ eat of the forbidden reel > was, by the judicial fentence of God, doomed a life of vanity and forrow, ending in death; which . judicial fentence consEQuenTIALLY extends to, L2 and Vigo’ ere A v1 on ‘it a and) affects, all his. pofterity thr vate pre: rations. ‘The apoftle Paul is ‘pa Stan this point. ‘Hence ‘thofe w to Vanity, not ‘pitlinaay| but’ by” Se on of ‘hh who fubjeéted the fame.”—It is direétly afirme in this text, that * the creature,” by'whir h' word muft be meant, at leaf in part, the’ ¢ réatu MaNn *y was “ fubjected to vanity ;” and nt fo, but that it was brouglit into’ this’ beetion by. the wint} or constiTuTron, “of Gop," For ‘this’ is evidently the’ import” of the? words)’ [dra Tov umerakdvre | §5 by him. who: fubjected'the: fame.” Drv Doddridge indeed: fuppofes*Ham toi have been the bim,; hes whom mankind'became> “¢ fabjetted to vanity.” Mr. Locke fays, itiwas’ the devil. But neither of thefe writers, however’ high an opinion we may have of themy’ ‘appear'tq have hit upon the true fubftantive here uniders. ftood. It ‘is readily owned, both ‘thedeviland’ Adanm had @ hand in introducing’ this’ ‘fabjecs - tion: Adam;) by his one act of difobedience’s 15 AE he ape? * IE the words in this paffage. of Scripture, » var warn. xtc, ave extended in their meaning, “as : pleafed to extend’ them, fo as to take in the zm the creation, the rational or moral part ought wc out; as the judicial fentence, ** fubjeQing thet nity,” parti icularly affe€ted the rational part | of the cre io mankind. | And it refpected the creation, as to its inanit ‘nO otherwifethan a8 a mean to carty the judicial fentence, would affect’ mankind, the more: fully into execution ¥. rational creature ought therefore to be more ef peciall y cohfidered a8 the creature here {poken of as “ fubje@ted to-vanity.” * mo 6 a: ee RUSSER TATION o149 2 ny devil, by... tempting him to it. But _though the deyil’ s temptation was the occafion | of A dar n’s. difobedience, and -Adam’s difobedience _was what. gave. occalion fo this fubjection; yet the will of God, publifhed in. the judicial fea- “tence, taking .rife from this difobedience, was that, and that only, which faftened it on-man- kind... This will,.or conftitution, of God, there- fore; taking rife from Adam’s lapfe, muft-be the © thing intended by the. apoftle. Nor will there _ bevany room for-dowbt-upon the matter, if we a what be -here fays, with hissmore clear and» pofitive declarations upon the fame point inne eth chapter. His words are, yer. 16. *%the judgment was by one to condemnation.” Andagain, ver. 18. “ by the offence: of one; judgment came upon all men to condemnation.” Bhe meaning of which texts is, that mankind . “wniverfally are fubjected to mortality, with the appendages and attendants on it, by the judicial “fentence «of God, occafioned ‘by the “ one of- ferice” of the ** one man” Adam, their common father. ‘ ‘No fenfe that does not include this, can es 3 (put upon thefe- Scripture- -paflages. This I efteem a point beyond all reafonable difpute. “Another queftion therefore arifes here, namely, ‘comes it to pafs, that the pofterity of Adam - are included in the judicial fentence of God, _ which, “by reafon of his lapfe, condemned him fo aftate of fuffering and death ? L. 3 a Thie Me 4 - a ~~. ‘10 “DISSERTATION If — This queftion has often been’ refolved ‘by 1 ng, that, in virtue of a conttitutes j ae ~ tween Adain and his potterity, they Sivwep when . he) committed the “one adv’? of difobedience, -and that, for this reafon they were involved, “in common with him, in all. the » ‘evils; conféquent - upon 'the firft tranfgreffion.. But this, withoutthe leaft hefitation, may be pronounced the invention f na and not a trurh-contained in the word-of God. (There is no hint given in ther Mofaic - Tega of the fall, of Adam’s being foconftieuted — _ the head, of his pofterity, .as that. they sinwep “when-he eat of the forbidden tree.) The, whole Old Teftament i is filent alfo,apon. this matter ; and a few phrafes only in the New Teftament “are #epaired to, as..containing, this, fentiment, The principal ones are to-be met with, incthe,gth | “chapter of Paul’s epiltle to the Romans, in:the 12th verfe, where it is faid, §¢ death upon all men, for that all have. finned ;” seondia the igth verfe, in which his words are;,. ‘hnone man’s difobedience many, weré made + _ ., But it is one of. the grofieft miftakes to’ Sunpak, - that the apottle intended to convey this ide. that Adam’s pofterity ji nned when he pron aie _for this reafon, they are fubjected to —_ te conftruétion of his wards appears, at firtt fight "toa mind not previoufly blinded: with rejudice, 10 ‘beas truly abfurd as to fay, that the Rained a bread and wine, by the ere § confeci ration. OPISSERTATION UL ‘rs: of Chrift’'; or that God, whovisia pure fpirit, has eyes and ears, hands and‘ feet. -The fin of one *man*cannot be the fin of another, unlefs he has been in fome way or other ‘acceffary to it. The ‘thought involves in it a palpable inconfiftency with the nature of things. © Moral irregularity and moral agency; are infeparably connected with each . other, "Were the pofterity of Adam, thoufands of years before they hada being, moral agents? Could they, while as yet in poffible exiftence only, have been, in any fhape or view, accomplices in the fin of their firft progenitor ? Are they not'as -diftiné&t beings from him-as they. are from one another? And can one being be a finner, becaufe another that is diftin@ and different from him ‘is fo A greater moral contradiction can fcarce be ‘conceived of. Befides, nothing is more abfurd than to fuppofe, thofe fhould be chargeable with fin, wherein they never were, or could ‘be, con-. {cious of the leaft guilt. Were any of the fons‘or -daughters'of Adam ever confcious of its being a faultof theirs, that their firft father eat of the forbidden tree? They may haye been affected ‘with grief, while they have employed their thoughts on this fin of his: but did they ever ‘Blame themfelves for it? Did God’s vicegerent._. - 9 their breafts ever accufe and upbraid them for “HER difobedience, in the one act of Adam’s dif; “obedience ? I dare be bold to fay, this was never ~ the cafe, with refpect t to any one of the fir ft man’ °s : * defcendants, unlefs through the influence ok. ask y, L4 deceived >. a A esa Rom, Ve The BIOL Br ah Gea ~ Vic SS 152 pis SERTA rae deceived imagination, We eine fn by. the God of nature, that we {cious of any fault, unlefs we shaye yrs done that which. is wrong. . Anasthinde eric cible proof, that.God doth norlook.wponAdam’s — potterity as having: finned, when he committed the one offence, which has. brought death into the world, Surely, he will not account men Yauersfor that, -in relation to which they) cannot charge themfelves with being finners, and.it is,impofible they fhould, while they pay regard to theirproper _amake, as intelligent and moral agents, @ Tofhall . further fay here, fuch an interpretation of the _ apottle’s words as has been oppofedwould-anakce: hiny peak inconfiftently with bimfelf. |For, in the 8th chapter of this,epiftle, where hh the fame fubject, jhe directly affirms, ithat $¢ the: - creature,” the rational creature, man, ‘was made fabjett to vanity, not willingly?” oy, embve a NOL ; vby any wilful act of its own*: may, inthe-very, Bash ci itfelf in which thefe phrafes are fond, : ¢ hans Lagat * Siys 4 critical expofitor iz loc. and yas af nde t pertinency and uruth, exovra feems here to have fame ' fication as sxovatnss wilfully, Heb. x. 25; ‘or astthorac, «dite gy Sf this they are wilfully dgnorant of | “Whar we sende ace Jie. not in wait,” (Exods xi, a cn Ce der “0x chin, * not wilfally, in Oppofition to ‘In the: pext-verfe. "Phus: sxerow denotes a ch in-an thigh hand’ too; » [carofally obferve; ‘fete Gases a> - . Heb. x»26.] namely, agran{grefion fubjeGting tow vrath. “greature was made fubje& to vanity,” nat by i ehoice, not by “« finning ay the fimilitnde ‘of. a DISSERTATION IM. 453 * thieeapoftle would grofsly contradi@ himfelf, and countéraét’ his own reafoning, if he meant, thar wethad’** finned ‘by Adam’s finning ;” and that " yrtwas for this reafon, upon this account, that we were brovght under fubjection to forrow and death. - For he has very clearly and ftrongly declared, over and over again, that we were fubjected to death, not for any fin of our own, but through thefentence of God, occafioned by the lapfe, fin, or.offence of our common progenitor, “ the one man Adam.” Hence thofe decifive affirmations, - “\through the offence of one, the many [os reader} - areideadj” ver. 153; *¢ the judgment was by one to condemnation,” ver. 16; ‘* death reigned by ONE,” ver. 17; ** by the offence of one, judgment cameupon all men’ to condemnation,” ver. 18. Phe true meaning of which text is obvioufly and certainly this, that mankind were fubjeéted to a. faffering ‘mortal ftate, not for any fin they had ‘THEMSELVES Committed; but sorety through the conftitution of God, occafioned by the lapfe, ry) fence, or difobedience, of ‘¢ the one Maw Adam.” This matter is made, if poffible, yet more indu- bitable in the parallel the apoftle has run, in verfes "15, 16, and 17; between $* Adam,” and * Chrift,” in which he confiders ‘¢ the offence of Adam,” on the one hand, as the true fource, through the - conftitution of God, of that §* pzatH which paffes — upott all men ;” and the §* obedience of Chrift,” on. the other hand, as the proper ground, through 4 like divine conftitution, of * the gift unto jufti- fication . < 4 . DISSERTATION IU fication of life.” So that “the offence of Adam,” — and not any fin of ours; is as truly the/oceafiomof our fubjection to death, as the obedience of Chrift,” and not ‘Sour own perfonal obedience)” is the reafon or ground of our being admitted to the benefit of juftification. Accordingly, when the apoftle fays, that «* death hath: paffed spon all.men, for that all have finned 5”*and:that, by the difobedience of one, many) are omade ofin- . ners: I fay, when the apoftle. declares thus, he ought not, moft certainly, to be underftood ina fenfe that will make us sinners by Adam's fin- ning, and ground our {ubjeCtion to deathon OpR Own siN inftead of H1s; for this would:introduce a downright contradiction between the: fenfe.of thefe phrafes, and thofe paflages, inythe) fame paragraph, which affirm, that ‘* death meigned by one;” that we were ‘¢ dead by. the offenceof oneE;” ‘and that the « judgment to condemnation Was by the difobedience of onz *sitva The eal — * In what has been above offered, it will ‘yea eke ee is ceived, that I have not endeaveured to afcertain _ meaning of ‘the apoftle Paul in thofe phrafes, Speciation. finned,” and ‘‘ by the difobedience of one, | metiperen mes Ainners.” This was purpofely erafed, left ig f oul ine i in the prefebt courfe of reafoning, too ‘long, an a t@0 dty “qnterivption for common readersy What T pee to a -thishead, I have referved forsa fupplement, in ewhichd hall clofel and critically examine thefe phrafes,” and the _ which they are found. To this part of the work : more in- quifitive reader is referred ; where, it may be, he will meet with. © that which Will pofitively let him “into the juft imp the . phrafes that have been mentioned, - ahh, Ma DISSERTATION Ii 155 the confticuted head of his potterity, ina fenfe , that would infer, that they srnNED when he ‘¢ eat “ofthe forbidden tree,” and are chargeable. with tranfgreffion in this inftance wherein he tranfgreff- ed, is not only an abfurdity in reafon, but a “thing quite remote from the apoftle’s thought, We may therefore be fure, the pofterity of Adam . and indeed abfolutely inconfiftent with the whole {cope of his argument in this portion of Scripture. are not fubjected to fufferings and death, in con- fequence of the original lapfe, becaufe they fin- ned when Adam finned; no conftitution, in con- ~fiftency with the make of men, as individual mo- “ral agents, could put this within the reach of poffibility. Bat, if the pofterity of Adam are not fubjeéted to a ftate of fuffering and death, as having Auned phen be Jinned, the queftion ftill recurs, from whence does this proceed? How comes it to pafs, that the judicial fentence, which was pafied upon him, takes place upon them alfo? The anfwer aneckeed is plainly this; As ‘Adam was the NATURAL HEAD, root, or “fick from whence the human fpecies were to come into being, their fubjection to fuffering and death’ became unavoidable, upon the judicial act at of God, which condemned him thereto. For as x >he fountain, fo muft the.waters be that flow from > “ats _is the. ftock, fo muft the branches be; and as is oT ‘fhall not think it needlefs, or impertinent, fo truth) pom the whole, is, that ‘Adam’s being. * .S co ae DUAR T ARH, ae ~ 9 dilate a little in explaining pon | : points, as it enters fo. elfen ; ial “we are upon, and the apoitl the lapfe, in the pth, chapte tof Romans. Let it then be obfe ei ve /. . Though it pleafed God, withou! tion of fecond cauifes, to give at man Adam ; yet it was with ar an ini fhould be the. bead, root, or, foc 6 “Gn a mediate fucceffive ways, con ifor ‘eftablithed by his wifdom, the w 0 fhould.be brought into exiftence. lan, according to which mankind tae beings i in eee, world, the co diti cumftances, under which ‘they rt to receiv me them, was unavoidably dependan ‘the condi- i tion, or circumftances, of him ho was” their a - ' original father.” Had‘he, by hisi int ori yy, in ¥ me day of trial, fecured that favou OP hi which put him in poffeffion of 'pe r difes him accefs to the “-tree of” fife,” render him immortal *, he woul d innocent Rate, was as naturally a MORTAL _ creat Bai ok ‘of the duft,” and, according to the ¢ have returned’ sto duit,” ‘had jit ino " ifes” which, > by. Virtue comimunicaied do it fi being a divinely ioftituted {ymbol ¢ of ni oe would ‘have made’ jt it ‘ceriaio, t ie < fhould, ‘by:the inierpofition of giace, be: ithe! judidial fentence, dooming ‘Adam :to.¢ eat , was tba magedbanttg withdraw ment of hat tone ft favour pisdeR TA tYON Wn sy {tence “to his deftendants under chef ad= oe “whereas, on the other hand, ‘having, byt a obedience, if the article wherein he was’ af expofed hitnfelf to an exclufion from a dife, and a right to “ take of ‘the tree of life';” not only fo, but toa judicial fentence from the fupreme lawgiver and judge, * curfing the earth for his fake,” that is, that he might be in a ‘ftate of labour and forrow, till he thould « res turn to the duft” out of which he was taken; I fay, it now became impoffible, confiltently with it was entirely owing, that he might have enjoyed immortality, without pafling through death. The defcendants from Adam come into being, as he did, naturally mortal, corruptible crea= tures: only with this difference, the favour of God, which, if Adam had not been difobedient, would have continued him in life for ever, without the intervention of death, is not granted to his poflerity. And what cbligation can it be fuppofed God could’ be ‘under to prevent that death, which, according to the courfe of nature, would take place in confequence of thofe cor- ruptible, materials of which we are formed? It was moft cer- tainly a matter of choice, under the direQion of wifdom, whether he would, or: would not, interpofe by his grace to hinder that, which muft otherwife come into effe@. And, as he had feen fit to counteract, by a difplay of favour, the natural operation of eftablified laws, who fhall charge him with having done wrong ? It would be an ungenerous return to the good Gout! if I did not add here, that the pofterity of Adam may, uponi the. et et ew plan of grace through Chrift, be as fure of a happy » if they : are obedient fince the lapfe, as they would sae been, if Adan’ had coatineed in inndcence ; only with this difference, they might, i in that-cafe, have enjoyed perpetual life, . withont death 3 wil ereas they muft now pafs throngh death before — uals can put on immortality. iaR ey 9 - ‘ . the 158 DISSERTATION Mh the eftablifhed method in which /his pofterity'were to come into exiftence, but that'it fhould?be, tran{mitted to them under the difadvantageous: circumftances of forrow and mortality; to which . their firft father had himfelf been fubjetted. ( me | (6 Se ore S&S . condemnatory fentence, pronounced a for his ‘* one offence,” could not ioe ral CONSEQUENTIALLY to them, and-affeé them, as, they were to proceed out of his loins, according to eftablithed laws.) God muft have altered the. eftablifhed method of their coming into exiftence, or their fharing with their common father in the - difadvantages under which he poffeffed Jife,\ by. reafon of his lapfe, muft have been, ects . in the nature of things. Fy Shhh: yO? This I take to be the true ante to the above queftion ; ; and, indeed, to all the obje@tions ; which have been made to our being in’a fuffer- ‘tion of fecond caufes, in an eftablifhed courh - but that this 1s the occafion of | numberk “fs infeli- ing ftate, through the offence of thi’ one man Adam. And I- cannot but efteem it) entirely. farisfactory ; and the rather, becaufe ‘our ‘frail mortal condition, in confequence of ‘the ‘fin’ of our firit progenitor, is, in this view of it, p fectly analogous to what ftill happens every ash, 3 in confequence of eftablifhed laws in’ ‘general, and. the law of propagation in particular." ° Hosta | It is the real truth of fat, not t only” that t jah- kind are made, and -preferved, by the interven-- | DISSERTATION IIL 159 cities; which they daily groan under, but cannot | prevents) There is not a perfon i in-all the world, but has fuffered more or Jefs, in one kind‘or ano- ther, i in confequence of thofe eftablifhed conec- tions which conftitute what we-call, the courfe of mature. This is particularly, the cafe of children twith refpe& to their more immediate progeni- tors., ‘They not only derive from them: that mortality, with its attendants, which is common to all men; but various sPECIAL DISADVAN= TAGES, by means. whereof ‘life is rendered far lefs defirable than it would otherwife have been. Thoufands and ten thoufands of children have had ‘tranfmitted to them, in confequence even of the vices of thofe they defcended from, con- -Mtitutional diforders, which have been'the occa- fion,, not only of, tormenting fenfations while they lived, but of bringing on death before they had continued on the earth one half the general period of human life. Nay, it has often hap- pened, that children have been {fufferers, and toa great degree too, even in confequence of judicial fentences both from God and mas, taking rife from the mifdoings of their parents. Thecon- . nection, indeed, between parents and children is fuch, that j parents cannot be judicially punithed, either by, God or man, but children will, in fome Shape or other, be fufferers with them. And, in’ many cafes, a condemnatory Sentence, faking. place upon parents, cannot but consE- pie QUENTIALLY 1 ae te 16 DISSERTATION QUENTIALLY extend to thei’ chil them: of fuch wits fubjece: them to.a ftate of comparative miferys,° Wifi 9 Aa | ‘And, perhaps, there is no way can fo well account for this; ds va ele parents. a ‘And the fabjedtion: of (gi a 3 in Pu to 4 fuffering mortal fate, ie Cc fully racodditabte ahh the juftice and t 29 lence of God, as the fufferings of paste" children, in confequence of the folly of theit _ more immediate progenitors, They both. arife from the fame cavfe, and. evidently bear a n analogy to’ each other. me Mai: a ly are, Tl. The other thing mankind univer fubjeéted to, fince the dapfe, and in confe of it, is a STATE OF NATURE LESS PERFECT ai it might otherwife have been, rendering ~ morally impoflible that they fhould, upon ie foot of sTRICT RIGOROUS LAW) i toe jaftification of life. : re i ‘This fate of nature, is conte by. nan} under the notion of aMORAL TAINT3 an, inf fe tion, corruption, or depravity, that . is er , Or WICKED, But ‘this, without all doub =. DISSERTATION Il. i: in the moral world. Nothing traaf to us from Adam, or any of jour mote immediate parents, can, fimply in this view, - taake us finfu/, or, what means the fame thing; _ taorally faulty, It may be our unhappinefs to come into exiftence with a natufe df per- fe@ than it might have been; but it cannot be, that we fhould be blameworthy on this account. We ate incapable fubjects of blame, till we become moral agents: nor can we then deferve blame, only as we are chargeable with voluntary néglect in improving, or reftraining, ’ or governing the nature that ae been commu- nicated to us. This is fo evident, upon the bare propofal, that no medium of proof can make it “more fo. it is indeed a truth intuitively appearing to be fo to all, who have not, in one way or ano- ther, become “ vain in their imaginations,” having ‘ darkened their hearts.” Without our own agency, how fhould it be poffible we fhould be blameworthy? And are we at all concerned, as agents, in our own formation? Do not we come into being abfolutely independent on our- felves? What more grofsly abfurd, therefore, than to think, or fuppofe, that Adam, becaufe he had finned, fhould tranfmit to his pofterity a mature that is finful; or fuch as that it may be - charged with mora faultineis, as it exifts sIMPLY in the ftate in which it was tranf- mitted ? | Ho M Perhaps, vs Sy 162, DISSERTATION Ik . ~ Perhaps, Chriftian divines have fpoken upo' “no fubje&t with greater inaccuracy, not A ‘inconfiftently: with the truth, than upon | “t € article we are now confidering. | It has been too generally their doétrine, that the _pofterity of Adam, as they come into exiftence, - ‘are, in cor- - fequence of his Japfe, MORALLY DEPRAVED if all their powers. Hence the frequent mention | that is made, in their writings, of a moral blind- nefs of mind, perverfenefs of will, hardnefs of 7 b heart, ftupidity of confcience, irregularity ‘os paffions and affections, which mankind univer- fally are born with; and as their fault. too, and what they are Dlameable for, fo as on this ace count to be liable to the eternal wrath of Al- mighty God. But no fach doétrine as this can be the truth of revelation, becaufe inconfiftent with the real, known, certain ftate of human nature, io its fimple form, as tranfmitted from _ Adam. Neither our underftandings, or wills, or hearts, or confciences, or affections, are an more at jirf than implanted powers, abfolutely in- capable, at prefent, of moral exertion; though capable of opening and expanding, and? be- coming, in time, fitted therefor. How, in’ this view of the matter, fhould we be accountable for thofe powers, upon our firt coming into exift- ence, or chargeable with any fault for their = ‘what they are? For they are now fuch, and onl fach, as the Author of our being, a abfolutely without BisSERTATION ii, 36; Wi ‘out any choice ¢ or doing ¢ of ours, was pleafed, ec ding t to a courfe of nature his own wifdom blithed, ‘to communitate to us. It is no tore our fault, it is not poffible, in the nature of things, i it fhould be, that we have not as perfec&t powers as any may fuppofe Adam to have had in innocency, than that we have not the fame powers the angels , in heaven are endowed with, The ood culture; and proper exercife, of our im- planted powers, is that, and that only; on ac- count of which we are capable, in the nature of things, of being chargeable with blame. 1! fhall “ not think it an impertinence to illuftrate this by a particular inftance. Sh gs . we “The mental power we Call the underftanding, ~ is aL “ark a naked capacity, fitted for the recep- tion of knowledge, but, -at.prefent, totally def- titute of it. For there can be no knowledge without ideas; and thefe, conformably to the efta ablifhed courfe of nature, are acquired but lowly. and gradually. ~Impreffions from the,ma- terial. world, by the. intervention of ~fuicably adapted bodily organs, affect the mind, and in time ftore it with ideas; which ideas, together with the perceptions we have of the operations of oUrown minds, are the true fource of the know- © ledge. We-naturally attain toy in this prefent ftate. Ts. it;now any faule of ours, that we come into. exittence thus: deftitute. of actual knowledge? ye any affirm, that we are, Woon this account, M 2 morally ’ 7 i oe (one on ; - 164 DISSERTATION Ill. morally bind, or finfully in the aa tA ‘hho mut — be out of his fenfes to fuppofe fuch a thing.” 