¢ ay 
 
 ‘C 
 cae ¢ 
 
 ’ oh 
 
 i A i ai, 
 
 ae THE - De a es 
 
 i ‘ ‘ ¥ * at : j \ 
 
 i ot % MAN, | 
 | ee. a. 
 
 he 
 O 
 
 VENANT or ‘WORKS, 
 
 e 
 
 h ag a eM . 
 
 i * ¥ AND ) : 4 
 
 g a - ¥ 
 “(ORIGINAL SIN. - My 
 
 PASTOR OF THE FIRST 
 
 There is no fact, or truth in the Bible, which was designed to be a 8 + 
 subject merely of speculative regard. x é 
 
 ee ee 
 se 
 ~~ 
 par 
 > 
 S 
 
 : ee roy N.Y. cs nasil ¢. “4 
 ; 1, 3 4 = : . » 
 ‘ am " RY *, is ca : * ‘ 
 N. TUTTLE, PRINTER, dont RIVER-SOREE Te 
 \ Shy * : 
 
 wb 1832," Ce se 
 
eo, 
 Agee in the Clerk’s Office ofthe Cour of the iets Dist of 
 
 : | ‘e, P 
 eee of prey York. ie ah a 
 
a 
 
 ANALYSIS OF THE WORK. 
 
 # 
 
 its , —— a ¥ 
 - Firing ' & ” 
 COVENANT OF WORKS. 4 Ps 
 DISCOURSE I. 
 ained. The parties, and the condition of : 
 ie il 
 
 de the Gaon at considered. 
 
 Genesis ii. 16, 17 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, 
 Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree - 
 
 sill of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the 
 
 day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. ‘ 
 
 LA if 
 oh e DISCOURSE II.  * 
 
 The penalty of the Covenant particularly exhibited. 
 
 Genesis ii. 16, 17—And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, 
 Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: but of the tree 4 
 of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of i it: for in 
 
 the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. 
 2 
 
 * DISCOURSE III. 
 
 The promise of the Covenant established. Its ratifica- 
 tion by asymbol. The previous argument improved, 
 in regard to the advantages of the Covenant, and 
 the representative character of the first man. , 
 Genesis 1.16, 17—And the Lord God commanded the man, saying) © 
 
 Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the trea ae 
 
 of the knowledge of good and evil thou shalt not eat of it: for in the 
 day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. Genesis iii, 22 
 lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and 
 eat, and live forever. 
 
* THE FALL OF MAN. 
 
 at - _- DISCOURSE Iv. 
 
 The historical facts explained and improved. 
 
 Gnnesis iii, 6—And when the woman saw that the tree was good for 
 
 fisoods and that it was pleasant tothe eyes, and atree to be desired to 
 ‘makejone wise; she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave 
 also unto her husband with her, and he did eat. 
 
 ORIGINAL SIN, 
 
 VIEWED BOTH AS IMPUTED, AND INHERENT. 
 OF IMPUTATION. 
 
 ‘* * DISCOURSE Mm Oy 
 
 Doetrine explained. Established from the inspired 
 » volume. , r 
 
 Romans v. 19—For as by one man’s disobedience many were made, 
 
 » 
 
 sintiers ; 80 by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. * 
 
 a 
 
 pec ORSE VI. 
 
 Objeetions to imprreion examined and obviated. 
 Romans v. 19—For as by one man’s disobedience many were made 
 sinners; so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. 
 
 OF DEPRAVITY. 
 DISCOURSE VII. 
 
 hy 2 “4, 
 
 Doctrine ‘explained. Proved mainly from the Scrip- 
 tures. Also, by respect to observation. 
 
 John iii, 6—That which is born of the flesh is flesh, 
 
 oH * DISCOURSE VIII. 
 wuE * 
 
 The subject discussed inferentially. (Paticulatly, with 
 a view to the refutation of prevailing errors inconsist- 
 
 ent with the doctrine advanced. Conclusion. 
 John iii. 6—That which is born of the flesh is flesh. 
 
“noe . 
 PRELIMINARY REMARKS. 
 
 * 
 
 ee 
 Te argument of the following discourses is drawn” 
 
 up, under a deep sense of the difficulty attending a ‘satis- 
 factory production ; and that arising, not merely from 
 the state of theological opinion, but also, the extreme 
 
 delicacy attending some points of argument, embraced 
 
 in a complete view of the subject. Yet, great as the 
 difficulty is, and to some minds, as disheartening as the 
 
 _ attempt, I am fully convinced that a work of this nature 
 
 ee 
 
 iS greatly needed: and am confirmed in the i impression, 
 not only by the wants of my own flock, and their ex- 
 pressed wishes in regard to it, but also, by the opinions 
 of able men, and professors of theology in our country, 
 with whom I have freely communicated. In a just 
 view of the design, I am strongly assured, that a work 
 of this character, comprising what is valuable on the 
 topics it embraces; excluding from it what is foreign 
 
 and local; and embodying a pointed, clear exposition 
 
 and defence of the doctrine inculcated, cannot be an 
 unacceptable offering to the public. Whether I have 
 achieved the object in view, I am deeply aware, is for 
 others to judge: With regard to myself, I can only say, 
 if any other one would have performed the same task, 
 should most willingly have resigned my charge to his 
 disposal. But having consented to the publication of 
 
 this work, it is fit to acknowledge, that my best wishes 
 
 are answered, if the reasoning embraced in it be satis- 
 factory in the main; and if, in other respects, I escape 
 |* 
 
 Era 
 
iv a charge SO jue 1ade by many, as connected with 
 © ephemeral notices on the same points, of prying into 
 things which are unrevealed, and apparently at least, 
 ‘darkening the counsel of the Most High, by the reveries 
 
 of a “vain and deceitful” philosophy.» th 
 » But while in the present design, I will keep within 
 the sphere ‘of legitimate “information, I am admonished 
 ; £ that the subject of inquirysis one of a fertile nature. 
 Taken as a whole, it is well denominated the disease— 
 the ruined state of man! And viewed as concerned with 
 ‘the telations between man and the spiritual creation, it 
 * is one of inexhaustible import ; and must hie at the bot- 
 - tom, not merely of what is now agitated in our land, but 
 of all correct, spiritual understanding of the scriptures. 
 A fact, of which I am so deeply apprised, that in a 
 thorough investigation, I resolved, treating professedly of 
 the disease, to restrict my remarks mainly to that thing : 
 and with respect to the remedy, particularly the disputed 
 * ground on which it is administered, I considered it ill 
 advised to mingle with it much of what is freely and 
 
 a 
 
 warmly contested. 
 
 I. remark that this work treats particularly of the 
 
 disease. It conveys a sensation to my heart of painful 
 interest, as connected with the manner in which subjects 
 of this nature are treated by many people. I regard not 
 so much the peculiar garb, in which they stand forth in 
 religious periodicals, or even the Germanizing character 
 geo some preaching among us, though it savors little 
 enough of Christ-like simplicity, but rather a certain 
 * morbid appetite, by which some, who profess even a 
 “¢ form of sound words,” are indisposed to candid inquiry. 
 The case of such, I think, is much to be lamented. 
 
: 4 ~_ . wry Br e 
 > i. 
 ’ i wee og 
 ‘ " id i "4 
 
 They are instantly alarmed if any thing is offered con- ! 
 cerning our lost estate, as though we were obstinately 
 bent, notwithstanding we ever assert his moral capacity, 
 of abasing man below the infinite demerit of his own 
 folly. A posture of things that clearly subjects them to 
 a double condemnation. For while they are inconsist= 
 ent with their professed faith, it is plain that they over- 
 look the grand point, without which, there can be no 
 just impression of the remedy ; and in the consequence 
 of it, become foolishly averse to any thing, which could 
 awaken a holy zeal in their hearts, or convey to thein- 
 tellect a new apprehension upon a theme of unrivalled ~ 
 solemnity. | bi 
 
 Yet, whatever is proposed for the'regard of the read- 
 er, if founded in scripture, will challenge a respect 7 
 -vand by the judgment there passed, if it describe, our 
 state sufficiently, we must all abide, if its judgment be 
 supposed to be according to truth. Impressed myself 
 with that conviction, I resolved, that the evidence of 
 the work should rest on a close exposition of the inspi- 
 red volume. A course, of which the propriety is evi- 
 dent; and not only in this instance, but generally so, 
 where topics are discussed, which are certainly a mat- 
 ter of inspired asseveration. 
 
 If that be allowed in regard to their character, it is 
 manifest, not only as the word of God is an infallible 
 guide to us, but as the views cherished of one part will 
 exert an influence on the understanding in regard to 
 the whole system of revealed truth. An intimation of 
 which is given us by our gracious Master, when refer-* 
 ring to a certain sect among the Jews, he spake of their 
 doctrine, making it truly of the nature of leaven ; and 
 
* 
 
 ce ae a 
 ¥ * 
 # mF, ” 
 . > «= m + ' 
 ae ti. we Vil a % 
 
 sea Wis disciples to beware of it, lest a spice of error 
 in its influence on the mind, should beguile them away 
 from the simplicity of sanctified attainments. 
 - At the same time, while a primary regard is due to 
 the oracles of divine truth, I designed» however in this 
 attempt to pay some regard to the opinions of the de- 
 vout and excellent of. the earth. To the concurrent 
 testimony of those who have agreed essentially in the 
 faith inculeated ; especially, to the doctrine asserted in 
 the various standards of the Protestant Reformed Church. 
 For the sense entertained by other persuasions is al- 
 ways a desirable fact, with those who respect the char- 
 
 acter of their fellow servants and companions in the 
 school of the same Lord.* 
 
 / * Ofthe standards or confessions of the reformed churches, on points 
 
 of doctrine, I shall cite the following : Those of Augsburg, the Second 
 Helvetic, the French, Articles of the Church of England, the Belgic, 
 the Bohemian or Waldenses, Articles of Dort, the Westminster and 
 the Savoy Confessions. And some historical notice of them I add 
 here, taken from a harmony of Confessions recently published in Utica, 
 in connexion with the Acts of the Synod of Dort. 
 
 I. THE AUGSBURG, 
 
 this confession was drawn up at the suggestion of the protestant 
 princes, by Melanchton, under the direction of Luther ; and was pre- 
 sented to the Emperor, Charles V., at the Diet of Augsburg, in the 
 year 1530. It has been generally received and adopted as the confes- 
 sion of faith of all the Lutheran Churches in Europe and America.” 
 
 Il. THE SECOND HELVETIC. 
 
 ‘The first Helvetic confession was framed at the requisition of the 
 
 ~ rulers and Senate of Basil, by the delegates of the Helvetian States, 
 which had embraced the evangelical doctrine, in the year 1536, and 
 was sent and presented to the assembly of Divines at Wertemberg, by 
 Bucer and Capito. But when the first confession was too short it was 
 written over and enlarged in 1566 by the Pastors of Zurich, and was 
 
 approved and subscribed unto, not only by the Tigurines, (i. e. the 
 
 é 
 
) 
 
 net } 
 @Ex : hid a" 
 
 Ma ~ / a 
 With this declaration of my purpose, I close thes® 
 suggestions with intimating: That the argument of the _ 
 work agrees substantially with the following authors : 
 Witsius, De Moor on Mark, Turretine ; A. Gibs 
 Boston and Colquhoun on the Covenant of Works; Ed- 
 
 o 
 
 wards on Original Sin, Marrow of Modern Divinity, 
 
 Bates, Brown, Ridgley, Toplady, Berry-street Sermons, 
 
 Canton of Zurich) but by their confederates of Bern, and Schaffhau- 
 sen; and Sangallia, Rhetia, Myllhausia, and Bienna, of the Grison 
 
 ‘league ; and by the churches of Geneva, of Savoy, of Polonie, of Hun- 
 
 gary, and of Scotland.” : Oe 
 ri iy HA 
 Ill. THE FRENCH. i 
 ‘Tt was drawn up and adopted by a Synod held in Paris in 1559, 
 and presentedito Francis IJ, King of Francqgibehall of all his pro- 
 
 testant subjects.” 
 IV. ARTICLES OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. | 
 
 “They were agreed upon by the Arch-bishops, Bishops and Clergy, 
 of England and Ireland, in the convocation holden at London, in the 
 year 1562, for the av iding diversities of opinions, and for the estab- 
 lishing of consent touching true religion. They, 39 in all, were also 
 established by a convocation of the bishops, clergy, and laity, as the 
 articles of faith, of the Protestané Episcopal Church in the U. States, 
 
 in the year 1801.” 
 V. THE BELGIC. 
 
 “This confession was first published in the French language, in the 
 year 1563, in the name of all the churches of Belgia ; and was confirm- 
 ed and adopted by the Synod of their churches in 1579, and rendered 
 and published in the Dutch language. The confession and catechism 
 of the Belgic churches, and the canons of Dort, have been adopted as 
 the faith of the reformed churches of the Netherlands. And these 
 
 again have been received and adopted in this country, as the confes- _ 
 
 sion of faith of the American “‘ Reformed Protestant Dutch. Church.” 
 
 - VI. THE BOHEMIAN, OR WALDENSES. 
 
 ff This was drawn up in the year 1573, and was highly approved by 
 Luther Melanchton, and the whole university of Wirtemberg.”’ 
 
= ie 
 
 a 
 
 ee Lectures, Fisher’s and Westminster Cate 
 _chisms. im 
 
 . Works of the above stamp have not Snly been thor- 
 oughly examined, but what is valuable in them I have 
 hoped to retain. And though some may dissent, in 
 
 whose hands this small edition may come, from our 
 
 sense of imputation, or the character which we give to 
 the various evils by which we are assailed in the pre- 
 sent world, (yet i in this day of divine rebuke, we should 
 berare how we touch on these awful topics, ) it is 
 thought, however, if they are somo on the point of na- 
 tive depravity, that the work may not be on the whole 
 less acceptable ; but that the effect of it will be to stir 
 i * 
 
 & VIL, THE ARTICLES OF port 
 
 “‘ They were drawn up by a Synod convened at Dordricht, or Dort; 
 at which, many theologians of the Reformed Churches of Great Brit- 
 ian, Germany apd "a a were eo It sat in the Baad of our 
 Lord 1618, 1619. Fal 
 
 VUl. THE me 
 
 ‘‘This was drawn up by an assembly, of divines convened by an 
 act of Parliament, 1643. It was acon ty the general assembly of 
 the Church of Scotland, and ratified by an act of parliament in the 
 year 1645.—-Was acknowledged as the confession of faith of the New- 
 England Churches, by the Synod of Cambridge, in Massachusetts, 
 1648. And has been adopted as the confession of faith of the General 
 Assembly, the Burgher, Anti-Burgher, Covenanter, and Associate Re- 
 formed Presbyterians in this country.” 
 
 IX. THE SAVOY. 
 
 “ This confession is a declaration of the faith and order, adopted in 
 
 the congregational churches in England, consented unto by the elders 
 
 and messengers in their meeting at the Savoy, (London,) in 1658. 
 Was approved by a Synod at Boston, 1680, of the elders and messen- 
 gers of the congregational churches of Massachusetts. And was own- 
 ed and consented unto by the elders and messengers of the churches 
 in Connecticut, assembled at Saybrook in the year 1708.” 
 
 wy 
 
n mm wf 
 ? 
 aia é 
 
 .., ee e 4% » 
 up a spirit of inquiry ; to explain and conciliate, rather 
 than disturb ; and especially, to foster those views of 
 our state by nature, which in th 2 glorious work of God 
 in this place, and more or less through the country, 
 have been blessed to the eternal good of many souls 
 ‘¢ dead in trespasses and sins.”’ 
 
 That this, under the Divine blessing, may ever be 
 the case, not only with my own people, whose assidui- 
 ty in listening to these discourses iy do most fervently 
 reciprocate, but as connected with the spiritual advance- 
 ment of any who shall hereafter make them a subject 
 of particular contemplation, is the devout wish and ~ 
 
 prayer of the Author. , diy 
 * | Ping 
 } *” .. | a a 
 My ‘ 
 * # * 
 % 
 Wi. 
 
 ‘eo 
 
‘ae 
 
 a ‘ bad 
 
 COVENANT OF WorKs. 
 
 . 4 
 in DISCOURSE I. 
 Genesis ii. 16, 17—And the the Lord Gode d the man sayith, 
 
 Of every tree of the garden thou mayest fr 
 
 of the knowledge of good a nd evil, thou sha t eat a for in 
 
 the day that thou eatest t of thou shalt surely aie, 
 
 Tuat God in the creat 2 of the world purpo it 
 glorify himself, is a point ver ry cordially embraced ; a 
 by those who differ in the mode of securing the object 
 while they admit the fact, is not 
 made the basis of all evidence in 
 istration of the universe. 
 
 Ifthe proposition however be pai its bearing upon 
 our guilty race, nm of the first man, and de- 
 sign of God in 1g his moral agent, may be easi-’ 
 ly discerned. In connexion with the situation of man- 
 kind, this doubtless er. Had the earth only 
 been created, and no intelligent being placed in it, no 
 medium had existed of displaying God’s moral attri- 
 butes in this part of the empire ; and his main purpose 
 in regard to that device must have seemingly failed. 
 But forming Adam a responsible agent, and, as the 
 head of his species, impressing on him his glorious im- 
 age, he endowed him at once with those attributes of 
 which his nature was susceptible ; and over the work 
 of his own hand, ina state of primeval purity, pronoun- 
 ced the example of his wonderworking power to be 
 incomparably good. 
 
 But that particular likeness to the Author of good, 
 
 2 
 
 regard to the admin- 
 
 y adopted, but is 
 
 a 
 
» no less than absolute control, 
 “ connexion ; or regard that semblance, as issuing in an 
 
 Pe ” 
 making him an object of peculiar care, is immeasurably 
 important. The “ae it we shall not expatiate on 
 at present. It was s however, as laid a foundation 
 
 of rational and endearing intercouse between man, and 
 the Eternal Source of being and happiness. It was such 
 
 as became in the same instance, and that adorned his 
 state, the sweetly attempered relations of lawgiver and 
 subject, of a. parent and child. And in regard to the 
 va man, as a fit medium of exhibiting the divine per- 
 fection, and with that view, an object of tender regard 
 
 we shall consider it im one 
 
 understanding between him and the Father of spiritual 
 yagents, that in ag prehension may deserve the name 
 of a covenant. © 
 Whether the transaction referred to, however, should 
 retain the customary pie ie I think, will fully ap- 
 pear from what may be o ered io our notice : from 
 what is made a subject hereafter Ais contempla- 
 tion, that respects the design of any covenant. And if 
 it appear well founded in the historical writings of Mo- 
 ses, to say no less, will be deemed important under a 
 variety of aspect ; as it may serve not only to explain 
 the constitution under which Adam was placed, but it 
 may shed some light on the wisdom of the divine dis- 
 pensations generally, by which happiness is dispensed 
 ‘to our race, as we imagine, whether before or after the 
 apostacy, on the same general principle ; and any por- 
 tion of human felicity is suitably derived, only from fed- 
 eral stipulations, dictated by a God, that keepeth cove- 
 nant and mercy with them that fear him. 
 But whatever is proved in regard to the subject of 
 future examination, or any position that may be adopt- 
 
 +d 
 
 wae 
 » 
 
ae 
 ~15 
 oa 
 
 ed, it is fit to remark in the onset, that some obscurity 
 may rest on the apprehension ofpecrles in @ narrow in- 
 spection, from the use of the word covenant in the sa- 
 cred scriptures. si 
 
 The reason of this may be easily detected. It arises 
 observably from the circumstance, that the name is ta- 
 ken by the sacred penmen in a more undefined sense 
 than we adopt it in this relation. ‘As you will certain- 
 ly discover, it is frequently used by them in a broader 
 acceptation : is made, that is, to signify, not the terms 
 of a covenant, s on but what is very true, 
 to import simply, or, on a large scale, any divine plan 
 of operation, constitution, establishment or mode of pro- 
 ceeding. In this sense you may be aware, that it is 
 used unquestionably in regard to the material world; 
 and in reference to things, which, on their own part, can- 
 not properly assume the stipulations of an engagement. 
 An example of its use may be taken from the following. 
 Itis declared then in a final settlement with Noah, that 
 God enfered into covenant with him, and with his seed 
 after him, yea, and with the fowl, the cattle, and every 
 beast of the earth; that all flesh should not be cut off 
 _ any more by the waters of a flood, that there should not 
 be any more a flood to destroy the earth. I can name 
 also, an example in point, where God is allowed to have 
 made a covenant with the day and night ; and in virtue 
 of which, they succeed each other in the manner that 
 is experienced in the vicissitudes of time.t But this, I 
 apprehend, will answer the end of an example. And 
 while it appears altogether unnecessary, that a mist 
 should be thrown over the subject by a particular use 
 
 * Genesis ix. 9,10 11, 
 t Jeremiah xxxiii. 25, 
 
16 
 
 of the term, though appearing in Scripture, as it no way 
 affects my present purpose, I may add, that we should 
 derive from it perhaps a very important intimation, viz., 
 that the propriety of the name in the very cases I quote 
 appears to be taken primarily from the security, pertain- 
 ing to the mutual relations and formal notion of the cov- 
 enant in a more limited signification. 
 
 This being premised, it shall be my object in what I 
 may propose for regard, first, , to vlan the doctrine | 
 shall maintain in your hearing, viz.: that in the prime- 
 val state of Adam, GoD ENTERED INTO A COVENANT WITH 
 HIM, WHICH IS COMMONLY DENOMINATED THE COVENANT 
 or works. And this attempted, it is my purpose to con- 
 sider in order : 
 
 1. The parties of this covenant. 
 
 2. Its condition. 
 
 3. Its sanction. And, 
 
 4. The promise of the covenant, together with its 
 ratification by an admirable provision of the Author. 
 
 In compliance then with the plan announced, I shall 
 explain, first, the sentiment I have espoused ; or give 
 an outline of the view entertained of it, in order that 
 you may appreciate better what is advanced on every 
 head inviting your serious regard. 
 
 In fulfilling this desirable purpose, I remark then in 
 general, that so far as the Bible may teach any thing 
 whatever, it warrants us in the belief of a principle lying 
 at the bottom of all correct views of divine things. It 
 is this: That in the plan of J ehovah’s government, it 
 is his avowed purpose, that every accountable being in 
 the universe be placed originally in a state of trial. 
 That all be tried on a basis of natural requirement, or if 
 you please, pass through a legal probation. And as a 
 
 7 
 
af 
 
 17 
 
 consequence of said trial, or probation, it appears as 
 
 agreeable to reason, as to the inspired record itself, that 
 the future happiness or misery of any dependent crea- 
 ture, be made to hang derisively on the meritorious 
 character he sustains. 
 
 This was the case no doubt in regard to the angelic 
 creation ; not only them that sinned, but those who 
 abode in primitive purity and zeal, nit who, in a pro- 
 per regard to a test of mo ral duty, by the impartial 
 Jehovah, are certainly confirmed in a state of peace and 
 happiness forever. = 
 
 And this we conceive on the authority of the scrip- 
 tures was the case with Adam. He had certainly a 
 trial. And speaking of it in a bare outline of the fact, 
 we may call to mind that in a proper sense his natural 
 condition was that precisely: I say his’state, as born 
 under the necessary dominion of the Eternal, and from 
 the nature of the relation subsisting between them, ex- 
 pected to render the Being that made him a suitable 
 homage. A principle indeed not pofrequently over- 
 looked; but if correct, of the greatest importa e. Artd 
 its Paging is palpable. For whatever behatta of the 
 covenant in question by those who can hardly endure 
 the name of it, they have yet a serious matter to dispose 
 of apart from any thing of the nature designed. e 
 
 But to render the natural ge Oe of man more appa- 
 rent, I remark, that you must view him at the creation, 
 as made under a law requiring of h im what.the covenant 
 of works is said to have done, viz., perfect and unerring 
 obedience: just what the relation subsisting between 
 man and his Maker makes indispensably needful. - And 
 
 with-regard to the law itself, viewed as embraced strictly - 
 in the precept of it, and more especially, as laidona * 
 
 ‘ f 4 ° > 
 w 
 
 i 
 
 “: 
 
¢ | oul 
 mutable being it had a penalty meantime virtually 
 
 against the least aberration by the decalogue, would | 
 
 18 
 
 ; 
 
 nexed toit. And whatever was implied in the penalt 
 no doubt, the same wrath essentially which is denounced 
 
 have impended on any departure from its claims. 
 
 To appreciate the condition of Adam therefore in the 
 circumstances described, the covenant of works being 
 left out of view, you must con eive of him as undergoing 
 a sort of probation perpetually. The terms of which 
 frie ‘he obeyed the law of 
 God exactly, or maintained inviolable the purity of his 
 nature, he should “ae be exempt from a threatened 
 
 eurse, but at the sa 
 
 were plainly this: That w 
 
 ‘time, retain a gladsome sense of 
 his Maker’s favor. In regard however to the latter 
 point, or the enjoyment arising from free communion 
 with the Fathér of mercies, be it well digested, that he 
 had no certainty of any thing, except for the time being: 
 be his obedience what it may, only for the passing mo- 
 ment. And while this must be admitted, in regard to 
 the imagined stateyof our forefather, I may add, that the 
 degree ‘of This enjoyment had been surely incomplete. 
 For humanly speaking, he must be ever liable to apos- 
 tacy; and even while retaining his integrity, to beg 
 harassed, perhaps, by the'bitterest temptations of Satan. 
 Andewith the thought ever recurring to him, as I can 
 well imagine, that be might lose all he had delighted 
 in, and sink away eternally, as one has observed in re- 
 lation to it, had -his obedience held out for any assigna- 
 ble 5 eins) the good he should have certainly deri 
 from. it, had been little more than simple immortality. 
 Now in this state of things, % nd as I think too, of 
 dreadful uncertainty, comes in our perception the cove- 
 nant of works: or, understanding entered into between 
 
 * 
 
 * i oe 
 
 " * 
 
 ° 
 
 # 
 
—-_ 
 
 one party, and the promise! 
 
 9 
 
 God and a dependent creature, in virtue of which, and 
 on the ground of obedience of the nature just named, 
 our first parent in a limited trial, acting on the behalf 
 of himself and his own offspring, might attain the prize 
 of ‘everlasting life. I call this understanding or agree- 
 
 “ment a covenant. The idea is perfectly natural. In 
 
 respect to the substance of any covenant whatever, it 
 had the parts of it in the mos 
 tion and a promise: the 
 
 simple form, viz., a condi- 
 ition to be perforilea by 
 fo be made out or made good 
 by the other, when the fulfilment of that condition had 
 actually taken place. And in the case before us, [ will 
 only intimate, that the obligation of the deed was eon 
 authoritatively by asanction ; or, in respect to man, and 
 especially his mutable state, hy the terrors of penal an- 
 guish; or the divine threatening against every departure 
 from duty, of which in due time I shall speak with more 
 particularity. 
 
 In explaining my view therefore of the doctrine I 
 will assert, you must perceive the advantage of this 
 covenant to - Pane in one pont 
 
 possess not fucka happine ess f, connexion with inno- 
 cence, butas the reward of fidelity too, the possession of 
 everlasting life. After a limited period, on remaining 
 
 stedfast, he might be confirmed in the unchangeable to-_ 
 
 kens of his Maker’s benefieenee and care. And not 
 
 only in my apprehension had he been confirmed in a 
 ; ‘ee 
 
 oly life through a boundless existence, but “what is 
 
 worthy of regard, that life had been crowned with bles- 
 
 sings more importan ‘than could have been obtained on 
 
 any other scheme ; more extensive, than could have oe 
 
 been insured, even by unintermitted compliance in a state * 
 
 o BS. ee 
 th | oll 
 
 ¢* 
 
 “a, 
 
7 5 
 
 of pure condescension, bearing no comparison whateva?” 5 
 
 20 
 
 of endless probation. For in respect to this covenant, it 
 
 is judged a very fair presentiment, that a great deal of ae 
 grace was really expressed in it. And the reason is not. M4 
 
 remote from the weakest apprehension. As all admit 
 
 that the reward of eternal life on any plan must be an ¢ act. 
 
 with the desert of man, there is no sound objection to 
 the thought. And I can suppose that God would have 
 
 rewarded Adam, not merely with eternal life, but in 
 his holy prerogative, hone crowned that life with in- 
 expressible kindness. That he had done it in fact, with 
 
 the liberality of a prince. And in the covenant under - 
 
 which our first parent | was placed, it was the avowed 
 purpose of the Creator, not only to display some evi- 
 dence of kind regard, but in the free disposal of his 
 
 own gifts and grace, to exhibit to created intelligences 
 
 a paramount regard to his adcrable Sovreignty. 
 
 This is the sense we entertain of what is familiarly 
 styled the covenant of works. Not unfrequently, and 
 for reasons that are apparent, a covenant of friendship, 
 of life, —" and the like.* And having report- 
 
 4 The name by which this act, or understanding is designated i is com- 
 parativ ely unimportant. Yet the propriety of retaining the name it 
 commonly bears, is seen from other parts of scripture. For example, 
 the lawof works; as opposed by Paul to the law of fuith, is the very 
 same thing, i. e. the law of Heaven in a covenant form.* For as op- 
 ca in any sense, lt is 
 
 erely as a way of life ; being viewed in re- 
 
 ‘ith God, as the primary and natural method 
 py ough faith in Christ is truly secondary and 
 supervenient. Agreeing with which, it is said in Galatians: ‘ For a 
 many as are of the works of the law are under the curse.t But Bair 
 shall we consider that ? That all who aregbound to obey the divine 
 law, merely as a rule of life, are certainly damned for that very reason? 
 Ah,no. Then surely were it vain to put any creature upon trial, From 
 * Romansiil. 27. + Galatians ili. 10. 
 
 %  % 
 
 of obtaining it, while ited : 
 
a a tie i * 
 
 ’ 
 
 21 
 
 ed briefly the view entertained of its nature, I shall go 
 . on, as proposed, to consider in detail the parts and attri- 
 
 the covenant introduced for your particular 
 
 . First. I call your attention, as intimated, to the 
 - individuals who constitute properly the parties of this 
 covenant. 
 
 With respect to the pe es agents, they are re- 
 spectively God and the first man he created, assigning 
 him a place on the rolling element we inhabit. On the 
 one part, it is the self-existent One; the eternal and 
 transcendantly glorious Jehovah. On the other, a finite 
 creature whom he had just formed, and made a subject 
 of his moral and tenderest regard. And such being the 
 
 all which, it appears, that the law is here viewed, simply, asa federal 
 means of securing an interest in God’s favor, and a title ta. a prospec- 
 tive felicity hereafter. With the above, compare another declaration 
 of Paul respecting believers, saying, For sen shall not have dominion 
 over you : for ye are not under the law but wnder grace.{ Andif the 
 reader please, the enlightning remarks of Fraser onthe same passage, 
 in his forcible exposition and paraphrase of the 6th and 7th chapters 
 of the epistle to the Romans. 
 
 From the Harmony of Confessions referred to in a previous note, I 
 
 extract merely the following : 
 * 
 
 Tue Latrer Conression OF HELVETIA. 
 
 ‘Man was from the beginning created of God after his image, in 
 righteousness and true holiness, good and upright: but by the instinct 
 of the serpent and his own fault, falling from goodness and uprightness, 
 became subject to sin, death, and divers 
 as he became by his fall, such are ail h 
 
 death and sundry calamities.” 
 “ ae 
 
 alamities ; ; and such an one 
 0, spring, even subject to sin, 
 
 ConFEssion oF BoHEMIA, OR THE WALDENSES. 
 
 “Man being placed in this estate, had left unto him free will, so that 
 if he-would, he was able to fulfil that commandment which God gave_ 
 
 ¢Romans vi. 14. 
 
 ae 
 
 ue 
 
——— 
 
 OS —_ = =, 
 
 22 
 
 parties, if a question arise in your hearts, whether the 
 were able to enter into,.a covenant with each other— 
 answer, truly. Without any mistake they were f 
 ed for it: unless it can be shown there is sometk 
 the nature of the covenant at war with the so T 
 of God, or the moral liberty of his dependent cre: 
 man; or again, if any difficulty of the sort arise, some- fas 
 thing perhaps, that is unjust in the very stipulations of ' 
 the covenant to which Iallude. And to shew that either 
 point may be fully disposed of, and no serious difficulty 
 arise from ought that appears, Iremark, first: | 
 
 That no argument against the strain of this covenant 
 having respect to mere agency, whether applying to God 
 or a dependent being, can be arrayed successfully against 
 the character ascribed to it. 
 
 him, and thereby to retain righteousness both for himself and for all 
 his posterity after him, and every way to enjoy a spirit, soul, body, 
 and an estate most blessed.” 
 
 ARTICLES OF THE Synop oF Dort. 
 
 ‘* As all men have sinned in Adam, and have become exposed to 
 the curse and eternal death, God would have done no injustice to any 
 one, ifhe had determined to leave the whole human race under sin and 
 the curse, and to condemn them on account of sin; according to those 
 words of the apostle, “‘Allthe world is become guilty before God.” 
 Romans iii. 19. 
 
 THE WESTMINSTER CONFESSION. ‘ 
 
 “ The first covenant made with man was a covenant of works, where- 
 in life was promised to Adam, and in him to his posterity, upon condi- 
 tion of perfect, and personal obedience. 
 
 ¥ 
 Tuer Savoy Conression, 
 
 ‘God having made a covenant of works and life thereutien, with our 
 first parents, and all their posterity in them, they being seduced by the 
 subtlety and temptation of Satan, did wilfully transgress the law of | 
 their creation, and break the covenant in eating the forbidden fruit.” ( 
 
* 
 23 ” 
 
 iia ty that subsists between our Maker, and the in- 
 al that forms the other party of it. An inequality, 
 wed as compatible enough with the relations of law- 
 
 _ But in reply to this, I can freely admit, that the dis- 
 tance between God and any dependent creature whatey- 
 er, is truly great. Unspeakably great it is! And such 
 as should inspire us, not only with a feeling of abasement, 
 but with the profoundest emotion of religiousawe. This 
 no doubt, is a sentiment familiar to a holy mind; and 
 was appreciated in all its importance by our first parent. 
 But the distance between God and man, as bearing on 
 the topic before us, if I mistake not, is altogether imma- 
 terial. And to make it apparent to the mind you have 
 only to employ an apt simile ; one of that nature, by 
 which the correctness of the principle may be fitly il- 
 lustrated. 
 
 With that very respect, imagine to yourself, then, if 
 you please, an earthly parent; one clothed with the 
 highest authority, making toa son a tender of this de- 
 scription. Forexample: “Son, go into my field and 
 labor faithfully to-day, and at night I will make you a 
 very handsome present.”? It is plain to my just appre- 
 hension, though the son be under a prior obligation to 
 regard the authority of his parent, and without the gift, 
 should obey his expressed wish even in that declared 
 
 point, yet viitue of the allegation, the case now is 
 materially changed. What he could not have claimes 
 
 before solelgan in virtue of labor, i in the instance of his - 
 
 regard, he may now insist upon from other considera- 
 
 # 
 
 if, 
 
 wet 
 
 re 
 
4 
 
 ‘. 
 24 
 
 tions. And though his title to the present be x 
 
 ately, from respect to the spirit and stipulati on 
 reciprocal engagement. oe 
 
 Again. In regard to any unfairness in what is inti- 
 mated of the tenor of this covenant, it is hard to discover 
 any possible ground for it, unless it be insinuated by the 
 fact, that one of the parties is an absolute Sovreign, and 
 by a natural, yea, infinite prerogative, bears rule over all 
 his dependent creatures. 
 
 But so far as injustice, connected in our apprehension 
 with a covenant between God and man may be drawn 
 from this source, it is entirely misplaced. And most 
 assuredly, if it have respect to the interest our first pa- 
 rents had in obeying the declared will of the Creator. 
 
 In relation to that point, the character of the parties, 
 jointly considered, may relieve us from any fearful ap- 
 prehension. If we look narrowly at it, nothing is plain- 
 erthan the intimation, whatever is urged in regard to the 
 fallibility of Adam, yet, his Maker undoubtedly was 
 infallible. He was supremely good and invariably just. 
 
 And if the covenant referred to contained nothing inter- 
 fering with the freedom of either—left them to act | 
 entirely their own will—I cannot but think, that there | 
 was every qualification on both sides to secure an agree- 
 ment naturally desirable. A covenant, suited in its aim 
 to promote the brightest manifestation of J ehoyah’s glory, 
 
 nd singularly adapted, if fairly noticed, to promote the 
 safety and happiness of our natural progenitor. 
 
 And here 1 would barely ask, (supposing its rae 
 
 tte. 
 
i Wi 
 
 ) if it were not the fact? If you will have a correct 
 to the query, take simply the condition for a 
 t, viz., abstinence from the fruit of a certain tree ; 
 which presently I will speak more largely, and on 
 
 1 the happiness of the first pair was made to de- 
 J. And I barely ask, if the infinite One, without 
 egard to the terms of a covenant could not justly 
 required it of Adam? If so, what reason could he 
 for doubting its fairness being simply aware of its 
 y existence? For any disinclination to compliance 
 with it, must be an act of daring wickedness; and result 
 very plainly, in an absolute denial of all allegiance to 
 the Majesty on high. Now if this be a just representa- 
 tion of the case, as the change of a precept morally just 
 into the condition of a covenant transaction will not affect 
 its nature, and consequently, Adam could find no fault 
 with it in that light, it only remains to saya word of 
 the promise and penalty. And while in regard to the 
 former, I will only intimate, that it is vain, and worse 
 than that, to talk of any disaffection with it, if it be 
 found embraced in the character given unto it, I greatly 
 err, if it be not equally so, to imagine, that the father 
 of the human race, in a state of moral rectitude, could 
 possibly have objected to the propriety of Pens | sin 
 
 n a most exemplary manner. 
 
 If the covenant then required nothing more than Adam 
 was bound by the law of nature to do, nay had ability 
 for, and even promised more happiness than he could 
 otherwise have anticipated, it is plain to a demonstra- 
 tion, that God and man were able to form a covenant, 
 
 They were able to understand, and cordially assent to 
 
 terms: mutually acceptable. And that they did it in 
 fact, not only with the most untrammelled freedom of 
 3 
 
 és *' 
 
Ms ote 
 
 * 26 
 the will, but with the highest advantage to the pr 
 tor of our race, I think, is justly implied in the 
 given to the serpent by Eve. For when a.quet 
 “started, whether God had forbidden our first pare t 
 taste of a certain fruit, she avers most sincerely +, We 
 may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden; but of 
 
 ¥ fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, 
 hath said, ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye toue 
 lest ye die.* It would seem from the concession 0 
 to be a given point with the happy pair, ere sin had 
 stroyed them, that the tenure on which their happiness 
 was suspended, was a very plain and reasonable require~ 
 ment of the supreme Ruler. | 
 I have said however in what is proposed on the sub- 
 ject, that one party in the covenant was our forefather 
 Adam. I supposed that in his person Eve was included, 
 as constituting in the mind of God but one agency in 
 the transaction. They together formed the party on the 
 side of man. And as their mutual consent in sinning 
 
 was required in order to their fall, so, it were in vain to 
 ask,- what could be the consequence of one’s obeying 
 and the other disobeying in paradise ? Not to say, that 
 in the same circumstances a presumption exists that they 
 would act alike, it isa given point, as will appear here- 
 after that their mutual defection was necessary to their 
 failing upon trial. As necessary, if viewed merely as 
 a sovereign dispensation of Almighty God as any thing 
 else imaginable. As much so, for example, asthe united 
 act of mind and matter, of the will and of the hand, in 
 a Violation of the test, on.which the per sonal ap olfare of 
 the inmates of Eden was plainly and most signally de- 
 pending. . But leaving’this for the present, | 
 
 * Genesis ili, 2, 3. 
 
 re ee ee 
 
ae ™ 
 
 ¥ : ’ 
 - 2. I will speak in the second place, of the condition of 
 the covenant made with Adam: And what as yet, Ihave 
 ely anticipated in regard to it, I shall hope, to present» > 
 ina more distinct and satisfactory manner. 
 The condition, we are assured by the text, was entire 
 bstinence from the fruit of a tree planted in paradise. * 
 ind as the condition is given in the form of a precept, 
 istent enough with a covenant transaction as I have 
 | in a preceding statement, it may be fitin handling 
 oint to speak of a distinction among the laws of our 
 Maker. That I have in view is very generally con- 
 fessed ; ; and may serve in a measure, perhaps, to disclose 
 the equity of the divine administration in this lower 
 world. 
 
 ‘The laws of God then, for convenience sake, have 
 been distinguished into natural and positive: intending 
 by natural laws or requirements, in distinction from the 
 other, those of natural and unchangeable obligation. Of 
 the former class, for example, is the command to love 
 God supremely ; our neighbor with a sincere and impar- 
 tial affection; to honor God’s holy name, abstain from 
 lying, stealing, murder and the like. These in all cir- 
 cumstances whatever are binding on the consciences of 
 men, because, that they are of natural and everlasting 
 application. 
 
 On the other hand, by positive laws or requirements, 
 are intended those differing from the other to this ex- 
 tent; or which, in respect to their source, as well as 
 particular end, must be traced invariably to the sove- 
 reign will of God alone. Not, but that they have mean- 
 while a seat in the divine mind, and are rooted firmly 
 in the principles of the all-wise and perfect government — 
 of God. But what I intend is merely this : In regard 
 
| be Eaely apparent to man, it is the “will of Hits only © ; 
 
 * 38 
 
 to their proximate origin, as well as their application in — vor 
 respect to the circumstances of time, place, &c., we are — a 
 
 indebted unequivocally to an expression from fe Law- yi: 
 giver himself. The will of God alone is the object of ih 
 
 * that ceasiapites the pice prc of aeecmnie. to’ na 4 
 
 Mosaic dispensation in regard to the ime of keep oe 
 the sabbath, viz.,on the seventh day of the week fo 4 
 which under the christian dispensation is changed from 
 the seventh to the first—a fair sample of what I intend 
 by a precept of this nature. ‘To which could easily be 
 added many things under the former, and some things 
 under the christian economy of a very similar complex- 
 ion.* 
 
 But of this sort, I will barely suggest is the command 
 in regard to the forbidden fruit, addressed plainly to the 
 first pairin paradise. It was not a.law of nature, or 
 one of natural and unyielding obligation. It owed its 
 origin to the sovereign will of the Creator ; and was to 
 be observed, while that will should dictate plainly the 
 
 * Tf this distinction, though ancient, is not perfectly obvious, the read- 
 er may take, as of equal force, the following representation. 
 ‘¢ The laws of God for the government of men, have some of them 
 been temporary and local, and some of perpetual and universal obliga- 
 - tion. The ceremonial and judicial laws of the Jews were, during the 
 continuance of the Mosaic economy, perfectly obligatory on that peo- 
 ple—as much so as the precepts of the decalogue. But they were lo- 
 cal and temporary. They never were binding on any other people. 
 beside the Jews; and not binding on them after the advent of the 
 Messiah. ‘They were given for a particular purpose—That purpose 
 has been accomplished, and the Deity, the legislator who enacted, has 
 repealed them, and they are no longer laws.” —Green on the shortes> 
 Catechism. 
 
29 
 
 riety of Gt. But while the distinction referred to 
 ay exist among the laws of the Creator, be it care- 
 i ally marked on the subject that all laws of divine en- 
 actment agree plainly in one point. They come with- 
 me the scope of the moral law. ds all of them God 
 
 a the “only Potentate, the King of kings, and the Lord’ ° 
 of ” And the first requirement of the decalogue, 
 to say no more, makes them all binding on our inmost 
 spirit, viz., Thou shalt have no other Gods before me: or 
 one God thou shalt have, and his authority must be 
 complied with. And I conceive it will be hardly ne- 
 cessary to add, that if they all come within the sense of 
 -the moral code, they are all to be obeyed undoubtedly 
 with the same temper of heart, and reverence for the 
 authority that most graciously imposed them. 
 
 Having made this statement, we are prepared, I think, 
 to weigh the condition of the covenant, and to discover 
 in what its propriety eminently appeared. 
 
 First. The nature of the condition, considered as a 
 positive law or requirement of our Maker, had this ad- 
 vantage very plainly. While the ground of it then 
 was a special revelation from above, whether the rea- 
 sons of it, in their intrinsic or relative magnitude were 
 apparent or not, is immaterial : as in respect to obliga- 
 tion, which is the main thing in this discussion, the 
 ground of respect to it being merely, as declared, the re- 
 vealed will of a sovereign Lord. 
 
 This granted, in regard tothe formal motes on which 
 compliance i is anticipated, I will add in the first place, 
 that the condition of the covenant had the fact of simpli- 
 city to commend it to favor. 
 
 3* 
 
 " 
 ? w 
 * 
 
 ft 
 
30 
 
 \f Rein: Nothing more simple, sane more eas’ y of 
 
 apprehension could have been devised. It was purely — sh 
 an external act—a single thought—to abstain from a " F 
 certain’ article on a tree. And no subterfuge of igno- 
 
 rance, no room for sheer mistake can be imagined in 
 extenuation of sin. And bearing in mind too how vari- 
 ous is the influence of law, as administered for a variety 
 
 of purpose, the idea is one of considerable importance 
 
 and merits at least a very solemn regard. 
 