9° Should it be faid, the underftanding; confi- dered as one of the powers of our nature, ‘ds tranfmitted tous, by reafon of the lapfe, inva lefs perfect ftate than it would-otherwife have been, Be it fo. What follows herefrom? Not that:we are faulty in poffeffing this power in this lefs per+ fe& ftate; not that it is our fin, and that we are blameworthy on this account. It may bevour unhappinefs, that our faculty of underftanding’ is not communicated in a moré perfect ftate; , but it is not, neither is it poffible it fhould -be, - an immorality, or vice in us. (, This power, inthe fimple ftate in which it is tranfmitted to, us,..i jutt fuch as God was pleafed it: fhould be...) An if there is any moral fault.in its being no better, wherever the jreproach. finally sidbacdii we.are certainly clear of it. ) ody Aised yiinb ie The plain truth is, there’ is no: _ imaginable fenfe.in which we can be faulty, or chargeable with fin, with refpe& to our underftanding, ‘but — by neglecting, or mifufing it, after we, are) be- come proper moral agents. And here, one would think, without going any further back, there is room enough for blame. And, indeed, we are all blameable, in a lefs or greater. degree, for want of care in the culture of our underftandings, or for not making a wife and, good ufe of them, Though it ought to be well obferved. here, the fault, ‘with refpect to the underftanding,, which, the i'M oO j C KOR DISSERTATION TIE 165 the Seelsture deftribes by i its being ** blinded, ; of ‘6 darkened,” is always the refule of moral folly in: tthe perfons themfelves, whofe underftandings are weprefented to be in this bad ftate.. This Sf: blindnefs,” or €* darknefs,” is of that fort which argues’a wilfully depraved mind, and could not have taken place, if the fubjects of it had not neglected their underftanding, cr abufed their natural powers, by perverting it to thofe ends for which it was not implanted in them. e “ « ne 5 ‘It may, ina fenfe, it is true, be faid, even of _ the beft of men, that they have « darkened their hearts,”-and “ blinded their minds ;” for who will pretend, that hehas made fo gooda ufe of the means of information and inftruction as he ought to have done,” ‘and might have done? Yea, who can de- elare)” and do it with truth, that he has not. actually been the occafion of introducing dark- fey inftead of light, into his mind, ina lefs or greater: degree, by criminally indulging too un- — coh iggy and undue sseitedit > é Wri dates ” which good Hen in this imperfect ftate} are too often chargeable with, is not thas Which’ is pointed out in Scripture, when it fpeaks df the** heart as darkened,” and the *¢ oe as alienated from God through ignorance.” It is rather now defcribing the charaéter of habitually wicked men, and giving us an idea of that moral leh aa or defilement of their underftand-. M 3 ings, ie Dee ee - u 166 DISSERTATION tea ings,, which, is not the effect of mere fraily but . of great wilfulne/s and perverfenefs. AD 38g / What has. been thus faidbof clicnaae iteeditttin is equally applicable to all our other implanted) powers, and will readily be perceived to be fo by every intelligent reader.» They’ are: all, cat frft, meré capacities only, neither fitted “nor defigned for prefent Monat exertion, ‘but yet fo formed as that, in time, they may attain roam ability herefor, And thefe capacities, /what+ ever they are upon our. firft coming into -the world, being precifely’ fuch- as were. communi= _ cated to us, abfolutely without any will, ‘adion; or ipfluence of ours, conformably. to. laws efta2 - blifhed by. the God of nature from the beginning, of the creation, how fhould they be moRALLY - faulty in their firft Simple sexiftence 2) “Nothing is more felf-evidently true, than that, their becom= ing morally depraved, in whatever: degree: they are thus depraved, is, and muft be, the effect of the perfonal folly of each individual’ fubjed of _thefe powers, by the neglect, mifimprovement, abufe, and perverfion of them. 7 Nor ‘is any’fon of Adam efteemed blameworthy, ‘with’ tefpect to thefe original capacities, upon any other a¢count, or in any-other view, in any ex “of the? whale _ book of God. 2) ody dam - Tt. is commonly faid here, "Nagra fen “by his * one offence,” corrupted his whole} nature and, being himfelf a creature corally ¢ort Orru] i . DISSERTATION “ur! rey - Behere: ‘Ne “was a fatlier, fuch ‘alfo mutt ‘be hig polterity.’ ~The defcendants from him mift ‘be; as he was, morally corrupt, or finful, in all their tranfmitted powers. ~The reply is obvious. Ata, in virtue of the law of propagation, eltablifhed by God, was -no more than the medium, inftrument, or means, - by which the human kind, in. diftinction from every other, fhould be brought into exiftence. He could only tranfmit, in confequence of this law, THAT watuRE which would denominate the defcendants from him men, and not creatures. of another fort or kind. His. fuperinduced _ character, as a morally corrupt man, was no,part of, th = nature he was made, by God, an inftru- ment in tranfmitting to others: nor indeed could it have been in confiftency with the eternal rule of right. ‘There can, be no fuch thing as meral depravity, but in connéétion with mifufed moral agency, pAnd: will, any fay, that the mifufed moral agency of one man can, by propagation, be tranfmitted to another, fo as to be nis mif- ufed._ moral agency ? Yea, that this. mifufed - moral agency is capable of being communicated from. one morally corrupt. man, throughout all generations to the end of time? And yer, this muft be the cafe, if Adam, becaufe he had morally corrupted himfelf, muft tranfmit moral corruption to all that ever have, or will proceed from him. There i is not a more certainly known | broth, than. that the qualities of parents, confi-- M 4 dered 16% DISSERTAT HON Td. dered as wirtyous or vicious, ingeonfequence of the, good or bad ufe of their. moral agency, are not. tranfmitted to children, The machines,' called our bodies, it is true, may, | in confequence ot the virtues or vices, of progenitors, be tranf- mitted in a better or worfe ftate to be employed as inftruments for the foul to a& by., But. this infers only a more or. lefs advantageous: commu- nication of exiftence; not any moral faultinefs;!or finfulnefs, in the exiftence itfelf, confidered fimply as communicated. We come into:being; ' §n’the way of generation, exiftences of the fame rank, or order, that Adam was,! im dittin@ion from the other creatures; but as to any fuper= induced qualities, confidered’ as’ virtuous or! di» cious, they were not propagated from hin to any) of his immediate children, nor from then’ fo! any other generations : nor was it ever “ineended by God that they fhould, in virtue ‘of ‘the vinely inftituted law of multiplying thé “hunt kind. ‘The powers that effentially conftitute the nature of man, in diftinétion from the’ ‘other’ fpecies of creatures, are communicated by ae ration, not that ftate of thofe Sohne h the effet of the good or bad cit dc them. ‘The proper juft character of ' every: ‘indiz vidual of the human race, as virtuous ‘or vicioag.” as morally depraved or holy, mult be ie not by their powers, as fimply communic with their exiftence, bus by) the ufe pat _ of them, after they have arrived to an abi Nalig * a DISSERTATHON:llki 269 pcting “as:‘moral agents. This. account of the matter: is‘ both. intelligible and reafonable; and fot only fo, but ic perfectly agrees with revela~ tion, which blames no man bur for his. folly in nots taking that ufe of his tranfmitted powers, under the advantages he is favoured with, which it is reafonable he fhould do, and muft be fells condemned if he does not. It may not be amifs to add here, Howiis it known, that Adam was that entirely corrupted creature, ‘* indifpofed to all good, and prone to all evil continually,” he is reprefented to have been? Does the Scripture teach us this for truth? It informs us, it is aknowledged, that he difobeyed. in the one article wherein he was tried; and that, in confequence of this fin of his, he became expofed to the penalty of the law he had violated ; infomuch, that it might have been. immediately put in execution. Bur where do we find, that, in confequence of his lapfe, his WHOLE Nature became finfully corrupt, either by. watural operation, or divine infidtion? It is — not. eafy to conceive, how one. fingle act of fin. fhould naturally operate to produce at once this effect.. It certainly does not fo operate, with relpec. ta thofe of -his pofterity, who are ‘* new mep i in Chrift.”” And no good reafon can be given, | why its operation fhould be fo widely dif- ferent in | regard of their firft father, And are we gold by the i in{pired writers, that this befel him, ina way of _punithment, by infliction from the Se Deity? 4 Bru. * Sipe : it a 3 re S ie 170 DISSERTATION ‘ily Deity? Mott certainly Mofes has given us°nd fuch account; though he hag particularly’) res corded the fentence vide condemnation that was paffed on him for his ** one offence,” Tei any other of the facred penmen have tranfmitted fuch an one, let it be plainly and particularly pointed « out. In the mean time, it fhould’ be remembered, Adam, . notwithftanding his lapfe, and all” ‘i effects of it, whether natural or judicial, ‘w favoured by God, and even before the condemna- tory fentence was pafied, with’ the role f THE WOMAN'S SEED, in confequence af Ww being placed under a new ftate of ony he. mi; fo ufe, and improye, his originally Pine powers, as to attain the CHARACTER, of 8 truly righteous man, formed toa ‘meecnefs for an, eters nal life of bleffednefs in the refurreétion- world, / And, for aught that is known by any one living - to the contrary, this might have, been his .cha- ratter, he might have been ¢bis righteous. matty before he had pofterity,. And if this .was the cafe, it may as reafonably be, faid,, that, the, de- fcendants from him, were born righteous, as that they would have been born corrupt, had he been the corrupt creature that is pretended : | though ‘the real truth is, neither a. virtuous or “vicious charaéter is tranfmitted by propagation. ‘This always was from the beginning of the world, and will be to the end ef it, confequemt upona good or bad ufe of the effential il that have been - DISSERTATION Il we been, communicated, conformably’ to the ‘efta- blifhed law of propagation. | as) Car is faid likewife, in. vindication de our de- riving from Adam; with our very exiftence, a totally corrupt nature, that we may feel the work= ings of this corruption, and fo as to know, from our own inward perceptions, that we really are the corrupt creatures we are reprefented to bet! ft anfwer, be the perceptions of the working of corruption as ftrong, and general, as any may. fuppofe them to ne it will’ not follow from REMCE that any fon of Adam ever felt the work- ing of what’ is called original corruption,’ or asin communicated with’ exiftence itfelf, Who; among all that have defcended from the firft pair, can fay, from their own experience, what their tnward workings were, when they firft ¢ame into exiftence? ‘Fhey were roew no more éapable of feeling moral corruption, than Or morally corrupting themfelves, It requires time, T might fay years, according to the eftablifh- meént of heaven, before we are capable either of moral feeling, or moral exertion. Be the feel- jngs, therefore, of ‘any, after their arrival to a capacity of moral difcernment, as they may, they are not the perceptions of the workings of their nature when they firft came into being. They may, by this time, have made themfelves ‘the fubjects, “in a lefs or greater degree, of moral corruption ; and, if they hould feel the geo : ; workings ~ 172 DISSERTATION Kk ea workings of it, jt would be ‘nothing tranmedl but.no more could be argued from hence than: this, that they are wow morally corrupt crea- tures; not that they were fo the firft moment they came into the world. They may’ know, and with all certainty, from the PRESENT work- ings of corruption, which they have the aétual perceptions of, that they are aT PRESENT pol- luted; but that their nature was, at firft, in the fimple ftate in which it-was communicated, thus polluted, is what they do not feel, ever did, or evericould, . a _ It is faid, alfo, the general. prcvelinst of fin, from the days of Adam, through all fucceffive generations, to this day, is a fure arguméntifi proof of our bringing into the world with ussa morally depraved or finful nature. How elfe can it be accounted for, that the ** world fhould lie in wickednefs,” as has been the cafe'albalong from the beginning? It is readily owned, the -wickednefs of mankind has» been, and ‘now jisy awfully great and general; and this, notwiths {tanding all the preventive methods of heaveng upon the plan of grace through Chrift: thoughy perhaps, fome may have been betrayed into’ a like miftake with that of the prophet Elyahy who fuppofed the idolatry of the people of: Ifraek was fo univerfal, that he was left the alone wore! shipper of Jehovah, the one true and living Gody while yet the real truth was, that) Godehad among DISSERTATION It. 373 _ among that people feven thoufand, who had not bowed the knee to Baal. There has been, with- out all doubt, a number of truly pious holy men, in all ages, fince the lapfe. What propor- tion'this number has borne to the impious and unfanctified, is known, with exaétnefs, to God only. ‘So far as we are able to judge, from the paft hiftory, and prefent ftate of the world, it may, I believe, be faid in general, that the righteous have been few in comparifon with the wicked. But the wickednefs of the wicked, ‘However great or general, is no argument that we are born with morally depraved or finful na- ture. Neither Adam, nor Eve, were created finful; and yet they both fell by tranfereffion':: which is a demonftrative proof, that there may be: the commiffion of fin, without a previoufly fuppofed corrupted nature. It will, doubtlefs, be fuiggefted here, the created finlefs beings'in our world were only two: whereas, fince their: lapfe,\ in «the feveral fucceffive periods of time; finful. men have been vattly numerous. » And how fhould fuch vatt numbers exhibit fuch plen-= tiful evidence of their being finful creatures, if they did not come into being with finful natures?. The:anfwer is obvious. If two only, without an originally: finful nature, might be overcome by temptation to violate the law of their Maker, the fame: thing was equally poffible for two more, and. fo on to any afligned number. No reafon can bé:given, why it muft have been otherwife: And, & rh ie bes! | ee ee 4 be hale i! Z 74 DISSERTATION ‘Hi’ And; it is’ the truth of faé&, fo far as we give credit to revelation, that thoufands ade thoufands of originally created finlefs beings, r belled againft the.God who’ brought them into exiftence. The.angels that finned were at firft angels of light, and yet they made’ themfelves devils, and in numbers awfully great.” “Wea are ‘told, that a Lecton of them were in one man only, in the days of our Saviour Jefus Chrift. » Se general wickednefs of mankind | may “as. eafily, perhaps much more eafily, be ac counted for without the fuppofition of a pre- - vioufly finful nature. The plain truth is, n is angels nor men, Adam or his pofterity, were ‘Made impeccable creatures. The pofibility, ‘therefore, of their making themfelves finners, is leffentially founded in their original conftitution, as fallible mutable creatures. Whether we can'or “cannot point out, with precifion, how that’ whic h was pofible becomes afual, is a matter of no- great importance; though it certainly is, that we do. not impofe upon ‘ourteliee or iets account of this matter that is fa; as would be the cafe, if we fhould afcribe the wickedneis of men; fince the Japfe, to a finful nature com- municated to them with their exiftence. ” For this would be grofsly abfurd in itfelf, “and an utter inconfiftency ‘with the whole mo i fyftem. (aa om 4 It is ftill faid, in proof of our being born w wi oy corrupt nature, that this is one - of the ae DIS SER‘ + A T LON 3 Iiky ' 175; ys made manifeft in the tenyper and conduétof — de chives, It is acknowledged, thatchildreny . very early, difcover their being the fubjects. of various appetites, paffions, and affections, by ‘ir various, and, many times, undefirable. ex- ettions. But none, furely, will pretend, that their nature is finful merely, or only, becaufe it is endued with appetites and paffions: for they were implanted in Adam at his firft creation, and his pofterity come into. being the fubjects of them, for wife and valuable ends, which could not have been fo well anfwered without them. The, finfulnefs, therefore, of thefe appetites does not lie j in their fimple exiftence as tranfmitted to us, nor yet_in any exertions of them, till we become actual agents, and obliged as fuch, in duty to God, to keep them under due govern- ment. This little children: are abfolutely i in- capable of. They are not, at prefent, moral agents; and God only knows, with any degree of certainty; how long it is before they are fo: let therefore. their dilcoveries in their nonage or, wilfulnefs, peevithnefs, paffion, or any Bice elfe that is difagreeable, be as they may, they are. effentially wanting in that which will deno- minate them .fixful; and this is, a .prefeng capacity for moral agency. Nothing they either think, or fay, or do,.can- partake of the nature of inh till they are arrived to an ability of moral difcernment, and to fuch a degree as to . ae ac gprs for their conduct as moral ag a, Ie eenir neat : ave ’ - #76 «DISSERTATION ‘Mf. © Sloe’ would ‘fot -be a needlefs ‘digreffion, iff fhould add here, as the natural operation of our _ implanted appetites and affections takes place; . before our mental ‘powers are got to a ftate wherein it is poffible this operation fhould be morally reftrained and governed, ‘there is’ great danger left, in after+life, the appetites ahd» paf- " fions fhould have the chief fway over s.. It may be principally owing to this, thar fach numbers amnong mankind turh out corrupt, “fins ful creatures. This, to be furé, © will much better account for the general wickednefé of the world, than any are able to account for the difo- bedience of two perfedtly: intelligent, and: pers fectly holy creatures, in a cafe whereinothey might, fo far as appeats, have eafily withftood the temptation they were affaulted with)» and retained their integrity. Some, perhaps, jmay be difpofed to complain of the eftablifhed method of our growing from infancy to a ftate of saétual faoral agency. They may be ready to thinkyrit would have been better, if, according: tomehe . fettled courfe of nature, our mental powers might fooner have come to duch ftrength and vigour, as that the exercife of the appetites and paffions fhould have been reftrained and governed by them. The apoftolic: folemn cheekss:ré+ cotded in Romans, ix. 20. is properly dappli- cable here, “* Who art thou, O man, that thou replieft againft God! Shall the thing formeddfay. to him who formed it, Why haft thou mademe . thus ?”* - DISSERTATION 10. a9 thus?/%f fall degree ef modeftys;,one would think, might be f{ufiicient to keepomen, ** who arelofeyefterday, .and know comparatively no- thing,’ from finding fault withthe work of that being, who is infinite in underftanding, as: well asin benevolence and-righteoufnefs,. And thereis — lefs reafon for complaint here, .as the all- wife:good God has committed the guardianfhip of children, Avring. their growth to.a mature flate, to parents; enjoining it on them, as their indifpenfable duty, fo, exercife that moral government over them, they vare incapable of with refpeé to.themfelves. . Pa- f€Ntsy it is true, may; by their: negligence, inat- ' stention,. and. in. ways ftill more criminal, -be the ' faulty, oceafion of children’s being habituated.to | live: sand, aft under the influence of, the fiefh, in oppofition to, the mind. And it, isa great un-— happinefs to children, and as great a,faulein . fnetentss when they are. negleéted,.and fuffered, as they. grow in years, to grow in bondage to | aopetihe and paflion; their ftate of trial ra ano- ‘aher world will, on this account, be rendered far emore, difficult and hazardous, than it would ‘otherwife have been ; though, after all the crimi- nal neglects, or pofitively faulty influence, of ‘parents, and contracted bad habits in children hereupon, it remains a certain and moft com- fortable truth, that they may, in confequence of othe plan of grace through Chrift, be delivered _ . “from. whhtarei: bondage they may have been i : g y y _ebrought into by coffuption. ‘Though they ea ON fhould 278 DISSERTATION Til. _fhould« have been. “ the fervants of fim SSbiy smay become ‘* the fervants of God,” and * have -their fruit unto holinefs, beseiey whereof will be everlatting life,”> 4 Bei, Halle oy It is faid yet further, there cell. 9 ‘Gn the facred books, which clearly 1 fully teach the doétrine of a corrupt finful nature, as derived from Adam to all his’ potterity, in confequence of his lapfe. This has often"been pretended; but the produced texts, | faid to teach this, are far from containing fo grefs an abfur- dity.. It would take up too bee § room to be\par- ticular in feverally examining thefe texts; andit ~ . might -be thought needlefs, as they have been fo . ‘repeatedly fet in a juft and unexceptionable light. However, it may not be improper to take a brief notice of fuch of them as ate fup- 9 to be moft ftrikingly conclufive. (9 > One of this fort is Job, xiv. 4. « ‘Who. can a bring a clean thing out of an unclean? not one.” ‘It is not eafy to conceive, how any could cite thefe words as a convincing proof of ue, ture derived from Adam with exiftence “nll unlefs it be firft fuppofed, that they had previ- -oufly imbibed, and were ftrongly prepoffeffed in favour of this fentiment. The quoted words are, at firft fight, a proverbial general. faying, the particular, more fpecial fenfe of which, ‘as : . here ufed, can be afcertained in no way, but by \ the nature of ‘the difcourfe of which it is a part, ‘and to illuftrate which it is brought: “The — Wibaush i o- _ quettion | ae DISSERTATION Ml. t79 queltion then is;ito what purpofe is it introduced »by Job? What is its connection with the point he “is upon?’ Whoever will confult the preceding and following words, can be at no lofs to determine, othat at relates wholly to man’s frailty as a mortal creature. It mutt; therefore, be here ufed as a ‘known conmimon mode of fpeech, importing in general, that the thing produced muft be as that is from whence it proceeds. As if it had been _ faid, man that is born of a woman is a poor, frail, mortal creature. And how fhould it be: other- wife, fince, from the general proverb, ** a clean. thing’ cannot proceed from unclean,” it appears, ‘that as is the fource, fo muft be the derivation from it?’ We proceed from thofe that are’ frail ‘and mortal; it is, therefore, no other than may . ‘be expected, that we fhould be fo too. It is-ob- fervable, MORAL UNCLEANNESS is no part of the fubjeGt Job is upon in this place: nor, if it had» would the proverb he brings to view have been to his purpofe. For uncleannefs, confidered in a morat fenfe, cannot proceed naturally from pa- ‘rents to children. They may be, as in faé& they ‘really are, inftruments in conveying exiftence; but they cannot convey with it Mora unclean- nnefs, becaufe this is infeparable from moral agency in the perfons themfelves, who are the fubjeéts of it. To fuppofe otherwife would be to ‘contradict all the ideas we have of the nature of «! fin. j N 2. Another =? corvette yy OWS 74768 1820 DISSERTATION Ith - Another: text: we are turned .to, is Pfalm. lis, 5: a Behold, - I was. fhapen: in iniquity, and in, idid_ my. mother conceive: me,” ” It! would ‘be abfurd to, fay, that David,,in tesa pats. Af this paffage, had it in view. to reprefent his ther as a filthy woman, as fhe muft hay ‘a literally fpeaking, he had been. _conceiv Je fin? The abfurdity would be much | gt if it fhould be fuppofed, that he ought to tee un- derftood according. to. the ftrigtnefs ¢ of t famed ‘when he fpeaks, in the former part, ht ee tence, of his being ‘ fhapen. in ini apie whom was he fhapen? His own. ‘matter is expreffed i in that addrefs to, God, Pla GRIX. 924, <6 eda hands have made me, fhioned me.” And again, fh 8 y PRLS Thou haft covered me. in ee r’s womb. I will praife thee, for” am and “wonderfully made.’ In. thy book “ were all my members written, which in _ continuance “were fafhioned, when as yet there. Was. nae a ‘them?”” Will any now imagine that... could mean, in the text before us, to repr God as the being that * fhaped him i, quity?” And, had he made. him | with.a corrupt finful nature, would oat from heart -fele gratitude, have praifed him herefor?. It. Mull asleet highly. on him to fuppofe fuch a thing. oh gals ’ Whether. ‘the words in difpute are soulcanee dered in our Englifh Bibles, or whether they might be better tranflated, ‘$f was born in i Ani- quitys "DISSERTATION TH. “18: uity"and nurfed by my thidther in fin,”"is “a Sacer no ‘great ‘importance. In either way lation they are certainly an hyperbolical - a Jof dition, ftrongly expreffive ” of David's "early ‘attachment to finful indulgences, tHfough ‘the unreftrained influence of his natural appetites, paffions, at and affetions. What he "here laments may be “explained ‘by that prayer of his, Pfalm xxv. 7. which he utters in fimple plain language: «© Remember not the fins of my youth, ‘nor my tranfereffions.” It may “be worthy of ‘our no- tice, like figurative ways of {peaking are’ common in Scripture. Says Job; in mentioning his bene- volent cafe of the widow, chap. xxxi. 18. « Ihave guided her from my mother’s womb.” Accord ing to the ftri€tnefs of the letter, thefe words do not contain the truth: for it was not poffible he fhould be a guide to the widow, till he ‘had ‘arrived ‘to a capacity of being fo. David himfelf ufes the fame figure, Pfalm lviii. 3. where hé fays, ** The wicked are eftranged from the womb} they go aftray as foon as they are born, fpeak- ing lies.” He could not here mean, that the | (fickshd obs lies before they had attained to an ability of ufing their tongues to the purpofes of sech, © The language, therefore, is figurative, importing only an aggravation of their wicked- nefs; for that they were prone to ‘ fpeak lies” _ from their early days. The’ fame figure ftill is ufed by the'prophet Ifaiah, chap. lviii. 8. where, gaia ofthe people of Tfrael, he fays,. they eyty, N 3 were, 32 DISSERTATION? HL were: ‘called tranfgrefiors from,.the 1 that is; foon after their political/exiftence.: had fcarce been formed into a nation before they _ tranfgreffed. The penitential’ acknowledgment of David is evidently expreficd iim east rative language. It would be as grofsly abfurd to fuppofe, literally fpeaking, that he was «< fhapea : in iniquity, and conceived in fin,” as to, fay of the wicked, that they could ‘ fpeak lies” before they could fpeak at all; or of a benevolent man,..that he could be a ‘* guide to the widow,” before-he could, in any fenfe, be a guide either to. himfelf Ee or any one elfe. Belides what has been already ~ faid, it may be proper to. obferves it) would -be very extraordinary to fuppofe, that;David, while confeffing and lamenting his fins before’ God; in all their aggravating circumftances, fhouldy ih-the _ midftof this penitential exercife, refleét the blame of his finfulnefs on. God, inftead: of taking at wholly to himfelf; which would | certainly be the truth of the matter, if he is: broughtim telling: his Maker, he was ‘ fhaped in iniquity,and- eons ceived in fin;” underftanding the words in their literal fenfe: whereas, if they are interpreted. figuratively, ‘as. carrying in them this meanings that he had even, from his early days, been ad- - dicted. to fin, through the prevalence of shisnarus ‘val appetites, it would, perfetly fall in with; the grand. bufinefs he was now. engaged, ims: that,.of confeffing and. bewailing his. paft fins,» It .ywuas highly fit and proper he fhould, hn occa fion, DISSERTATION Ili’ 183° fionj"look back to’ former iniquities, even thofe’ of ‘youth’ and’ childhood, sc a me ies of fhame and guilt. _ Another’ text ftill, that has often widen men- tionedsin proof of our. coming into the:world - with«a corrupt finful nature, is Eph. ii. 1,25 30! This:text 1 fhould have pafied over, it is fo little’ to the purpofe for which it is brought, but that T was willing to take this occafion to give what I. judge to be the moft* obvious and undoubted meaning, not only of the whole paifage; but of thofe words in it in fpecial, “‘ and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.” ~The apo- — _ fle, that he might affe@ the hearts of the Ephe- fian’ Chriftians with an admiring fenfe of the §% rich mercy and creat love wherewith God had loved’ them,” turns their view back, not to what they were when they firft came into exiftence, but’ to what they had been in arrer-virs, before their faith in’ Chrift. Says he, fpeaking of fuch of them’ as were converts from’ Gentilifm, Ye were dead in trefpaffes and fins, wherein, i time paft, ye walked according to the courle ofthis» world; according to the princé of the power ofthe air, the fyirit that now worketh ia the ‘children of difobedience.” He then adds, with reference to himfelf, and thofe who were bet lievine Jews, ‘© among whom alfo we had otir ‘converfation’ in times ‘paft in the lufts of ‘our ‘fleth » fulfilling the defires of the fefh and the a, and ‘were “by nature’ the children “‘6f D Pe ae | wrath, ‘ tek opie DESSERT ATLON Uk wrath, even as others.) ofBhere is stot \ariword’ ” in, this, whole paflage that \ean!sbeyappliedstde thofe converts, either from. Gentilifm:oriJudaifmny: confidered. fimply, in the ftate\in which-they:firtt exifted. Their character. is wholly. drawn ifromy their conduét.in life, APTER they became: capable of a vicious, courfe of ‘ walking in lutt’?:of-have ing. their.“ converfation according to the defires: of the fefh.” And, having thus made themfelves morally. corrupt, and to an high degree of guilty «they were by nature the children, of wrath”, that is, judging of their cafe upon the principles of merenature, they had rendered: themfelves, the objects of Divine wrath, Inis obfervable, the apos file does not fay, “ We arg-by nature thechils dren of wrath,” »? but we WERE; that is, 1m. cons fequence of a paft, wicked, and. fen courle,.of life... He could not have ufedwor more. dis rectly and ftrongly fitted to convey this fentiment, that their being, <« children of wrath” was,owing to their having been perfonally, the §* childrensef difobedience,” and as. fuch, the meet jobjedtsaof the righteous dilpleafure of ,Heavens which was fo evident, that it might be clearly known:-from {© nature,” the law, written on. man’s heart,” without any ela from, fupernatyurak, revelation. « Wewere by nature the children of; wrath» even _ag others.”’. As if the apoftle. had faid, weswho are now. believing Jews. had, |. ‘§ in times pay indulged tonthe lufts of the flefh and mind; jan - taade ourfelves fuch heinous finners, that 5h: C. a certainly ’ DISSERTATION WE w¥ certainly conclude; from’ the law of nature only,’ that pin common with the'like’ finful Gentiles;’and asitruly/as' they, ‘we had rendered’ourfelves jultly dbrioxiows’to the wrath of Almighty God. © This meaning of the apoftle gives the original word PHUSIS; NATURE, its proper full force, is fo obvi- eustatothe firft glance, and? fo perfectly: falls inf with» the: whole* difeourfe.-with which it is cons nected; that:one:can fcarce help wondering it has ; nét ‘been *univerfally perceived and adopted} efpecially if it ’be remembered, that this ‘famé | apoftle has*toldius, ‘that ‘the work of the law; WATUR ALLY wrote on man’s ‘heart,’ fhews itfelf by ithe -witnefs of confcience,” in accufing and condemning, '2as well as excufing: .infomuchy - that thofe who have no other Jaw than that of mere Waiurey may “know that°they who commit fuch fins® are. worthy of death,’ “deferving of God’s wrath, ‘Rom. 1°32. and ii. 14, 15, compared AWheny’ therefore, ‘he is fpeaking; in the paffage ‘Before! us, of thofe who had been abominably dif= ‘obedient? by their:own perfonal- tran{greffions' of athe Divine law; and then fays, they ‘‘ were by mature: the ¢bildren- of wrath,” what more éafy, ents -and, confiftent» meaning, can his ewords) be taken-in than this, that they had, judg- “ing of ‘their cafe upon the principles of mere na- oturey the:dictates of common reafon, made ed felves:<* ‘children of wrath.” . ile tg faid vyet further, the numerous texts of Scripture: avhich affirm, the: neceffity of men’s | Wei | being 126 DESSERTATION Gi. being ‘* born again,” of their being made ** new creatures,” of their being ** anew the»workmans) fhip of God created in Chrift Jefus,” inorder ta. their admiffion into the kingdom. of ‘heaven, are: fo many clear, ftrong, and full proofs, ofour bes ing born.at firft sin a corrupt and: finful nature, “Far from denying the doétrine of the’ ** new birth,” I entirely acquiefce in it»as a Scriprure’ one, highly important, and:clofely»conneéted with’ falvation; infomuch that there cannot«be the’ latter without the former.) But where is the ne> ceffity of grafting this doctrine upomafinful nas: ture, communicated with our beings upon our firft coming into exiftence? The Bibleiteaches us no fuch thing. It is, indeed, the invention of many: ~ and not.a deduction from the word of Gods s\n _ The ftate of the cafe is plainly thiss.as we firft ~ _ come into being, we:are nothing: ‘more than crea» tures of the human kind, in diftin@ion from every other, Our powers are naked capacities: only, which, as they gradually unfold and gain‘ftrength,. - will, by their good or bad improvement, acquire’ different moral qualities, giving us:an anfwerable different character. If our natural powers ‘are’ negleéted, mifimproved, and turned: afide! from their proper ufe, we become morally corrupt;“or finful; but if they are cultivated and improved to our attaining an ACTUAL LrKENEss to’ God in knowledge, righteoufnefs, and true holinefiy we have now a new nature fuperinduced, and ‘ma aeeyatively fpeaking, be’ faid ‘ta’ be ‘new- Ric. | = “4 —" DISSERTATION Ik 187 creatures. Onis a miftake, and a very great one; ' ¢ofay that)we muft be born into the world witha corrupt finful nature, in order to give fenfe to what the Scripture means by the ‘‘ fecond birth.” > The idea it would convey by this metaphor, is thatvacquirement which makes men aéfual living images of God, as being the fubjects of thofe mo- ral qualities which are included in his character as Houy. ‘They are not, upon their firft being born, the fubjeéts of this likenefs; but they have, in their NaTuRe,’a capacity for its fuperindudtion: and whenever it is fuperinduced, they are the perfons*of whom it may be faid, and in Scripture aftually is ‘faid, {that they are ** born again;” andwith great propriety, for they are now in the ~~ moral fenfe, as truly new-born creatures, as, in the watiral fenfe, they were born at firft.) There is not the leaftineed of a fuppofed original ‘finful’ nature, in order to give meaning, and an highly important one, to what the Scripture calls the fetond birth; and it'is, without all doubt, areal .truth; that fome among the * born again” were néver the fubjets of rErenrnc depravity, either patural-or acquired. (In confequence of a good - education, animated by the fuperintending influ- ence of the Divine fpirit, they became pofieffed of thofe: morally good qualities, on account of: which men are called the ©‘ born of God,” the _ ¢© born a fecond time; Jand this, before they: had’ acquired that ftate of mind which would have: made them the \** feryants of corruption.” Not, 22371 that rr us) DISSERTATION UL that this'is a’common cafe.” "Generally peaking - the appetites‘ and’ paffions’ firft’ bear fway,! and gain ftrength, fo as that our nature becomes’ mio+ tally corrupt, or finful, before we are God’s'chil- dren. by being * bora again.” “Invall infkances of this kind, thenew-birth is‘a change; not merely; - or only from our nature in the» fimple ftate in which it was tranfmitted to us, but from our nas ture, as. having had fuperinduced. on it thofe qualities that are morally corrupt or finful.. And, from hence many, have been led to fuppofe, that that finfulnefs that has. been fuperinduged upon nature, is a finfulnefs of nature we jare),all born, with;..and that the new-birth takes» rife from, na, tive depravity, corruption. coéval’ with our, firf exiftence. . But this would, be to.groundfa) great, and good a work.as the ‘* new man, ithe; “f\new> bora creature,” upon a non-entitys; for we are, . not more fure, of any thing than this, thatithete. cannot be moral deppaviiad or finfulnefs;. where, there i is no, prefent capacity for moral agency,) as _ is infallibly the cafe with refpeét to,.every defcend, - ant from Adam, when he firft conn abe Be ing, eS be (Gj. MAGN 6 00 Ay .,The a coulel is; a likenefs to God in his sited character is, effentially, the idea the Scrips. ture would convey by the metaphor of. a) **new. birth.” .\And this likenefs may he an acquires ment, either previous to, or confequent upon; ia moral depravity or finfulnefs of mature.:icin fome, though comparatively few, it re an . «DISSE RTLATON a 189 anattainment previous to, and/preventive of} that - - bondage to corruption,;-which denominates’ men the children; not of God, but of theevil one, * Invothers,» and. by. far -the-moft, itis a fuperins dution, upon: their nature arrer “they hadj%as agents, introduced into it thofe vicious’ qualities; - on account of which they might juftly be called morally corrupt or finful creatures. But ,in no inftances whatever does the ‘ new birth,’ take _ rife from moral, corruption co-exiftent with man’s - pvature, as, atfirft derived; for, in this’ fimples naked ftate,it is not a capable fubjeét of moral corruption, though capable, by mifimprovement, of being made morally corrupt; or, by a due cul-+ ture, under the Divine influence, of attaining thatlikenefs:to God which denominates men his childreny: as being figuratively ** born” or “created..again.”” The facred books, inftead of- interfering with this reprefentation of the mat- ter, perfectly harmonife with it. It,would bean omiffion. if I did not add here, that the faperinducing upon our nature, as at firft tranfimitted’to us, an a@ual likenefs to God in his moral glory, is the refult of that new dif= penfation of grace mankind were placed under after, the, original lapfe; for which reafon-it may, with emphatical propriety, be, defcribed by our being, *€ born. again,” by our. becoming ‘ new creatures,”.and the like. And as this new dif- penfation we are under is founded in Chrift, and has -him at its,head with the ‘Holy Ghoft as his $4 agent; cr SSER TAT PLO Num agents, it is with equal propriety, that itabiie: | to be ‘ born of the {pirit,”? to-be the ‘* work. manfhip of God created in Chrift;Jefus.” Only it fhould be remembered, when, the, Seripture © fpeaks of the ‘‘ new-born creature,’ the ‘f new man. created in Chrift,” the mode -of digtion is figurative. Weare, in a phyfical fenfe; the fame creatures after the ** new birth,” ‘or the: new creation,” we were before. \\ No new faculty i is added to our nature; but whatever is done in'this work, is done upon thofe powers) we at fir brought into the world with us. A’ MORAL alters ation only is effected in us; and this is effeéted'in a way adapted to our character as men, or, what means the fame thing, intelligent ‘moral’ agents. God, it is true, by thie influence of: ‘the Divine fpirit, has the main hand _ in forming the charac ter which gives the denomination of ** new men in Chritt;” but, in the doing of this, he confi- ders us as naturally endowed with the feveral powers of thinking, reflecting, willing, choofing, refufing, hoping, fearing, loving, hating, ‘and the like, and accordingly deals with us as fuch by co-operating all thefe powers in the ufe of meatis fuitably adjufted to their nature. ‘He does not make men his children by regeneration without - the ufe of their own faculties, neither ‘does he form them to his own moral likenefs by giving . . them any phyfically new faculties, or by deftroying or making any phyfical change in their old ones; but accomplifhes his pleafure i in them-by accom- : modating | € ’ * Mr. Edwards, gn € Original Sin,” page 317. . o Se a a PI i DISSERTATION UT 19% triodating- his agency to’ their proper make and conftitution,; “The Bible ‘always fers the matter Pi point of light. ‘And this method of ‘act- "ing exhibits the true reafon, and the only confilt= ent intelligible one, of the ‘creation of the’ go- _ tpel kingdom, with its various means, seit pri- vileges, motives, and bleffings. I have now offered what may be thought fuffi- cient to make it evident, that we do not come into oe exiftence with a morally corrupt or finful nature: nor, may I pertinently add here, is our nature, as tranfimitted to us, fo deftitute of all capacity for that which is morally good, as that a native to- tal corruption of heart becomes hereupon univer- fal,-without the exception of a fingle defcendant ‘fromthe one man Adam. This, of late, appears to be the fentiment of fome, who would be thought to be more confiftent and refined Calvin- ifts than their brethren., Says one*, in this way of reprefenting the matter, * In order to account ** for a finful corruption of nature, yea, a total ‘** native depravity‘of the heart of man, there is not the leaft need of fuppofing any evil quality © infufed, implanted, or inwrought into the na- *€ ture of man, by any pofitive epite or influence ‘s. whatever, either from God, or the creature; ‘* or of fuppofing, that man is conceived and ny “born, with a fountain of evil in his heart, fuch “« asis any. thing pofitive.”. How, then, poflibly -Can 2) 168 jlo can be a “ total warave depravity the children of Adam, of, in other they fhould come into paisa ct finful, and totally fo, without ¢ ee 7 05 ence either of God or man, is afecrett has not feen fit. to reveal, and ity Ww 1, withor doubt, remain a myftery to ‘the or of t Befides, by affirming, as he does*, w peremptorinefs, a fr: doétrine a © neither implies or infers any corr © fufed into the human nature by ence, or any quality, taint, eee © tion, altering the natural vondieae ion _ fact “ ties, and difpofitions of our fouls,” he di contradicts the doctrine of “ native univer ruption of heart,” as received, _ftrenuoufly pleaded for by Calvinifts of ! _eft rank for learning, and other aaa pg natural 1 or acquired. But what is his pecu _ this point? Take it in his own words. Nae ‘c J think a little attention to ‘the pimp «¢ things will be fufficient to fatisfy an . confiderate enquirer, that the ae « tive good principles, and fo the _© of a fpecial Divine influence to nr and -& maintain thofe good origi Nera the «* common natural principles of f felf-love, n ise ad rectly «¢ ral appetite, &c. (¥ which were in man in * Mr, Edwards, on « Original Sin,” pa Page 316. aie og + Ibid, ~ see) | cilleal : } t cence) Jeaving thefe, I fay, to themfelves with- - “yout the government of fuperior Divine prin= ! ‘ciples, will certainly be followed with the cor- © guption, yea, the total corruption of the ¢ heart, without occafion for any pofitive influ- ence at all; and yet it was thus, indeed, that “© corruption of nature came on Adam immedi- #: ately on his fall, and comes on all his pofterity 6 as finning in him, and falling with him.” This is his notion. But he goes on more parti< cularly to open and explainit. Says he*, * The * cafe with man was plainly this: when God «© made man at firft, he implanted in him two «: kinds of principles: ‘There was an inferior « kind, which may be called naturat, being the principles of mere human nature, fuch as * felf-love, with thofe natural appetites and paf- € fions which belong to the nature of man, in ¢ which his love to his own liberty, honour, and « pleafure, were exercifed: thefe, when alone, - © and left to themfelves, are what the Scriptures «© fometimes call FresH. Befides thefe, there © were fuperior principles that were fpiritual, «holy, and divine, fummarily comprehended in : Divine love; wherein confifted the fpiritual « image of God, and man’s righteoufnefs, and “ true holinefs; which are called in Scripture “the Divine nature. Thefe principles may, in. « fome fenfe, be called eke tbe a being ios Mr. Edwards, on ** Original Sin,” pages 317, 318, 319. ts vs. ba © ‘ @) bs (how- DISSERTATION lll, 193, = a aN ec 6c : aS ae «ce ce ce wh DISSERTATION BE ‘(However concreated ‘or ‘connate) fuch asvare ‘above thofe principles that ‘are!efféntially im- plied in, or neceffarily refulting from, and/in-— feparably connected with, were buman nature’ and being fuch as immediately’ depend on man’s union and communion with God, or divine communications and influences of’God’s ‘ {pirit; which, though withdrawn, and? man’s nature forfaken of thefe principles, human ‘nature would be human nature ftill; man’s na- ture, as fuch, being entire without’ ache divine principles, which the Scripture fometimes ‘calls ‘SPIRIT, in contradiftin@tion to FLESH. Thefe fuperior principles were given to poffels’ the throne, and maintain an abfolute dominion i in the heart: the other, to be’ wholly fubordinate -and fubfervient. When man finned sand broke God’s covenant, ‘and fell under his curfe, thefe Juperior principles left his heart: and thus 1 man was left ina ftate of darknefs, woeful corrup- tion, and ruin, nothing but fle without jpirit. It were eafy to thew how every luft and de- praved difpofition would naturally arife from privative original, if here were room — for it. Only God’s withdrawing, as “it were highly proper and neceflary he fhould, ‘from Hs man, being, as it were, driven away by * abominable wickednefs, and man’s. oe principles being /eft to them/elves, this is cient to account for his’ becoming entire ely’ rupt, and bent on Anpias againft God, ‘Aud eas DISSERTATION: I; igs <¢- ag Adam’s nature_became corrupt, without ssGod’s implanting or infufing any evil thing into his nature, fo does the nature of his ftepofterity. God dealing with Adam as the *s head of his pofterity (as has been fhewn), and £* treating them as onz, he deals with his pofte- *¢ rity as having all finned in him, And, there- ** fore, as God withdrew fpiritual communion, s* and his vital influences from the common *« head, fo he withholds the fame. from all the '*€ members, as they come _ into exiftence; © whereby they come into the world mere fleh, “* and entirely under the government of natural - ** and inferior principles; and fo become wholly “* corrupt as Adam did.” This ftate of the cafe, far from. being fetched -. either from reafon or. revelation, is neal in- confiftent with both, { As to Adam:—Where are we told in the facred books, that the. created principles by which he was enabled to love, honour, and obey his Maker, were suPERNATURAL, any more than his other principles, either bodily or mental ?