 ‘And with respect to Adam himself, whether he con- 
 sidered this trait of it or not, the test I apprehend should 
 have taught him, that if God would revenge an infringe- 
 ment of a plain positive precept, with far more prompt- 
 ness, so to speak, would he revenge other precepts of the 
 same law prescribing man’s duty ; or, those which have 
 their origin in the natural and enduring relations that 
 subsist between himself and accountable beings through- 
 out his vast empire. . 
 
 Again. Not only the nature of the condition in respect 
 to simplicity, but also in regard to fullness of expression 
 will offer itself to our devout consideration. * I look at 
 it now touching the spirit of the decalogue ; the first and 
 second tables of it: and how far, as a test of duty, it 
 
 may serve to display the requirement of either. In what 
 
 conceivable, manner, it may extol the love we should 
 have to God; and the impartial affection that we should 
 cherish toward a neighbor. 
 
 In regard then to its bearing particularly on the deca- 
 logue, I remark first, that it was fit to display the sense 
 of the first table, by regarding especially the first pre- 
 cept of it. It was a loud response to the declaration of 
 
 1? 
 a 
 ~ 
 
” . 
 iy: 
 
 ie * 
 ae Sinai, Thou shalt have no other gods before me. As 1 
 ne haye said, one God thou shalt have, and his authority 
 must be regarded. And with regard to the divine will, 
 ay or its simple manifestation as the exact basis of compli- 
 2 with it, you cannot fail to discover, that it was 
 ordered wisely in regard to the first man to put his tem- 
 Wi per to a trial: and in the most glorious acceptation of it, 
 ~ to see if the will of God and that alone could govern his 
 ‘heart. And viewed in connexion with his trying situa- 
 
 tion, and the various motives he had to praise the mora! 
 and dispensed goodness of his Maker, you will find im- 
 mediately, that the condition of the covenant, in regard 
 to this feature, was admirably fitted to unfold the spirit 
 of God’s law. | : 
 
 Besides ; the test contemplated was.no less expres- 
 sive of relative obligation implied in it; or what is 
 familiarly designated by second table requirements. 
 
 Though Adam in respect to finite beings seemed to 
 be alone, and his cares restricted to the precincts of a 
 garden, notwithstanding, as a moral agent, the effect of 
 his obedience or disobedience was by no means tran- 
 sient. And in regard to his own offspring which should 
 arise to overspread the earth, it is altogether incredible 
 he should not be aware, that the consequences of his 
 conduct on some principle or other must aflect their hap- 
 piness: and that the weal or woe of myriads yet unborn 
 was fearfully suspended on the manner in which he ob- 
 served the pleasure of his Sovereign. Surely, in these 
 circumstances, every tie of native sympathy, no less than 
 the moral sense, or a quick perception of duty, should 
 
 have persuaded him to pause : to beware of astep that _ 
 
 was pregnant with all evil: and the only consequence 
 of which could certainly be, not merely to ruin himself, 
 
18 
 
 32 
 
 but to damn his species; and in respect to legal desert, 
 bring upon his soul a a and most repelling ie i 
 sibility. Mie | 
 
 But once more. In regard to the precept of the cov= a) 
 enant entered into with Adam, there is reason to think, uh 
 it was designed to be of short duration. Or, the con- 
 dition, as such, viewed as the turning point of the trans- 
 action was intended to be of transient application. 
 
 This, in fact, might be argued with considerable 
 point from the analogy of the divine dispensation in re- 
 gard to the fallen angels. For according to the inspi- 
 red record, the time of their probation in heaven was 
 undoubtedly a very limited period. 
 
 But so far as our first parents may deserve a notice, 
 though we have no formal intimation from the Lawgiv- 
 er himself in regard to the circumstance of time, it has 
 justly been deemed an important thought, that the: pro- 
 bation of Adam must have doubtless expired, whatever 
 had been the consequence of it, prior to the birth of his 
 immediate offspring. For on any other principle, ap- 
 pearing on the stage before his probation was closed, 
 there had existed the same propriety, or necessity appa- 
 rently, of subjecting them personally toa like trial. A 
 position we are not prepared to adopt. As we believe 
 it not only inconsistent with divine revelation, but also 
 with an opinion very extensively embraced, and agree- 
 ing with painful fact, that the consequences of Adam’s 
 trial, were to have a decisive bearing on the moral tem- 
 per and prospective happiness of all his posterity.* 
 
 * How long this probationary state would have lasted we are not 
 able to determine ; some suppose it would have been till Adam should 
 have children capable of yielding obedience, or of sinning in their own 
 persons ; but if I may be allowed to offer aconjecturein this case, 
 
 Ry) , 
 
33 . 
 
 And with respect to entire abstinence from the fruit 
 of atree as the requisition of the covenant formed in 
 paradise, I will barely superadd, that if we respect the 
 circumstances in which our forefather was placed ; es- 
 pecially his insulated state at the beginning, the earth 
 being then uninhabited ; we may find it difficult to sug- 
 gest a more easy and practicable test, one every way 
 adapted to man’s rational nature than what has invited 
 our respectful examination. And in regard to that one, 
 so clearly displayed in the prohibition of the text, it is 
 not unlikely, as some have remarked, and in the ab- 
 sence of a particular intimation, that it was revealed to 
 the great progenitor of our race by an audible voice 
 from heaven. 
 
 With this discussion, I leave for the present the sub- 
 ject of our devout contemplation ; persuaded in my 
 own heart that you are apprised in this stage of my re- 
 mark, we are enlisted in a good cause, and are devo- 
 ting our zeal to a theme of unparalled interest. Nor 
 can you be unimpressed that the subject is one wrapt 
 in some obscurity: and which, from the brevity of 
 the Mosaic records will require not only a comparison 
 of the Scriptures, but what is not easy to all, an exer- 
 cise of patience. It requires particularly that we bring 
 to the meditation of it, a “ spirit of meekness and wis- 
 dom,” a sense of our own weakness and need of gra- 
 cious instruction from above. That in pursuing the 
 theme by permission of a covenant God, we may bask 
 perhaps it was to have been no longer than the fruit of that season 
 should hang upon the forbidden tree. However, be this as it will, we 
 may reasonably suppose the goodness of God made the period of his 
 probationary state as short as might well consist withthe honor of his 
 
 goveriment, in passing an sct af confirmation upon his fulfilling it with 
 out default.—Berry-street Sermons. 
 
“> 
 
 in his smiles; may search for knowledge with unwea- . 
 ried pace ; and enjoy the aid of that benignant Spirit, 
 which maketh darkness light before us and leads 1 
 
 wandering mind into all truth. if 
 
DISCOURSE If. 
 
 ea | 
 
 Genesis ii. 16, 17—And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of 
 every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the 
 knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day 
 that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. 
 
 In a preceding discourse, I called your attention to a 
 
 subject of no ordinary interest to the human mind. One, 
 
 more intimately connected with correct views of Bible 
 truth than many are aware. And of great importance, 
 not only in regard to our knowledge of salvation by a 
 Mediator, but what relates certainly to an enlarged ac- 
 quaintance with the works and ways of our Almighty 
 Benefactor. In other words, I attempted to present to 
 your regard, a well defined view of what is termed the 
 covenant of works; or, understanding supposed to have 
 existed between moral agents. As I affirmed, betwixt 
 the God of heaven on the one hand and a finite creature, 
 viz., Adam on the other. And with that respect, we 
 gave not only the view entertained of it, but resolved to 
 present the parts and attributes of it distinctly to your 
 apprehension. | 
 
 fn the prosecution of the same purpose, as you know, 
 we made a subject of particular notice, what are called 
 respectively the parties, and the condition of the cove- 
 nant. And pursuing the plan, then announced, we are 
 called in the next: place, to meditate on a theme of live- 
 
 liest import. A subject above all others, that oughé, I - 
 
 imagine, and certainly will, in the pious mind, ex- 
 cite thoughts and feelings of unbounded interest. We 
 are called to meditate on the dreadful penalty of that 
 
covenant: or divine displeasure against sin, of which 
 our text is a token, and which is denounced against the 
 least aberration from its sacred requirements. 
 
 As this point will claim a patient attention, being ur- 
 
 ged particularly in the injunction of the text, I am de- 
 termined in one discourse to give it a free, not to say, 
 exclusive regard in what I may offer for your pious con- 
 sideration. 
 
 : 
 
 We observe then, that this feature of the covenant — ; 
 
 alluded to, is preeminently exhibited in the text. The 
 words are: And.the Lord God commanded the man, say- 
 ing, Of every tree in the garden thou mayest freely eat : 
 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou 
 shalt not eat of it : for inthe day that thou eatest thereof 
 thou shalt surely die. | 
 
 From this‘declaration of the divine Lawgiver, it ap- 
 pears, that disregard of his law was threatened with 
 death. Death was an evil of punishment, denounced 
 against the evil of sin. As the Author of our being de- 
 clared—Eating of that fruit, thou “shalt surely die ;” or, 
 in the Hebrew tongue, dying thou shalt die. A mode 
 of address, denoting not merely the certainty, as some 
 remark, but as I conceive, importing in like manner 
 the solemnity and awful importance of the event. 
 
 And since the penalty is stated with that simplicity 
 in the sacred history, though long a subject of debate, 
 
 ‘what is justly implied in it, a fair presumption exists 
 
 that ne ambiguity is chargeable on its author ; or is de- 
 rived legitimately from any obscurity marring the rev- 
 elation of his gracious will. And in vindication of the 
 fact, I take upon myself to assert, that no exposition of 
 it from Scripture or the acknowledged developements of 
 
 Providence can impugn the belief, that by death gene- 
 
y .% 
 
 rically viewed, 1s meant simp iy, sery,* infelicity and 
 
 the like. Or if. you will, though largely construed, na- 
 
 tural evil arising. from moral in whatever way it may 
 
 appemt, whether in the deprivation of good, or by the 
 
 infliction of positive harm. This I conceive is the 
 
 sense of the supreme Arbiter: is the impression that was 
 
 certainly made on the heart of Adam. And what. is 
 
 worthy of respect, is consonant with the simplicity of 
 other testimony where God’s hatred. of sin beams forth 
 
 in like manner. For example: The soul that sinneth ii 
 
 shall die.} Cursed is every one that continueth not in all 
 things written in the book of the law to do them;} and to: 
 that effect. From all which, it is apparent by an easy 
 
 construction of the text, what the design of its Author iss 
 
 For if we consider the threatening embraced in Hie 
 death spoken of, not merely as a cessation of life, but 
 
 what it actually imports, the opposite of happy and 
 
 desirable being, there can be no cause for perverting its 
 
 meaning. Inthe simplicity of inspired truth, it will cer- 
 
 tainly appear, and more definitely I imagine, to those 
 
 acquainted with Hebrew usage, that by the death con~ 
 templated, or displeasure of the Almighty against sin, is 
 
 meant neither more nor less than what naturally arises 
 
 from this view of the threatening itself—that is, a State 
 
 of complete, sensible, hopeless ruin and misery. — 
 
 But speaking of the death.referred to in the text, you 
 will call to mind, it is often presented to our notice un- 
 der a twofold » aspect ; and termed accordingly natural, 
 and spiritual—the former relating, to the body, the latter: 
 more immediately to the soul. . ae cn ' 
 
 And naming a distinction of this. character, it is freely 
 declared, that though inclined to adopt it, we shall not 
 3 * Lat. Malum, + Ezek. xviii 20.8 © £ Galiii, 10, 
 
 4 
 
é 
 
 38 
 
 its proper step lukib aa from that I shall not swerve, 
 it imports a cessation of vital action, and is naturally fol- 
 lowed by a certain disorganization in regard to the pur- 
 poses of life itself. A view of the subject, as you will 
 discern in a moment, to say no more, that renders its 
 respect to mere casualty y, or any thing evanescent entire- 
 ly vain: and that accords, in my opinion, with the un- 
 biassed impression which is generally entertained, by 
 those who freely employ the term in this relation. 
 
 With this remark on the subject of discussion, we 
 
 may consider first, the death spoken of in a respect to 
 ‘the body. 
 - Amd in this part of my argument, I will confine your 
 attention n, principally, toa particular evidence; or, that 
 derived from the use of the verb “die” in the sacred 
 scriptures. In a free investigation I find it often em- 
 ployed in the sense I contemplate. It denotes very 
 plainly, the separation of soul and bedy ; or change un- 
 dergone by the latter, when the via takes its leave of 
 this sublunary state. 
 
 In’ this sense, it is frequently shifteyel by Moses. 
 ‘And applied to our mortal frame, it is very evident, im- 
 ports a manifest and real dissolution. Examples of the 
 
 - fact can easily be named. | For instance, in the twenty- 
 
 first chapter of Exodus, the very term of our text occurs 
 
 five times in a limited ape and in onli to the body 
 conveys preci sely wk 
 
 I ean name al 
 
 ) the very same form, is presented 
 to notice. You find it in the first book of Kings. With 
 
 Verses 12,'14, 15, 16, We 
 
 the same verb 
 
39 
 
 rsed David, it is declared 
 
 St 
 
 regard then to Shimei who cur 
 
 by Solomon: On the day that oe goest ai and passest 
 
 over the brook: Kedron, thou shalt know for certain that thou 
 SHALT SURELY piz.* And touching his delinquency in not 
 obeying that righteous admonition, it is very apparent, 
 what kind of death was intended by the king. 
 
 Indeed, if the death contemplated be not embraced in 
 the text, it is difficult to prove there is ought contained 
 in it ; Or, that Adam had any thing to fear from a threat- 
 ening really above his comprehension. And to agitate 
 the point therefore in what the divine) wrath consisted, 
 were that supposeable, would be in my regard a frivo- 
 lous design, and involve an inexcusable waste of time 
 and strength. But on the contrary: If the warning of 
 the text do actually embrace the sense I have nanied, it 
 is important to remark, that the death spoken of implies 
 more than a bare separation of soul and body. It com- 
 prehends every thing that naturally conduces to that 
 event : or implies fitly, what is found in any manner to 
 have an unhappy bearing on natural life. It comprizes 
 the long train of ills, which, through a habit of corporeal 
 infirmity are found by experience to be either injurious, 
 shameful, or distressing. So that not only the pang of 
 final dissolution, but whatever leads on ‘to it in wasting 
 
 disease, is realized in fevers, consumptions, plagues. 
 
 pm VO ee 
 
 wounds, bruises, distortions, additions and defects ia 
 the system, must all be evidently set down to the untold 
 misery implied in the threatening of the ivine Lawgiver 
 and Judge.f ‘eae 
 
 * Chap. ii. 37. ey 
 
 ee . . ° & 
 
 t The primitive bodies of our first parents ° ot subject to the 
 deformities and infirmities, the fatigues of labor, and the injuries of cli- 
 mates, or seasons, nor to.distempers, violence, and death, which we 
 
  « 
 
‘ 
 ee) 
 7 - 
 are 
 a= 
 
 ae 40 
 
 This is the view Thad purposed to take of this matter, 
 and other sources of proof, I have willingly dispensed 
 with in this connexion. » 
 
 Again. We may contemplate the death spoken of in 
 the text, viewed as a spiritual effect, and distinguishable 
 in its nature from what pertains to the body. 
 
 With regard to the phrase “ spiritual death,” as freely 
 used, I think no impartial lover of the gospel can con- 
 sistently object to it. The declaration is often repeated 
 in your hearing: The soul that sinneth, i shall die.* 
 And not merely scriptural propriety, flowing from a simi- 
 lar verbiage, but what is worthy of notice, as most 
 decisive, the death ascribed in Scripture to the immortal 
 spirit, is denoted in Ezekiel by the word occurring in 
 the text, even retaining the same form. An example is 
 this: When I say unto the wicked, Thou sHALT SURELY 
 pie; and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to 
 warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the 
 same wicked man shall pix 1n nis rntqutty 3 but his blood 
 will I require at thine hand.t It is evident from this 
 statement, that the subject of admonition relates to the 
 soul; and that a death in trespasses and sins is par- 
 ticularly described by the sacred penman. And touch- 
 ing the death spoken of, I may suggest, that in sub- 
 
 _sequent parts of the same gropneey it is spoken of in 
 
 are now exposed to; and no doubt but they were built with various 
 beauties of due proportions, color, and form, vastly superior to all thay 
 now appear in the ruins of human nature. And perhaps, in their ori- 
 ginal state, there was an amiable and awful lustre shining all around 
 them, and covering them as with a garment, something like that which 
 shone in Moses’ face when he had been with God in the Mount.—Ber 
 ry-street Sermons. 
 
 * Ezek, xviii. 4, 20. + Ezek. iii. 18. 
 
 s 
 
a ee tid 
 
 41 ia 
 
 in a manner, as may appear, that is wholly inapplicable 
 to the body. The reason of it also is very obvious. It ari- 
 ses then from the fact, that it is not consummated in the 
 moment of real infliction on the wicked; and again, that 
 the righteous, living as such, or dying unto sin daily, are 
 delivered from a natural trial of its consequences.* 
 
 And respecting this dialect as designating a spiritual 
 effect, I will remark by the way, that the figurative na- 
 ture commonly ascribed to it, may be justly suspected. 
 To say nothing of death as an attribute of some nature, 
 I regard it then as a point of philology. And viewed 
 in that light, nothing is more common among men than 
 the use of a word.in a twofold acceptation ; and in re- 
 spect to either, the meaning ascribed to it is equally pro- 
 per. This is true of words that constantly recur, what- 
 ever be thought their primitive application. And mani- 
 festly of a particular class, which denotes not only 
 
 *T say, in regard to the wicked is not consummated, i. e. perfectly 
 displayed while in the present world, though they live under its fatal 
 tendencies. In proof of it, take the following: ‘Again, when the 
 righteous man turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth ini- 
 quity, and DIETH in them; for his iniquity that he hath done sHALt he 
 die.”* tis very plain, that the death contemplated in this passage, 
 does not answer fitly the character of temporal death. Also, in regard 
 to the righteous, I intimate, that they are delivered from a proper trial 
 of its effects. With respect to that point, take the following: “ Again, 
 when the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness that he hath com= 
 mitted, and doeth that which rs lawful and right, he shall save his soul 
 alive. Because he considereth, and turneth away Srom all hts transgires- 
 sions, that he hath committed, he shall surely l SHALL NOT DIE.” } 
 It is equally evident in this, as in the other I ee, that the death spo- 
 ken of, can be only a death in sin; and from whieh i in their own expe- 
 rience, as a vindicatory manifestation of divine hatred toward it, they 
 _ are justly and eyerlastingly delivered. 
 
 * Chap, xviii, 26, + xviii, 27, 28. 
 4* 
 
 Me 
 
i 
 S 
 , 
 Ws 
 
 42 
 
 sensible objects, but the more refined and spiritual 
 endowments of our nature. Of those referred to, you 
 may take for example the words heart, sense, light, con- 
 ception, and some others. And in regard to this class 
 you perceive immediately, that they are used, not only 
 to denote sensible forms, but also gifts and operations of 
 a very diverse description. A trait of speech, peculiarly 
 prevalent in eastern idioms. And in respect to the 
 Hebrew, is cértainly one of undoubted interest ; and 
 can hardly escape the notice of any one, in the least 
 acquainted with the original languages of the inspired 
 volume. 
 
 * But in relation to spiritual death, as implying what I 
 
 have said, a difficulty arises frequently in. the minds of 
 some respecting its penal nature. The matter they sug- 
 gest with great plainness. In their own dialect it is 
 briefly as follows: ‘Is not the notion of punishing sin 
 with sin implied in the fact r” Yea, if admitted, ‘Cis not 
 
 * the divine law in its coercive power made to subserve 
 
 this dark and mysterious dispensation ?” 
 In reply to this, 1 cheerfully premise the sense of a 
 late writer. He says: ‘We must here, however, care- 
 fully distinguish between what in spiritual death belongs 
 formally to the nature of sin, and that which is the ef- 
 fect of judicial infliction. To the former belongs the 
 privation of rectitude, and the corruption of the whole 
 man; to the latter pungent sorrow, and the privation 
 of mental enjoyment. The former constitutes the sin- 
 fulness of man’s fallen state, the latter its misery. That 
 
 in spiritual death must be from God; but were this 
 death as it lies in the privation of moral rectitude the ef- 
 
 % 
 
 ~\ r the former is not strictly penal must be obvious to eve- 
 ry person of discernment. Whatever is strictly penal” 
 
43 - 
 fect of divine infliction, God would be the author of 
 sin. Man sunk into spiritual death by his own delin- 
 quency, and not by judicial infliction on the part of God. 
 By the same act of transgression which constituted him 
 a sinner, he fell under the power of this death. The 
 law and justice of God, it is true, gave him up, when 
 thus fallen, to its dominion ; so that by the force of his 
 own depravity he sinks more and more under its power, 
 unless that power is counteracted and overcome by su- 
 pernatural grace. But this is a consequent of judicial 
 permission, and not an effect of sensible wrath; and 
 must be referred to that misery which springs out of 
 the being of sin, and not that which arises from penal 
 infliction on the part of God.*” 
 The words of this author I have repeatadlith a 
 view to a fair consideration of this topic. If the dis- 
 tinction be a just one that he insists on, between what 
 is implied in the origin and predominance of moral 
 pravity, and that in respect to it which is certainly pe- 
 nal, a foundation is laid for areply that is usually made, 
 viz., That God, as a righteous Governor, may punish 
 sin with sin, but not as sin. It is predicated on the 
 fact, as you must perceive, that sin is a natural no less 
 than moral evil, a hurtful no less than moral disa- 
 bilitygyphich hinders us from attaining the end of our 
 existence. Viewed in that light, it may be a means 
 ‘in the hand of God of Messing his sovereign displea- 
 sure against iniquity. Itcan be adopted for that pur- 
 pose, viewed merely as a positive ¢ calamity... And con- 
 sidered in that light, no doubt it en employed by 
 the supreme Majesty, and a 
 
 * STEVENSON on the Atonement. 
 
 ciple asserted is” 
 made a matter of unchangeable record. And do you | 
 
44 
 
 ask the proof of it, in what is evident respecting his con- 
 duct toward mankind ? It would be easy to reply, that 
 his own word contains unanswerable evidence of the 
 fact: that in his dealings with our race, in ages gone 
 
 by, he acted onthe principle avowed. It would be 
 
 easy to shew that in cases well known, he has display- 
 ed it. How he declares, for example, that he punish- 
 
 . edthe adultery of David with the incest of Absalom. 
 
 Solomon’s idolatry by the revolt of Jeroboam. The 
 sins of Israel by the oppression of the Assyrians. And 
 in regard to sinners of our depraved species who tram- 
 ple under foot his paternal prerogative, that he is judicial- 
 ly pleased, as declared, to give them up to the lusts of 
 their own hearts :* that they may receive in themselves: 
 a recompense of error which is meet :} and while unre- 
 
 claimed by the grace of the gospel, yea, continuing in 
 
 a state of confirmed guilt and impenitence, as the 
 
 righteous reward of sin and shame, may eat of the fruit 
 
 of their own way, and be literally filled with their own 
 
 devices. 
 
 And with relation to the amount of pain and otuine 
 that spring immediately from moral causes ; the base~ 
 appetites and malignant passions of our frame ; or the 
 moral nature of man prostrate, 1 think we may gain 
 some lively impression of it, by looking at any sin in 
 regard to its pestiferous ged on the condition of 
 our race. 
 
 Surely, if observation can teach any thing, or expe~ 
 rience confirm - our acquaintamee with the past, we 
 know, that it is ‘the nature of sin to separate the soul 
 
 “from a knowiedge ofits author; and deprive it of an exer- 
 
 sise in which its faculties obtain their highest expap- 
 
 * Romans i.24. + Romans i. 27.—Gr. antimisthia. + Prov. i. dl. 
 
45 
 
 sion. It is the nature of sin to take off the moral affec- 
 tions of the heart, or master feeling of it, from the only 
 satisfactory good on which it is placed. And it is the 
 . nature of every sin, though small perhaps by compari- 
 son, to oppose a barrier between the creature, and the 
 the self-existent One, effectually debarring the former 
 from sharing the natural expressions of divine compla- 
 cency and care. And in the loss of a possession so 
 strongly marked, I merely ask if there be no injury sus- 
 tained? Is there no destruction of peace and comfort 
 to the proprietor; or ought that should excite in the 
 heart of a rebel a natural emotion of complete dissatisfac- 
 tion >—If you would obtain a reply to the fearful in- 
 quiry, consider then, I entreat you, the experience 
 which is naturally blended with the perpetration of all 
 sin. Let it pass distincly in review before the mind. 
 Ponder it faithfully—the conscious guilt, feeling of de- 
 sertion, bitter regret, sense of wrath, keen temptations, 
 and awful fear of the Eternal’s presence! And on com- 
 parison of these things, I repeat it—Is there nothing 
 . here inimical to happiness? Is there no worm close at 
 the root of peace and concord ? and whose incursive 
 step blights the welfare and endearments of our state? 
 I trust you can respond with one voice in the affirma- 
 tion, and deprecate sin as a most alarming evil. And 
 yet this simple sketch, I conceive, may be viewed as 
 but a faint response to wit is contained in the Book of 
 inspiration. In words which the Holy Ghost teacheth 
 our state is graphically penned. ous in virtue of the 
 apostacy, and of its natural effects, there is connect- 
 ed in a strain of unequalled pathos, with a lively 
 
 apprehension of sin, and the unrestrained practice of it — 
 
 by dependent beings, a reprobate sense, a seared con- 
 
 te 
 
= 
 
 46 
 
 science, hardened heart, vile affections, spirit of bondage, 
 and in the consequence of an unremitted opposition to 
 the divine will, being given up of God to a “ strong de- 
 lusion” to believe a lie that they may be damned! And 
 in the possession of these characters, or what is natu- 
 rally attained of them, man degrades himself below the 
 beast that perisheth. The sacred energies of his soul 
 are withered at the shrine of Satan. Yea, in virtue of 
 such infatuation, as might be anticipated, the earth it- 
 self is filled with a prelibation of enduring anguish ; 
 and by a righteous dispensation, the rebellious worm, 
 that defies Omnipotengy, is most properly a subject of 
 spiritual death. 
 
 Nor can it avail any thing whatever to ied to this 
 statement, that no man during his 'stay upon the earth, 
 is as sinful in the eye of his Maker as he can be.’ Or, 
 that he may discover, perhaps, some cheering traits of 
 natural goodness and pliancy of temper. 
 
 In regard to that instance, it does not reach the point 
 contemplated in in my remarks. The death I am speak- 
 ing -of is the dying of a moral agent: or rather, extinc- 
 tion of life occasioned by the loss of our Maker’s im- 
 age. And whatever else a man may retain while des- | 
 titute of that glorious resemblance, and therefore unfit 
 for communion with him whose favor is life; nay, how- 
 ever much he may be pleased with his circumstances, 
 
 he is actually dead while he liveth. He has no con- 
 
 formity whatever to a law spiritually perfect, and from a 
 settled aversion to it cannot bring forth fruit unto holi- 
 uess. And regarding the sinner in that light, as an en- 
 
 ~emy of the Being that made him, the soul itself must be 
 
 acknowledged the prime instrument of rebellion. It 
 must be regarded, as the seat of all that is offensive to 
 
47 
 
 a Being infinitely perfect and holy. And.as the princi- 
 pal agent, in every thing relating to an unholy war- 
 fare with Heaven, itis easy to perceive, that the wounds 
 it inflicts on itself are richly deserved. They are 
 doubtless the sorest display of the wrath implied in the 
 text... And ought in fact to be deprecated the more ear- 
 nestly, as striking at the root of every thing spiritually 
 excellent, and .as wounds are found by painful conse- 
 
 quence to be the more dangerous to the subject. that 
 bleed inwardly.* 
 
 Once more. In_a faithful exponen ie the death, or 
 
 threatening implied in the injunction of the text, it may 
 be viewed in regard to its whole duration i in the experi- 
 ence of the transgressor himself. 
 
 With respect to that point, if left to the undisturbed 
 operations of law and justice, the penalty must appear, 
 in harmony with the simplicity of its publication, to be 
 complete and hopeless misery throughout the whole pe- 
 riod of the sinner’s existence. If a distinction be made 
 between time and eternity in respect to its execution, 
 
 * Spiritual death, or habitual and. immoveable sin, in the view of 
 
 Adam, a holy, and spotless being, and hating wholly every sin, might, 
 I think, be regarded, not only as not chosen, or loved by him, but as 
 an object of supreme dread andhorror. Letit be, for a moment only, 
 considered, how such a being must feel, under a sense of losing his 
 holy character forever, and of being confirmed, beyond recallin a per 
 petual hatred of God, and a perpetual love and practice of sin; and I 
 believe ail serious persons will agree, that this debased, odious and 
 contemptible character must appear to himan evil literally infinite. To 
 sin once, was to him an object of horror; but to be cousigned for that 
 sin to habitual and eternal rebellion and iniquity, andto become thus 
 forever hateful, vile, and despicable, must be, on the one hand, a loss ; 
 and on the other, asuffering, dreadful beyond all conception, except 
 thatofexperience. It was, therefore, capable of being the subject of 
 threatening, or penalty; and that te any supposable degree, —Dwight, 
 
 ene 
 
 a 
 
 \/ 
 
. 48 
 
 * no Teasgn’can: be given, why it may not be literally ev- 4 
 erlasting. Not, indeed, that the penalty does specifical- 
 ly declare it: but though silent on that point, the finite a 
 capacity of the transgressor will require it. For as sin 
 
 is an infinite evil, at least, objectively so, nothing can 
 ‘atone for its dreadful demerit, but a suffering that is ex- 
 tensively commensurate with it. And while the light : . 
 
 of nature may seem to teach us, that suffering beyond 
 
 the grave is required. for that end; and mere change of 
 circumstances cannot diminish the terrors of spiriiual 
 death ; the word of God, I- apprehend has definitively 
 tiled: the question—that in the eye of a law morally 
 perfect, every violation of the divine will) as legally 
 
 Besispmaliitoe tie 
 a * 
 a> pee aoe 
 
 = 
 = 
 
 SET 
 
 visited, must be followed up hy the desolahions of an | 
 interminable being.* | : 
 _ But while this is actually sudecceal as onan © | 
 
 tes 
 
 ewtcdneumyor cs Sess s Sate eee 
 
 with our first parent, however, the truth of the matter 
 will admit of a qualified attention. 
 
 Had he remained then under the bond of. the Ree 
 covenant, and no mediator between God and man ap~ 
 
 * God meant to punish Adam according to his deserts. And what 
 did he deserve? Why, an infinite punishment; i. e. to have all good 
 taken away, and all kinds of evil come upon him forever. Well, ae, 
 good had Adam i in possession? Why hehad a natural life, resulting 
 from the union of his, soul and body, with all the delights and sweet- 
 nesses thereof} and he had a spiritual life, resulting from the gracious 
 influences of the Holy Spirit, and consisting of the image of God and 
 sense of his love, with. all the delights and sweetnésses, thereof; and - 
 he was formed for immortality » and so was in a capacity for eternal life 
 arid blessednegs, in glorifying God, and enjoyinghim. Here, logy 
 fore he was capable of a natural, a spiritual, and an eternal death; 
 
 " f se 
 a SS Seas i 
 
 -— 
 
 aye soul and body rent asunder forever ; to.be forsaken by the es iy 
 of God, and given up to the power of sin and Satan forever, and to have ” 
 God Almighly become his everlasting enemy. Ali this he deserved : cf 
 and therefore God meant ail this. All this he new he should deserve ; B 
 and therefore he could not but wnderstand the threatening to compre- a 
 hend all this. —Bellamy, : Ke 
 
 i 
 
 a 
 
49 
 
 peared for our relief, we can suppose, that the penal 
 effects of sin had been similar to what is actually expe- 
 rienced. I say, had displayed the same visible charac- 
 ter. As itrespects the body, in the moment of transgres- 
 sion it were judicially dead: and ata date resolved upon 
 in the divine mind, it had died actually. Remaining 
 on the earth long enough to propagate his kind, or an- 
 swer the ends of a certain pilgrimage, the dust had 
 returned ‘to the earth as it was,” but the spirit might 
 have winged its course to the God that gave it. And 
 though we admit a separation of soul and body to be the 
 desert of that threatening, it cannot interfere with a re- 
 surrection of the latter, if needs be, and re-union to its 
 spiritual partner. For on the principle that a sentence 
 before a human court, as you are aware, very often in- 
 cludes the confinement of a culprit, and his being surren- 
 dered up on the day of execution—it will happen—that as 
 the effect of legal threatening, rather than an act of 
 adorable mercy, that union might be plainly formed in 
 the consequence of a resurrection to damnation. And 
 our first parents, in the same nature in which they trans- 
 gressed the will of Heaven, might be made to endure 
 the displeasure of a moral Governor through a ceaseless 
 eternity. 
 
 And what is the sentiment in relation to it, obviously 
 confirmed by kindred facts? or, the light that is shed on 
 this matter by the analogy of the divine dispensations 
 revealed to our faith ? 
 
 [f our attention be turned to the angels that sinned, 
 we learn, that for an act of transgression they were cut 
 off from the source of infinite blessedness: and in the 
 very nature, in which they transgressed the will of God, 
 
 5 
 
 git 
 
50 
 
 are made to endure the marks of vindicatory displeasure 
 forever and ever. | 
 
 Or, if we turn to reprobate sinners in hell, damned 
 not only for breaking a perfect law, but for rejecting the 
 tender mercy of a Savior, we derive an argument of un- 
 yielding force in favor of the same opinion. For in 
 regard to their condition in the world of despair, we are 
 taught plainly, as relating to the body—that being remo- 
 delled in a peculiar manner, made inconsumable by fire 
 and sustained without food, it is designed to be the in- 
 strument of pain to the undying soul. And that both 
 the one and the other, in regard to their original destina- 
 tion, as bound to the performance of a rational service 
 and promotive of a holy conversation, are acknowledged 
 in every respect to be dead. And though the guilt 
 of denying the Savior be enhanced by the terms of a 
 more gracious covenant, as we freely confess—we shall 
 honestly infer, that it furnishes at least fair presumption, 
 that the guilt of Adam in rejecting kindness most im- 
 pressively exhibited, would actually bring on himself an 
 irreversible ruin. 
 
 But while no proof from the original transaction, or 
 
 aught which is disclosed in the dispensations of Heaven, 
 
 can quash the evidence in favor of this belief, but so far 
 
 as it has a bearing whatever on the subject will esta~ 
 
 blish it decisively, I arrest your attention for a moment 
 to an important intimation, viz.: An opinion has been 
 fostered in the church which makes the penalty of our 
 
 text, in respect to a coming world, to embrace no inflic- 
 
 tion of positive evil, but to consist barely in the depriva- 
 
 tion of good. tis an opinion which has extensively _ 
 obtained. And the reason of it, as connected with the | 
 
 imputation of the first sin, and especially, its bearing on 
 
 | 
 | | 
 | 
 
51 
 
 those dying in infancy may be easily discovered. But 
 with regard to the fact however, or what is really em- 
 braced in the divine threatening, the thought can be 
 shown as repugnant to reason, as to the plainest princi- 
 ples of the divine administration ; and must appear so, 
 to an unbiassed mind, that will give it for a moment a 
 candid examination. ae 
 
 I say then, that the position is repugnant to reason. 
 For the deprivation of all good cannot take place, ‘with- 
 _ out being attended with a sense of penal displeasure. 
 In a sentient and active being, whose faculties will 
 excite pain if not suitably employed—to say nothing of 
 involuntary confinement in hell—the deprivation of good 
 is a gloomy thought; and till man shall lose forever a 
 capacity of enjoyment, must excite in the breast of the 
 conscious offender a lively sensation of vindicatory wrath. 
 
 Again; the idea is at variance with the very nature 
 of sin. It appears so manifestly from a single considera- 
 tion. For whatever idea be entertained of it, it is easy 
 to see, as concerned with that point, that it is something 
 more than a negative quality. It makes the creature not 
 only unlike his Author, but in his own filth to bear the 
 very image of the devil. And continuing in that state, 
 it is morally certain that God will behold him with aver- 
 sion ;. and while seated on the throne of his holiness, 
 will leave upon his person the unfading marks of his 
 righteous disapprobation. 
 
 And being at war with the nature of sin, I hardly 
 need subjoin—that it is wholly inconsistent with the spi- 
 rituality and extent of the moral law. It is opposed to 
 any conception that we may form of the decalogue. As 
 in virtue of its threatening denounced against the least 
 defection, it is affirmed, that the wrath of God is revealed 
 
52 
 
 from heaven against a1 ungodliness and unrighteousness of 
 
 men.* And if the declaration remains true, while the 
 veracity of the great King is unimpeachable, there 1s no 
 reason to imagine that any will escape its fury, who is 
 an enemy of the most High God, by a deviation from its 
 pure and reasonable requirements. 
 
 But all argument in relation to the point, and without 
 
 doubt, in regard to the duration of the penalty contem- 
 plated, is foreclosed by an appeal to the testimony of 
 Christ. For in the gospel of our divine Master the 
 truth is declared. And we are instructed not only, that 
 a sense of positive indignation is the portion of the un- 
 ‘godly hereafter, but that the displeasure of God will be 
 executed on them without intermission through an end- 
 tess duration. 
 
 And turning to the gospel, as a source of credible 
 proof on the subject, I may remark, that taken ina lax 
 sense, as embracing not merely promises, but moral du- 
 ties, it is not a rule of conduct distinct from the deca- 
 logue, or new preceptive law. One, for example, as 
 
 some have explained it, of milder requirement, yet of # 
 
 more terrific penalty ; but considered in this light, it is 
 
 simply a more explicit revelation of what the divine _ 
 
 law is disposed to insist on. And with regard to its of- 
 fice, meantime, as a source of information on the sub- 
 ject of remark, we strenuously urge, that while it 
 speaks with more plainness of a future state ; especially, 
 the demerit of actual offences, as bringing on the sin- 
 
 ner the infliction of ‘many stripes,” it does not pre- 
 
 tend any thing further. The doctrine of eternal suffer- 
 ing, as the recompense of sin, 1s not peculiar to that re- 
 
 cord. Itis not as concerned with any individual, and q 
 
 * Romans 1. 17. 
 
3 
 
 therefore, not with the first man. On the contrary, 
 while it ever assumes, and does not create the connex- 
 ion between sin and unending torment, it deals with 
 our race simply, not as ‘‘ without law to God,” but as 
 having incurred its dreadful penalty. And in a perfect 
 exposition of what pertains to futurity, it disposes of 
 them universally by sorting them into two classes: and 
 in regard to either, if there be any dependencc on the 
 record itself, will insure the same general treatment 
 in the day of judgment. 
 
 Nor can there be any room on this momentous theme, 
 for the least misapprehension. With that record spread 
 out to view, and, in imagination, an astonished universe 
 convened at the last day—we are taught, that not only 
 the dispisers of redeeming grace, but enemies of God 
 universally, will inherit the same destiny. Weare ad- 
 monished, in fact, that they all will be present on that 
 eventful occasion. As Christ affirmed, the ‘men of 
 Nineveh” will be there; yea, and the “ inhabitants of 
 Tyre and Sidon.” And among the rest, our progeni- 
 tor willbe there. And if he have not obtained the par- 
 don of sin, of which it must be confessed, as relating to 
 himself, in a near view, there is no absolute evidence 
 in Scripture—in the same class with those who know 
 not God, and have not a well founded hope in his mer- 
 ey, he must go toa place of unceasing dispair. And, 
 on that supposition, shall hear from the lips of the om- 
 nipotent Jesus the unchangeable sentence : Depart from 
 me ye cursed, into everlasting fire prepared for the devil 
 and his angels.* 
 
 This, in our belief, is the substance of what is inten- 
 ded inthe text by the threatening, “‘ In the day that 
 
 * Matt, xxv, 41, 
 hs 
 
54 
 
 thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.” The aim of 
 it, as it fell from the lips of the Lawgiver himself. And 
 is naturally resolvable, from an. eye not only to its pri- 
 mary publication, but especially, its influence in the 
 experience of the sinner, as commonly stated—into death 
 natural, spiritual, and eternal. 
 
 And having spoken largely of the nature of it, though 
 not required by my design in this attempt, you will suf- 
 fer me, in conclusion, simply to add:—That if the pen- 
 alty be what I have said, there is reason to believe, that 
 God wasnot only in earnest in threatening it, but that 
 he actually inflicted it on the first man, in the very mo~ 
 ment of violating his revealed will. I say imposed it. 
 In the eye of the law, and to all intents and purposes, 
 in a correct perception of it, we may consider that in 
 virtue of the stroke, Adam was judicially dead. Lite- 
 rally so in regard to his soul: inchoately and. certainly 
 in regard to the body: and in respect to either, in the 
 sight of an unerring Judge, a fit subject of everlasting 
 agony and shame. 
 
 And in favor of the impression we shall earnestly in- 
 sist, that if our Maker did not mean as he said, in that 
 terrible threatning, he acted in defiance of all the dis- 
 pensations of the divine government. Plainly, in oppo- 
 sition to his treatment of the fallen angels ; who, leav- 
 ing their first estate, for an act of daring impiety are 
 doomed to everlasting misery. And what is equally 
 impressive, as coming near to us, directly in opposition 
 to what has been viewed a comforting thought, to wit: 
 the final nature of that proceeding—in regard to both 
 saints and sinners—that respects the awards of an eter- 
 nal judgment. And, as bearing on the veracity of the 
 
 supreme Ruler, if the idea be indulged, on what prin- 
 
§5 
 
 ciple, I ask, can we sustain his fidelity ? How shall we 
 demonstrate that he is a God of truth? or, in regard to 
 this very transaction, clear up the equity of it, in a man- 
 ner which may deserve the approbation of accountable 
 agents >—Surely, if the design of his administration on 
 earth, is not to disparage his recorded will, there is no- 
 thing in the Bible more express than I have named. 
 Often is it urged on our attention, The wages of sin is 
 death.* Death by sin, as the apostle has intimated, 
 is a connexion vitally certain.| The reality of it is ba- 
 sed not only on the unchangeable purity of Jehovah, 
 but is required by the necessary deformity of vice. And 
 until God shall cease to hate sin in a perfect manner, 
 or his absolute purposes are disannulled, that connex~ 
 ion in regard toit, must be faithfully displayed. 
 
 Nor will it in my judgment avail the least whatever, 
 to object with some in our day, that the particular evils 
 denounced against the first pair after the fall, were no 
 part of the primary threatning of our Maker. For ex- 
 ample, Severe toil, sorrow of heart, the pains of child- 
 birth, and the like. But that under a mediatorial dis- 
 pensation, they were designed in much mercy, to be 
 a part of a very gracious and paternal discipline. 
 
 Although, in respect to elect sinners, they are con- 
 fessedly made to subserve that particular use, there is 
 no proof whatever, that they were uttered in paradise 
 with that intent by the righteous Governor of mankind. 
 So far from it—they are introduced naturally as an ap- 
 pendix, or more properly indeed, a serious exposition of 
 the original threatening. And without any regard 
 whatever to the mediation of our divine Redeemer, as 
 
 compared with the primary sentence, the exposition is - 
 
 * Romans vi. 23. + Romans v. 12. / 
 
 =p pag ay 
 
 a of oe ae ho 
 
ae 
 
 x 
 
 56 
 
 a perfect counterpart of the threatening itself. The 
 evil threatened is—‘ Eating of that tree thou shalt sure- 
 
 ly die” The answer of the Judge—“ Because thou — 
 
 hast eaten of it, which I commanded thee not to do, 
 dust thou art, and unto dust thou shalt return :’’—with 
 regard to that specification, as you discover, the latter 
 corresponding exactly to the former. And in respect to 
 the various evils contemplated in the exception referred 
 to, and which could be easily particularised while they 
 flowed purely from a federal transaction, it may also 
 be observed, that they are such as were very congruous 
 to their infant state. Of which, in their earliest expe- 
 rience they should know the guilty cause: and make 
 them also a subject of prayerful and earnest meditation. 
 
 And as adapted to answer a variety of purposes on God’s 
 part, better perhaps than we have certainly understood— 
 it is very obvious in the reading of the inspired nar- 
 rative, that they were judicially announced, both in 
 spirit and form by the moral Sovereign of the universe. 
 
<a 
 
 bs DS gail he led 
 
 DISCOURSE IIL 
 
 Genesis ii. 16, 17—iii. 22—And the Lord God commanded the man, 
 saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the 
 tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for 
 in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. lest 
 he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life and eat and 
 
 live forever. 
 
 In what has been offered to your notice respecting the 
 probation of Adam, we named some points, of what is 
 termed a covenant transaction; and in the light of re- 
 vealed truth, endeavored to make them a subject of 
 devout meditation. 
 