_) The principles he was formed with were, without all doubt, different in their kind, fome /uperior, others inferior; as it was proper they fhould be, becaufe defigned for different ends; fome higher, others lower., But Jet their fuperiority or infe- - tiority -be as it may, they were equally naruRAL to him as a creature of fuch an order in the feale pe beings, | Nay, if Adam, upon his being - . O2 broughe : pe equally aphurd* to me he could be bound to 196 DISSERTATION MM | brought into exiftence, was obliged to"behave with all dutiful reverence and fubmiffion tovhis — Creator, he muft previoufly bave had implaticed | | . in his nature fuch principles as would render this — fervice performable by him. It is’ a contradic- tion to all the ideas we have’ of that which is right and’ fit, to fuppofe otherwifey His ‘being under obligations to duty, and principles in his nature making it poffible for him to” ‘ pef= form it; were abfolutely neceffary concomitants, Thofe /uperior principles, ‘therefore, in’ ‘onfe= quence of which he might pay homage to*his God, ‘were no more suPERNATURAL, than his appetites, paffions, affections, or any other prin= ciples of his nature: they were EssenTIAL to him as a moral agent, placed under moral obligations. to the Deity. It lay wholly with God to choofe, whether he would make him at all, or what fort of creature he’ would make him; but if he faw fit to make him a being of whom he required, ‘and from whom he expected, the return of love, gratitude, and .conftant obedience, it was in it felf right, yea abfolutely neceflary, that -he -fhould endue his nature with principles, rendering it poflible for him to do what .was thus expected _.and required of him. \ Had he.created him with- out the natural organs of fight or hearing, could -he have been obliged to ‘perceive the difference ‘between colours and founds, ‘or! to have: shad.in his mind fo much as the idea/of either It would love DISSERTATION? HL 197 Jove/and honour God, if he had not been formed with a capacity in ‘his nature fitting him herefor. Such a capacity, upon fuppofition a fuch abli- gation, is rather a matter of juftice than of grace. ‘Without the former, the latter would be cent Wrong, unfit, unjuft. : ~ A.diftinction ought always to be made kienten Adam’s implanted powers, and the ufe or exer- ' cife, of them. His well-ufing or abufing thefe powers, Juperior or inferior, did not give him the denomination of man, that is, a creature of fuch a tank in the order of being: but it was ESsEN= Tau, to his being thus denominated, that his nature. fhould be endued with principles that _ would render it poffible for him to conduét him- felf :conformably to what was required of him, Such principles were neceffary ingredients in his conftitution as man, and infeparable from it; infomuch that he could not have-exifted a crea- ture of this rank or kind without them. His approving himfelf a good man, or becoming a bad‘ one, was dependent on the ufe he fhould make of his implanted principles; but he could not have been a creature under moral obligations to love and ferve his Maker, if no principles had been implanted in his nature; in confequence of which this would have been a performable duty: nor, would I further fay, does it appear ‘from the facred books, or elfewhere, that God, even after his lapfe, ever withdrew from him, Beoseiee hereby his leaving his nature entirely bs O 3 devoid —— ae 198 DISSERTATION ; _ devoid’ of thefe effentially neceflary principles, ‘ Ie would be highly unreafonable in itfel{ and — gteatly difhonorary to the all-wife; righteous, and — benevolent Ruler of the world; to fuppofe fuch a thing, if it be at the fame timefuppofed, that he - faw fit to continue him in being under like moral obligations to do duty to him. Surely, if Adam . had been divefted of that capacity in his nature, - that principle, or whatever other name any! may pleafe to give it, without which it would have been as impofiible for him to love and honour the Deity, as to fee without having eyes, orto hear - without having ears; he never would, he never ~ reafonably could, upon being deprived of this - ¢apacity; have had this required of him. God “might, it is true, upon the offence he had com- mitted, have immediately turned him out-of exiftence, as he threatened he would; the effeé& whereof would have been the total lofs of all his principles, bodily and mental, and of ‘alll his ob- ligations: but he faw~ fit, notwithftanding his fapses to continue him in being (though under a fentence of death), and with the fame natural effential principles he was endued with before his fall. The facred books, far from fuggefting any thing to the contrary, ditectly lead us to think thus of the matter. The new ftate of trial he was placed under, in order to his reigning in eternal - life after death, is clearly, I may fay effentially, connected herewith. To fay that he now exifted © devoid of all capacity in nie nature.to do what was F DISSERTATION* IL 199 was required under this new ftate, would be. as _ abfurd-and unreafonable, as it was in the tafk- ' mafter.of Egypt to require “ the full tale of brick without giving any ftraw.” Had. there been, upon Adam’s.lapfe, a total withdraw of that*faculty, principle, or capacity in his na- - ture, without which. a compliance with the-de- _ mands of the new eftablilhment he was under would have been impoffible, it muft have been reftored, or it would have been palpably abfurd to have made fuch demands, To require that of a creature, though fallen, if placed under a new trial upon the foot of grace, which he has no principle in his nature, no faculty rendering it poffible for him to perform, is, in the moral fenfe, abfolutely wrong, and muft intuitively appear. to be fo to all who have not perverted ‘their underftandings. To reprefent Adam, therefore, as left deftitute of thofe /aperior prin- ‘eiples in his nature, the total abfence of which, even under that difpenfation of grace in which he was placed, muft have been followed with a total corruption of heart, and impoffibility of doing any thing that could be pleafing to his Maker, is ~ ‘a° bafe flander injurioufly refle€ted on the good God ; and the more fo, as it is entirely the refult of 4 vain imagination, and not the dictate either of reafon or Scripture. What has been faid with reference to Adam, is equally, to be fure, not lefs forceably, appli- -*¢able to’ his pofterity.. It would argue their Bs O 4 being oe” © oie - Se NAR tee! a ch + 200 |©=«# DISSERTATION UL? being cruelly, I may rather fay” ‘unjuttly, deale - with, to fuppofe, that they come ‘into exiftence under obligations to attain to a truly virtuous — character, under the penalty of eternal» tuiny — while they are, at the fame time, fuppofedde- — void of any faculty, or principle in their nature, in the exercife of which, it would bey poffible for them, by complying with their obligations, . to efcape this ruin. The entire want, or abfence of a principle or faculty’ in their’ nature, the effect whereof would unavoidably be a. total corruption in heart and life, and a liablenefs hereupon to certain remedilefs mifery,. is, fin reality of conftruction, precifely the fame thing, as if they had been brought into this wretched condition by the poftive infufion of principles that are corrupt. There is certainly no-dif- ference as to the unavoidablenefs of the event; nor is there any, in point of equity, as:tothe - way in which this event is effected. If they muft be'corrupt creatures, and as fuch expofed 'to;the vengeance of. heaven, it matters’ not’ whether, what is thus unavoidable, takes rife from poftive or privative principles ; the infufion of thofe that - are bad, or the withholding thofe which would ‘have made it poffible they might not have got into this deplorable ftate. The Scripture, far from giving this abfurd account of the matter, is particularly clear and exprefs in affuring: wsj that the pofterity of Adam, notwithftanding: his lapfe, or any confequences of it, comeunto! ex- iftence air SERTATION IN0 cor iftentce under an eftablifhment of grace, putting themupon trial: for an eternal happy life after | death. (It is accordingly declared, in all parts of the’ facred books, that they fhall be’ dealt with, in the great day of retribution, conform- ably to what they have done in the body; and that it will be their own fault, not owing to Adam, or any other being in heaven, or hell; or earth, but wholly to themfelves, and the mif- ufe of the faculties they were endued with, if they are adjudged to mifery, and not happinefs. ) Now the fuppofition only of their being in fuch a ftate of trial is in itfelf an abfurdity, as being jnconfiftent with that which is morally fit sell tight, if there is in their nature the total abfence, or want of a capacity, faculty, or principle, without which this trial they are placed under, would unavoidably prove ruinous to them. Is there any underftanding to which it would not appear grofsly abfurd to fuppofe, that men fhould be: put under trial for their perceptions of founds or colours, if they had no organs planted in their. -conftitution, making it poffible for them either to hear or fee? The abfurdity is not lefs glaring to fay, that they come into a world in which they are under trial as to their being truly virtuous, when, at the fame time, it is affirmed, that they have no faculty, no capacity in their nature, in the ufe or exercife of which this is poffible. It is, indeed, upon fuch a capacity in nature, which the human kind come into exiftence endued with, BIGSs1 that 202, nie SERTATIONSHN that the fcheme of | grace, through: Chritt sia, _ grounded. Ic does not fuppofe that any faculty; or principle, proper to man as-a moral, intelli< gent agent, or that Adam, the fir progenitor, | . \q . : had implanted in his conftitution, was deftroyed — by the lapfe, either naturally, or by pofitive de- privation; nor does it make provifion for the fuperinduction of any phyfically new faculty:or — capacity in any of the fons.of men;, but what. ever it propofes thould .be done,.is done upon faculties or capacities they bring inte the world with exiftence itfelf. It does not lead us to think, that their becoming vicious, inftead of _- virtuous, is owing to the want, or abfence, of a faculty or, principle in their nature, without _ which this is abfolutely unavoidable; but to their own negligence,. folly, and fin, in not makin, ~ that ufe of their. implanted principles and facul- ties they might have, done, and ought to have done, under the helps and advantages they are favoured. with. And, in truth, had. they, no faculty or capacity in their nature, in the exer- cife of which they could, upon the eftablithment of grace through Chrift, attain the charaéter of © virtuous perfons, the whole gofpel-apparatus of means, helps, advantages, arguments, and mo- tives, could be: of no more confideration, than preaching over the graves of men naturally dead and buried would be, in order to «their rifing . alive out of them. There mult be a capacity, or principle in nature, in confequence of which 2) men, Kee ha - Pe er. ase aie ig DISSERTATION IIE = 203 gien’ may be truly virtuous, or it is impoffible they fhould be fo. If therefore this capacity is wanting in human nature,-or abfent from it, it muft be created and introduced by the almighty Miraculous power of God, or means, motives, perfuafion, and the like, will be fo many no- things. We might as well be without them as withthem, They would have no more influence © upon the produétion of this faculty, or principle, than mere founds would have to give life to the dead in their graves: ‘nor, in this cafe, would there be a foundation laid in nature either for re or punifhment. « The plain truth is, it is always taken for seslitet, in the gofpel fcheme of grace, that the _pofterity of Adam come into exiftence with im- Planted capacities, or principles, in the due ufe of which they may attain to a moral likenefs to. God, and meetnefs for the enjoyment of him; and it provides for the help” and guidance of ‘thofe implanted principles, in order to prevent, ina moral way adapted to the character of ‘moral agents, their becoming ‘* the fervants of fin:” or, fhould this be unhappily the cafe, it affords all needed affiitance in order to their being * delivered ‘from the bondage of corrup- ‘tion into the glorious liberty of the fons of God.” And this, it effects, not by creating new underftanding, but by enlightening the old “" ‘one; not by producing any new faculties, but ’y feverally mpEITIOE to old ones, according to their a 204 (DISSERTATION I 4 their refpective natures. h "Nothing lands new is introduced, no power, no principle,sno — - €apacity, by which we difcern; choofe, relith, . approve, love, or hate, whatwwe couldinot be- — fore, through the abfence, or want, ofja faculty — in our nature herefor. There is indeed-no need of the infufion of any new faculty in orderto:our being ‘* new men in Chrift,” and) interefted; as _ fuch, in the promifes of the gofpel-covenant. — The due exercife of thofe naturally planted in © the human conftitution, will be fufficient forithe purpofe ; and they may be. thus effeétually-exer- cifed under the helps, means, and advantages ‘of that kingdom of grace God has. created: in our lapfed world. 2M It will perhaps be faid here, there is ‘no i. culty or principle in the nature of Adath’s pofterity, as fuch, to diftinguifh between moral good and evil, or to perceive the beauty of the former, and the deformity of the latter,” fo as to . approve and relifh the one, and difapprove and he difgufted at the other, The anfwer is vealy. . The God of nature has fo framed our minds, and _given us fuch a natural power of difcernment, that it muft be owing to fome great fault. we ourfelves are perfonally chargeable with, if we cannot at once ice the diffcromen between right and wrong, in the more important points of moral obligation. Will any man, who has ftrangely vitiated his perceptive powers, prete that he cannot, or does not fee it £0. be aa 7 DISSERTATION Ml, 20g and fit, on the one hand, for fuch creatures ag _ we are, to love, honour, and worfhip the God who gave'us our beings; and, on the other, to be unfit and wrong to hate him, and behave with irreverence and undutifulnefs towards him? _ Will any man, not deprived of natural reafon, - _ «almly and deliberately fay, that he does not at f! once fee it to be right, that-he ‘ fhould do to others as they ought to do to him,” and wrong that he fhould do otherwife ?. Will any man, not loft to: common fenfe, pretend, that he cannot fee-a difference between honefty and knavery, -kindnefs and cruelty, brotherly love and hatred, chaftity and lewdnefs, temperance and debauch- ery; or that he does not perceive the former to -be amiable lovely virtues, and the latter de- teftable infamous vices? The moral difference between thefe tempers and behaviours is felf- evident to thofe who have not blinded their eyes, and rendered themfelves not eafily capable _of difcernment. There needs no argumenta- tion, no feries of intermediate ideas to enable men to perceive this difference; and that it. is, “on the one hand, right; and, on the other, “wrong. The bare mentioning thefe virtues and vices, provided it be done in intelligible words, is at once fufficient, not only to enforce convic- tion, but to excite approbation or difapproba- tion;, unlefs men have, by their own perfonal folly, perverted the operation of the natural powers they brought into the world with them. ody true reafon, why they are fo prone to prac- tife ay a6 «DISSERTATION HL. tife vice rather than virtue, is. not becaufe they a do not difcern a difference between. the one and | the other, or becaufe they inwardly approve the former, and difapprove of the latter; “~but-be- — caufe they are enticed and drawn afide of their lufts, It is a real and certain truth; iniregard even of wicked men, that they often dot hat; a induced thereto by their apperites and” paffic which their reafon condemns, “They “may, & an habitual indulgence to fenfual gratficatons become, in time, the willing flaves’ of ‘corr tion, perceiving little or no ftrugele’ hebredh “¢ the law of their members, and the law of their mind.” But this is not the ordinary ftate of finners. There are comparatively few, very few, who gratify their lufts, but with fore. contett ‘between their animal appetites, and the r remon- ftrances of their inner man. They give into thefe and thofe gratifications, not becatfe they do not perceive them to be unreafonable, but becaufe their flefhly part gets the better of vie mental. And to this it is owing, that the os do thofe things which are ftrongly ies of by their underftandings: nay, ‘they fegandy hate with their minds thofe aétions they are be trayed into by the powerful influence of thei animal inclinations. I doubt not, I here {pe | the real experience of moft wicked men. It is indeed the truth refpecting all, who ha ae oie habitual folly awfully corrupted’ thei powers. By thefe we are fitted, not perceive ate DISSERTATION iff. e207 perceive moral: forms, and. the difference ‘be-_ tween them, ~but to feel the beauty and excel- _ dency of virtuous ones, and the upglinefs and deformity of thofe that are vicious. This capacity thaS not been deftroyed by the lapfe; and it is, ‘perhaps, impoffible it fhould be totally deftroy- ved, but by the deftruétion of the faculty itfelf by which we perceive at all. It is accordingly thetruth of faét, that men, who, by their perfonal folly, have __ awfully vitiated their underftandings, and moral — tafte too, are yet capable of feeing, and feeling, a beauty and glory in‘ characters that are the re- verfe of theirown. When placed before their view, ina ftrong point of light, they. command — their approbation; they cannot but own ’their perception: of that which is amiable and excellent in them; though, at the fame time, they are afhamed they are not themfelves the fubjeéts of this giory. Ms Upon the whole of what has been offered, it appears, (that our nature, as tranfmitted from Adam, is neither morally corrupt, or devoid of -. thofe faculties or principles, in the exercife of which we may, under the means, helps, andad- vantages we are favoured with, become the fub- jects of thofe qualities, which will prepare us for honour and: immortality in God’s kingdom that is above 2) but ftill, it would be greatly befide the truth to fay, that it is as perfec? as our firft father Teceived it from the creating hand of God, and _ that we are as able, notwithftanding any difad- es 4 _ vantage « —— 208 DISSERTATION — 4 vantage that has happened to us, by reafonatt juld lapfe, to obey our Maker, as he was in paradifes This, I am fenfible, is the opinion of fome; but it appears to me a great miftake.. And I cannot but wonder, that thofe fhould fall into it, who have been much converfant in the apoftle Paul’s writings. His Epiftles, in general, and his Epifile to the Romans in particular, cannot, as I imagine, be underftood upon, any other fuppo- -fition than this, that mankind, \in. confequence of the lapfe of the one man Adam, came into ___.. the world under a difadvantageous ftate of nature ; infomuch that it is morally impoffible they fhould, upon the terms of law, lawdisjoined from grace, obtain either the juftification of life, or that meetnefs for heaven, without which they. can=. not have admiffion into that bleffed places) and this I fhall now endeavour to confirm with all the clearnefs and brevity I can, In order _ where- to, let the following things be carefully attended. . tO: # . b I gh sas Aliy 33 1. The apoftle Paul, in his Epiftle to ) the Ro- mans, has diftinétly and largely. proved, not that mankind are totally corrupt in heart and life, either by the pofitive infufion of bad principles, sor the withdrawment of good ones; but that, when they are capable of moral action, they will. fo far tranfgrefs the rule, as to be incapable of claim- ing juftification upon the foot of naked Jaw. proof he has exhibited of iis is contained i i. ' fuppofed; that the charaéter he here draws ‘of. DISSERTATION If. 205 the threefirft chapters of this Epiftle; where we fhallefind: a. very melancholy account’ of the degenerate ftate the whole world of men, then eonfifting of Jews and Gentiles, -had fank into. Ie cannot, indeed, with any face‘of reafon, be Jews and Gentiles ‘juftly belonged, in’ all its lineaments, to either of them individually confi- dered. There were, without all doubt, among both thefe bodies of men, a number, who had “€"efeapéd the pollutions” that were common in that day “* through luft:” nay, there is no reafon to think but that fome, at leaft, of the indici- duals that conftituted thofe collefive bodies, were Feally good men, in the gofpel-mitigated fenfe of the words; but ftill, ic was true of — all, that they had “ gone out of the way ;” not equally, viewed as individuals, but in various degrees, fome in one, others in another, and the @enerality in an high degree; infomuch that the Apoftle might juftly defcribe them, in the grofs, as awfully corrupt. For this was the real truth of their charatter; though it might be faid ‘Of fome*of them, in the said? fente? that they were finners only in the eye of law, as fepa- tated from'the grace that is in Chrift Jefus, And that it was really the defign of the Apoftle. ‘to give US to underftand, that they were all Gh- - ‘ners’ in the judgment of rigid law, individually Ypeakihe, and not in the colleéfive fenfe only, — ““thouldfeem ‘evident beyond all reafonable dif- me - P putes 210 DISSERTATION Mh pute. ‘How:elfe could he) fay, chap: iii. ve “, We have before proved both Jews and ‘Gen- tiles, that they are at. under fin?” How elfe could’ he fay, in confequence) of this) proof, 4 ver. 19. ‘* that EVERY MovTH is flopped) and ALL THE WORLD become guilty before God?” ; t How elfe could he introduce, from his thréad — of reafoning in thefe chapters, the univerfal :con= | clufion, ver. 20. ‘therefore, by the deeds of — the law thall no Friesx be juftified in his fight?” And, in fhort, how elfe could he go on. and affirm, aS in ver. 21. that “¢ now,” that is, under the gofpel, ‘* the righteoufnefs of God,” the righteoufnels God will accept in) the affair of juftification, ‘* without law,”-upon another foot than that of mere law, ‘ is manifefted?” And again, ver. 24. ‘* that we are juftified freely by his [God’s] grace, through the redemption, that is in Jefus!” And yet again, ver. 28. * therefore: we conclude, that a man is juftified. by. wom without the deeds of the law iy; sabiaos It fhould feem indubitably clear, : saaihe Apoftie’s aim was to teach, and eftablifh, juftifi- — cation upon other than Jaw terms; ‘and that his reafoning, in the three firft chapters of ‘this Epiftle, was principally direéted to fettle this important point. But if, in confequence of *his reafoning, it is not the truth of fact that*both’ Jews and Gentiles were finners in the a¢count of fri law, confidered inpiviDUALLY as well a8 ere a be there is no argumentative’ con-~ nection 7 DISSERTATION UL QU8 nection between, the point he had in view, and the reafoning he has ufed. to defend and fupport it. Nay, if ic were true of any one individual, whether i in the Jewifh or Gentile world, that he was not a finner, judging of his character by law, without grace, the Apoftle has left his doctrine of the impoffibility of juftification upon the terms of law, without folid proof, at leaft, in regard of that univerfality in which he has afferted, and endeavoured to maintain it. . He can, in a word, be looked upon as a confiftent conclufive writer upon no other fcheme than this, that Jews and Gentiles, individually as well as collectively con- fidered, were finners in the eye of law, as having been the breakers of it in a lefs or greater de- - gree, and therefore not within the poffibility of _ being juftified upon a trial by fo feverearule. . “I may pertinently add here, that the Apoftle’s reafoning, with refpect to-the unattainablenefs of juftification upon the terms of law, ought to be confidered as referring not only to mankind as exifting at the time when he wrote, but to man- kind in all after-ages to the end of time. For _ the confequence he deduces, from his method of qibistore by the deeds a6 the law, there fhall NO FLESH be jultified in his fight.” No FLEsH; that i is, no fon of Adam, not one of the human race... Nor, unlefshe is to be underftood as taking. into his meaning mankind _univerfally, have we, in thefe days, any concern with his P 2 ; doétrine- 22° DISSERTATEON Mh — doétrine of * juftification without law?” whereas, ) he moft certainly wrote with a view to after-ages, — ‘as well as that in which he lived;* defigning to” affirm, and prove, that no man, in any age till the end of the world, could be juftified upon — mere law-terms; becaufe, in the eye of naked — law, they could not, but be found guilty before God. ‘And the real truth is, his reafoning upon — ‘this head is as applicable to mankind univerfally | in thefe'days, as to mankind at the time when he — wrote his Epiftle. For it is as true now, as it was then, and has all along been fo, that they have — univerfally finned. Not that mankind, in all ages, have been finners juft in the fame degree — _ as in the Apoftle’s days; but they now are, always have been, and always will be, finners in fuch a fenfe, as that it is impoffible they. ‘thould | be juftified by the rule of ftrit law. | And this account of his reafoning, it is Bb: fervable, perfe€tly coincides with the reprefenta- tions that are, every where elfe, given of this matter in Scripture. Says the infpired David, Pfalm: cxxx. 3. “ If thou, Lord, thouldeft mark iniquities, O Lord, who fhall ftand?” And again, Pfalm cxliii. 