 In our last attempt, we considered particularly the 
 death spoken of in the text ; viewing it, not merely as a 
 threatening but terrific sanction, by which the claims of 
 a covenant bond were practically enforced. And though 
 we gave it a prior consideration, as respects the promise 
 of the covenant, it was not from regard to the bare form 
 of the agreement, or, the manner in which its stipula- 
 tions are practically observed. It was rather from the 
 fact, that the sanction occurring in the text is so strongly 
 displayed: and a solemn conviction, that it’ might be 
 more useful in regard to what is yet before us, and 
 which, in the discussion of it, will be found in respect 
 to its proper aim, to constitute more fitly the reigning fea~ 
 ture of the covenant. ; 
 
 In accordance then with the plan adopted, we shall 
 consider in the last place, the promise of the covenant 
 whose attributes have claimed a serious regard: espe- 
 
 cially, the proof that may be drawn from unerring truth, © 
 
 in favor of its existence in a solemn engagement.. And 
 
 ; 
 ; 
 * 
 
— 
 
 i a 
 
 58 
 
 having done so briefly, may go on, as was remarked, to 
 take a survey of its ratification by an admirable expedi- 
 ent of the Creator. | 
 
 With respect then to the text, as we observed, the 
 penal displeasure of the Lawgiver is more formally as- 
 serted in it. But in regard to its precise import, as con- 
 cerned in any shape with the existence of such a pro- 
 mise, that fact, will not determine of itself, that a blessing 
 also is not fairly implied in it. In a fair view of it, 
 there are two points, in my apprehension, that. deserve 
 a careful consideration. First: Though we were tied 
 down to the Mosaic record, in regard to what was actu- 
 ally communicated to Adam, it is very easy to perceive, 
 that our forefather did not stand in need of an explicit 
 promise, so much as an explicit penalty, And the rea- 
 son of itis apparent. As in regard to the former, or life 
 contemplated by it, he had already a relish of it; while 
 in respect to the legal consequences of sinning, it must 
 be acknowledged at once that he was comparatively 
 ignorant. Again; though a promise of life be not af- 
 firmed in the text, it is in our opinion strongly imnphed 
 in it. If we are not grossly mistaken, in the very face 
 of it, it is couched, that if he do not transgress, he will 
 ‘“‘surely live.”? Nay more; if a limited probation was 
 assigned him, it is equally plain, that remaining sted- 
 fast to the end of it, he would certainly have been bles- 
 
 _ sed with the happiness of an everlasting reward. 
 
 That this was the principle on which his trial was 
 based, and these the auspices under which it really oc- 
 curred, may be argued with presumptive evidence in a 
 single resort to the narrative in Genesis: as, in a brief 
 respect, to what is embraced in that account, we may 
 certainly observe the following things. 
 
 ©, 
 a = 
 
 SS aT TT TT a TT aT 
 
 Fenn em Milas Mn 
 
 Se 
 
 Bn TSS es ge Sh aI oe ee 
 
59 
 
 First. If the penalty be as severe, and even the form 
 of it, impressive—as we have;declared, it is just to reason 
 from those circumstances in favor of positive kindness 
 displayed toward the innocent. And the principle that 
 we improve will commend itself to any man’s conscience 
 before God. It is plainly this: That in the paternal 
 care of Jehovah; in other words, in the character of one 
 morally perfect, the happy union of every quality, and 
 especially of justice and benevolence had been freely ex- 
 hibited ; and the same honor given to the former had 
 been cordially bestowed upon the latter. A principle, 
 
 . in fact, which admits of easy illustration in the case of 
 
 an earthly parent; one {who is qualified to bear rule at 
 his own fireside ; and who is alike just, and merciful, 
 in what certainly pertains to the proper discipline, and 
 care of his inconstant offspring. Again: Presumptive 
 evidence derived from this quarter, is greatly strength- 
 ened by reference to a fact embraced in the sacred sto- 
 ry. itis this: The evident connexion that subsisted 
 between a positive institution, viz., the tree of life, and 
 the happiness of our first parent. For whatever be the 
 precise nature of it, in relation to the tree itself, which 
 is offered only in the light of an apparent symbol, it is 
 very plain, that it was associated in the mind of Adam 
 with an idea of eating and living forever. And a con- 
 nexion of this kind, as respects any fruit whatever, and 
 certainly a-definite one, could not be an arbitrary fact. 
 it doubtless had a proper basis, and owed its existence 
 to the supreme Ruler. And if any thing were desired 
 
 to justify the thought, I barely add, that in my opin-— 
 
 ion, an allusion to it in the New Testament must appear 
 
 truly significant. It isa declaration of Christ addressed - 
 
 to the church at Ephesus. He avers: Yo him that 
 
 sn | ae a ee rs 
 
60 
 
 OVERCOMETH, will I give to eat of the tree of life which is 
 in the midst of the paradise of God.* Where the idea 
 
 of finishing a certain trial is connected with an enduring 
 reward, of which, the tree of life was anciently a living 
 emblem. 
 
 But in speaking of the promise embraced in the cov- 
 enant of works, we are not to suppose that the princi- 
 pal evidence in its favor, is derived only from the place 
 in Genesis. 
 
 As connected with this point, it is a doctrine of the 
 sacred scriptures which is expressed in the most un- 
 qualified manner—That the law of God was ordained 
 unto life.t As the testimony implies, was laid on the 
 human family by the only Potentate, to be ob served as 
 a way of life. It was laid therefore upon Adam—for 
 his case is not anomalous. And with respect to the 
 first man, could have given life, if he had obeyed it per- 
 fectly ina covenantform. Ithad secured to him the bles- 
 sing, on fulfilling the condition of the compact, for the 
 best reason imaginable, viz., that righteousness had come 
 by the law. Nor is it any objection, but wholly in fa- 
 vor of the impression, that the law of God is no medi- 
 um of life to his depraved offspring. Though it cannot 
 justify us now, on the eround of personal compliance 
 with it, the impotence confessedly pertaining to it, is not 
 properly inherent. And in proof of the fact, I will only 
 remark that it is no where said, or even implied in the 
 scriptures, that a promise of life was never made to 
 exact compliance with its dictates. Nothing whatev- 
 er is found that wears the appearance of that dogma. 
 On the contrary; the reason given why compliance 
 with it cannot effect the glorious end, is merely this: 
 
 * Rev. ii. 7. + Romans vii. 10. 
 
tf 
 
 ll Dd. 7.’ * sd 4 bl a 7 Me ee 
 i » sare 
 
 i ae Bag 1 
 4 vr if j 
 
 61. 
 
 That by the law is. the hacusedi: of sin.* The law 
 eannot do it, in that it is weak through the. flesh, and ” 
 words to that effect.t From which it is honestly infer- 
 red, not that a promise of life was never appended to if, 
 but thatthe law of God, as designed to be a way of life 
 on the score of merit, and given with that specific de- 
 sign, is no longer serviceable in a particular eee for 
 which it was promulgated. 
 From this statement, we learn without controversy, 
 that a promise of life was made in the old covenant ; or 
 understanding that existed between our first parent and 8 
 his Maker. And in reference to the nature of the life | 
 embraced in that promise, 1 may add in like manner, 
 that in due regard to the text, and from every just princi- 
 ple of interpretation, it can be only considered in one 
 light, viz., as the opposite of the death we have fully dis- 
 cussed. it respects therefore not merely the body, but 
 particularly the undying spirit: and connected with 
 either, denotes that perfection of being, and conscious 
 happiness derived from it, that spring only from person- 
 al friendship with the Author of all good. ‘In regard to 
 the nature of it, and the various consolation it might 
 impart, it is the same substantially with that pureness 
 of heart required of christians; and the blessings of 
 a new covenant confirmed to their faith by the blood, 
 of a Mediator. The very same undoubtedly, which 
 the enduring relations between man and his Preserver, 
 certainly require. And whatever had been its char- 
 acter in the primitive. state, the promise annexed to at 
 fidelity in Eden, denoted unquestionably, not barely, as “4g 
 by implication, a continuation of being—but a life bles- 
 
 sed with purity, vigor, liberty, ama 3 from pains : eS 
 * Romans iii. 20. + Romans viii. 3. 
 
 6. | . + 
 
1M 
 
 # 
 
 62 
 Pg) disappointment, and a perfect measure of undisturb- 
 
 “ed peace, plenty, and enjoyment. ne 
 _ But with relation to the promise spoken of, a query 
 
 ‘may arise in the mind—Have we explicit evidence, that 
 
 the life referred to had been everlasting life? Also, 
 whether Adam, having sojourned on earth for a time, 
 and improved his probationary scene, had been finally 
 removed to a state of enduring happiness in heaven ? 
 To the first named inquiry I will reply in the following : 
 Apart then from presumptive and circumstantial evi- 
 dence embraced in the history of the fall, and what is 
 
 just named, there is unquestionable proof that the bles- 
 
 sing contemplated had been an immortal prize. That 
 the reward of obedience for a transient probation, was 
 
 nothing less; and is urged on our notice in that light, 
 
 in a various manner, in the book of inspiration. And 
 referring to scriptural evidence in regard to it, I may 
 adduce in support of it, and request you on the subject, 
 simply, to compare the sense of two or three passages of 
 the saered volume. For example: in Leviticus it is 
 declared, Ye shail therefore keep my statutes, and my 
 
 judgments; which if a man do he shall live in them: I am 
 
 the Lord.* And to the same éffect, we have similar 
 testimony upon the inspired page. Again: in regard 
 to the obedience implied in the passage just quoted, 
 the viriue of it, were it a perf fect and personal attribute, 
 is declared in the epistle of Paul to the Romans. No- 
 thing is plainer. He says: For Moses deecribeth the 
 righteousness of the law, that the man which doeth these 
 ihings shall live ny them. And the declaration is there 
 made, merely to establish the single point—that no 
 man can be justified by the law, on the cron plainly, 
 * Leviticus xviii d. + Romans x5. 
 
63 
 
 that no man in his: fallen state, is able to comply with 
 the purity of its Tequirement. And solely with that) 
 respect, it is urged in favor of our relying wholly, for 
 acceptance , in law-judgment, upon the righteousness 
 of faith. And further: that the life secured by the 
 righteousness of the former, i is of the same duration with 
 that merited by our gracious Substitute, i is apparent ; ; for 
 they often occur in a most intimate connexion, and nev- 
 er with the least acknowledged disparity 1 in that view. 
 An example in point, may be taken from the epistle to 
 the Galatians. It runs thus: But that no man is justi- 
 fied by the law in the sight of God, it is evident : for the 
 just shall tive by faith. And the law is not of faith : but 
 the man that doeth them shall t1ve in them.* It is clear 
 therefore, from the usage of the sacred penman, that 
 the life spoken of in connexion with the two ways of 
 acceptance with Jehovah, is unquestionably of the same 
 perpetuity in the one case as in the other. - 
 
 But again: The reply of Christ to a proposition made 
 by a young man during his ministry on earth, is much 
 to our purpose ; and merits a serious notice in its bear- 
 ing on the subject of our inquiry. | 
 
 The object of regard was simply this: Master what 
 Ess thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?} He 
 ‘was desirous of obtaining an interest in the skies; or, 
 at least, of securing to himself the endless fruition of his 
 Maker’s benevolence and care. And in answer to what 
 he must do for that exalted attainment, it is-‘given ‘tay 
 Keep the commandments. 
 
 But in respect to that young man, as a vente su- 
 
 premely i in love” with the present world, and known to 
 ‘ai 
 ce Galatians | i, ‘nL, 12, + Matthew Mix. LG: 
 
 Py, 
 
a * y 
 re ‘ 
 
 “ 64 
 be so De ‘the blessed Master, we cannot imagine, ii 
 - think, that he would exhort him to any thing theoreti- 
 cally vain ; which is evidently so, if eternal life in the 
 primary use of the law, nay, on a transient probation, 
 “was not connected with a full compliance with its spir- | 
 it. Nor again; can we suppose that he would exhort | 
 him to a step practically desperate : or if you will, in- | 
 sist ultimately on his doing that to make sure of salva- _ 
 tion, which is not required in the gospel, and that was _ 
 entirely beyond his strength to accomplish. Vet, if the — 
 le reply be taken merely, as made to one under the bond — 
 " ofa broken covenant; whose fault is, that he does | 
 not really consent to the terms of a better; and who - 
 cannot be convinced of his error but by an experimen- _ 
 tal notice of danger—all is very plain. he reply of | 
 - our Saviour is based on a principle, universally proved } 
 true, whatever may be professed on the topic—that | 
 men desire naturally to be under the law* ; and are not ; 
 beaten off from that cruel presumption, except by urg- | 
 ing upon their practice the severity of its broadest re- 
 quirement. But considered in that light, as involving, ! 
 at least, an historical reference to the primary ground ~ 
 of acceptance with the Supreme, viz., perfect and un- 
 ceasing obedience as a way of life—the passage in 
 
 en Sele Ne See eee 
 
 question furnishes proof of a decisive nature, in favor of | 
 the sentiment that we are aiming to establish. 
 
 But I will not dwell on the point, to which your at- — 
 ; tention is.solicited. . Forin addition to what is declared » 
 ‘ his at this time, no person, aware how often the terms life — 
 “ and death, taken singly, are used in Scripture to desig~ _ 
 ‘ nate an enduring recompense hereafter, ean believe, that 
 ‘al ¢ * Galatians iv. 21. ; 
 h; Ag 4 * 
 ' « 
 a ; 
 Wr ry 
 
65 
 
 what I have urged is unimportant, in respect to its bear- 
 ing on the duration of the promise implied in our text.* 
 
 And with regard to the other inquiry, viz., Whether 
 
 Adam, having improved his advantages on earth, had 
 been removed to a place in the heavenly country—being 
 persuaded to take the affirmative in the absence of spe- 
 cific intimation, I will corroborate the opinion with two 
 or three important suggestions. — | 
 First. I cannot believe that the condition of Adam 
 on earth, in respect to himself, was the most favorable to 
 calm and increasing enjoyment. Thatit was eminently 
 blessed, is most cheerfully admitted. But as respects 
 the inferior appetites of our nature, or influence they 
 must have exerted over him; and especially, the bear- 
 ing of animal subsistence, it could not, in our apprehen- 
 sion, have been the most eligible for perfect happiness. 
 It could hardly have promoted in the first pair, the 
 
 ‘greatest amount of knowledge and piety: and under any 
 
 aspect, must be plainly regarded, as conducive rather to 
 attainments of a very stationary character. 
 
 Again. It is not agreeable to the analogy of the divine 
 dispensations, that confirmation in holiness, should not 
 be followed up by an increase of felicity. This, I ap- 
 prehend, may be fairly elucidated by respect to the holy 
 angels. For after their confirmation, in Heaven, the 
 knowledge and happiness derived from acquaintance 
 with redemption is important. And while every. virtue 
 
 * Of Life, remark instances of this nature. Peal. xvi. 11. Prov. xiv. 
 97. Ezek. xxxiii. 15. Matt. vii. 14, and xviii. 8, John iii. 6, and v. 
 29, and xi. 25. Rom, v. 10, 17, 18.. II Cor. iii. 6, and v. 4... Gal. ili. 
 
 91, Jamesi.2. IJohn v.12. Rev. ii 10. Of Death, barely the fol- 
 
 lowing. Prov. xiv. 12. John vill. 51. Rom. i. 82, and vi. 21, 93. If 
 Cor. ii. 16, and iii 7. Jamesi. 15, and v. 20; I John iti. 14, and v. 
 16, Rev. i. 18, and xiy. 12. ; = 
 
 Nae 
 
 « 
 
 " 
 
 - 
 ae 
 
=> 
 
 ee ae — Se 
 as © 5 
 
 | tion, that Adam had attained, on a perfect compliance 
 
 offspring maintained their innocence, is to suppose a pro- 
 
 _ consideration, which might have been urged on. the no- 
 
 ss UBER Eo Pe 4 Te 
 
 66 
 
 they possess, is greatly enriched by its contemplation, 
 the advantage derived from that quarter, would seem ) 
 very congruous to a state of secure happiness. And ) 
 viewed in that light, it has often occurred to me, that | 
 it may intimate something in regard to a heavenly por- — ; 
 
 } 
 
 ; 
 
 with the will of the Almiphty'™ 
 And finally. It is no éntravaband supposition, that 
 proof in regard to this point may be drawn from regard | 
 to the situation of the race. For in the administration ) 
 | 
 ; 
 
 of the old covenant, had Adam remained here below, 
 his posterity which appeared in due time must have 
 overstocked the earth. The apprehension is felt, at 
 least, to be perfectly natural. And the only remedy | 
 imaginable for that eyil, in case the first man and his 
 
 SR RT a ee 
 
 per translation to a state of heavenly enjoyment. <A 
 
 tice of the patriarchs, when’ Enoch in early life— 
 having the answer of a good conscience that his ways 
 pleased the Lord—was caught up in the early history of 
 our race, to join the beatific throng that range amid the 
 heavenly courts. ‘ 
 
 I could name also on this point, the reply of Christ to 
 the young man, whose case we have just contemplated. 
 Advising him to sell all.that he had, in a trial of his 
 disposition, or declaring he lacked one thing to the at- 
 tainment of eternal life, he affirms, that if he obeyed his 
 advice, he would attain a treasure in heaven : importing 
 evidently, that the life annexed in the eye of the law 
 to compliance with it, and, as the reward of well-doing, 
 is synonimous with the nature and paramount blessed- 
 ness of that, conferred on God’s believing people in the 
 
 i, 
 
67 
 
 siendisiiiiall of the last day. But this I trust may be 
 amply enough. —And we go on, as proposed, to what is 
 termed a ratification of the divine promise by, an excel- 
 lent device of its adorable Disposer. 
 
 And in speaking of its ratification, by the ‘‘ Lord of 
 heaven and earth,” I will merely confirm the opinion, 
 that it was unquestionab! ly in ie use of a sacramental 
 THES, 
 
 Of the material however employed for Pa there may 
 be some difference.of opinion. While it is generally 
 admitted, that the tree of life was set apart for a sacra- 
 mental sign, others, would add unto that, the “ tree of 
 the knowledge of good and evil.” And in respect to 
 the latter, there is no proof against its use, based merely 
 on the mode of its application : or, a consideration of the 
 fact, that it was not primarily intended for a subjective 
 gratification of sense. For as the nature of the christian 
 institutes may intimate, I think,.and as the learned 
 Witsius remarks: Itis not the nature of a sacrament, in 
 regard to sensual allurements, to be designed exclusively 
 for the mouth and the palate. And should we acknowl- 
 edge it therefore as a positive institution, it may not 
 only be a sacrament, but in its distinctive character, may 
 have an important respect to the manner, in which the 
 blessings of the old covenant were to. be attained. 
 
 In respect to this point however, it may not be sup- 
 pressed, that in urging the claims of the latter, itis said, 
 that a rite of this acknowledged importance should be 
 
 evidently ordained of God for the purpose: and with 
 
 that view, it appears, that some are inclined to insist 
 only upon the tree of life. And from my own investi- 
 gation, I shall confess, that the impression is one of 
 
 solémn importance, and in its bearing too on this topic,,- 
 
 I 
 
‘and practical sign, or, a substantial pledge, sustaining a 
 
 evident in your apprehension, I will only add here, what 
 
 68 
 
 that I am measurably disposed to the same conviction. 
 Nor can the reason of it, perhaps, be very distant from 
 your perception. For in the reading of the narrative, I 
 observe in regard to the latter, that it is naturally intro- 
 duced, as if, it were its primary aim. Is presented to 
 our notice, as designed for that specific end, viz., to be 
 recognized by man as the seal o! | 
 
 a promise ; a voluntary 
 
 due resemblance to a blessing signified by an almighty 
 Benefactor. And if any thing more were lacking to 
 favor the suggestion, what may strengthen it plainly, is 
 a reflection of no trivial interest. It is this: That the 
 name given to that tree—the tree of life—can hardly be 
 explained on any other plan, than its definite application 
 in the manner contemplated. And to make it the more 
 
 may be worthy at least of an honest meditation. 
 
 ‘First. In relation to that point, there is no proof 
 whatever, that the name is taken from any extraordinary 
 virtue it had, for nourishing our frame in an earthly 
 paradise: especially, from any nutritious quality it might 
 possess for preserving the health of our sensitive part. 
 That it bore fruit of an excellent kind, may be easily 
 presumed; and the same may be conjectured, not only 
 in regard to the tree interdicted, I conceive, but every 
 other, perhaps, that bore any fruit in the paradisiacal 
 snclosure. But that its nature was unparalleled in this 
 respect, is bare presumption. Is not supposed in the 1 
 narrative of Moses; and cannot be inferred with any 
 more certainty from it, than a natural effect is inferred, 
 from what is said of the ‘tree of the knowledge of good 
 and evil’—w hose name was given it from considera- 
 tions that are altogether spiritual. 
 
iy Mi eRe Wa hea. 
 of be. ’ ne i 
 
 Again: What some have objected in regard to this: 
 tree, deriving its name from a quality it had for restoring 
 our nature to perfect soundness after the apostacy, 1s 
 very surprizing. The origin of this prejudice, is a per- 
 
 version of the divine declaration in respect to Adam, 
 
 viz., lest he put forth vis hand, and take also of the tree 
 of life, and eat and live forever. But in regard to that 
 declaration, if it be founded on, or imply any thing 
 more than its symbolical use, as a sacrament of that eco- 
 nomy, we should receive it rather, as the expression of 
 pity toward a deluded creature. A rebel, who would 
 put forth his hand as usual to the tree—and in a change 
 of circumstances as fatal, as it was wholly unprovoked 
 —would manifestly do it from motives, that were alto~ 
 gether incongruous with his fallen state. But the idea 
 of restoring our nature to health, as derived from this 
 source, is,exceedingly vain. Jt is so in every respect, 
 As relating to the body, it is hard to imagine that any 
 fruit should be a sovereign antidote against mortality ; 
 and least of all, when the curse of the great God was 
 lying on the earth. And in respect to the soul, whose 
 deep-rooted maladies we have shown, are the sorest 
 part of the divine threatening, it is perfect folly to think, 
 that any fruit, in paradise or elsewhere, could indemnify 
 our first parents, in regard to the painful and complica- 
 ted effects of their own transgression.* 
 
 * When transgression had subjected Adam to a sentence of con- 
 demnation, the case was altered. Glory and immortality could no 
 longer be obtained upon the terms of the first covenant, now broken 
 and void. ‘The yery attempt became criminal. Man was to be put 
 under a new covenant, and in a new course of trial. He was to suf- 
 fer in the flesh for sin, and to pay the penalty of death. But, through 
 
 the merits of a surety, that death was to be made the gate of immortal- 
 ity. By faith he was to acquire, upon the mediatorial plan, a fresh 
 
 _* oO a 
 
70 
 
 In regard to the tree of life, therefore, its name, con- 
 
 spicuousness, as well as other circumstances establish. 
 
 an impression—that in the old covenant, it was an o?- 
 dinance of Almighty God: and whatever shall be said 
 of a similar rite, was made use. 
 the important blessings it it e 
 
 to represent and seal 
 
 Having discoursed thus largely of the covenant of. 
 life formed with our ancestor in Eden; or expatiated 
 on the parties, condition, sanction, and the glorious 
 promise of the covenant—I will ask your attention to a 
 
 right or power to eat of the Tree of Life, and live forever, after the 
 
 resurrection from the dead, with his propitiated and reconciled Maker. 
 
 In mercy, therefore, he was excluded from the garden of Eden, and 
 from the original symbol of that eternal life, which was now to be 
 sought after by other means, and represented by other sacraments. 
 
 _, He was sent forth into the world to pass his time in toil, pain, and sor- 
 
 row; in mourning, contrition, and penance; till death should set him 
 free and introduce him to the } joys purchased and prepared for him by 
 that blessed person “in whomis Life, and the life was the Light of 
 men.” ‘The same divine person was always the source of immortality, 
 however the sacred symbols instituted to adumbrate it, have been va- 
 ried under different dispensations, To our first parents before the fall, 
 he stood in the relation of Creator and Lord. To them, and to their 
 posterity, since that sad catastrophe, he hath stood, and ever contin- 
 ued to stand, in the new relation of Saviour and Redeemer, The 
 man who doth not now acknowledge him in this latter character, will 
 find him in the former, an ayenger to execute wrath: and what wrath 
 can be so fierce and terrible, as that of the Lamb? It is oil set on fire, 
 The'sinner, unless he’ be in love with condemnation, must not revert 
 to the first covenant, and aim at the acquisition of eternal life, on the 
 foot of the law of works, or the performance of unsinning obedience. In 
 this case, the rebel claims promotion, instead of suing for pardon. He 
 puts forth his hand to the fruit of the now forbidden tree, which is no 
 longer foodfor man. Its nature is changed with « our condition. T'o 
 the eye of human pride it still looks fair and tempting; but its con- 
 tents, when eaten are ashes and sulphur; and immortality without re- 
 demption would prove the reverse of a bsceing ama on the 
 Shorter Catechism. 
 
 PN) When 5 Mga ile ee ee aA lO Pe ee 
 
71 
 
 further consideration of the subject, that naturally ari- 
 ses, from what has been offered for your particular ex- 
 amination. 
 
 And first. If what is advanced in regard to the coy- 
 enant be fundamentally true, we find displayed in it, 
 the unbounded goodnes: blietey of the infinite God. 
 
 - Ina proper view of this matter, and to render it the 
 more obvious to your mind, I will- assert on the one 
 
 hand: That Jehovah in this covenant acquired no new 
 right or prerogative whatever. In regard to his per- 
 sonal endowments, he was not more rich or happy than 
 he might be, had this covenant never been established. 
 In other words; viewed as the only Potentate, ‘‘ who 
 only hath immortality,” or underived excellence, he had 
 the sources of inexhaustible felicity in himself:—and 
 he could have eternally. remained happy, without any 
 respect to the consequence of a trial in the garden. 
 And if any thing more be distinctly considered—in its 
 bearing upon his Lordship, founded primarily on infi- 
 nite excellence, it did not add or diminish ought from 
 his privilege, of laying a command on the race which 
 was actually just. Of binding their souls by any rule, 
 natural or positive. And I may add too—giving it to 
 them simply in the form of a requirement, or, the con- 
 dition of a covenant offered for their immediate sub- 
 scription. And with regard to the point, that in the 
 covenant contemplated, God comes under obligation to 
 man—as it was purely sovereign condescension, and 
 he became more properly a debtor to himself than any 
 ereature whatever—it.is very clear, that it could add 
 nothing of power or happiness to his prior advantages : 
 or, in respect to that thing, presents him materially in 
 a different light, from what he had appeared, had he 
 
 re. Se Se ee De 
 
 ws 
 
ae 
 
 é 
 
 72 
 
 | displayed his manifold kindness toward man ase be in 
 the style of an absolute sovereign. 
 
 But on the part of man, the case was infinitely the ca 
 reverse. He alone could be profited by this dispen- | 
 sation. As relating to him as every way to his a 
 greater advantage. It was so festly, in regard to the 
 term of his probation on earth: for now it was limited— 
 and the hazard of a probation that might be uncertain — | 
 and endless, was kindly superseded. It was so, as 
 concerned with the simplicity of the test divinely en- 
 acted. In a view of that feature, you will bear in mind 
 that it was not the moral code in the variety of its ap- 
 plication : for then, were he exposed in every point, 
 place, and temptation to the wiles of Satan. Nor was 
 
 it in fact merely a voluntary act. It was barely a plain ul 
 
 and outward test of faithfulness: one too simple; I had 
 almost said, to be perverted by the craftiness of the 
 devil. As weheard’ ‘ Abstain from the tree,and thou 
 shalt live”’—“‘ Eat of it, and thou shalt certainly die.’ 
 And while the test was simple, yea, of temporary obli- 
 gation—you will certainly infer meanwhile, that Adam 
 had nothing to fear, about apostatising from any other 
 breach of the divine will. As generally admitted, the 
 bare fact of a penalty annexed to a positive precept, and 
 ‘one of indifferent nature, argues plainly, that God would 
 have kept him from falling by any other act of sinful — 
 indulgence.» He had so disposed in his mysterious prov- . | 
 idence, that in the consequence of his sinning at all, 
 this should be his jirst sin: and in regard to that cir- — 
 eumstance, he had nothing immediately to dread, that | 
 could possibly mar the peace and felicity of his situa- _ 
 tion. And as I observed, in the view entertained of the 
 whole matter, it isa point of no trifling importance, that | 
 
 ee Le ae, REL. eee eR Rea omen . a 
 
73 
 
 instead of the prize of a natural probation—consisting, 
 as remarked, in little else than exemption from deser- 
 ved wrath—here was a prospect truly most animating! 
 For if Adam obeyed in this particular instance, instead 
 of uncertain compliance, I evhad been eternally confirm- 
 ed in obedience tovevery part and requisition of the 
 moral law. And instead of present comfort merely, de- 
 rived from conformity to the will of the supreme Arbiter, 
 as the reward of innocence and fidelity both, he had, in 
 a little time, been established in a state of unalloyed 
 peace, and in the perfect glories of an endless beatitude. 
 We infer therefore, that within the stipulations of the 
 covenant alluded to, or fullness of the gracious provision 
 implied in it, the eternal God displayed his parental 
 kindness in a most lively and engaging manner.* 
 
 *The name of Jonathan Edwards is occasionally referred to in this 
 work, as one in the main, thoroughly orthodox. It is only to be lamen- 
 ted that his speculations about identity, moral oneness, successive ex- 
 istence, &c. should have marred the simplicity of his able treatise ; 
 and in the pursuit of a delighted theory, should have led bim to wander 
 so far into the fields of fruitless and conjectural inquiry. 
 
 With regard to his observations on the kindness of God displayed 
 toward the first man, I will suggest the following : 
 
 “The goodness of God in such a constitution with Adam appears 
 in this: That if there had been no sovereign gracious establisment at 
 all, but God had proceeded only on the foot of mere justice, and had 
 gone no further than this required, he might have demanded of Adam 
 and all his posterity, that they should perform perfect, perpetual obedi- 
 ence without ever failing in the least instance, on pain of eternal death, 
 and might have made the demand, without the promise of any positive 
 reward for their obedience. For perfect obedience isa debt that every 
 one owes to his Creator, and therefore is, what his Creator was not 
 obliged to pay him for. None is obliged to pay his debtor only for 
 discharging his just debt. But such was evidently the constituffon with 
 
 Adam, thatan eternal happy life was to be the consequence of his per- 
 severing fidelity, to all such as were included within that’constitution 
 (of which the tree of life was a sign) as well as eterna! death to be the 
 consequence of his are Sin, pi 445, 
 
 -. —=_—— 
 
a tS = 
 
 74 
 
 Butagain. In view of what is offered on the theme 
 of contemplation, I remark: A strong presumption arises, t 
 that the covenant made with Adam was made in a 
 and with him, for all his posterity : and in ar legate con- - | | 
 sequences of his sin, they Wi i 
 as copartners in a public engag ent. . 
 
 In favor of the opinion then, I will observe, that a | 
 addition to what is distinctly presented, Alege i 
 proof of it, arises from the situation of Adam as the nat- a { 
 wral root of his unborn posterity. His condition was | 
 materially different in that respect from the angelic or- | 
 ders. They were formed sepatately—separately, they | 
 were placed under the law—and in respect to their bles-_ 
 sedness, fell from it solely in a personal consciousness of 
 defection. But that was not wholly the case with Ade@ 
 am. Ifthe Mosaic record be our guide, he was ad- j 
 dressed more commonly, not as one, but as the head of — o 
 avast progeny. A fact, I should think, very clearly 
 exhibited, in what is said to him about animal food, 4 
 the marriage covenant, the seven day sabbath, and do- 
 minion over all the inferior creation. Inall these com-_ 
 munications of himself, God revealed to him what he | 
 certainly intended for his natural offspring... And “i? a 
 out a distinct allusion to the latter, I infer from the most — 
 irrefragible testimony, in regard to the above nanedl : 4 
 considerations, that he was dealing with human nature, — { 
 as such; and in the person of our common parent, con- ~ | 
 
 sidering our nature as formally subsisting, that he ad- _ ‘a. 
 dressed himself immediately to all mankind. e 
 
 Again. Presumptive, evidence derived from this” 
 source, is materially strengthened by another consider 
 ation: one, intimately conjoined in the Mosaic account — we 
 with the declaration of the text. I refer to the predic“ 7 
 
 “—— a wee ee Si 
 
75 
 
 ament of Eve, when the precept was announced in re- r 
 gard to the. forbidden fruit. Onamere glance at the 
 narrative, you perceive that she had no existence at that 
 moment, save in our forefather: and yet, she is subject 
 apparently to the sp " he same identical agreement. 
 
 And remarking 
 perception of it, that ow Hext, as occurring in the se- 
 
 point, we observe, in a clear 
 
 cond chapter of Genesis, i is no proof of Eve’s existence 
 
 before its delivery. The orderly account of her origin 
 
 is made in this chapter posterior to that thing. And 
 
 whether formed outright the first day, or, as some im- 
 
 agine, only virtually in the person of Adam, is immate- 
 
 rial—if the order of relation respecting the facts be re- 
 
 tained. And keeping to that, which is prompted by 
 
 the narrative, in the improvement I will make of it— ‘ 
 
 it is plain, that the text itself, as addressed to Adam, 
 
 was uttered in him and through him, to the mother of ' 
 
 our race ; and the precept of it was made binding on 
 
 her regard judicially, at least, before she appears to 4 
 
 have acted a responsible part. | i 
 And in harmony with the position, every thing which j 
 
 could evince a covenant transaction is in admirable 
 
 keeping. When their probation had fully terminated, 
 
 nay—a trial waS summoned—we find that Adam is uni- 
 
 formly dealt with, as a principal transgressor. As the : 
 one, by whom sin entered the world, he is arraigned wah 
 first: and being convicted of a fault, upon his person, 4 
 the curse threatened by God was formally denounced. 
 There is something in his case, pervading the whole 
 measure that is peculiar: and it leaves an impression 
 on the mind, that he was in himself—and by a singular 
 eminence—the offending party that violated the stipula- 
 tions of a most solemn engagement. 
 
76 
 
 Now, if Eve were designed to act wholly an inde- 
 pendent part in the matter ; and prior to her formation, 
 was not included in the terms of any agreement ; it is 
 plain, I should suppose, that she maid have been pre- 
 sented to us ina very differe 
 
 Once more. The argument founded on the relation 
 of Adam to his posterity, and i I have intimated, is 
 reduced to moral certainty—if we examine the sense of 
 some testimony, having a definite regard to the cove- 
 nant of friendship formed in paradise. I refer at this 
 time merely, to a direct allusion of the holy penman to 
 
 what I have considered. 
 
 In illustrating the fact of such regard, I am satisfied 
 with announcing simply a declaration from the prophecy 
 of Hosea. It is this: But they hke men have transgressed 
 
 * Having spoken of the goodness of God displayed in that covenant, 
 the author just quoted, adds: 
 
 And as such a constitution was fié.and wise in other respects, so it 
 
 was in this that follows. Seeing the divine constitution concerning 
 
 the manner of mankind’s coming into existence in their propagation, 
 was such as did so uaturally wnite them, and made them inso many 
 respects one, naturally leading them to a close union in society, and 
 manifold intercourse, and mutual dependence, things were wisely so 
 established, that all should naturally be in one and the same moral 
 state ; and not in such exceeding different states, as that some should 
 be perfectly innocent and holy, but others corrupt and wicked; some 
 needing a Saviour and others needing none; some in a confirmed 
 state of perfect happiness, but others in a state of public condemnation 
 to perfect and eternal misery ; some justly exposed to great calamities 
 in the world, but others by their innocence raised above all suffering. 
 - Such a vast diversity of state would by no means have agreed with the 
 natural and necessary constitution and unavoidable situation and cir- 
 eumstances of the world of mankind; all made of one blood to dwell on 
 ail the face of the earth, to be united and blended in society, and to par- 
 take together in the natural and common good and evil of this lower 
 world.— Original Sin. p. 467. 
 
a 
 
 07 
 
 the covenant ; there have they dealt treacherously with me.* 
 Observe the phrase—they like men have done so. The 
 original word rendered men, is the same which in Gene- 
 sis, is rendered simply, Adam. The word here, has even 
 And if it be rendered the same way, 
 as all serious expos do cordially admit, the passage 
 is this: ‘‘ They like am have transgréssed the cove- 
 nant: there have they dealt treacherously with me.” 
 And leaving out of view, that the word is actually ren- 
 dered so, in other parts of Scripture, I conceive the pro- 
 priety of it in this place, may be easily perceived. 
 There is no danger of material error on this point, for it 
 is obvious, viewed simply in this light. Considering 
 then, that Hosea spake to the apostate tribes of Israel, it 
 has a peculiar and admirable propriety. For as Adam, 
 by the goodness of God was placed in paradise, so they 
 were placed in the land of Canaan: as Adam was 
 driven out of Eden on account of sin, so they, he de- 
 
 a singular form. And 
 
 * Chap. Vie! Ts 
 
 t’The original word is found only in two other places: in one’ of 
 which, Job xxxi, 33, our translators have rendered it, as Adam; and 
 had they so translated it, in the other, Psalm Ixxxii. 7, the passage 
 would have been much more plain, and striking. “‘T have said, ye are 
 gods; and all of you are children, Heb. sons of the most High: but ye 
 shall die like Adam,” like Adam who was a son of God. The phrase 
 in Job, evidently refers.to Adam’s excusing, or attempting to. cover, his 
 sin of eating the forbidden fruit. As, therefore, the word is the same ia 
 all the three places, the marginal reading in Hosea, whichis the literal 
 one, seems ‘to many others, as well as to me, to be the true one: But 
 they like Adam, have transgressed the covenant. If the Spirit of inspi- 
 ration, in one of these passages, refers to Adam’s covering of his trans-- 
 gression, and in another, to the death to which, by his transgression, he 
 became obnoxious; is it not natural to conelude, that in the third, he 
 refers to the transgression itself, which occasioned both the one'and the 
 other ?—Colguhoun on the Cov. of Works. 
 
 4 
 
 > 
 
clares, before whom the blessing and the curse were 
 displayed, should be driven out of Judea, if they persist 
 in a course of wilful opposition to the requirements of 
 the Almighty. And, brethren, the divine threatening 
 
 was not in vain. The result pl aces t beyond all doubt: 
 fully accomplished by 
 
 for the fact typified, was mournfu 
 their captivity in the east. ATMO forte ofithe allusion 
 will be fully apparent, if we bear in mind, that the co- 
 venant with Israel wasa federal act. Thatit embraced 
 not only them, but their posterity throughout their gene- 
 rations ; not only parents but their little ones, yea, and 
 the stranger that should afterward sojourn among them. 
 The terms of it, as given in Deuteronomy, are the fol- 
 lowing: Ye stand this day all of you before the Lord 
 your God ; your captains of your tribes, your elders, and 
 your officers, with all the men of Israel: your little ones, 
 your wives, and thy stranger that is in thy camp, from the 
 hewer of thy wood unto the drawer of thy water: That 
 thou.shouldest enter into covenant with the Lord thy God, 
 and into his oath which the Lord thy God maketh with thee 
 this day: That he may establish thee to-day, for @ people 
 unto himself, and that he may be unto thee a God, as he 
 hath said unto thee, and as he hath sworn unto thy fathers, 
 to Abrahan, to Isaac, and to Jacob. Neither with vou 
 onty do I make this covenant and this oath; but with him 
 that standeth here with us this day before the Lord our God, 
 and also with him that is not here with us this day.* 
 From the declaration of Hosea, and the exposition of 
 the subject in this and a preceding inquiry, we honestly 
 infer, that a covenant was formed with Adam in para- 
 dise. A compact, of which we have explained the 
 parts? And the truth of which, in the whole extent of 
 
 * Deut. xxix. 10, 1o. 
 
19 
 
 its influence, will be more largely developed, when we 
 ~ come to discuss the imputation of the first offence to his 
 natural posterity. | | 
 In pro now S to the goodness of God revealed 
 in the transaction, 1 could have added more, which had 
 eminently displayed th . propriety of its design. Which 
 must establish the moral fitness of it, as founded in the 
 relations which exist between man and Infinite excel- 
 lence. That fitness, for example, exhibited in the obli- 
 gation assumed on God’s part, to manifest his benevo- 
 lence toward the innocent. A feature of the agreement, 
 not merely concerned with divine veracity, but in re- 
 
 gard to his real character, which renders him properly _ 
 
 an amiable Being. And much might be said, in respect 
 to the endearing intercourse which is fostered by the 
 terms of a mutual engagement, among those who are 
 naturally unequal. An advantage on the part of an in- 
 ferior, as displayed in this instance, which is gained 
 partly, by an unbounded condescension of the Maker, 
 and in part, by a conscious elevation of the creature 
 himself. A moral fact, that is often disclosed in cove- 
 nants among men, and which is made frequently a sub- 
 ject of particular regard in the sacred writings. 
 
 But without a farther discussion of the suitableness of 
 this divine dispensation, as regards the interest posterity 
 had in that probation, arising from a certain respect to 
 the first pair, I close, with merely adopting the sense of 
 an eloquent preacher. He remarks: “If our whole 
 race had been created when this understanding took 
 place: had all the offspring of the first man been ranged 
 about him at the commencement ; and the terms of a 
 public manifesto, of the nature described, been fully 
 offered to their acceptance : I do not say, it had not ¢n- 
 
tered the imagination of the heart, to look for any thing 
 more desirable than its stipulations, but of this, 1 am 
 confident—if a solitary agent in this innumerable multi- 
 tude had rejected a trial of this nature with disdain, or 
 
 spurned away its kindness—it had been just in God Al- 
 
 mighty, to have annihilated t | rebel in an instant. 
 And when the consequence had appeared, all Heaven 
 must have approved the act: and so far from a stain, 
 lying on the sceptre of a gracious King—his throne 
 should have remained forever guiltless, and his glorious 
 character, unimpeachable and lovely in the perception 
 
 of an admiring universe.” 
 
THE FALL OF MAN. 
 
 ‘ 
 
 - DISCOURSE IV. 
 et 
 
 “ a 
 
 Genesis iii. 6B—And when the woman saw that the tree was good for 
 food; and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired 
 to make one wise; she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave 
 also unto her husband with her, and he did eat. 
 
 The covenant made with Adam in paradise, was not 
 long regarded on his part. The condition, plainly sta- 
 ted, was not observed by the first pair. Of this, we are 
 admonished by the text: for the main point on which 
 the blessings of the covenant were suspended, viz., ab- 
 stinence from‘the fruit of a certain tree—was not wisely 
 adhered to. Withregard to delinquency in that.trial, it 
 is faithfully averred—that the woman, who was designed 
 to be an help-meet of the first man, took of the fruit 
 thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband 
 with her, and he did eat. 
 
 The covenant being violated then, it becomes us with 
 liveliest interest, to consider the steps by which the 
 painful occurrence took place. And if we are suffered, 
 in the good pleasure of its author, to trace the scheme by 
 which the act was prosecuted, we should bear in recol- 
 lection, that the word of God is our only guide on the 
 subject; and the information it imparts, should ever be 
 received, with the simplicity of heart and communica- 
 tion that becomes an inspired record. 
 
 In discoursing on this subject, I shall take occasion, 
 
 First. Tospeak of the Tempter, as he is styled; and 
 - the measures he employed for promoting a rebellion in 
 the garden. 
 
Again. A particular object, that is made prominent 
 in promoting his intentions, viz., the forbidden fruit. 
 And finally. The actual guilt incurred by the first 
 pair, in yielding to his infernal persuasion respecting the 
 use of it. ; ot a 
 First. In regard to the tempt , 
 sures and the like. bs: 
 Here it must be scowl at that in the tempta- 
 tion and fall of man, he takes the name doubtless of a 
 serpent: and from the historical fact, a diversity of opin- 
 ion has arisen, in respect to what is truly the character 
 of that being. 
 
 au rapeacter, mea- 
 
 J 
 
 But with regard to his character, as far as that may | 
 
 deserve a separate notice, I am deeply convinced, that 
 there are two extremes in the opinions respecting it. 
 mean more especially in regard to the query—Who the 
 serpent is? or, what rank he may sustain in the scale of 
 animated being? For some have contended on one hand, 
 that a serpent, properly so called, and nothing buta ser- 
 pent, was employed in the trespass of the garden. 
 While others in like manner, insist on it, that no ser- 
 pent properly speaking is found there, but an invisible 
 
 agent, of which, the serpent spoken of, was barely an 
 
 unreal sign, or, at the most—an external symbol. And 
 in naming the extremes, or what I describe in this 
 manner, there is, at least, some consolation in. the 
 thought, that if but one agency in strict propriety was 
 mainly the cause of sinning, it must be purely a ser- 
 
 pent’s act, or solely that of Satan. For reason and the © 
 
 sacred narrative alike, will plainly teach us, that on that 
 hypothesis, no other agent than one or the other of the 
 
 two, can be really imagined, to have set on foot that in- 
 
 famous conspiracy. 
 
jo 
 Tey 
 ae 
 
 83 
 
 This being premised, I will propose a few thoughts, 
 which may leave an impression on the mind, that nei- 
 ther view is fundamentally correct; but the truth of 
 the matter lies more evidently here—that a real serpent 
 was actually engaged in the affair, and that serpent, at 
 the same time, was literally *¢ possessed of the devil. pak. 
 position, in my apprehension, that may harmonize every 
 scheme, and accord etl with the truth of divine 
 revelation. 
 
 First. A real serpent then, was concerned in that 
 foul transaction. 
 
 This is proved in the first place, by the entire unifor- 
 mity with which the tempter is so denominated in the 
 third chapter of Genesis. For not only Moses calls 
 him so, as an historian, but he declares in the chapter, 
 
 (in a record of the whole matter,) that the woman 
 
 spake of him by that name-* And not only so, indeed, 
 but the Lord God addressed himself to him, as the ser- 
 
 pent, or outward agent, at least, employed in that trans- 
 
 action.— And what may deserve particular notice, he 
 is not only styled thus:in the record spoken of—but the 
 original word here employed, is commonly made use of, 
 to signify that creature in the pages. of the Old Testa- 
 ment: A lively instance of which, you have in the 
 book of Numbers, where it often occurs to denote the 
 animal, or fiery serpent, by which the Jews were bitten 
 on their way through the wilderness.{ And to say the 
 least, if a real serpent were not employed in that af- 
 fair, but only Satan—it were a very faint compliment 
 indeed to lavish on the arch apostate, to say of him, that 
 he was more subtle than any beast of the field which the 
 
 Lord God had made.§ To say, indeed, that he were 
 
 Gen. ii 18 +Gen. ii 14 $xxi, 6, 7,8 and9. § Gen. iii. 1. 
 