2. «« Enter not into judgment with thy fervant; for in thy fight fhall no man living be juftified.” To the like purpofe is the Baeliiicia’ in the book of Job, chap. ix. ver. ait «© How fhould man be juft with God ? If he con- tend with him, he cannot anfwer him: ‘one of a thoufand.” *To the fame purpofe till ae vias ge SEU 2h vf Fe \ DISSERTATION I. 213 words of Solomon, Ecclef. vii. 20. “ There is not a juft man upon earth that doth good, and finneth not.” Agreeable whereto the apoftle John affures us, in his firft Epittle, chap. i. ver. 8. ‘that “* if we fay we have no fin, we deceive our- felves, and the truth is not in us.” 2. (The apoftle Paul, and indeed all the facred writers of the New Teftament, do as certainly ‘ground man’s fanr@ification, as their juftification, on the fcheme of grace that is opened in the. gofpel ;) giving us to underftand, that no fon of Adam can, upon any other foot, attain to a ‘* free- ~ dom from fin,” any more than ‘* condemnation.” Their language is as full and exprefs upon the former, as the latter of thefe points. Hence the gofpel is called, verfe 2. of the 8th chapter of the Epiftle to the Romans, ‘* The law of the Spirit of life,” which makes us * free from the Jaw of fin and death.” Hence “ the righteouf- nefs of the law” is faid, ver. 4..to be « “fulfilled by thofe who walk after the Spirit,” that is, ‘as influenced and conducted by the Spirit of God, who is exhibited in the gofpel plan as the “difpenfer of all gracious affiftances. Hence our ¢ mortifying the deeds of the body” is fpoken of, ver. 13. as accomplifhed ‘* through the ——s Spirit,” that is, help miniftered from him. C And ° hence our attainment to a ftate. of moral reétitude, -is every where attributed to thofe influences 4 pice are beyond the power of mere nature. i P43 . Agreeably, . DISADVANTAGEOUS STATE OF NATURE. ai4 gitxth x ae Agreeably, we are not only faid to: be - sain again,” to be ‘‘ created again,” tobe ** renewed an the inner man;” but to be “born ‘of the Spirit,” to be “ created in Chrift Jefus,” to be «renewed by the Holy Ghoft;” the evident ~ purport of which texts is, that, upon our be- coming good men, we have, as it were, a new moral exiftence, and have it from the grace and fpirit of God, through Jefus Chrift; and not in confequence of the fole workings of mere nature. And this is equally true of all the fons of Adam, whether they are Jews or Gentiles. In fhort (for it would be needlefs to enlarge in fo plain a cafe), it is very obvioufly the great feope, efpe- cially of the apoftle Paul’s writings, to teach us, that our condition in the world is fuch, as that it is impoffible, by the force of mere nature, under | a difpenfation of rigid law, to attain to a ftate . of fanétification,, any more than juftification. He equally grafts both thefe attainments on the gofpel-plan; nor can his writings be made intelligible and confiftent upon any ase pofition. * 394/10 . 3. I now add, in the laft place, that va oc ‘ dittinaly and particularly acquainted: us ‘with, the true rife, or occafonal caufe of all this; namely, ‘our coming into exiftence through the firft: man Adam, baal: in confequence of Hig lapfe, ae a Bes} * "are feveral paffages in the sth chapter DISSERTATION WM. 216 Epiftle to the Romans, which evidently carry in thenr this meaning: nor can they be underftood, eas I imagine, in any other fenfe, fovas to make the Apoftle a coherent conclufive writer. The »paflages I refer to are thofe, in general, con- tained in the 12th to the end of the 19th verfe ; ‘more efpecially thefe words, «* Wherefore, as by one man fin entered into the world, and ' death by fin; and fo death has pafied upon all men, for that all have finned: 1] would read the lait words <“* for that all have finned,” [ee @ RAVTES rear tov | UPON WHICH, IN CONSE- QUENCE OF wHicH, all have finned; or, in other words, are in fuch a ftate, under fuch cir- - cumftances, as that it is morally impoffible but they fhould /@ far fin, as to be incapable | of being juftified by law without grace, or of attaining to a meetnefs for the future glory and immortality. That this is the meaning of the Apoftle in thefe words, or that, by ufing them, he had it in defign to reprefent ‘ the one offence of the one man Adam,” as that which gave rife,- or occafion, to the difadvantageous circumftances under which his pofterity come into} ence, in confequence of which they will cu fin- ‘ners, and unfit for heavenly happinefs, fhould they be dealt with according to law, without the intervening mixture of grace: I fay, that thisis - - the idea the Apoftle intended to convey, we fhall ~ endeavour, in a fupplemental differtation, largely - to > il And I chofe to offer what was proper P 4 and ~he ha 216 DISSERTATION ra and neceflary to be faid Upon, this, head indie { ring differtation, that I might, not ngage ithe, attention of the common. reader to what he might think too tedious, as well as hard Tayhewoader iigte iin ' From the two foregoing pattiguiaee and, the laft, as illuftrated in the Supplement to this Work, it undeniably appears, that mankind come intal the world, in confequence of Adam’s lapfe, not .. only fubjeéted to death, but to fuch a fate of nature as renders it impoffible they fhould, uponja rule of law not mixed with grace, obtain the joftifis cation of life, or that moral rectitude, without which they cannot be happy as moral and intel - ligent agents. ) And I have taken the more, pains upon hig head, becaufe the gofpel-fcheme,, as fet forth in the writings of the apoftle Paul, takes rife from BOTH THESE DISADVANTAGES, derived to us in confequence of the lapfe of our firft father Adam; and this, with evidence fo clear and full, that it is really unaccountable any, who have made ic their bufinefs to. ftudy. his Epittles, fhould declare to the world, that Hi mankind derive from Adam as good « a nature as efore his lapfe ;”, that is, a nature, as wellfurnithed to attain to a ftate of moral retti- tude, and that the “ gofpel-fcheme no cotherwife refers to the lapfe of Adam, than as it delivers his pofterity from the power of death, to which they had thereby been fubjected.” Fore if this: is “Mes reprefentation of the cafe, the Fa, j DISSERTATION Ul. a7 of Adam thad no more need of the gofpel- dif. penfation to promote fanétity in them, than he had to. promote it in him in his innocent ftate, however they might need it to deliver them from the power of the grave. For poffeffing, by fup- pofition, a nature as well fitted’ for warn attain- ments as his, they might, without the gofpel, have been the actual fubjects of them as well as ‘hes but, furely, the apoftle Paul has given us a quite different account of this matter. Can any, who have .carefully ftudied his Epiftles, his Epiftle to the Romans in fpecial, with the leaft face of reafon, pretend, that mankind, in his ‘ wiew of the cafe, ftand in no more need of the gofpel than innocent Adam, in order to. their attaining to a freedom from the power of their flefhly nature? and that the gofpel relates to no other difadvantage, arifing from his lapfe, than our certain liablenefs to fuffer death? It muft be owing to fome ftrange bias of mind, if it is not perceived that the dpatile Paul makes it impof- fible, that any fon of Adam fhould attain to a. ftate of moral reéfitude without the gofpel, or by the fole force of mind, or reafon; and that the gofpel-difpenfation was as truly erected in relief of our weakue/s and imperfection, in ourfelves fimply confidered, with refpe& to fanéiijication, asto deliver us from death which had got doni- nion over us. | It has been faid by no lefs a writer than Dr. Taylor, and by others from him, ‘that it cannot Uariie:: ) be “OM AS RO eRe ag DISSERTATION fl, be colleéted from any thing that was either faid or done by Adam before his’ fall; that «his faculties were fuperior to what they were after= wards, or that they exceeded the faculties ‘his potterity have been endowed with fince.” Should this be allowed, it will not follow (as has been largely proved already in anfwer to this objec- tion), but that he might, notwithftanding, have poffeffed faculties that would have enabled him, -by ufe and exercife, in due time to have at- tained to vaftly more exalted degrees, both of knowledge and holinefs, than any of his potterity are capable of in their prefent ftate. 9° 9) 9 And it is with me paft all doubt, that this ts ' the truth of the cafe. For if it be a real fat, as ‘we have in fome of the foregoing pages ens deavoured to prove it from the Scripture'to be, that the earth has been changed fron its’priftine ftate by the curse of God, it is highly congruous to reafon to fuppofe, that fome analogous change’ has been made alfo in the conftitutions of: men, fitting them to live on it. And, without intro- ducing the immediate agency af God to effect. this Ore oy it may eafily be accounted for, It is both natural and philofophical to think, that ‘the dodily conftitution of Adam might be gra- dually altered, upon his being turned out of paradife, into a world that had been curfed of God; that is, fo changed as to be» adapted: to very different purpofes from what it Ww *be- fore. It could not indeed have been ot fe. E a slifhed | j _ JDISSERTATION Ill. ‘arg Eftablifhed connections made it neceffary. -A ehange in external nature, rendering it /e/s perfect, — would, in confequence of fettled laws uniformly 4aking place, produce a like change in his bodily . mhachine, gradually reducing it to a ftate fimilar toitfelf. And if his bodily nature was rendered lefs perfec?, the difadvantage would unavoidably have extended to his foul. For as his foul acted by the medium of his body, its exertions muft have been proportioned to its fitnefs as an inftru~ ment to act by; which amounts, in true fenfe and reality of conftruction, to the fame thing, pre- cifely, asif a change had been made in his foul it- felf, becaufe its faculties, with refpec& to their afe or exercife, is all we are concerned with in the- prefent argument. And asthe pofterity of Adam « were to have exiftence as derived to them through him, and to hold it in a world that lies under the curfe it was doomed to for his offence, it could not-be but it muft have been in the like changed and lefs perfect ftate*. , ; And * I have fuppofed, in the above reafoning, that our firft fae ther might have been gradually changed, according to the efta- ‘blithed courfe of nature, into a “f perfez creature, in confe- quence of the curse that was faftened on the earth by reafon of his lapfe; though it might alfo have been effefted in a more di- rect way, by the immediate agency of God. A change in his body, as his foul could a& only by thatas its infirument, was all that was neceflary. And why may it not be thought that the dedy of Adam, upon his lapfe, was deprived, in a meafure, of that perfection, asa machine, which it had in his innocent ftate, and by the fame power that originally formed it? Poffibly the refur- aa rection- "Be ‘DISSERTATION 1m And. it was, perhaps, expedient, i in potaeear | baie, that, upon a change in material nature, there fhould be a change alfo in the human confti- tution. A different ftate of the earth would te- quire a proportionably different one inthe powers of its inhabitants. Such powers as we now have, might not be fuited to the ftate of the world be: fore the lapfe; as, on the other hand, fuch powers as Adam had in innocency might not’ be adapted to the condition the a has beenin Awe " reStion-bodies of the faints may be little, if any thing more, than their comparatively ‘‘ vile bodies” reftored to the ftate they might have been in, had it not been for the lapfe of the one man Adam. ‘There may be reafon. to think thus, if we attend 394 to the manner of fpeaking fometimes ufed in the New Teftament - writings: asin Ads, iii, 21. where ‘* the heayensaredaid fowre- ceive Chrift until Larewarasacens moyrwy | the rannnep of f all. things;”’ that is, the times when they fhall be reflored to the ftate they were in before the lapfe, and the curfe that was confe- quent upon it: fo, in Matth. xix. 28. where our Saviour, {peak- ing of thofe who had followed him, fays, ‘In the: nsgenesatiqn [ev +n wepsyyeosa] they fhallfit upon twelve thrones.” The generation here mentioned, doubtlefs, points our view to tbe tended renovation of all things; their being, as: it were, born again, fo born as to exift in their former better ftate. nlike manner, the apoftle Peter befpeaks the Chriftians he wrote to in fuch language as that, 2 Ephef. iti. 13/ “* We, according” to his promife, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteoufnefs.” This new heaven and new ‘earth is the fame with that which the apoftle John faw if his vifions, bai xxi..13; which feems to have been the earth delivered, fpeaks, chap. xxii. 3. from the curfe, and reftored to its ee faic ftate: for it is reprefented to have in it “*a river ‘of water of life,” and the tree of life,” in allufion to the péradiferof _ innocent Adam, Rev. xxii. 1, 2. ; La Tas aCe. DISSERTATION IU. 221 fince, “might be unfit, difproportionate, for pees ‘or any of his pofterity, in fuch a world asthe curfe has made this to be, to be capable of acquiring either fo much knowledge, or holinefs, as might have been fuitable and proper for them to have acquired in the paradifaic world. The world, in its prefent ftate, may be quite unfit for _ fuch improvements, either intellectual or moral, "as might have been highly proper in its original _ ftate. But, however this be, it is certainly the truth of faé&t, and known to be fo from univerfal expe- rience, that the pofterity of Adam are in fuch circumftances, as that an unerring attachment to’ -- the rule of duty is not to be expected; infomuch that it is not poffible they fhould be juftified upon the foot of rigid law, or that they fhould attain to acceptable rectitude, but by the affiftance of grace. “Aid, if we may depend upon the in- © fpired Paul, this ftate we are in took rife from the offence of the one man Adam, our firft father. It will, probably, be faid by fome, as an infu- perable objection againft our deriving from ~- Adam, in confequence of his lapfe, the ftate of nature we have defcribed, thatit bears hard upon the attributes and moral government of God: and Facknowledse, with all freedom, if God had determined to deal with the pofterity of Adam in a way of firift law culy, the objection, fo far as I am able to judge, could not poffibly be anfwered. ide if they ‘were placed from the beginning, and have 222. DISSERTATION Hh have all, along fince been, under a difpenfation}. that is adjufted to their nature and circumftances'; (which, as I fuppofe, is the real truthof the cafes. — and ‘has, in fome of the foregoing pages.been proved to be fo), there isno difficultyinthe mat-> ter; at leaft, no greater difficulty than arifes from. the fubjection we are under to forrow and death, in: confequence of this fame original lapfe. Both» thefe difadvantages ftand upon the fame foot.) - They are both juftified by like analogies, and may equally be accounted for upon the doétrine of general laws eftablifhed for the general good.’ ( We have already feen that-children are fubjeéted’ to heavy fufferings, yea, grievous anticipated deaths, through the default of their more imme- diate parents; which is a fact perfectly analogous ° to that fubjeétion we are all under to forrow and’ death, through the default of our common ‘fa-” ther, and may, in the fame way, be reconciled © with the perfections and righteous papa as wai 3 ~ God. wi I now add, the fame analogy takes place, il S refpect to the difadvantage here objected to. ‘Tei is”* . daily feen in fa&t, and known by experience, that children derive from their next or more im- _ mediate progenitors, conftitutional turns, com-~ plexions, temperatures, diforders, or whatever ” elfe any pleafe to call them, which have a very?’ great influence in the formation of ‘their main'” charaéter in life. In virtue of thefe general laws,” which the God of nature has eftablithed, thefe conftitutional conftitutional turns (whether we can conceive of the modus of the thing, or account for it or not) are fot only tranfmitted from parents to children, but,;’in confequence of them, children are fub- jected to vat difadvantages, with refpect both to mental and mora/attaintments. To this it is ow= ing, that fome children are born incapable of ever coming to the proper-exercife of reafon and un- derftanding; to the fame caufe it may be attri- buted, that others arrive to the exercife of reafon in a poor; low degree only; and to the fame bo- dily temperature. ftill it may juftly be afcribed, at leaft in part, that many among thofe who pof- fefs the power of reafon, in a confiderable mea- fure, are fo exceeding apt to be betrayed into wrong and miftaken notions. And dodily conftitu- tion has the like influence upon men’s morals. It is not more certain that children derive from their parents bodily tendencies towards thefe and thofe dif-. DISSERTATION Ill 243" isd tempers, than that they are born with conftitutional - turns, prompting to thefe and thofe moral irre- gularities. The fanguine, for inftance, have that in their natural frame which tempts them to light- nefg, vanity, and wantonnefs; the choleric, to paffion and quick refentment; the phlegmatic, to _ idlenefs, floth, and careleffnefs; and the melan- cholic, to fufpicion, jealoufy, and fournefs of | temper. Thefe, and the like turns, may, poffi- bly; be fuperinduced in fome perfons upon na-~ ture; but, with refpect to multitudes, they have ‘their foundation in-that animal temperature which Ret: ‘ ; has . a . 224 has di 2 aN to din th ee sand sgwiab piv wma" “~ . Not that any are to be BLAMED fortheir confti-. tutional diforders, fimply as fuch, be they ‘as-chey- tried apraapest . may. ‘It.is no more my FauL; with a temperature of blood and. fequence of. which I am apt te be betrayed into rath anger, jealoufy, hatred, or flefaly indul- — gences, than that 1 was born with a,tendencyrin my nature to the gout, or gravel, or ftone, orany -other bodily diftemper. I may be FAULTY, when -I come to the exercife of reafon, for not reftrain- ing and governing my contftitutional turns3. but it is impoflible I fhould be july chargeable,with blame for having them ia my nature, fimply as | they are tranfmitted to me with But ftill, thefe conftitutional diforders are great DISADVANTAGES, and may prove the eccafion.of, — or temptation to, a very vicious and a ig racter in after-life; which, God_ knows, is often the cafe in fact: nay, thefe oe ‘ampere tures may render our ftate of trial far cult and dangerous than it would otherwife.have been; nay, further, in confequence of them, it may be impoffible, upon the foot of a difpenfa- tion not mixed with grace, but that we fhould be. ’ obliged to hold exiftence, under the. ‘Tack of aeoaftitution Less PERBECT miferable. xis gee Now, if the eftablifthed-laws of nature as that we may come, into, exiftence, . 7 DISSERTATION Ii, 22g _ rrrrEp for ‘intellectual and moral attainments, than would have been tranfmitted to us, had it _ not been for the fin and folly of our more immediate progenitors, why may not the like di/advantage be derived to us from our original and common father? There is certainly an analogy between thefe cafes; and if the former can be accounted for, the latter may alfo, in the fame way. It will, perhaps, be faid here, Why need the: . Deity have confined himfelf to eftablifh general laws in the beftowment of exiftence? Why, to laws from whence have arofe fuch manifeft incon- veniences? Does it not argue a defect in God’s _ wifdom or benevolence, that mankind, by the fa- tality of fettled connections in nature, fhould be made liable to fufferings, and this, through even the follies and vices of thofe from whom they de- - rive their being? In reply, it is eafy to obferve, that queftions of this kind do, in their final refult, prove nothing more than the ignorance of thofe who make them. It may be true, for aught any one can fay to the contrary, that man’s coming into exiftence, and then holding exiftence, not by immediate, unre~' lated exertions of Divine power, but conforma- bly to eftablifhed connections, in an uniform courfe, is the fitteft method for the accomplifh- ment of the beft and wifeft ends: and it may be ‘as true, that the connections which God has, in fagt, eftablifhed, are as well adapted as they “could have been to promote thofe fame ends, To Q. be. be fure, ‘no man has a right to find. fault, either. ‘with eftablithed Jaws in general, or thofe in: par= ticular which are eftablifhed, till he i vis able to make it appear that better ends could hhaye been anfwered; that is, inconveniences” leffened, . and. the common good, upon the whole, au t if no connettions were fettled, or others efta yi ed, in the room of thofe that now take place. . Should it be again faid, upon fuppofition hey a courfe of nature, and fuch an ome as is adtually eftablifhed, might not 1nTERPOsITIONS be rea- fonably expedted, fuch interpofitions as would prevent the inconveniences that would etherwife happen? And does not the want of thefe interpo- fitions, and the fufferings of mankind thereupon, bear hard upon the benevolence of the sul saly Being? The anfwer plainly is, the inconveniences which arife for the prefent, from general Jaws ftatedly permitted to take their courfe, may pof- fibly, under the condu& of infinite, wifdom, reenne power, and goodnefs, ‘be remedied in the. final iffue of their operation. But however this | be, who knows what would be the refult of thofe d de- fired interpofitions, whether good or evil, upon the whole? It is true, if they would be followed with no other confequences than the Prevention of the inconveniences they are introduced for, they might reafonably be defired and expected; bur ‘who can fay, there would be no *other _confe- “«uences; yea, that there would not be. bad ones ; A 2. it: : gt gyi a ; pa aE 2 26 DISSERTATION UL ted, » J > = - 7 4 7 + DISSERTATION Il 9 227 it may be, Yuch as might’be more'than a balance for the evil i it is propofed they fhould remedy? is, thefe afked-for interpofitions would neceflarily introduce an effential change in the - government of the world: and we may’ be feadyto i immagine, i it would be a change for thebet- - _ ter; but we know nor that it wei: And if we fhould affirm fuch a thing, it would be only by way of mere random conjecture. Befides, it ought to be remembered, the interpofitions ‘here required arefuch as muft be prrecrvat certainly to prevent moral as well as natural evil.’ And will any undertake'to make it evident, that mera/ evil " could certainly and effectually have. been pre- vented by interpofitions that would not, atothe fame time, have brought on other confequences astruly fatal to the happinefsof moral agents? it is, perhaps, an indubitable :truth, that no inter- ~ pofitions but fuch over-bearing ones ‘as are de- ftruétive of moral agency itfelf, could +have cer- - tainly and abfolutely prevented moral evil. And the deftruction of moral agency would; I wilk venture to fay, have at once deftroyed the. true - and only foundation on which the: gréateft.and moft valuable happinefs, that is conamunicable from the Deity, is built; as an intelligent reader may eafily perceive, by purfuing the thought i in hisown mind. Upon the whole, the method ar giving exift- ence to the human fpecies, and fupporting chem in it, not by immediate unrelated atts. of power Q2 and ) oi Ae ay ; x n if A) og 228 DISSERTATION IL and goodnefs, but in a fucceffive way, conform- ably ‘to eftablifhed laws, not over-ruled by. fre- quently repeated interpofitions, but permitted to take effe& in a regular uniform courfe, may be the wifeft and beft; and the Deity might know it to be fo, and for this reafon pitch upon it as the only way in which he would manifeft his benevo- lence in bringing mankind into being, and con- tinuing them in it. And we ought to reft fatif- fied with this method; to be fure, we ought not to find fault with it, till we find ourfelves able to devife one that is better. . And if this method, for aught we can fay, may be the beft fitted to accomplifh the beft ends, it is no objection againft the wifdom or goodnefs of it, either that the whole human fpecies, in con- fequence of its operation, come into exiftence fubjected to the difadvantages we have been fpeak- ing of, or that any of the individuals of this fpe- cies, in confequence of the fame eftablifhed laws, poffefs their beings under inconveniences peculiar to themfelves. For thefe may be unavoidable ef- feéts of that which is the beft adapted fcheme to accomplifh, upon the whole, the greateft good. It may be fubjoined here, as a juft corollary from what has been faid in the immediately fore- going paragraph, that the whole human fpecies, by means of the firft man Adam, or any of the individuals of this fpecies, by means of their next progenitors, may come into exiftence and pofiefs it, under di/advantages it would be a reflec- tion ; i => DISSERTATION Ill. 229 tion on the Deity to fuppofe he fhould fubjec them to, if they received their being immediately ' from his creating hands. The reafon of this is evidently founded on the preceding doétrine of general laws taking place conformably to an efta- blithed fettled courfe: for, according to thefe laws, the abufe of moral agency is connected with difadvantage, not only to the guilty individuals, but others alfo connected with them, efpecially thofe who derive their exiftence from them; which connection of difadvantage, with the abufe of moral agency, notwithftanding its thus confe- quentially affecting others befides the guilty per- fons themfelves, may be the wifeft and beft expe- dient to accomplifh, upon the whole, the beft and wifeft ends: And if fo, this fubjection of - others, befides the guilty perfons themfelves, to this confequential difadvantage, may confift with, the higheft wifdom and benevolence in the Su- preme Being; while yet it might be inconfiftent with the honour of thofe perfections to fuppofe, that he fhould fubject thofe innocent beings to this difadvantage, without the intervention of abufed moral agency; as would be the cafe, if they were brought into exiftence by immediate un- “yelated a&ts of power. From: whence it follows, that fhould it be the truth of fact, as I doubt not but it really is, that the condition of mankind, by means of their firft father and after-progeni- tors, isfuch as they could not be placed in, if they received their exiftence by immediate atts ye ah of 230 DEISSERTAFLON UL © - of creating power; I fay, fhould this be the — truth of fact, it may, notwithftanding, be as truea one, that their fubjection to this condition is perfectly reconcilable with the attributes of God, as it comes. to.pafs in confequence of laws, — which, though eftablifhed for the accomplifhment of the beft ends, are yet unavoidably capable, in the nature of things, of being perverted in their operation, fo as to leave room for this inconvenience, however great a one it may. be efteemed.. _ But, after all that has been faid, it may yet further be objected, Why need Adam, upon his” one offence, have been fubjected to a doom: that made it impoffible for him to attain to a happy immortality, without firft paffing, through a va- riety of forrows,. and even death itfelf? Could not the all-merciful Being have admitted him to pardon upon the terms of repentance, and a ‘better. care of obedience for the futures. and in this. way have prevented thefe fufferings? And would not fuch a method of condué have better * comported with the conceptions we have of. his infinite goodnefs? Efpecially as the fentence pro- nounced againft him would, in confequence of fettled (eS involve his pofterity, through- out all generations, in a multiplicity of trials, and unavoidably prevent their ever obtaining. enernal life without firft undergoing death. This objection, it is obvious, would fet, upa {cheme: in remedy of the inconveniences. of the lapfe, different from that which. is) propofed:in the DISSERTATION Il. 23 i the revelations of God. But who can fay what | would have been the refule of this {cheme of | man’s wifdom? Will any pretend to affirm, that - if would, in the final iffue of its operation, have "been more honorary to the Governor of the world, or more conducive to the good of man- kind) than that which is opened in the facred - books’of Scripture? Perhaps,’ the reafons of go- vernment might make it fit and proper, and. _. therefore morally neceffary, that the threatening which God denounced fhould be executed: _ Would the wifdom of the Supreme’ Legifator have guarded his prohibition wich a penalty it was not reafonable and juft he fhould inflict?) And might not the infliction of it, when incurred, be of fervice, fignal fervice, to the honour cf the Divine authority, and to fecure the obedience of — the creatuté in all after-times? And it might be more for man’s good, for the “ one man” Jefus Chrift to become “ the wifdom and: power of God” unto’ out falvation, than that it fhould beleft with outfelves'to work it out; efpecially after the trial that had already been made with refpect to - the firft man. : Teis'true,: there is’ no arriving at‘immortality in’ the way propofed: in the infpired writings, without paffing through forrows, trials; and even death itfelf; but thefe are all capable, upon the plan of God, through the grace there is in Jefus Chrift, of becoming advantages, rather than dif- advantages, tous. For the greater our forrows, Q+4 the | o32 DISSERT ATI onnm : the more numerous and heavy our fatferiig yy the ** more exceeding will be our weight of glory” athe refurrection-world, “if; “by means of them, . we are made more perfe¢t, in conformity to the example of him who is our pattern and Saviour: and they may; upon the gofpel-fcheme ‘ofimercy, be a fit and wife courfe of difcipline, in order to our being formed to a meeknefs for this glory and honour. Ashe AO Abe The fhort of the matter is, Goa would not . -. have permitted Adam, after his lapfe, to) have continued in life long enough to have had pofte- rity, if he had not devifed a fcheme for theityre- lief under the forrows and trials they Id come into exiftence fubjected to, and the , fins likewife they might be led afide and enticed to commit. And this fcheme, we may depend, is a _wife and good one, an infinitely better one than could have been contrived by man, or God _ would not have adopted it, It is, at prefenty, in '. operation only; and as we do not fee its whole refult, we can judge of it but imperfeétly :, but when it has had its full effect, and is 4 finifhed work, there will be no room left for difpute. All intelligent beings, in all worlds, who may. be made acquainted with it, will be obliged to own and admire the riches both of the wifdom and goodnefs which have been manifefted by it, \.. Hoaysbe on Penrhyn - * ap Vt 293 5] ; serboratit | 7S fey ’ —~~~IEy*y~y» yyy DISSERTATION Iv. Of the difference between the one man, Adam, in his innocent ftate, and his pofterity de- _ feending from him in his lapfed frate. O one can read the foregoing pages, and not perceive, that there was a difference {important in fome refpects) between the one man, Adam, in innocency, and hi’ pofterity as deriving exiftence from him, after his fall from God. It may not be-improper to be particular and diftiné& in pointing out this difference, as it will enable us to take in, at once, a clear and full idea of the true ftate of our firft father before his lapfe, and of ours in confequence of it. Adam was brought into being by an immediate exertion of creating power. He was, accord- ingly, as at firft made by God, a creature pers fe&t in his kind; that is, he had nothing wrong in his nature, no faculties, either bodily or men- tal, but what were wifely and admirably well adapted to one of his rank in the fcale of exift- ence. He was not made naturally incapable of © ene his implanted powers, Had this been poffible, 234 DISSERTATION IVY. | poffible, it did not feem expedient to the wifdont “ of God; for it is evident, from what Has taken’ place in fat, that he might become a finful ‘creature. But yet, his endowments were fuch as that he was every way fitted to anfwer the _ ends for which he was created.’ “This, as we have feen, is the account the Scripture has given cus of the matter. His bodily machine was cu- rioufly fuited to be a fit inftrument for his*foul to-act by; and his foul was futrifhed! with intel- lectual and moral faculties, rendering himcapable of attaining to an aétual refemblance of the Deity in lennisleikee, holinefs,: and happinefs’;. and of growing perpétually in this likeneis to’the higheft: degrees attainable by a) oreataneral his order in the creation. ae The pofterity of Adam come into catia, i not immediately, but by the intervention of an cftablifhed courfe of nature. And to. this; it is owing, that exiftence is handed,,to them in a les _ perfec? ftate than that in which.it, was’ communi> cated to the one man, Adam. If the original progenitor had continued innocent; it is not cer~ tain that his pofterity, from generation to gene- ration, would have had his nature ttanfmitted ta them. in the: fame: perfec degree in which here- ceived, and would: have poffeffed, it... But howe ever it might be as to.this,, it is, fince, the lapfe, — a real fact,. and has all along been.fo, thar man- . kind come into being, /ée/s. per fea 3 in degree, than their firft father came, out of the creating, hands : ‘of Ss He : a 5 DISSERTATION IV. 295 of God “The effential characteriftics of human ‘nature, if is true, have, in all ages from the beginning, been’ tranfmitted eat parents to children; but not in’ the fame degree of perfec- tion, This has éver been various, and ever will be fo, in'virtue of thofe’ intermediate fecondary “caufes, with which the’ tranfmiffion of exiftence is univerfally conneéted. And as thefe caufes have their operation fince the lapfe, it is im- ‘poffible but that exiftence fhould be communi- cated with comparative di/advantage. No fon of - Adam comes into being but with le perfec- tion of nature than he might, and would have done, had it not been for the introduction of fin into the'world, and the numerous evils that are, : by’ the eftablifhment of heaven, conneéted with jt: ahd as to multitudes, exiftence being com=- vhunicated to them through progenitors, who _ have funk'their natures by cnet, follies and vices, Ftis poffeffed by them’ in lathentably fad circum- -ftances > aiid the more fo, as their trial for the future ftate ‘has hereby been rendered Seu dificule, and peculiarly hazardous. “ Another difference between Adam. and: ig potterity is this: he was created a MAN at once; that is, with implanted powers,-in fuch a “flate as that they were immediately fic for ufe and exercife. We are born INFANTS,.,in regard of our minds as well as bodies. Whatever. natural powers we are endowed, with,. they: are ate firft in a RAK. low, feeble ftate; and it is in a leifurely ‘gradual = shee hail 236 DISSERTATION. gradual way, that they rife toa degree mat rity | ‘tolerably fitting them for exercife. The bh advantage here will readily be “Perc ived to be much in favour of the one man am. It is ‘true, his powers, at firft, were naked capacities as ~ “ours are; but then, they were the powers of a full-made man, and not of a mere babe or inf es for which reafon he might, with great cafe and quicknefs, have arrived at that perfection, efpe- cially in moral qualities, which he was. 1 ‘made capable of attaining to, and in the attainment of which he would beft anfwer the ends of hi his crea- tion. It is true, likewife, he muft, his, “powers being at firft nothing more than mere. naked ‘ones, have ftood in need of foreign guidance and help in his prefent unexperienced and unim- “proved tate. And he was accordingly fayoured with it immediately from God... His Maker.was his guide, tutor, and guardian; and had he not difobeyed his voice, by hearkening to his own counfel, he would have trained him up toa, con- ‘firmed ftate in every thing that was valuable. In this, the advantage was unfpeakably, on. the fide of Adam, For we, his pofterity,.. inftead -of having God for our immediate, inftrudtor, are placed under the tutelage of parents, or ‘others, ‘wha may happen to have the car€, of us, while in our non-age. And as we are, from the day ‘of our birth to the time of our growth toa -ftate of maturity, under the guidance of thofe who "are too generally ignorant, not pie he w to ; tivate * DISSERTATION Iv. . 237 cultivate our powers ; or negligent, taking little or no care upon this head; or fo in love with vanity and fin, as to educate usin folly and vice: I fay, as we are for years too commonly the guardianfhip of thofe who are thus weak, or negligent, or grofsly wicked, it muft be obvious at firft fight, that we are under great difadvantage as to the good culture of our minds, in com- parifon with our firft father. And, in truth, it is very much owing to this difadvantage, as our powers are in growth, that fo many contract, in their early days, fuch habits of vice as denomie nate them the flaves of corruption; though, if they continue fo in after-life, as, God knows, is too generally the cafe, to the utter ruin of thoufands and ten thoufands, the fault will be their own; for deliverance from the bondage of fin, how- ever great it has been, or however early con- tracted, is obtainable upon the foot of grace through Jefus Chrift. Further, Adam, upon his being brought into exiftence, was placed by his Creator in paradife, where he was in want of nothing to make him as happy as a creature of his rank could be, ina world, with reference to which it is faid, ** God faw that it was good.” The earth, without any toilfome labour of his, brought forth every thing that was * pleafant to the fight, and good for food:” nor was he fubjected to the fuffering of evil in any kind. He might, from the make of his body, and the manner of its being fupported, be 4 238 DISSERTATION WW, be naturally capable of undergoing pain ial a rious ways; but his Maker'was his protection and: guard ; infomuch that, while innocent, he would have preferved him from whatever might have , occafioned the fenfation of anxiety and grief i in any fhape or form. . Such, in a word, were his circumftances, in regard of foul and body, ‘and the world he was placed in, that he might, with- out interruption, have enjoyed life ‘as perfectly: as it was fit he fhould do. ‘We, his pofterity fince the lapfe, come into being in a world, the: si ground” of which has been * eurfed,” ts as that it is “in forrow,” by the ** fweat of our faces, 2? and the toil of our hands, we mutt oni “eat of its produce all our days:” befides which, we are * born to trouble,” in innumetable i in- ftances, “< as the fparks fly upwards.” Tt is « on thofe accounts, that mankind “ groan and ‘travail ee 3 in pain;” and they are herefrom fubjeéted to many and great difadvantages refpeéting their attainment toa ftate of moral reétitude. It is acknowledged, a vaft variety of thofé inconve= niencies, aia eaies: forrows, and fufferin rs, we are fubje€ted to, are not fo direZly owing to - Adam, as to immediate predeceffors, " and the Wickednefs of the world we live in? but then, it ought to be remembered, whatever diforders ont nO? there ate in this lower creation, whether ¢ of i 4 natural or moral kind, they took rife’ from i ; “one offence of the one man,” Adam,” This gave occafion for their introduction into “the world ; | ee. PE, de. _ DISSERTATION IV. 239 world; and.by means of them we are under cir- cumftances greatly difadvantageous, in .com- ~ parifon with the ftate Adam was in while in- nocent. - Another difference between innocent Adam and his pofterity is this: he, though formed of corruptible materials, in confequence of which he was naturally a corruptible mortal creature, might, in virtue of ‘the tree of life,’ have lived for ever, had he not.eat of ‘* the tree of the knowledge of good and evil,” concerning which his Maker had faid, ‘* thou fhalt not eat.of Jt, for in the day thou eateft thereof thou {halt furely die.” We, his pofterity, come into being not.only _ corruptible mortal creatures by nature, as he was, but under fuch circumftances that death muft inevitably pafs upon us. That grace which would have made our firft father immortal, by keeping his corruptible from ever feeing cor- ruption, was, upon his one offence, withdrawn; in confequence of which, he not only died him- felf, but his pofterity alfo will univerfally and certainly undergo death. But then it muft be added here, they, as well as he, fhall be deli- vered from the power of death. In Chrift * all fhall be made alive,” and with as much cer- tainty as that “ in Adam all die.” And all come into pevtcace under the poffibility of ‘* reigning in life;” completely happy life, and” this for ever, through our Lord Jefus Chrift, * the gift of God,” by whom is ‘* eternal life.” _ ; , ” There ~ 240” Dae ae W. cent Adam and his soon ies: to i j rule of trial under which our firft father was placed in innocency, there was no- room for. repentance, in cafe of tranfgreffion 5 but,” upon one offence only, he would be fubjeéted to the threatened penalty; as was the truth of fact. For having tranfgreffed in the one article wherein he was tried, he was doomed to die. We, his pofterity, upon the foot of the new dif- penfation we are under, may, if we are wrought upon to repent, be admitted to mercy, though our offences fhould have been ever fo numerous. Herein, as the apoftle Paul fpeaks, the advan- tage by Chrift, exceeds, goes beyond the damage by Adam. The condemnatory fentence was pro- nounced upon him, and confequentially takes place upon us, by reafon of ** one act of difobedience” only; but ‘the free gift is of MANY OFFENCES unto juftification.” However many, or how- ever heinoufly aggravated our fins have been, we may, in oppofition to them all, upon the gofpel- plan, obtain the pardoning mercy of God. In this refpect, we are in better circumftances than Adam was, gt) under trial in his innocent ftate. er Finally, The reward promifed to Adam, ins cafe of perfevering obedience to his Maker, was _ PERPETUAL LIFE, though naturally a mortal crea- ture: only, he was to enjoy this life here earth; which he would have done with as mucl happinefs, Bry [SSERTATION 1V.- 23? _ happinefs, as one of his rank in the creation “was fitted for*in fuch a world as this. It has been often faid, "he would in time have paffed through fome alteration as to the mode of his exiftence,’ and been placéd in feme other world, better adapted to his making ftill higher advances in - bleffednefs. “Bur this is mere conjecture. The Bible fpeaks of no promifed life, or happinefs, _ beyond that he would have enjoyed in the earthly et We, his pofterity, notwithftanding the ; lapfe, and any confequences of it, corhe into ex- ' iftence abfolutely fure, in virtue of the promife of God, of a refurreélion to life affer death; and, if we behave well in the ftate of trial we are placed under, we are in like manner fure, upon the word of the fame faithful and true witnefs, not only that our “ corruptible fhall put on in-" corruption, and our mortal put on immortality, but that we fhall exift incorruptible immortal creatures in that kingdom that is above; where the infinite God himfelf dwells,” in whofe prefence is fulnefs of joy, and at whofe right hand are pleafures for evermore. In this re- fpe& alfo, Adam’s pofterity are, perhaps, in better circumftances, than he would have been in had he continued innocent. It is eafy, upon what has been now offered, to anfwer juftly and properly the queftion fome have propofed; namely, are the pofterity of Adam in worfe circumftances than he was placed under while in innocency? Without ail doube, \ R they “It ds ndonaenat of fa&t (however we underftand: the words of the Apoftle we-are upon), that, rw consequEnce of - of our prefent faffering mortal frate, ‘we até often induced to do that, ‘which, upon‘fober refle@tion, _ ‘we cannot’ but condemn ourfelves for: infontueh that we muft all own, ‘from: what’ we ‘know of ourfelves, that it is impoffiblefuch mortalicreatuves as we are, living in a world’ fo furrounded with temptation, fhould ever attain to fuch' moral refii= tude as will avail to our juftification, unlefs placed under a more favourable difpenfatiom than that of rigid law. And this, IT could: obferve here, is the very thought the apdftle Paul en- larges upon, “in the 7th chapter of: this “Epittle, to the Romans: where he has it profefiedly in his, view to how, that /axéification, or, what means. . the fame thing, moral reftitude, is, upon.the foot; 4, of sere law, utterly unattainable. And awhy 3 5c eh IN CONSEQUENCE of the operation.) of appetites Dy Mi Segyennrnnzet; DissERTATION. 277 “inclinations, feated in ovr mortal bodiess “ certainly thall, without,,the .interpo- fisidn of grace, or gofpel, be unhappily urged om todo that which our mind tells us.us,we ought not to do; and the doing of which. will denomi- nate us the captives of fin, the fervants of cor- ruption. . The illuftration and, proof of this.is whatihe labours:inothis 7th chapter; in ordér whereunto he gives us to underftand, that there are) two different principles of action in men: Qnewhe calls “the flef,” verfé1%; <‘thedaw isis our.. members,” or the propenfities: of .our bodies, which are, as it were, a rule or law cto uss sverfe 23. ‘Eherother, he charatterifes “© the inward man,” verfe 225 “ the law of the mind,” verfe 23;” the mind,” verfe.25; meaning that faculty, or power, of the foul or ‘fpirit, -in vir tue of which we are ‘denominated rational intel- ligent’ beings: Thefe two principles, refiding in) the*hvman conftitution, he" reprefents as oppe- fitess contefting with, and counteracting each other, And “it ig obfervable, ‘he particularly “afetibes it to ** the fiefh,” by means of the over- bearing influence 6f its’ propenfities in this our prefent mortal ftate; that, on the of hand, we do'that which our minds difapprove} and, on the Gther, that we do not that which we would do, ~ though convinced, from our own perceptions, thar it is'what we ought’ to do,” Says‘he, verfe 15. «that which I do, I allow not; for what “I would; ‘that do Thor ; ‘but what Phate, that dof.” a T 3 . we 278 Svuppremenrar Disserratrows © i As if he had faid, that which’ do}: in’ contra: — diétion to the law of God, as influenced thereto, — by tbe fle, 1 allow not’ with my mindiz) for whaty: — with my mind, 1 would do in conformity tovthe: — law, that, through the prevalence of the fgdy I do not; but what, with my mind, leven abomi- nate, ‘that Indo’ as urged’ to it by my fgso~ To the like purpofe are thofe words»in the 18th sand) rgth-verfes, << To will is prefent with mes“ but how to perform that which is good, I find not. - For the good that I would, I do not; but the’ evil which ‘I would not, that I) do;” i. e. the power of willing to»do that which is good is: actually in me; but to perform that ‘which is good, though I fhould fo will, I find no ftrength, fo great is the influence of my flefhly propenfi- ties. For I perceive it, from my experience, to be the truth of fact, that the good which, with my mind, I would do, I:do not; but the evil, which, with my mind, | would, not, thatIsdo,; through the prevalence of my. snieal -mortal part. It follows, in the 24ft verfe, § { a find then a law, that, when 1 would do good,. evilsis prefent with me,;” i. e, I experjence ‘therefore, — as by a law fettled, and ruling in me, that when L.would, with my mind, do. that which is good, vevil is prefent with. me, by flethly appetites, »to ‘hinder and reftrain me. And again, verfe 23d, «¢ IT fee another law in my members, warring -againft the law of my mind, and bringing,.me into Sapeyvian to the dps 3 fin, which: is;inamy x “members” ¥ SupPLEMENTAL DissERTATION. 279. ‘members ;” ‘that is, I am fadly fenfible of a prin-. ciple-of a€tion, a law, as it were, in my bodily — members, which oppofes the law of my mind, - my-reafon, my power of moral difcernmenty and makes me a captive to that law of fin which is in my members; or, in other words, to my flefhly or bodily appetites. In confideration of this , prevalence of appetite in his mortal part, over his reafon and judgment, he bitterly exclaims, as in the 24th verfe, “* O wretched man that I, am, who fhall deliver me from the. body. of this death |” As if he had faid, from a fenfe of the miferable condition I am in; 1 cannot but cry out, O wretched man that I am, who fhall deliver me from THIS MORTAL Bopy*, which, by _* T have rendered ex rov cwpectos sou Caverou rovtov, from THIS MORTAL BODY; and, as I judge, with ftrift propriety, by giving Oavzrov, a fubftantive of the genitive cafe, the force of am adjectives An obfervable inftance of this mode of diétion we have in Col. i. zz. where the Apoftle fpeaks of ‘‘ our re- conciliation to God,” as effected, o» rw TOMATETAS TapxoS avToU dia rovbavarov; ** by his [Chrift’s] flefhty body, through death ;” that is, by the death of his body, which was made of flefh. The fame thought precifely is intended to be tm here,’ as when it is faid, by another Apoftle, 1 Pet. iv. 1. * having fuffered for usin the flefh;” that is, in that f% ‘ply bedy God had prepared for them. But inftances of this ufe of a fubftan- tive of the genitive cafe are fo common, efpecially in the New Teftament, that it would be an affront to thofe acquainted with the language in which it was wrote, to point them out. And its ufe in this fenfe here may the rather be admitted, becavfe the conftru&tion formed upon it admirably falls in with the maia drift of the foregoing end following difeourfe 5 at it is, ess the only-one that does fo. For, mind well, T4 the 280. SUPPLEMENTAL! Doveentl by its appetites and. yooplalitliieshsdiaaniay | me the flave of fin! He adds; frobis own, Arty! Y HO: and. ein charaGer the Apoftle had been defcribing, was tha fo captivated by the appetites of his flea, or mart that, inftead of doing what bis mind, or reafon, AF Dro There was a ftrife, or conteft, Belweed the "peal fh Sefely body, and his mind, or ‘pirit, in which’ his’ tty 2 maftered, and he ‘* led into captivity” by his bodily appetites. And now he cries out, “ O wretched man that 3 ee fhall deliver me?” From what? “ From Tuts moRT AL BODY ;” that is, from the enticing power, which #i} fabjeéted to a frail mortal fuffering condition, has ‘over me means of its propenfities and appetites, ‘To this fe1 whole preceding argument points our view. For it of te influence, which his mortal body, by its ‘appetites, had bvéer hith; that was the ground; or teafan; of the * ttre he fo paffionately complains of. This mortal body, therefore, as to this {way over him, is the thing he enquires how iin be delivered from? Nor will there be any reafonable room | for doubt pon the matter, if we attend to the answer to this enquiry, in the words that next follow, ] thank God,” | deliverance is to be had, “ through our Lord Jefas amet what is the idea the Apoftle gives us of this. del a may readily collect it from the next chapter, wh ¢ hie has, particularly, and clearly, explained himfelf upon it,. ‘Thus us he’ aflures us, verfe 2. that ‘¢ the law of the fpirit of lifes in el $ Chrift, hath made me free [me who am in Chrift} from he law of fin and death.” . And again, he acquaints us, verfes 3 3 4. that ‘¢ what the Jaw could not do, in that it was weak through [the propenfities of the] fleth, [hath yet been done after following. manner] God, by fending his Son-in: the likenefs | finful fiefh, and [by fending him] for fin [irep rn; apeipr about, or concerning the affair of fin, that he might from it] hath condemned fin [deftroyed, put it to death refpeet to its influence’as feated] in the fleth ; [and t to this end: *« that the righteoufnefs of the law might [habaleitae fandtify ing Spirit} be, fulfilled. by us, who walk, not.aftersthe fleth, ay but SupppementaL Disierrarron. 281 andthe onfolation of others; the admiring, adoring es in the 2$th verfe; “ I thank God; baer - through : ‘ut after the fpirit.” Thefe words, thus conftraed | according ‘to their trac intent, exhibit an eafy and intelligible meaning and fuch an one as, at once, explains, and anfwers, the above inquiry after deliverance. The Apoftle having thus dire&ted our view to the true afid only fource of deliverance from the dominion, which our MORTAL BODIES, by their appetites, have ovér us, makes the obfervable remark in the 1orh verfe, “« Tf Chrift-be in you, the body is dead [% cuagras) with reference to fin; but the Spirit is life [da dxaicmm] with reference to righteoufnefs.” As if he had faid, if Chrift be in you by his fanctifying Spirit, the Jody is dead, as to its power or dominion with refpett to fin; fin fhall not reign in you by means of your mortal bodies, But, on the other hand, the amind, or fpirit, is life as to righteoufnefs; it is now alive and vigorous in employing your bodily members as inftraments unto holinefs. He purfues the fame thought in the next verfe ; “ But if the fpirit of him that raiféd up Jefus from the dead dwell in you, he that raifed up Chrift from the dead hall ane alfo your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you,” The meaning is, if the Spirit of God dwelleth in you, God, through his fanétifying Spirit thus dwelling in you, will quicken, make alive, your mortal bodies, by making them _ aétive and vigorous to the purpofes of holinefs, inftead of fia, - This interpretation, which I have borrowed from Mr, Locke, Dr. oditides (ia loc.) is pleafed to call “ his unnatural glofs ;” ;” at which [ cannot but wonder, as this metaphorical way of {peaking cencerning fanGtification, or deliverance from the power of flefhly or bodily luft, is fo common with this Apoitle, Hence he {peaks of men, while under the rule and fway of their mortal bodies, as *¢ dead in trefpaffes and fin,” Eph. ii. 15 kab: ii. 13. And when delivered from this dominion of their ss, through the influence of their propeniities, by sé whe Spr that raifed “up Chrift'from the dead,” he {peaks o. them as wh psi * ot ‘raifed together with Chrift,” Eph. ii ii. 5, 6, Col-ii. “13. He nfs the like figure of fpeech in 232 SuppLemenTal! DisseRTATIONY through Jefus our Lord;” thatdis,.I acknows ledge it with gratitude to Catan deliver= ; —— _» in Rom. vi. 6. “ He that is dead is ‘feed from fi that is, he, in whom the power of flethly propenfities is » is delivered from the dominion of fin, So, in yer 4 “ Yield yourfelves up to God as thofe. who are aliwe f dead ;”” that is, as thofe who, having a principle of fpiri life, in oppofition to the influence of fey luff, are ‘no longer Spiritually dead. And in the 11th verfe, “reckon ye youre felves to be dead indeed to fin, but aliwe to God, through Jefus Chrift our Lord;” that is, to be no Jonger under the power of fiefhly propenfities, but to be {piritually alive, 2s having the oppofite power of living to God through Jefus Chrift. I would yet fay, the Apoftle, all along in this’ 7th chapter, and in‘all the above-mentioned texts, muftobvioufly confiders our MORTAL BoDIEs, by means of their as the true souRCE, or roor of the dominion which fin has over'us. And he elfewhere difcovers this to have been his thovght upon the matter, . Hence he exhorts, Rom. vie 12 «* Let not fin reign in YOUR MORTAL BODIES 5”. that. is, by means of your appetites and propenfities. Hence that. | guage of his, in the 6th verfe, “* that the sopy oF sin ‘Tre cores ne apapriac) might be dehroyad: that henceforth we fhould not ferve fin;” that is, that the power which fin has by means of the Bopy, may be fp deftroyed as that we may no | fervants of fin, Hence he fpeaks, Col. ii. 11. of our “ pu off the body of the fin of the fleth [rov cwporos rw cxpacepr bean rng capxoc] by the circumcifion of Chrift;” that is, the’ fins we are influenced to commit by means of OUR FLESHLY BopDiEs, with their propenfities. Hence he declares, Rom. viii- 13. that we fhall * die if we walk after the fefh;”-but that we fhall “‘ live, if, through the fpirit, we mortify the deeds of the body ;” that is, the deeds done under the influence of animal propenfitics.—But enough, it may be, too much, has been faid to make it evident, that, by “the body of this death,”*the Apoftle means, “ this mortal body,” as to its influence, ‘by:its appetites, to lead us into fin, If this note. is duly i an SupPLEMENTAL DissERTATION! 283 ance*may be,-obtained, upon the plan of grace, through Jefus Chrift, the biaibcatel Lord of all.ie I have no need to concern myfelf here with the difpute, whether the Apoftle fpeaks in, his own perfon, or in an affumed one; or, upon either fuppofition, whether he fpeaks as a regenerate, or unregenerate man. For fhould it be even allowed, according to the more commonly received expo- fition, that he {peaks in the character, not of an unreégenerate, but regenerate perfon, which, as I apprehend, is far from the truth, his arguing will. {till prove, that ‘the. propenfities, feated in our mortal bodies, are the occastonaL cause of our being urged on; or that In CONSEQUENCE OF WHICH we are urged on to.‘ do the evil we would not.” This is true of unregenerate as well as regenerate men. Whether we are faints or finners, we are_¢* tempted 5 ;” and are tempted. fo as to be drawn: away, it is of ‘* our own lufts ;” that is, the enticing influence of animal propenfities, in this our mortal ftate. It may be worthy of fpecial notice, the ac- count we have given of the Apoftle’s difcourfe, and ‘compared with the phrafe, @ w wavres xyaplor, in the sth ‘chapter and 12th verfe, it will, perhaps, appear in 2 ftrong point of light, that I have given the very idea the Apoftle intended to convey by it.. And [ have been thus long, and, I fear, tedious upon it, principally with a view to bring fight, and afford ftrength, to the conftruftion I judged thete was abundant reafon to put upon it. eeg m 284 SuPpikithtat DissenraTiony = inthis 7h Chapter, not -obly-abprees . with the, whole foregoing Epiftie, but exbibits anzem-. phatically ftriking illuftration of ‘shisomesningaim, 1 thofe words, 29% mavres juaproveeck db | proved, that we could not: be jlgfifed upon.t foot of law, .becaufe we were all: finnerss4 proves, that our being /imners cannot, be pre vented by mere law, which is as inf Sanitification, as for jufti ification, He had. ) carried our thoughts up ro Adam, the firft father of men; declating that we were: << inners” )in confequence of his lapfe: he here explains this matter, acquainting us how we: became“ fice. ners” in confequence of his lapfe, not by having “© finned when he finned,” but’ by having finned in out own’ proper perfons; and as*influeficed\ fo. to do by'the propenfities of @ Hethly mortaliina. ture, which will certainly make’ us the Mavesof fing? unlefs ‘reftrained, and’ goverhed, by fhe | Sface that is Communicated’ fioiti God, ‘and“froih him alone, through Jefus the’Saviour’ | teh "hs | It is theréfore evident, from the Apoftle’s‘owh explanation of thé way, or maniier,” in which we afe influenced to become finners, that we have’ truly interpreted his words, by conftruing them, *¢ and fo. death paffed upon all. men; uPoN WHIQH; IN CONSEQUENCE OF WuHIcH,. ‘all “have, famed themfelves.” Anditis, as I imagine, wit accuracy. and propriety, , the poli sas ze _ preffed himfelf in thefe words.; , ag 9. — SupphEMENTAL Disserration; 289 our view! to’ Adam as the true“original /oyrce, of SIN, aswell as DEATH; - but ives. as to under- ftandy atthe fame time, that he is the fource of thofe different evils in a quite different way of DEATH, by the fentence of God, taking nile from - the **one offence” of this “‘one man;’’. and of SIN, IN CONSEQUENCE OF THIS,, by means of the cemptations of our MoRTaL sTATE, which with- Dut grace, or gofpel, will certainly entice and draw us afide. +4 “Tt cannot juttly be objected dates this inters” pretation, that it gives the prepofition em a wrong fenfe. For it is the very fenfe in which it is moft commonly ufed throughout the New ‘Teftament, when conftrued with a dative cafe, agit is here. The following texts may be thought an ample illuftration of this. ~ . ‘Matthew, vii. 28. And it came to ‘ea eal Felus bad ended thefe fayings, the people were aftonifped [ert zn. Bidar aurov| at his dofirine. The particle at, well anfwers the meaning of ea: in this text. But-then‘it is plain to the moft vulgar under- flanding, that it fignifies exactly the fame thing With upon, or in confequence of. Matt. xiii..4. dad in them [er awrois, in Con-' - fequence.of the temper they difcovered] is ful- Filled the prophecy of Efaias; which faith, Bc. - ‘Matt. xix. 9. dud I fay unto you, whofoever foalé putcaway his wife, except it be for fornication, fev ee ‘emk mopveva, unlefs it bexon: account. of, in confequence Veer anata a 2986 SuPprEMEWTaAL- ~ DissERTATION. . Luke, iv. 22. 32. Luke, v. 5. 9. Luke,” oe Sy ov. 36. Acts, villi. 2. Acts,’ xis 19. “ a xiii, 12. Acts, xv. 22 gr. Acts, xx.” confequence of, pibesionen and fball marry rey hes ther; committeth adultery. © <2 10 > ai *e Mark, iii. 5. And when ‘be’ bad” looked whe about on them with anger, being grieved for the bards : ‘ nefs of their bearts [ems rn mopwott is spd ura on account of, in confequence of, the t al, q their hearts] be faith unto the man, oti Mark, x, 22. And be was fad at ‘that ‘i [em rw Aoyw, in confequence of what he ae and went away grieved, for be bad 3 great ot off fions. Mark, xii. 17. 4nd Fefus anfweriig, ay them, render unto Cafar the things that are <7 and unto God the things that are God's: and d_ they marvelled [ew-avrw] at bim; that is, On a count “aq what he had juft faid. His having fo po was the occafion of this wonder. eS AS ‘ i Inftead of taking up any more room i in, citi g the words of texts, I fhall refer the reader | to ‘the following ones, among others he may find i in ‘the New Teftament, illuftrating the fenfe. we have p put upon the word em. Matt. iv. (Ae. Matt. xviii fe Matt. x. 24. Mark, xi. Luke, i i. S14. 2 > 59. Luke, il. 20. 33. a "dhe lii. “19, 20. 43. 48, 49 Dhike, xiii, 7. Luke, xv. 7. i. Luke, xix. 41. Luke, xx. 26.— Luke, ‘. 25. Acts, iil, to, 16. Acts, iv. 9. ane Bs. Supprementat Dissertation. 287 A&ts,..xxvi. 6. Rom. v. 2. Rom. vi. 20, Rom, viii. 20. 1 Cor. i. 4. °1 Cori vii. a Cor. ix. 10. 1,Cor, xiii. 6. 1 Cor. xiv. 16. Cor. xVie 17, 2,Cors is 4 2 Core vik 4a 7. um multis aliis. . The above examples are full to our prefent purpofe. The prepofition er:, in all of them, is joined with the dative cafe, and has exactly the fame force I have given it in the.text under . confideration; that is to fay, it ftands to denote the occafional caufe of the things {poken of, or that. ~ by which, through which, upon which, in confequeuce of which, they are as they are there paprey a to be. z It is true, ‘Ido not Hales the relative w, in my “way of conftruction, to agree with either avOpwros, or @averos, the only foregoing fubf{tantives. Buc this is an objection of no weight; becaufe it may as well have’ for antecedent the immediately "preceding fentence. It may be worthy of fpecial notice here, the phrafe, «@ w, is ufed by the apoftle Paul in three places befides this we are illuftrating 5 and, in all of them, the prepoli- ‘tion, eg, has the fame ‘meaning I have given it “here: and, in like manner, the relative, «, grammatically agrees, not with a preceding /ub- ftantive, but Jentence. _ The firft inftance to this purpofe we have in 2 Cor. v. 4. * For we thatvare in this tabernacle do groan, being burthened; not for that we would 4 288 Santander. rectal would [egw ov bercus} be unclothed, but. clothed upon, that mortality might be fwallowed upsofy life.” ‘The pafflage may, T- think, ‘more. ee fiftently with the true. force of «9 a, | 2 re thus: ‘ For we that are in this tabernack groan; being burdened: not that we would’ _Tuts [upon being thus bordesed ets unclothed, . but clothed upon. 1 ae if the Apottle hac d fai We who are in the body do groan, being prefled under the weight of ‘many infirmities and trials. not that. we defire urow THISs, - ‘UPON THE ACCOUNT OF OUR BEING THUS BURDENED, to beiunclothed. by putting’ off our bodies; but ourdefire rather is, that we may be clothed from above, may put - on'celeftial. bodies, that: fo what id mortal, and therefore’ liable to thefe burdens. and: forrows, may be fwallowed up of life that is immortal, and not obnoxious to any of thefe infelicities *s» Afves thus make the words, ** being burdened,” ante- cedent to w, and: conftrue 9, the, pr joined: with: it, vPon, .an eafy and - Seeligisle fenfe is given to this whole fentence son Whichs a it lies im the common tranflation, | is difficult, and perplexed.) » And, in this. way . eer: the prepofition, <9». has .precifely 4 * The following words of ‘Clement of ie aa “are an evident a}! ufion to this text, and perhaps clea w, took it in the fenfe we have put upon’ its © ae Dual yap $ emedvodebai igobautes ra aObegra,” ampli sxdooacles, rm of pa For we do groga, being defirous to be cloth ce RRP ith ine -gortuptible things, before we pat off corruiption, ihe, SuppyrMENTAL Dissertations 289». theiigamienstcaning as in the: ieee numerous } Dr * Taylor 85 periers pang Original: Sit, page’ 52.] ‘ «9° @ fometimes fees: tobe “‘ufed abfolutely, without ‘an antecedent;\and. then’ ic may be underftood conditionally :”) in proof of which he brings this text;~-and renders: it thus :-* For we ‘that.aréda this'tabernacle: do» «groan, being burdened: -cp w ov Peropev, withy “¢ this:reftvition, or-fo far,: that: we would ‘not ybe: “¢ unclothed:[no, that is not the’ only; or!-ulti=: ** mate‘cobject: of our defire}],; »but clothed “upon.” -In anfwer whereto itsmay bes obe’ ferved, the ,phrafe, <9 », .is never ufed in. the New .Teftament, without an_, antecedent, either. exprefied, or underftaod.,. It may look. as though. Matt. xxvi» 20. was an example to the contrary, Our Saviour there fays to Judas, & eraupe, 9 @ morper ? Friend, wherefore art thou. come?” Eg w is here well. rendered §* wherefore : 2) Bue, then, it means. the fame thing with i2°,guo, ad. quid; as the Latin yerfions have it, for what, 10. what purpofe? The, relative » agrees heré with, mpzypnats.underftoad. This conftruétion,. there= ' fore, is without a precedent in the New Tefta-’ ment writings, unlefs in Philip. iii. 12, oF ive 10. which we fhall lave ’ occafion to confider She fently. ” “And it has ‘this’ ‘farther obje€tion’ lying’ againft it, that it dods not feem eafy and natu-' ral. One mutt attend pretty clofely, now Dr, Taylor Has given this conftruetion, to. underftand: ° U the 290 SupPLEMENTAL Deaaaacodlae _ the precife thought he would poikethetapoliles conveys and, perhaps, it will require ftill, greater attention to,underftand the grammatical, reafon he - grounds. it upon. The. meaning of the ftle, as I apprehend, is very, obvioufly this; ig dens with which he, and the Chriftians be wrote to, were preffed, excited in him and. them a defire of death: not that they defired death UPON ACCOUNT OF THESE BURDENS, merely.-as it would be.an unclothing them, a putting off their bodies; but their defire rather was, that they might be clothed upon wey heavenly. me immortal bodies. Sed) atta _~ Another inftance we meet with in Philip. i ii, 12. © Not as though we had already attained, either were already perfect: But I follow after, if that I' may apprehend ¢bat for which alfo Tath apprehended [er xar xararabw, 29 w xareanghny, |} of Jefus Chrift.”” This tranflation, you obferve, fupplies the demonttrative pronoun ‘rovre,” that, and makes. it antecedent to the relative « We The fenfe it conveys is juft; and it gives the prepo- fition, «9, the fame force I have all- along been contending for. But ftill, as I imagine,” the more proper antecedent to w is the immediately preceding fentence. Accordingly, 1 would render the paflage thus: ‘ ON, ‘ACCOUNT. OF wxicH, I alfo was apprehended of Jefus, Chrift.”. ~ As if the Apoftle had faid, like a racer, in-onesof isiqga 8 e | { , 3 SuppeeMENnTaL DIsstrFation. 291 —— you ate well acquainted with; 3 " prefe.on towards the ‘mark, if fo bé I may Tay holkdef the prize *, ror THE Saxe “OF wHicH + OW ACCOUNT oF MY LAYING HOLD’ OF! water; T ‘alfo was fuddenly and marvelloufly caught, Kid hold: of by Jefus.‘Chrift, when on my ages | cowtrds Damafeus. ~~ “What Dr. Taylor has offered upon this text Mss fot appear to me to be wrote with that accu= L * Intead ofapprehend, a.decinatine Som the Kelie,, 1 Jam rt in the. above paraphrafe, made ofe of. the words Jay bold of, which are more plain to common readers; and, to make ‘the fenfe ftill more: eafy, I have fupplied the Enpliftr word aaeer though-it fhould be remembered here, there. was’ no need of adding in the Greek the word Cpalsio, which anfwers: sei it; “becaufe the verb xarakaGu, being ufed here in allafion to oneof the known Gretia# exerci&s, evidently implied it, The Apofile, in this, and the twve-fellowing~ verfes, compares’ him- felf to a: racer- that had not already obtained the: prize, but was ‘running that he might, in'the end, lay hold. of it.. Ie is: ob- fervable,. the words Jioxw cs xaradcew, in this 12th verfe, mean the fame thing With zat cxoror diwew ex's ConCeuory i in the’ 14th verfe = and though: in the one, the Apoftle leaves out CocB scr 5 ; ‘and in the other, xararaCw; yet he is as readily underfto6d: asi if thefe words had been inferted, Compare the. ufe of rspba:w avd xdeXopCan inthis 12th verfe, with the ufe of them, 1 Cor. _ix, 24,. and:it: wilh be feen that they are’ ufed? in-the agcnifical \ "# Since the writing the above, I find, that. Bexa and Era/= wus Sthmidius, have given the like conftru@ion to :9 ain;this _ places rendering it, ‘‘ cujus réi caufa.”” Wodfius follows them herein.- His-tranflation‘of the’ ‘paffage i is this; “* Sed petfequor, “* ot etiam ipfe apprehendam: cojus rei: cali -etiam ‘appreben= “ fus fum a Jefa Chrifto.” Bat.I-follow after, that I-alfo may. apprehend: FoR wHicH THING’s sake [that is, that | might thus apprehend] I alfo was apprehended by Jefus Chrift. U2 racy i 202, SupPLEMENTAL Dusenraiom, aie 4 racy. of judgment, which he has d eS upon other. occafions. He t «+ that I may apprehend as far as. alfo. am apprehended;” very iit y two different, meanings to the propofitic one and the fame time, - namely, as as, an for. THe has done the fame in the paraphri fe h has added explanatory of his tranflation, It runs. _ thus; that I. may lay hold of happinefs, in that high and excellent fenfe, that furtheft reach a extent, for the attaining of which Jefus ‘Chritt hath laid hold of me.” | Had he only faid, cc ‘that, I may lay hold of happinefs, for the attaining of. which Jefus Chrift hath laid hold of me,” he, would have conftrued Ep juft as I do: bgkrns £9) two very different meanings. ‘But, without, faying any thing further, I leave it with the i in-_ NSD telligent reader to judge, whofe tranflation of. thefe words is moft eafy and natural, aot or, mine. ae ey ‘The laft inftance we have in Philip. AV. 109» Expny de ev Kupiw meyaadws, ors non wore vila To» UTEP ELOV Qpovetyy ED W XH&b EMPOVEITE, measpese0s, Be «« But I rejoiced in the Lord greatly, that sat a the laft, your care of me hath flourifhed. ‘again, ‘ wherein 16 were alfo. careful, but. ye lacked, Op>,. portunity.” So our tranflators have given - the a fenfe, making the relative w to agree with | SRC» wart underftood; whereas, it ought rather, AS ah imagine, SUPPLEMENTAL DisszrTaTion. 