 _. 2 
 
84 
 
 yaore so than man, had not been extravagant. But this, 
 certainly, were no extraordinary meed of praise ; and 
 hardly comports, in my weak apprehension, with the 
 spirit of that maxim, which requires us to one even 
 unto the deyil his due. te 
 
 But again A real serpent was s not only interested 
 in that affair, but the principal actor, no doubt was Sa- 
 tan himself. This is proved by the fact—if we had no- 
 thing further in regard to it—that the serpent in ques- 
 tion could both speak and reason; and exhibit those 
 qualities, for aught that appears, in a high state of per- 
 fection. This did the serpent. And yet nothing is 
 clearer in my perception, than that this is no attribute 
 of a mere animal. : 
 
 In respect to reason, whatever trace of it appears in 
 the inferior creation, there is no exertion of it about 
 topics {purely moral: or, which is marked by that 
 strength of conception displayed in the record of the 
 fall. And with regard to speech, as the apostle Peter 
 certainly intimates in his second epistle, a “ natural 
 brute beast,” (or, one in his natural state,) is alogos*— 
 rendered in our version brute, or dumb, implying lite- 
 rally a total incapacity for verbal communication. And 
 in a view of this attribute, it can be no objection to the 
 thought, that the lack of speech on the part of the ser- 
 pent, as learned by observation, is thought by some, a 
 part of the curse inflicted on him. Not to say, that the 
 idea is unsustained by an acquaintance with the animal, 
 in other respects, it is a mere imagination ; there being 
 nothing, in the only infallible account which we have 
 of the curse, that contains an allusion to it any de- 
 scription whatever. 
 
 * Chap, ii. 12, 
 
2 R 
 ae, s 
 1 a5 
 
 But happily all debate on this point is foreclosed by 
 the gospel revelation: for there a notice occurs, that 
 must dissipate all doubt whatever in respect to it. 
 
 In the gospel of John, it is declared of Satan, that he 
 was a liar and murderer from the beginning :* plainly, 
 countenancing the received opinion, that by a fals 
 he persuaded man to disobey God; and, by ta cing that 
 step, became truly the author of his certain perdition. 
 And what is there implied, is, as expressly declared by 
 Paul} in his second epistle to the church at Corinth ; 
 where he speaks of the serpent which beguiled Eve— 
 meaning evidently in a respect to this matter, that 
 old serpent, (as it occurs in the Book of Revelation,) 
 which is called the Devil.t It appears then, that there 
 was something more than a bare serpent, concerned in 
 
 the temptation of our first parents; and their disobedi- 
 
 ence tothe requirement of an infinitely pure and bene- 
 volent Creator. 
 
 But at the same time, another query arises, from its 
 
 alliance to this, that may deserve a momentary respect. 
 Itis this: Why should Satan desire any external agent, 
 to help him forward in his design? Why not tempt 
 people, as he does now, without a third character in 
 the plot ? by suggesting evil thoughts and purposes im- 
 mediately to the mind. The inquiry is important, and 
 may be answered, I doubt not, in a satisfactory manner. 
 
 We suppose then, that the reason lay not clearly in 
 the impossibility, of presenting evil thoughts to the 
 mind of aholy being; or, any lack of ability on the 
 part of Satan to adopt that course. On the contrary, 
 
 we suppose, in this instance, that it was purely a mat- 
 
 ix e viii, 44. + Compare II, Cor. ii, 3, Rev. xi. 9, and x, 2. 
 : 8 
 
86 
 
 ter of expediency. That the course taken, was appro- 
 ved for the same grand policy, that marked the frequent 
 appearance of holy angels under the former dispensa- _ 
 tion: asin regard to their sensible forms, it is well 
 known that they assumed the appearance, and probably 
 the realitige human nature, in order that they might 
 ‘hold more easy and unreserved intercourse with a sin- 
 ful world. On the same principle, we shall not 
 question, that Satan employed an outward agent ; ; and 
 thought to act more warily in this manner, by conceal-— 
 ing himself, and his purposes under a garb. Why he 
 pitched upon a serpent for this object, ‘involves, per- 
 haps, nothing very mysterious. For we must consider, 
 that prior to the annunciation of a curse, there was no- 
 thing about the animal so very nozious, or, that excited 
 aversion in the heart of man: so far from that—it might 
 have been an object of unusual delight in the appre- 
 hension of our first parents, and been nourished by them 
 with singular tokens of regard. But be that as it may, 
 the serpent was probably near by at the unhappy mo- 
 ment: was a creature possessing a fine appearance : 
 was endued with a nimble, adioit, and graceful motion 
 and gesture :—and in this respect, if no other, was more 
 congenial to the mind of Satan, because its chief glory 
 was, as we are told, that it was more “subtle than any 
 beast of the field which the Lord God had made.” 
 But in speaking of the tempter, who waylaid our an- 
 cestors in paradise, I must call your attention more 
 pointedly to the measures, and opportunity he had of 
 accomplishing his purpose: and very soon, you will see 
 the compound he manifested of envy, hatred, and ma= 
 levolence, displayed in acts of most daring presumption. 
 In regard then, to the season he preferred, of executing 
 
87 
 
 his base design—it was undoubtedly the most auspi- 
 cious for the object. He lost no time, it would seem, 
 after Adam and Eve were put on trial; but made all 
 possible despatch, lest the time of that trial should ex- 
 pire; and on exact Se Peas with the divine will, 
 they should be instated in the favor of God rever and 
 _ever.*—He is thought also, to have commenced an, at- 
 tack on them, before they had intelligence of a rebel- 
 lion in Heaven: or could, by any just medium of infor- 
 mation, be impressed with the nature and effects of that 
 
 * It is not suggested in the above declaration, or, the idea supported 
 in any form—that the dwellers of paradise certainly fell the very day of 
 their creation. This has been thoughtby some. But while it is not 
 asserted in the narrative, there is much that wears a different aspect. 
 In respect to that point, it is plain, that on the evening of the sixth 
 day, every thing, was pronounced very good; and from the work of 
 creation, as itthen was, God “rested” on the ensuing day, ‘‘ and was 
 refreshed.” But leaving that wholly out of view, I could add—that 
 too much is reported as occurring prior to transgression, to make it 
 very plausible. Ofthe incidents, which are detailed in the narrative, 
 
 remark merely the following. 1. On the creation of man, a grant of 
 
 food was made him; also, a qualified allusion to certain trees in para- 
 dise. 2. The inferior creation were assembled by-God, and Adam 
 gave names to every individual, 3, A ‘deep sleep” ‘came upon Ad- 
 am, and Eve is said to have been taken fromhis side. 4, When Eve 
 was fashioned, the ordinance of marriage was celebrated in the instance 
 of the first pair. 5. Dominion was given to Adam over every living 
 creature on the earth. 6. God pronounced his gracious benediction 
 on Adam and Eve; particularly, inregard to being fruitful and replen- 
 ishing the whole earth.* From all which, and what could be enlarged 
 upon, Lam disposed to think, that sin did not enter the world, tilla 
 sabbath, at least, had been spent by man in innocency; anda certain 
 trial was sustained of divine care and sympathy, that corresponds well 
 with our sense of an advantageous probation. 
 See Van Mastricht. De violatione Foederis Nature LIB IV. Ca- 
 put primum. — . . 
 b _* Compare Gen, i. 29, and ii, 16, 17, and ii. 20, and ii, 23, and ii. 24, 
 andi, 26, andi, 29. 
 
88 
 
 unhallowed conspiracy.—It is believed in like manner, 
 that he carefully met Eve aside from her husband: 
 lest in the hour of temptation, the judgment he might 
 form of his plan, should entirely baffle his intentions.— 
 And it would also appear, that Satan commenced this 
 parley with Eve, at a moment, ‘when she was in full 
 view of the prohibited tree. For as he aceosted her,,it 
 is clearly intimated, that she cast her eye upon it—saw 
 that it was good for food—pleasant to the eyes—and a 
 tree to be desired to make one wise. Thus it appears, 
 that the craftiness of the devil, was preeminently exert- 
 ed, in fixing a train of circumstances, that should cer- 
 tainly achieve that terrible result. : 
 But in regard to the or der, or manner of the ae. 
 tion, in the garden—nothing can exceed the consum- 
 mate skill and ingenuity of Satan. The first step he 
 ventured upon, was to shake the faith of the woman in 
 regard to the divine preceptor condition of the cove- 
 nant: and accordingly, he said unto the woman, we are 
 plainly informed, Vea hath God said, ye shall not eat 
 of every tree of the garden ?* As serious expositors are 
 inclined to think, the adv ersary here, does not deny the 
 
 precept flatly ; but he would insinuate the possibility of 
 
 a mistake about it. Pause a moment, he says, and re- 
 volve it in your mind. Can it be, that in a grant.so 
 large and munificent, a particular fruit was meant to be 
 excepted by Deity? As derived from her husband—or 
 a knowledge of the fact—a mistake might be, he ima- 
 gines. And being purely a misconception at any rate, 
 -about what seemed plainly an article for use, he would 
 not by any means represent it, as culpable. Now to all 
 
 this, the woman unwarily replies, when she os 
 
 * Genesis iii, De 
 
on 
 
 89 
 
 have fled from him without a moment’s delay. And 
 what is her answer? She said: We may eat of she fruit 
 of the trees of the garden: But, of the fruit of the tree 
 which isin the midst. of the garden, God hath said, ye 
 shall not: eat of it, neither shall ye touch it lest ye die.* 
 Thus she addressed the tempter, and having done so 
 still remains by. And Satan therefore, finding a wil- 
 lingness on her part to hear his suggestions, improves 
 every appearance ; and without demurring, replies to her 
 apparent scruple in that emphatic declaration, Ye shall 
 not surely die: for God doth know that in the day ye eat 
 thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as 
 gods knowing. good and evil.t } 
 
 Nothing can exceed the art displayed by Satan, in 
 that rejoinder. ; 
 
 ‘In the first place, he declares, Ve shall not surely die. 
 However it be, he says, respecting the prohibition, I will 
 not dispute—here, I am confident. He impugns there- 
 fore the just penalty of the law; and the terror with 
 which its sanction is invested at the tribunal of Jehovah. 
 And that, no doubt, was the true course for him to take 
 in promoting his object. For in regard to that point, so 
 far as Eve is concerned in it, it was purely a matter of 
 foith. By sad experience or painful observation, she 
 knew nothing, as yet, respecting the death in question. 
 While in respect to every thing else, imiplied in the hap- 
 py constitution under which she was placed, she may 
 be said, to have had clear apprehensions of it; and at- 
 tained both a speculative and experimental knowledge, 
 of what was intended by her gracious Protector. 
 
 If this circumstance be well considered, in connexion 
 
 with the instinctive aversion we possess to anticipating 
 
 f hy , : | : eee e one ‘ 
 vs Genesis iii. 3. + Genesis iti. 4, 5. 
 — 8* 
 
 ‘a : 
 ae 
 
evil, we may not wonder so much, that Eve was inclined 
 to hearken to his suggestions: and the more so—if, 
 what some have intimated, has a proper foundation in 
 fact, viz., an admonition of the serpent, that he had 
 
 himself tasted of that fruit ; and, so far from being hurt. 
 
 by it, in consequence of its surprizing virtue, he had ac- 
 tually attained a‘clear knowledge of things, and acquired 
 a gift of communicating it readily in an articulate man- 
 ner. . : 
 
 But again ; the art of the great deceiver is more pa- 
 thetically displayed in what immediately ensues: to 
 
 wit, For God doth know, that in the day ye eat thereof, 
 
 then your eyes shall be aS and ye shall be as ital 
 knowing good and evil. 
 
 In this declaration, we have on the back of a barefa~ 
 ced lie, what can be considered only, an equivocation 
 and scandalous hypocrisy. It was not enough for him 
 to deny the penal threatning, and insult the justice of 
 his Maker, but now he is all concerned for her, welfare. 
 And what method does he take to persuade her of his 
 benevolent regards? It was just this. God commanded . 
 the first pair to abstain from a. certain tree. And from 
 respect experimentally, to the effect of regard, or disre- 
 gard of his will, had given ita name; to wit, the tre¢ of 
 the knowledge of good and evil. But bin] of viewing 
 it purely in that light, as was meant, the tempter runs 
 into an extreme, and would make it throughout a specu- 
 lative consideration. And thus, perverting the very 
 breath of the Almighty, he would have them think, that 
 in eating the fruit, they would become wiser and hap~: 
 pier than at present. Says the tempter—as in our ver- 
 sion—‘ Your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be ag 
 gods knowing good and evil.” The word rendered 
 
gods, is doubtless in the, plural number, and translated 
 with some regard to the angelic creation. Butlet it.be 
 
 noted, that the word rendered simply God, in the con- 
 nexion, is always the same, and retaining the same form ; 
 and being the common name to designate the ‘Deity, is 
 uniformly taken in that sense in the scriptures, unless 
 the connection shall decide otherwise. This ‘being the 
 fact, and our first parents, being strangers comparatively 
 to the angelic hosts, I think, with candid expositors, it 
 should so run here: “Then shall your eyes be opened, 
 
 and ye shall be as God”—or, like your Maker knowing 
 good and evil. You will attain, that is, an exalted con- 
 ception of things, and in the sudden expansion of your 
 powers, shall rival the self-existent One, in knowledge, - 
 happiness and glory. . 
 
 The assertion of the tempter, being delivered in a 
 confident manner, which has often an effect; being im- 
 pressed frequently. on a heart, free from guile, and wholly 
 inexperienced ; and what is obvious—necessarily casting 
 a slur on the policy of the glorious Creator himself, as 
 being unreasonably selfish and partial—had the desired 
 effect. A silent regard to the fruit, after infidelity had 
 invaded her heart, led on inevitably, toa direct and open 
 
 a“ 
 
 violation. of the divine requirement. 
 
 As an author remarks: ‘‘It is evident on the whole, 
 that the story, as related in Scripture, is either the close, 
 epitome, or both, ofa large description of the apostacy. 
 Yet as it stands, it is a proof of consummate art, insidi- 
 ousness, and fraud. ‘The manner of address on the part 
 of the serpent, is eminently adapted, to inspire and fo- 
 ment jealousy and irreverence toward God ; uneasy and 
 ie repining thoughts of the condition, in svlitel man was 
 placed; an ardent longing to be like an angel, or rather, 
 
 oe 
 
like Jehovah himself, in knowledge, happiness and pow- 
 er; an earnest desire too, to eat the forbidden fruit to 
 that end—with a lively expectation, that no bad effects, 
 would actually result from the violation of a positive 
 command.” | 
 
 But hasten secondly, to notice a certain thing, which 
 is made conspicuous in the attempts of Satan to Bestel 
 the inmates of paradise. 
 
 This, I ‘have said already, was the rit of an inter- 
 dicted tree ; a tree, denominated by God himself, the 
 “tree of the knowledge of good and evil.” As I re- 
 marked, it was called so, from respect experimentally, 
 to the effect of obeying, or disobeying, the requirement 
 of the Creator. If our first parents obeyed, the know- 
 ledge they had already of good, would be vastly increa- 
 sed. If the contrary, they would have a practical and 
 painful experience of evil, and a new acquaintance, no 
 doubt, with the value of the good that they had forfeited 
 forever. 
 
 This being observed, I may notice in regard to ie 
 tree, a few particulars. 
 
 First: Of the position of the tree; and whether it be 
 merely one, or aciually a species. 
 
 With regard to its position, it is said, to have au 
 planted in the “midst of the garden” of Eden ;* not 
 meaning the centre exactly, by precise admeasurement ; 
 since on that presumption, there must be a Aas 
 here, with the description given of the “tree of life?” 
 
 forasmuch, as that too, is said to have been planted, in 
 
 the « midst of the garden.”} By the expression then, 
 we understand simply, an interior part of the inclosure, 
 the whole circuit of which may have included a spa~ 
 
 *Genesisii. 9, ‘+ Genesis iii, 3. - oe “4 
 
93 
 
 cious encampment. And this allowed, which is intima- 
 ted in the narrative, we may judge, that either tree con- 
 stituted more properly a species, than a single example. 
 o For surely, if they were designed primarily, for use and 
 ‘ ornament too, itis natural to infer, that the object would — 
 : be promoted the more efficiently, by producing a num- 
 : ber of them, belonging respectively to the same order. 
 
 Again: In regard to the nature of it, or sort of fruit it 
 actually produced. 
 
 An opinion has gone forth in the world, that the fruit 
 in question, was certainly that, styled familiary the ap- — 
 ple. And without any reason for it, usually pretended, 
 
 ~ the origin of the notion, is consistently traced to a fan- 
 2 ciful exposition of Scripture ; the interpretation of a pas- 
 sage in Solomon’s Songs—which has'no certain respect 
 to it however, though it makes mention of a fruit pass- 
 ing by that name.{ Others, however, from the bare 
 existence of a ‘fig tree, of whose leaves, Adam and Eve 
 made themselves aprons, infer that, it, must have been. 
 the tree, from which they were enjoined to abstain con- 
 scientiously. But not to say, which is very natural, 
 that they had hardly returned immediately. to the very 
 same spot, after their revolt—there is reason to imagine, 
 that the nature of this fruit, is entirely unknown to any 
 one in this age of the world. 
 
 In remarking to the point however, I would merely 
 add by the way, that the Author of our being ordered 
 - jt most likely, that the tree in question, as well as the 
 tree of life, should never after, be a subject of curious, 
 or solemn veneration to our depraved species. And ac- 
  eordingly, for the more effectual attainment of this end, 
 
 — suppose, that neither of these trees, had any 
 
 Chap. vii. &. 
 
a | 
 
 94 
 
 existence at all, out of that inclosure. This, to say the 
 least, is a reasonable conjecture. But whether gene- 
 rally embraced, or not, the utter impracticability of 
 searching for this fruit in our day, must be fully recog- 
 nized, if we bear in mind, that not only a curse, which 
 fell originally upon the earth; but subsequent to that 
 period, a dreadful and sweeping deluge was experienced 
 —in consequence of which, a destruction in the face of 
 our globe, and particularly, of what relates to the vegeta- 
 ble creation, was most certainly accomplished. 
 
 And I goon, as purposed, in the last place, to ) 
 speak of the guilt of our first parents, in yielding to the 
 persuasion of the great adversary of our peace. This 
 will appear to be great, without a particular comparison 
 of it, with the sins of their offspring, placed in circum- 
 stances of a very different character. 
 
 The guilt of their delinquency must appear so, not 
 only, from respect to the condition of the covenant— 
 as expressing exactly the sense of the moral law—but, 
 from other considerations, deserving at least a transient r 
 inspection. BL Ate | 
 
 It is evident then, from regard to the divine prohibi- 
 tion, considered purely, as a striking symbol : admonish- 
 ing them in the first place, of their universal depend- 
 ence on God, for every blessing which distinguished 
 
 _ their lot; and, the sincerity and devotion, with which 
 they should acknowledge any favor, dispensed by an Al- 
 mighty hand: and again, reminding them, that the 
 happiness of a moral agent, cannot consist mainly in the 
 enjoyment of-an inferior good: that nothing beneath * 
 ‘the sun, Is a perennial source of bliss ; Or in any man- | 
 ner, can fully satiate the evergrowing desires of the im- _ 
 mortal mind. . x 
 
95 
 
 It appears too, from an eye to the prohibition, consi- 
 dered fitly in relation to its material. In regard to the 
 fruit of a tree—to say nothing of its nature, viewed merely 
 as anexternal test—we may have a certain reference to 
 itsreal value. And here plainly, no apology can be offer- 
 ed fora theft, which was committed in paradise ! As 
 some have remarked: earthly princes, in bestowing a 
 patrimony on their subjects, not unfrequently exact a 
 small rent of them; or, make a reserve, as a medium 
 of proper regard, and a token of submission to regal au- 
 thority. And surely, God may assert his prerogative, 
 and claim atleast, a paltry pittance, where he is pleased 
 to dispense to creatures, his kindness with liberality. 
 And considered in that light, the situation of our an- 
 cestor, in seizing the forbidden fruit, may be fitly com- 
 pared to Esau, that profane and unthinking man, who, for 
 a morsel of meat parted with his birthright. 
 
 But the guilt of the apostacy, appears, moreover, 
 from respect to the state, or circumstances generally, in 
 which the first pair were placed at the moment of their 
 transgression. 
 
 a * 
 
 In regard to those ;circumstances, you eal retain at 
 least the following. 
 
 At that important crisis, they had just received at 
 God’s hand an existence in the world; and for that ex- 
 istence, and their kind preservation, were indebted 
 purely to sovereign grace: andif any thing could found 
 a claim to unqualified subjection, an obligation derived 
 
 ‘from that source, must be admitted sufficient for the 
 purpose. 
 
 _. They had also, been kindly exempt from the influ- 
 ee of bad example: plainly so, in the varied forms of 
 earthly depravity :—and up to the moment, that they 
 
 as 
 
hold sacred converse with the Father of lights—with 
 
 96 
 
 were assailed by the tempter, cannot be allowed, to 
 haye had.an inward relish or ee for the wages of 
 iniquity. ; 
 
 They were endowed. also, at the beginning, with all | 
 spiritual gifts and advantages. Blessed with the divine. 
 image, and extraordinary sagacity, they were fitted to® © 
 
 holy beings in the present life—and with flaming spir- 
 its that pour their praises into the ear of the Eternal. 
 
 They had likewise the operations of conscience ; or 
 that guide, which is termed in Proverbs, the candle | 
 of the Lord shining in the soul.* And with regard to | 
 five, it was evidently a sharp dictate of that sense, and 
 one which they certainly resisted, leading her to say 
 with that preciseness, But of the fruit of the tree which — 
 is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, ye shall not 
 eat of it, neither shall ye touch it lest ye die. 
 
 And to crown all, they were not only sustained by di- 
 vine interposition, but from their earliest existence, the 
 benificence of Almighty God, was displayed about them 
 in a most lively and satisfactory manner. Every sense 
 of the body, and every appetite of the mind—or facul- 
 ty that they received—was consulted in the actual dis- 
 pensations of Providence: and nothing was lacking, 
 that could possibly add to: their happiness, in the sea- 
 sonable and abundant provision of their ne YenNy Ben- 
 efactor. 
 