293 imagine, to have for antecedent the immediately preceding Sentence. TZ aoe 2 “cannot give you a clearer idea of the true eaning of this text, than in the words of an in- genious friend, particularly well verfed in the Greek, who, upon reading my conftrudtion of £9 w, Was pleafed to approve of it, and fend me his ‘thoughe upon Philip. iv. 10. as an obfervable iluftration of it: Says he, “ The Exglih tranfla- «¢ tors have made fad work with this text, and fo, «¢ indeed, has the old Latin tranflation, and Beza. “too, as well as Erafmus [though this laft comes «© much the neareft to the Apoftle’s meaning], by. *¢ ‘not attending to the full force of the metaphor "in avelaarcre, and to the ro gpovev. They have s¢tranflated it as though the text was avelarcre. “50 Qpoverv, and NOt ro gpovey: the former of «© which implies the revival of their care and. «€ concern; the latter, their receiving frefh vi-_ ‘¢ gour and life in order to fhew forth their care «© and concern, like a tree that had for fome time ¢¢ been without fruit, and, as it were, dry and bar- «ren, but now puts forth buds and leaves in or- ~ «der for fruit. Upon wuicu, fays the Apoftle, «© Yedid really concern yourfelves for me.” The “Philippians had been the firft in their bounties <¢*to him, ver. 15.3 and had feveral times, while ee he was at 7, beffalonica, adminiftered to his wants: *« but it had been now fome time fince he had «heard from them in this way, and rejoiced by © ** finding from what he had received from the U 3 * hands 294 SurmMextiL Dessert «« hands of Epapbroditus, ey “* of opportunity which broveliteeiamar# s¢ before. A metaphor i is a * and, I think, this ‘iss shai GO he « meaning of the text, ‘1. rejoiced. gre “ God, that, at length, like a tree-w ich.] “< for fome time, appeared to be dry and Jifelefs but had fhot out anew in order for fruits.ye— ‘¢ have. again put forth the buds of Jove and af- *¢ fection for me; nor. was it-a fair thew of blof- « foms only, but from. them have proceeded «* thofe fruits which,I have now received, and . « muft attribute my not receiving them fooner to © your want of opportunity,” The tranflation of «* the text, from whence you may judge whether «¢ the above is not the fair fenfe of i ih is word for ‘«« word thus: TI rejoiced greatly i in ‘the J sae «¢ that, at length, ye budded anew to concern “* yourfelves for me; UPON WHICH ye did eoncten “© yourfelves, but wanted an, opportunity,” "-T hall not think it improper, to add here a couple of paflages from Clement of Ale: ndric in which the phrafe, ca w, oF ass, is ufed « > at as I have conftrued it in the. above citations rom ( ‘the apoftle Pant. vi tegy ee The firft is to be -met ial Paidag, | : in thefe words, AAA’ oray moins Soxgaiy Mader 710s BTUs, [pw joeAsore dermrvon TOLNTEOV. But 4 ‘hen “you make an. entertaimment,. invite the poor ‘oN WHICH, ACcounT. [that is, on account, ae s being invited], chiefly a fupper is fo pay The * ‘Suppeementat Drsserrarion: 295 The <9 here, asin the above places, has the force of anoccafional caufe; and the w agrees with the whole preceding member of the fentence, je'The other we have in Strom, 2. and runs thus, Ta pew anoxypa ovros (Adaw) recdumws errero, emopevos 77 yuvami, Tey de @anbuy ras xdrwy NEANTEV 5 ED O15 Qynrroy KOcvicrou Erov, arr” ovr es TEAOS, avburndrAalaro. For be (Adam) following bis wife, willingly chofé things that were bafe, and difregarded thofe that were true and fair; IN CONSEQUENCE OF wuicH [of which choice and difregard] be exchanged an im- mortal life for one that was mortal, though not finally. T need not fay, that the conftruction of ¢¢ ais is precifely the fame.as in the above text, this is fo p< eat upon the {malleft attention. “Ie would be eafy to fill a great number of pages with inftances, from other authors befides the facred ones, in which the prepofition :¢, efpecially as joined with w, or a like relative, is ufed in. the very fenfe I have taken it. A few only fhall fuffice for a fpecimen: Tos pes AgpEavovery pyupioy avaynar ov cori amepyaCecbas TOUT, EO w pusTdoy AuuCavwory. It is neceffary thofe ‘who receive money, should perform the thing FoR WHICH, ON ACCOWNT OF WHICH, they are reward- ed. XENOPHON. Tlubopevos em oss nAdov. Being afked FOR WHAT CAUSE they came? HERODOTUS. Oudty £oTiy £0 oTm ay orp wopeces ewrdows There is nothing FOR WHICH, ON ACCOUNT OF WHICH, I will bowl, while I am fo pleafantly failing, Lucian, Q ens U 4 " wOAn “CLEMENT of Alexandria.’ Od: jeeravody words, 29 w ravers nyaprov, 1s well authorifed { toiled iniuch. Adiomiead ee ase ee wide Tov “Ado tipnrot. ON OCCASIO: a 1 ibree, without tke otber children of Adas ¥ CUTOY AUTETH) TWPAYAUTWVY, ED OIF mer@VonTE. repenteth, meddleth no more with thofe | bings WHICH WERE THE OCCASION of bis re; CHetseanene | Fi Nee ae >) - It.is, perhaps, by doin’ time,. ‘faficiently’€ dent, that the conftruction we have given to” the a like ufe of the prepofition <9, and of the p ir <9 w. Nor is the fenfe that this conftruétion offers, intricate,or trifling; but eafily” ‘ineeltic gible, and vaftiy important. \ Thofe words. » all have finned,” mean precifely the fame’ thing here, as when the Apoftlé fays, chap. ‘I € all are under fin;” and again, ver. I ‘fhe world are become guilty before | yet again, ver. 23. all have finned : ” ise ‘ in the text we are upon, according to” the fenfe Thave put upon it, the Apoftle lets as into the true original Jource, or ‘occafional cafe, of thisini- verfal defection; namely, the lapfe of the oné man, Adam, through which, dear; with its fore: | yOhners' and appendages, ‘is come upon all “men UPON WHICH, IN CONSEQUENCE OF wHIcH, they *have all finned” in their own perfonss as they mutt do} ifthey are juftly, or eveh intelligibly;, . eee with having finned at all, ‘. ee | seen SuppreMenTat Disstrtation, 299 ~ ot mays’ perhaps, feem ftrange to fome, if the Apoftle is here {peaking of men’s having finned in their owm perfons (as my interpretation fup- pofes), that. he fhould: fay « all have finned,” meaning mankind univerfally, the whole human face ;\ when vaft numbers of them had not then come into exiftence, and multitudes that had, were incapable of thus finning, as they had not arrived to. a capacity of moral afion. But the difficulty upon this head will all vanifh, if it be remembered, that it is no unufual thing to find. that fpoken’of+in Scripture, as. already come into fai, which in time certainly will do fo. So it is faid of our Saviour, Heb. ii. 8.“ Thou haf put all things in-fubjection under his feet ;” thougheit is added -in the latter part of the fame verfe, “we fee not yet all things put under him.”.. So, in the verfe we are upon, it is faid of ‘ all men,” ! that s* death hath paffed upon them;” and jit is thus faid of them, becaufe this, intime, will be the real truth of faét with. reference to them. (In like manner,, it, is, faid..of ‘* all men,?’, that ‘¢ they have finned ;”. and. it is thus faid of them, becaufe, jas they become capable of moral action, they will certainly be guilty of fiz, at leat fo far ‘as.not to be.able to claim juftification upon the foot of law. The truth.is, mankind, the. whole hu- man race, by. reafon of the lapfe of the one man, Adam, are,in fuch a ftate,\as that, they may. be fpoken of, in the virtual ,and, conftructive fenfe, . both as dead men and - Sinners :), and they are ac- Pri _ cordingly 298 SUPPLEMENTAL Damas | cordingly, thus fpoken Pe Be age Fig not, only fpeaks of << death’s | vi ‘pafied 1 them,” of their being *¢ all de aes <¢ having all finned.” And he of chery and with propriety and .j -becaufe\it is as certain, in pi nso - lapfe, that they will a// turn out finners. in the,eye of jiri# Jaw, as that they will fall by. the ftroke of death. 0) Samiaty The fenfe we have given “thofe, important words, in the rath verfe, 29 & mavrég. numprors namely, WHEREUPON, UPON WHICH, all dave finned, will readily lead us into a, juft conception of thofe parallel onés, in the 19th verfe; dia rns mopanons Tov vos ovOpwrov apmproro xarerrabnony aroaros, By one man’s difobedience, many {the many, or all men] were made finners.’ \They-* were made finners.” How? By their own wicked choice, In CONSEQUENCE of that conftitution of ‘God, which took rife from the. difobedience of the one man, Adam,” and fubjeéted them tora ‘Tife of toif and forrdw, ending in deathi = ‘Apoftle certainly means the fame thing roth verfe, when he fays, ** by the’ mace: of one, the many ate friade finners;” “ag: When he fays, in the rath verfe, “ and coda” in this “Way, death hath pafféd upon all men, WiteRe- -YPON, UPON WHICH, IN CONSEQUENCE OF WHIEH, all have finned.” If therefore the’ iriteepnelation we havé given of thé 12th verfe be jut; foralfo | _ “is this Of the igth ‘vérfe. ‘And; in truth)’ this POD firit ‘Suppbimentar DrsseeTation, 29 firlt élaufe in the 1gth vetfe, is nothing more . thanla* repetition of the latter part of the com- n begun, but left unfinifhed, in the rath “verfe ; in like manner as the firft claufe of the “ ¥oregoing 18th verfe, is a repetition of the former “part of that fame comparifon: for which reafon, the former part of this rgth verfe, and the lattér part of the y2th, muft mean precifely the fame thing; as I have made them todo. And it is obfervable, in this way of interpretation, I not only make out a clear and ftrong connection be- tween the 12th and the 18th and roth verfes, which anfwer to it, and refume and complete the ‘comparifon that ‘was there begun; but give the phrafes, “ all have, finned,” and * the many are made finners;” their full natural force, and can- not be complained of for making jiz, by an harth metonymy, to fignify mortakty. “Dhave yet further to fay in fupport of. thie ‘in- terpretation I have’ put upon ¢¢ w mavres nuaprov, and the parallel paflage dia rns rapaxons rou evos wubpwron wpuaprorc xarecrabncay woade, thatit well connects the feveral parts of the paragraph. in . which thefe words are found, not only with one another, but with the foregoing difcourfe. : _ It makes out a good connection between this paragraph and. the foregoing context. For, Jet it be obferved, this r2th verfe, together with the 18th and roth, are introduced with dia rovre, and ape ow, to fignify their being brought in as. a . proof or illuftration of the preceding 11th verfe, AOI 3 where 300 © Suppieniinran Drsseerarrows: where the” Apote had “fad, mlBpaNRORH Chrift] "we have ‘now revered | Tec rir tion *, ” the reconciliation before - othe — verfe ; peel is, a reconeil gpdly;” and “ finners,” verfe ’ ig} a a ie Apoitle had faid, I jutt now obferved; tha x | Jesus Curist we have li seed ee tire God; and it is for this reafon Y ‘that the’ free’ gift by the righteoufnefs of one is come upon all” men to juftification;” namely, becaufe it was in” fuch a way, viz. “ by the offence of one, that judge- ment came upon all men to condemnation.” The. view of the Apoftle, in thefe conneéting particles,’ . is to introduce a proof of the credibility, the fit- nefs, the reafonablenefs, of what he had faidin» — the 11th verfe, namely, that ** we have received» * Dr. Doddridge juftly obferves, “* The word sedition ' ‘< here, has fo apparent a reference ta Karabnary ney and xarar~ “© dcyevres in the preceding verfe, that it is furprifing i it fhould | d «* have been rendered by fo different a word in our ver, nd x “© efpecially as it is fo improper to fpeak of our rectiving an- «* atonement, which God receives as made for our fins.” | Hvis + The Englifs phrafe that moft exactly anfwers the true im- port of the Greck one dy% rovro, is, as I apprehend, for, this caufe or reason. There is always an argumentative connedtion — between the difcourfe that goes before, and” that follows’ after, this demonftrative pronoun’; ‘and’ ‘its’ proper, ul is, to 4. 4 point out the reafon, caujey or ground of this conneftion.. Paley it Ought to be well minded, the wads “a * ‘SupPLEMENTAL DissERTATION, 303° pl re ’ and have received it ‘+ by Jefus) - The thought he would: convey ..is i ly Pibis: It is reafonable,: as the change frona ate of righteou/ne/s and /ife to a ftate of fin and. death was made by ove Man, that a change back again from this ftate of fiz and death to a ftate of reamed: and iife, fhould likewife be made by. one MaN; the ftrefs being evidently laid upon this, that each of thefe changes, great as they» were, and univerfal in their eetge om was, effected by ONE SINGLE PERSON. at¥ “Dr. Taylor, in his Script. Doi. of Original Sin, sae in his Parapbrafe and Notes on the Epiffle to the ~ Romans, very juftly fuppofes, that this 12th verfe, andthe whole paragraph ‘of which it is a part, were introduced as © an illuftration of, or farther” enlargement upon, what the Apoftle had been fay ing of our reconciliation to God by Fefus Chrift :” Upon which I would afk, what coherence is there between this doétrine of reconciliation to Ged by Fefus Chrift, and his explanation of eo WO TUVTES NMOP- ro? For, let it be obferved, the obje&s of this — reconciliation are exprefsly confidered by the Apoftle, in the 10th verfe, as ‘ enemies ;” yea, it, was ‘* when they were enemies,” and enemies by- being “ ungodly,” and finners,” ver. 6. 8, that they “¢ were reconciled by the death of Chrift. Heh Now, what light does it reflect upon this recon. ciliation. for the Apoftle to tellius, as Dro Taylor would underftand him, that4ve are ** fufferers’as‘ | far as death »” by reafon of the lapfe of the “one ‘man, 302 SupebEMENTAL Dissemrariow. see ss to a" man, ddam?. Merely our being) ¢ thus fufferers; is a thought noways adapted, either to explainsar confirm a reconciliation that is\grounded om our being ‘* enemies,” and enemies by. being <* uns godly,” and..*¢ finners,* :” whereas ‘the interpret: ) . worthy (ean Oe galaaa : . " y Ley ae) Marte * Tam fenfible Dr. Taylor fuppofes, as Mr. Locke id bl , him, that the epithets, without frength, ungodly, fianers, and enemies, in the 6th, 8th, and roth verfes, are ufed with! refpedt to the Gentiles only ; and that the reconciliation. treated of.ite» lates alfo to their redemption from their heathen fates Bug this I efteem a certain miftake, and a miftake too tHat quite fpoils the conneétion of the Apoftle’s words, both with'the preceding and fubfequent parts of his difcourfe. at AEG. We have already feen, that, according to the true intent of the Apoftle’s-reafoning, for three chapters together, Jews as welt as Gentiles were ** all under fin;”” that ** the whole world were guilty before God ;” that “ all,” that ‘is, mankind, univerfally, “« have finned, and come: fhort of the glory of God/?) “Why, then fhould the characters, awithout firength, ungodly, fnners, and: enemies, be reftrained to the Gentiles only? What reafon is there for fuch a limitation?» Is there any thing mote affirmediin thefe epithets, if applied to mankind univerfally, then the Apoftle had before affirmed concerning-them; and largely. proved" too? And when he had been at the pains to prove, by a long: thread of laboured argument, tha: Yews as well as Gentiles, yea, that she-awhole world, all men, were become guilty before God, why. fhould we break the continuity of his difeourfe by confin-- ing the. charaéters smgodly, finmers, and-engmies, to the Gentiles only? Surely, we ought.rather to underfland them jnanexten> _ five fenfe, fo as to take in mankind univerfally, =. 5. And by this confined interpretation of thefe charafers, and the reconciliation that relates to them, their connection with the fol Jowing, as. well as foregoing context, will be greatly hurt; for it» is obfervable the Apoftle, in this 12th and following verfes to th end of the chapter, is not treating of any thing peculiar to the: Gentiles, but of that which concerns mankind in common; ac- quainting © a SupPLEMENTAL Dissea ration; 303° ation we have given Of &@ w mavres NUPTOV, 1S direGtly calculated to lead our thoughts up to the proper fource of the abfolute need we ftood in of. this reconciliation ; for we are told, not only that sin and death are entered into the world,’’ by- the one man, Adam; but to let us know that we are deeply interefted in thefe difadvantages, we are further affured that we are both mortal and ffuls and that our becoming thus mortal and finful took rife from the one man Adam, though in a different way, according to the different na~ tures of fin and death, as has been before. ex=. plained. The interpretation we are juftifying, makes out a good conneétion alfo. between the feveral parts of the paragraph itfelf to which it is related. «In order to our taking in a juft conception of this, let it be obferved, The Apoitle, having wrote the rath verfe, in-' terpofeth a long parenthefis, reaching to the 18th yeiicy en which, among other things, he confiders quainting us, that “ death hath paffed,"’ not, upon the Gentiles only, but ** upon all men ;” and that *¢ all,” not the Gentiles. only, ** have finned :” at the fame time pointing our thoughts to the one man, Adam, as the true occafonal fource thereof. And as the illuftration of the foregoing context, in this 12th verfe, and onwards to the end of the chapter, is exaétly fuited to the- ftate of mankind univerfally, 2nd not to the ftate of the Gentile, world only, we are herefrom evidently taught, that the charac-, - tets in the foregoing context are to be applied, not to a Pare of mankind only, but to the poferity. of Adam, throughout. all ‘generations. jasc Mr bik @ i 304 SUPPLEMENTAL Dissension ceeds, Dorpvaty Sirete he * beyor “me 16, 17. And having sncerpolel this eran he’ - returns, in the 18th verfe, to the comparifon he had begun, but left unfinifhed in the rath: “¢ Therefore, as by the offence of one, judgment << came upon all men to condemnation ; /even fo, «© by the righteoufnels of one, thefree-gift came «© ypon all. men unto juftification of life. For 48° «‘ by the difobedience of one, many were made , ‘* finners, fo by the obedience of one, many fhall “* be made righteous.” As if the Apoftle had “< By the offence of one,” it muft be affirmed the judicial act, ** in forrow fhalt thou eat re thou return unto the ground,” is come upon all. But then, as a counter-part to this damage, it _ muft be affirmed alfo, that the free-gift by the. righteoufnefs of one is come upon all; fo come — upon all, as that they are made capable of attain- ing to the juftification of life. And this is highly credible; for as, by the difobedience of one, the many, or all men, in confequence of a divine conftitution, occafioned by this difobedience, and fubjecting thern to a frail mortal fate, ‘are become finners ; even fo, by the obedience of one, the fame many, or all men, in confequence of an oppofite conftitution grounded on ‘this obe=" dience, are capable of becoming righteous perfons 5 and as fuch fubjecti vely qualified for the sjethie- cation of life, Conformably ge SuPPLEMENTAL DISSERTATION. 305 Conformably to this account of the Apoftle’s words, the two difadvantages which were pointed outin the rath verfe, as taking rife from the one offence of the one man Adam, namely, death and fia, are again diftinétly and feparately mentioned in the 18th and rgth verfes, as they ought to be in the repetition of a begun but unfinifhed com- parifon. And the wo cppo/ite advantages, through — the one man Jefus Chrift, which complete the comparifon, are, in like manner, Uife and right- eoufnefs, as indeed they fhould be, being counter- parts to the death and fiz to which they are op- pofed. In this view of the paragraph, its feveral parts perfectly harmonize with each other; and, what may be worth obferving, the connecting particle ye, for, which introduces the 19th verfe, has its proper force and emphafis, and makes this verfe, as it ought to do, areafon, and a very good one too, of that which immediately preceded: where- as, if the phrafes apaprwro xarecrabncav, and Sinasos xatactadncovTas, are interpreted, as Mr. Locke and Taylor interpret them, in the metonymical fenfe, this 19th verfe will exhibit no rea/on at all of the foregoing 18th verfe, though infeparably joined with it by the particle yae, or for, but will be a mere tautology. For if, by all men being «s made finners,” through the difobedience of Adam, and their being “ raade righteous” through the obedience of Ghrift, nothing more is meanr x than 306 SuppLEMENTAL DIssERTATION. . than their being «« made mortalyors fufferersoas — far as death,” and “ being “reftored*back again to life;” this rgth verfe containing thefe words, can- hot be a reafon of the 18th. Aecording to"this— fenfe of thofe phrafes, the fame thing is onlpre- peated in the roth verfe, which had been affirmed in the 18th; and the roth verfe, inftead of being a reafon, or argument, illuftrating and confirming the 18th (as it ought to be, to give the!cou- — neéting yap its juft force), is a needlefs ‘répetition ‘of one and the fame thing; ‘as it is really made - to be in the paraphrafes of both the above-named expofitors : nor, as I imagine, could it have’beén otherwife, according to their conftruction of the words. Mili Ye ad In fhort, it fhould feem indifputably evident, that thefe verfes (the 18th and 19th) are brought in to complete the comparifon between Adam and Chrift, which was begun, but left unfinithed ‘in ‘the 12th; confequently, as fa and death are the “two grand difedvantages on Adam's fide of the comparifon in the r2th verfe, the fame difaitvan~ . tages muft be meant in the repetition of the éom- parifon in the 18th and 1th verfes ; which being fo, the advantages on Chrift’s fide of the eompa- Tifon, as they are counter-parts to the difadoan- tages on Adam's fide, ‘mutt mean life and rig ie. ‘oujuefs anfwering to death and jim, to which they are oppofed. In this view of the paragraph, "its “feveral parts are not only beautifully and ftrongly : connate es ‘ w P f —_ SuepuemenraL Disstrtarion.. 307 connected with each other, and with the imme- diately: foregoing context, which confiders the abjedts of the << reconciliation by Jefus Chrift”’ as * ungodly, finners, and enemies ;” but with the main defign of the whole preceding epiftle, the tendency of which is to fhew, that ews as well as Gentiles, the whole world, all men, are finners, and guiliy before God; and, upon that account, inca- pable. of jufification upon the foot of mere law. Eythall only add what ought to be heedfully -. obferyeds namely, that DEATH and sin, the difad- vantages, in the Apoftle’s comparifon, by means of Adam’s lapfe, being in their nature effentially different, come upon mankind in a quite different way; and the fame may be faid, with equal truth, of the oppofite advantages, by means of the obe- dience of Chrift, uirz, and RrcHTEOUSNESs: being om their nature quite different, they are brought into effect in a quite different way. 4» Death, being a natural difadvantage, may come .upon mankind by the appointment or conftitu- tion of God, without the intervening confidera- tion of their own. mifufed agency. In like man- ner, fimple deliverance from death being a natural _ advantage, may, by a like conftitution of God, be ’ fecured to the fame mankind without any regard had to their own well-ufed agency: and accord- ingly this is the real truth of the cafe, if we may depend upon the fcripture as 9 revelation from God., The human race come into the world une aa ee ere X 2 : “der _ one man Jefus Chrift, (v Deliverance: from» ithe, 308 «=—s- Suppremenrat Drsserrar : der the difadvantage of being fubjedted to'dearhyint virtue of a divine conftitution, 'occafioned sosgpilil c by the “ one offence” of the “one manAdamiy and they come into exiftence-tikewife vinder the: — advantage of an abfolute affurance:that they fhalh — be delivered from death, in virtue of a divine conftiz: ution, occafioned soLety by the obedience ofthe, power of the grave is as ABSOLUTELY/and,CER>| _ TAINLY the advantage even all men are under, — through Chrift, as fubje€tion to death ist advanta ¢ that has come. upon them throug Adam. pe. ‘on ba 4 id But the cafe is quite didienali with. refpec to; the other difadvantage through Adam, nat sin ; and its oppofite aleaii through namely RIGHTEOUSNESS. Adam’s lapfe. Rita. a difadvantage to all men with refpect to_sin.;. but how, in what way, did it become a difad tage? Evidently as, in confequence of his lapfes, they. were fubjected to mortality in a world of. - toil, labour, and forrow; upon, WHICH, FROM. WHENCE, they would take occafion. to become fins ners themfelves. The obedience of Chsa on the other hand, is their advantage with re ‘to the. becoming RIGHTEOUS. perfons.. But how? . Evidently as, in confequence of this obedience.of, his, and the conftitution-of God grounded thereon, | they.are rendered capable, in amoral way (fuch, an.one as.is adjufted to moral agents); of Bian: | ‘ax RIGHTE SUPPLEMENTAL DIssERTATION. 309: _RicHTz0us perfons; for it ought always to be kept:in mind, that RIGHTEOUSNESS is as truly a moral good quality, as sin is a morally evil one: | they are both connected with perfonal agency, and abfolutely dependent on it. Wecannomorebe. . made perfonally righteous by the righteoufnefs - of another transferred to us, than we can be made finners by the fin of another, transferred m like manner: they are both moral impof- Abilities, and equally fo. That part, therefore, of the advantage through Chrift, which confifts in _ jur being made righteous, and in this way quali- ied, not fimply for life, but for an happy reign in ‘ife after we are delivered from death, effentially ‘uppofes the ufe of mrans, and fuch too as are oroper to be ufed with moral agents, in order to their being formed, agreeably to their natures, in- to RtcHTEOUSs perfons; or, what means the fame thing, a meetnefs for an eternal reign in happy life: and this at once lets into the true reafon of the ereétion of the gofpel-kingdom, with all its means, privileges, bleffings, and motives ; which, -in’ any other view, would perhaps be quite unin- _ télligible. ) ie el may have been long and tedious in illuftrat- ‘ing the above {cripture-paffages ; but if it fhould "appear that they have been fet in a juft and true light, an eafy forgivenefs might reafonably be ex a petted ; efpecially as the fubject of them is in it-