 Under such circumstances, adie united offence dis- 
 played a daring impiety, that deservedly merited, at the 
 hand of Jehovah, an exemplary punishment. They er- 
 red grievously. And if the question be asked, which 
 was the worse offender of the two, it may not be Ay er | 
 
 Chap. xx, 27: 
 
 ‘ee 
 , > 
 
to answer it particularly. Yet, as the point is not un- 
 frequently agitated, it may be fit to remark, that as the 
 covenant of life, was made with Adam primarily; the 
 condition of it, to wit, abstinence from a certain tree, 
 laid upon him formally ; and, as he stands forth in our 
 _ perception, as federally sustaining, and actually deci- 
 
 . ding upon the fate of all his posterity—he may be con- 
 sidered in the sight of God to have committed more sin, 
 and by the act of defiance, to have incurred a heavier 
 responsibility, in regard to the effects of it in time, and 
 its remoter consequences, on the experience of man 
 through everlasting ages. 
 
 With these remarks, on the topics I named at the 
 commencement, I will close, with some improvement 
 of the subject, that may redound to your spiritual ad- 
 vantage. 
 
 In the first place, from the facts which have claimed 
 ‘a profound consideration, we learn something of the 
 proximate origin of evil—or, the manner of sin’s iniro- 
 duction into our world. 
 
 It appears then, from the experience se our first pa- 
 rents, and the angels likewise in a state of probation, 
 that all accountable a%ents throughout the universe, are 
 created, naturally mutable. In other words, the moment 
 they are put on trial, with the motives to sin and ho- 
 _ liness before them, it appears there is a natural possi- 
 ’ bility, as it may be, of their falling away or remaining 
 _»* steadfast. And while this is affirmed respecting them, 
 gfe they fall, in no instance whatever, is the mutability 
 spoken of, to be viewed as its proper cause: for though 
 they may sink away, there is a natural possibility too, 
 
 of their still enduring. ‘The mutability I speak of, is 
 ia voncerned with apostacy, as without it, there can 
 9 
 
‘what he did meantime, he knew but partially. And «| 
 
 “wd 9 eee 
 
 98 
 
 be no moral defection. Under any otheraspect, it is no | 
 way implicated in the culpability of the fact. | 
 
 To perceive the bearing of this, on actual rebellion | 
 against God, we should consider distinctly what is im- 
 
 ‘plied in the thought. e f 
 
 There is no disparagement then, altered bp it to the 
 divine image; or, a true semblance of our Maker, im- 
 pressed on the soul of man at his formation. ThisI — 
 conceive, may remain certainly; and the creature at ; 
 the very moment, be strictly mutable. What is impli- 
 ed in the suggestion, therefore, is a mere imperfeciion. 
 And with regard to that point, it is not that which makes 
 the precise diiference between a sinful and holy being, 
 but that rather, which makes a natural and essential dif- 
 ference, betwixt the creature and his adorable Creator ; 
 between a being of finite capacity and one that is in- 
 finite; so that while one is changeable, the other is un- 
 changeable—while one retains his purity, the other may 
 fall away and certainly perish. 
 
 Now, if you ask in what way, this bears on the sin 
 of a being entirely holy, you may discover-immediately, 
 by confining your thoughts to a single specification. 
 
 In regard to Adam then, in the hour of temptation, it 
 must be admitted, that his knowledge of things was very 
 imperfect. And this imperfection, is not any thing, 
 which formed a part of his sin and reproach, but that, 
 which belonged to him asa being of finite capacity. 
 He could not, that is, know every thing himself, and 
 
 with respect to the various objects, that he was actual- 
 ly acquainted with, it is equally plain that ‘they could 
 not be all present to him at once, as they are, tothe un- 
 derstanding of the infinite One. His capacity would } 
 
 ¥ 
 
99 
 
 not admit of it: and a bold disparity, therefore, must 
 forever appear in that particular. From all which, how- 
 ever, you will quickly perceive, that in reference to 
 the motives of sin and holiness, there might not be an 
 equal representation ; or, if you will, an undue influ- 
 ence might be exerted over him, by one set of them, 
 actually present to his apprehension. An historical fact 
 fairly elucidated in regard to the apostacy : for an error 
 in judgment, based on this very imperfection, was a 
 principal incitement to the first transgression. You 
 
 see it, especially, in regard to Eve. For the narrative 
 declares, that revolving the thing in her mind, she saw 
 not only, that the tree was good for food and pleasant: 
 to the eyes—but in her own apprehension was desira- 
 ble to make one wise! What a sad mistake that! And 
 yet, acting on the faith of her own judgment about it, 
 she perceived too late, that she was sadly deceived. In 
 that respect, therefore, our first parents labored under a 
 
 real, and apparently, I think, an insuperable. difficulty. 
 But here, I know it will be said, that God had laid 
 on them an express command respecting it; and to 
 that, they should have betaken themselves, without agi- 
 tating its propriety. This, I readily grant; and it is 
 bringing the matter to some point; for we shall certainly 
 _ discover, that the sin of our forefather, in the inception, 
 and as qualified by our apprehension of it, was rather a 
 4 sin of omission. And yet, with this additional circum- 
 stance, I would reason in the very same manner. For 
 my if the mind of Adam was incompetent to view things, 
 _ precisely as they are, and he erred in opinion—I may 
 add, in regard to holy wakefulness, what is very appa- 
 rent, that no finite thought or capacity, without divine 
 
 ‘ ae can realize at once, all the motives which may in- 
 
 ‘2 . 
 
_ he had to gratify the temper, in himself considered, was 
 
 have kept Adam from yielding to any temptation; yea, 
 
 100 
 
 fluence to obedience ; while the motives to sin, and 
 transient. pleasure devivable from it, may be spit * 
 present to the creature’s perception. 
 
 In view of the whole matter then, we may fairly de- 
 cide, so far as it is made a thing of distinct meditation, ) 
 that while Adam, on the one hand, was made perfectly | 
 
 | 
 | 
 
 free from sin—there was nothing done, save by himself, 
 or his proper act, to mar the work of the Almighty. 
 That he was deprived of no grace, for that purpose, 
 which he had previously received. And the strength 
 
 only a copy of the strength he had to obey, being suita- 
 bly inclined. On the other, it is plain, that our Maker 
 did not vouchsafe that supernatural aid, which was re- 
 quired to keep him certainly from falling away. And 
 that being the fact, under given circumstances, it was 
 morally certain, not merely that he might, but that he 
 positively would transgress the precept of his Maker: 
 and so, it appeared in the sequel, and the consequences 
 of it, are mournfully exhibited to our notice. And yet, 
 if'a query be strongly urged respecting it, we must an- 
 swer, that God was infinitely able, and could easily have 
 prevented Adam from turning an apostate. On a mo- 
 ment’s consideration, we must easily perceive, how easy 
 he might have kept Satan out of the garden: or, in re- 
 gard to Eve, could have rendered her situation some- 
 what different: or, if you will press the point a little 
 further, by an immediate influence of his Spirit, could 
 
 done it with the same éase, no doubt, that Christ him- . 
 self, was preserved from it in the wilderness, when the } 
 adversary tempted him there, to satisfy the appetite of © 
 
 hunger. In one way or other unquestionably, the spose 
 
 ie oe 
 
_ oT 
 
 va 
 RO ey 
 
 . 
 ne 101 
 
 tacy could have easily been prevented by a proper de- 
 vice to that intent, if infinite wisdom had seen fit to 
 premeditate it. 
 
 But since the case has turned out fatally the reverse, 
 
 I think we may rest the inquiry here. And while on 
 the one part, we believe that Adam sinned dreadfully, 
 and would not palliate his guilt in any manner—yet, in 
 regard to the immediate cause, or want of love, that led 
 him to overlook a plain requirement of his Maker, I 
 think we should pause; and not pry curiously into 
 things, we have not seen, and with which, in our fallen 
 state, we have no proper acquaintance whatever. I 
 think it becomes us rather to confess, that here, is a 
 ‘“‘ mystery of iniquity.”? That the main point, or har- 
 monizing a state of feeling, supposed to exist in a holy 
 agent, with a palpable sin incurred by him, is beyond 
 our depth to explain. And deeply impressed with the 
 truth, we should be very willing, to view it plainly, on 
 the whole, as an ultimate fact in the dispensations of 
 Heaven. With meekness and unassuming temper, 
 what we cannot descry, to piously allow. And as one 
 has remarked on the subject, from a heart easily touched 
 with a sense of its vileness—while we suffer the painful 
 consequences of the act, and are thus conversant with 
 its nature, ‘ to adore the depth of the ways, and coun- 
 
 sels, and inscrutable judgment of the Almighty.* 
 
 * The long agitated point, how a holy being caz sin, and lose the favor 
 of Heaven, hasnever been adequately explained. Onthat topic, I often 
 admire the real modesty, expressed by the framers of the Shorter Cate- 
 chism. 
 
 Quest. Did our first parents continue in the state, wherein they 
 
 were created? ae 
 Ans. Our first parents, being left to the freedom of their own will, 
 Tai, Bi 
 he ae g* # a 
 ‘ 
 > \ 
 er! 
 
 aie 
 
 rs 
 
-In every temptation, Satan is the principal actor; whe- 
 
 displayed in paradise, is the insatiate principle, that 
 
 see 
 : . 
 
 Again. From what has engaged your oakley 
 we learn much of the nature, end effects of all sin, that 
 should convey a note of alarm, to those who are living 
 under its habitual domini | 
 
 Wherever there is asin, ike is undoubtedly .atemp- | 
 tation, let it spring from whatever souree it may; whe- 
 ther directly from the flesh, the world, or the devil, or 
 all of them in concert. And in the commission of sin, 
 ,we are tempted fundamentally alike; one man like 
 bthes and all, like the first ofletelag in the garden. 
 
 ther he operate simply by the depravity of the heart, or, 
 through the instrumehtality of wicked associates. And 
 1 may add also, that the same malicious pride, which he 
 
 leads him to seek the ruin of us all. In every case, he 
 acts the part of a murderer. And every temptation, 
 which is fomented, directly or indirectly, by his influ- 
 ence, as far as it prevails, can only promote the diabolic- 
 al design, by setting man at variance with his God, and 
 cheating an immortal being out of heaven. . 
 
 And with regard to every temptation, which the great : 
 adversary ever palmed upon us, the same motives, have | 
 almost invariably been addressed to the mind. The 
 same disparagement to ‘the divine rae R At, 246 been ee 
 
 (that simply,) fell for the estate, Weten they were'created, by sin: 
 ning against God. 
 With regard to that Saaiiy or the nature of i it, meantime, they do 
 nothatch up a metaphysical distinetion. They leave it just there—and 
 wait for the light of a clearer i intuition. Nevertheless, had those men 
 of “excellent spirit” lived in our day, and witnessed the ease with 
 which queries of this aivful nature are dispatched in the periodicals, Z 
 deeply err, if they had not exclaimed with a peculiar: sensation—How 
 
 superabundant eo iia ! ip. ae 4 
 
103% 
 
 7 
 | “warily insinuated. ‘T’he conduct of our Maker is com- » 
 . monly made to look strange, and apparently capricious. . 
 
 Some real good, is made to arise from transgression: and ? 
 
 justified also, by mistake, or peculiar circumstances. 
 ‘a And while the gains of iniquity, have been kept before 
 the eye, and through that, designed to subdue the heart, 
 no method has been left untried, or opportunity passed 
 by, to provoke a discontent with the precepts of Jeho- 
 vah, and the wisdom and purity of all his dispensations. 
 And what is foreibly urged on our notice, in the sacred 
 page, will merit a particular meditation, viz., a common). 
 | delusion, which seems to be co-extensive with the ways 
 of iniquity—that there may be a safety in sin. That a 
 «man can wilfully transgress the requirement of his Ma- 
 a ker, and flatter himself with absolute impunity! This is 
 a presentiment, which, in the early history of our race, 
 was imbibed from the lips of the devil; and without a 
 . the teaching of that accursed spirit, had, perhaps, never 
 been known to sinful men. For in a detailed account, 
 which has Been spread out to view, he said to the wo- ; 
 Mman—and knew it was false—Ye shall not surely die. 
 A story, propagated, at the first, by an heir of perdition : 
 whose aching thought, was desirous to people hell, with 
 millions of souls damned through his instrumentality ! . - 
 , I say, that he is the prime actor. He begun the tale. 
 » ‘And thousands have repeated it after him, because they 
 \ ~ wish it to be true: nay, believe it Sometimes, ‘on one 
 fortieth part of the evidence, or rather, even plausibility, 
 that they would ask, to stake their whole fortune, in . lp 
 any secular scheme of advantage whatever. And they 
 not only hearken to the rumor, but receive it gladly, * 
 from the lips of the vile and unprincipled. Will deride Mates 5 
 e simplicity of Eve, in her parley with the rapier ) 
 +8 
 
all 
 
 104 am by ¥ 
 
 and yet run after men, and hear them harangue on this 
 topic, who are seldom fluent, except in places of unhal- 
 lowed mirth; and whose companions, it is a fearful 
 truth, are too often those, that fill the seat of the scorner, 
 and who make it their principal aim, to sport with the 
 opinions of the devout and excellent of the earth. 
 
 And what is most of all to be deplored, in regard to 
 the slaves of sin and Satan, is the fact, that while some 
 retain their confidence in the delusion, and act upon it 
 perseveringly, others there are, who profess to be ortho- 
 dos in their belief; and yet live, as if there were no 
 
 - God, or, if there is, whose awful purity would not be 
 insulted by the sins they commit, in thought, word, and 
 deed. 
 
 Now of this description doubtless, there are some 
 present at this interview ; who have tried to palm it on 
 their own souls, that the wicked shall not be “ turned 
 into hell, and all the nations that forget God.” 
 Some, I fear, who not only cherish inwardly an ardent 
 desire of the conclusion—but who are secretly at this 
 moment, in consequence of it, halting between two opin- 
 ions on the subject of salvation. And who, like our 
 first parent, may find when it is too late, that they are 
 sporting with plain truth, in @rder to their perdition. 
 
 For if Adam sinned against God, by breaking a solemn — 
 
 covenant with him—what shall we say of unrenewed 
 
 ~ men under the dispensation of the gospel? Is not their 
 case more deplorable than that of the first pair? If Ad- 
 
 » am sinned against light in eating that fruit—is it not 
 more painfully true, that some among us, transgress the 
 plainest requirement of the New Testament? while it 
 
 is. said, “‘ believe-in the Lord Jesus Christ and thou 
 shalt be saved ;”? nay, ‘ he that believeth shall be sa- 
 
 4 
 
i ay 
 we - De 
 
 rae Hip re 
 
 105 -e 
 
 ‘ved, and he that believeth not shall be damned :” And 
 if Adam sinned against the goodness of the Most High, 
 and the most lively expression of pity and unexampled 
 condescension—what shall we say of them, who can tri- 
 fle with the gladsome tidings of redemption ? Of a crea- 
 turé—who can resist the dying love of Jesus? Can 
 not only despise his gospel, but, as brought home by 
 divine influence, with new evidence to his mind, can 
 do despiie to the regenerating Spirit ? Who, when he is 
 earnestly besought to fly to the blood of sprinkling, that 
 his guilty soul may be purified, delays the undertak- 
 ing ? Who can develope the vile depravity of his heart— 
 his contempt of the most soothing ‘accent of merey—and 
 plainly, ‘trample under foot,” the purchase of a Sa- 
 viour’s expiatory groans ! 
 
 My beloved hearers, the subject, that enlists our feel- 
 ings, is one of most painful interest. If Adam sinned 
 once, and by thevguilt of that step, lost the favor of God, 
 and heavens beside, what must be your condition, if 
 called away at this crisis to render up @ severe and final 
 account ? Bear it then, distinctly on your sinful hearts, 
 that in the sight of a Being infinitely pure, and inflexi- 
 bly just, you are condemned at this moment—not only 
 like him for the first error, but for the second, the third, 
 the fourth, and every instance in which you neglect to 
 
 perform a commanded duty ; to repent of your sins—to 
 
 give away your hearts to God—and to consecrate all, 
 which you:have, to the service of the Being who made 
 
 you. Let the thought be present, that the course you » 
 
 take is perilous in the extreme. That while you live 
 in sin, you corrupt the well-spring of action. — That you 
 
 are becoming more and more unlike God, and every 
 
 way like hisenemy. And instead of preparing to»meet 
 
 —o- 
 
 ee 
 
 —_ 
 
id your Judge, while a Thabit of sinning prevails, you ur 
 
 ® only sinking deeper in crime. And in the consequence 
 
 : of this folly—as sure as God willavenge his cause—there 
 is reason to think, that whatis said of some in the Scrip- 
 ture, may be verified in your fate—That their judg- 
 
 ment of « long time agence not, and their damnation slum- 
 bereth not. | 
 
 ~ 
 Ape 
 
 we 
 * 
 
 wl! Se ey 
 
~’ 
 ORIGINAL SIN. 
 me Pia * 
 
 OF IMPUTATION. 
 
 % 
 
 DISCOURSE V. ~ 
 
 Romans v. 19--For as by one man’s dfeohemenbe many were made 
 sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous, 
 
 Having discussed the nature of the covenant formed 
 in paradise, and spoken of the leading facts displayed in 
 its violation, we shail consider in the next place, the 
 bearing of these points on the destiny of our race: or, 
 the connexion properly between the sin of Adam, and 
 the welfare of those embraced in the stipulations of the 
 same agreement. 
 
 With regard then to the human family, as concerned 
 in the consequences of his sin, its bearing on our state, 
 is one of inexpressible interest. It is a theme, requir- 
 ing not barely a sense of our weakness, and need of 
 special influence from above, but some respect to 
 various considerations, which have controlling influence 
 
 on the mind: the effect of which is—however simple 
 naked truth—to prevent an exhibition of it that may” 
 
 not be rendered useless to,a painful degree. Re- 
 
 specting this intimation, nothing is more evident, than a 
 
 diversity of conception on this subject, arising purely 
 from different modes of thinking and acting. An effect 
 displayed in other departmentsiof knowledge ; but par- 
 ticularly on topics of a moral nature. It is seen, for ex- 
 ample, in the opinions entertained of human ai, which 
 
 _ establish a connexion between the offence of aparent and 
 
 : 
 
 a. a ge el 
 
—- 
 
 t 
 > 
 * 
 
 &.- 
 
 the disability of a cma: though the custom of making 
 children holden, in some instances, for the legal conse- 
 quences of crime, is greatly insisted on. And in regard 
 to that very instance—the case of a child in that state, as 
 illustrative of my remark—though it be clear, that the 
 child is not strictly one with its parent in the eye of the 
 law, it is made no exception; but in “harmony with 
 i ns of £ rovidence which connects the in- 
 ren with the conduct of parents, and not 
 unfrequently, very fearfully so, the principle is asserted, 
 and has been interwoven with the policy of the most hu- 
 mane and enlightened governments upon earth. _ 
 
 But what deserves a careful meditation, we should 
 approach the subject before us, with a lively sense of 
 its mysterious character: not mysterious, in regard to 
 the leading facts, but apparently so, no doubt, in respect 
 to a solution of various difficulties arising from it; and 
 which calls on the part of depraved and short-sighted 
 beings for the profoundest abasement, rather than inqui- 
 sitive meddling. We should approach a subject of this 
 nature, admonished that in all God’s works, there is 
 much confessedly remote from apprehension. And if 
 the’ fact be allowed, in regard even to the daily concerns 
 ofj Providence, and what pertains immediately to the 
 plan of salvation, we. must perceive, that on an argument 
 which involves the first principles of the divine admin- 
 istration, we need peculiar aid; and are entirely de- 
 pendent on a God “ that cannot lie,” to clear up to our 
 imperfect perception the equity of his own dispensations. 
 And conscious of thle sos, yea, acknowledging 
 it with gratitude, we should beware, in our. attempts, 
 lest the mind be drawn away from tlte simplicity of 
 Christ j and reason alone, whether promising to make 
 
 >. 
 & 
 = 
 
109 
 
 s as gods, or piously stamped with the name of common 
 sense, be the final umpire ; and undertake alone to set- 
 
 tle in our weak apprehension the pregnant design of tlie’ 
 
 Almighty. On this subject, above every other perhaps, 
 we may say with an apostle, “ For who hath known 
 the mind of the Lord ?' or who hath been his counsel- 
 lor?” And under a sense of our weakness, and the 
 darkness that rests on the most er itainments, let 
 us rather, triumph in the fact, that whatever we may 
 adopt on the subject of inguiry, can only beget 
 by the plain and unerring dictates of the divine'word. 
 
 In tracing the bearing of. the first offence on the state 
 of the species, it is important first, to explain the doc- 
 trine I shall advance on this occasion ; and having done 
 so, I have purposed to establish it from the testimony of 
 the sacred scriptures. 
 
 And first. - In regard toa position, or doctrine; accord- 
 ant with inspired truth. I will state it, as practicable, 
 in a distinct and explicit manner. 
 
 In respect to the subject of our examination, the posi- 
 tion we advocate, is the proper imputation of the sin, 
 committed by our forefather to his natural offspring : or, 
 that connexion between the first offence and threatened 
 evil, springing from a like interest in the stipulations of 
 a covenant engagement. I say, that springs primarily 
 from that quarter. In our opinion, it is based properly 
 upon it; is explained by regard to the alledged ‘stipula- 
 tions of it; and what is vastly important, can only Be 
 vindicated—I say not fairly—but vindicated at all, by 
 respect to its real administration upon earth. 
 
 In regard to the term impute, as here employed, I 
 observe in the outset, that a certain use of it in common 
 
 dife, is foreign to my purpose—its bearing particularly, 
 10 
 
 eS 
 
 =. 
 
_ extensively adopte 
 
 110 
 
 as touching the snoieee which govern our comdaeyia anil 
 then taken principally in a badsense. A circumstance, 
 you are aware, that causes the word to be applied here 
 any, way, with no small share of prejudice to oppose it- 
 Yet, not wholly discarding a term for that cause, so eXx- 
 tensively made use of, or, discovering meanwhile a bigot- 
 [will state briefly—tHat in our un- 
 iptures, the bearing of Adam’s sin, 
 ty , is twofold ; or, his offence in 
 of a holy compact may be considered, 
 or inherent; a distinction by the way, 
 J; and required in this place to a full 
 disclosure of truth. But respecting the distinction, I 
 may state, that we do not employ it, as suggesting a two- 
 fold nature of the sin, which may have a separate, nay, 
 independent existence in the person to whom it is char- 
 ged; but rather, as the terms insinuate—that the fault 
 
 ed attachment to it. 
 derstanding of, th 
 as relating to his 
 
 violating the 
 either as7@ 
 
 of our ancestor in its influence on the race, may be viewed 
 
 under a diverse aspect ; cither, in regard to the legal de- 
 
 sert of it, set down to their account, by an unerring 
 judge, or, a depraved Bh imparted to his off spring 
 by ordinary generation : and, in regard to either, flowing 
 to his natural seed, as supposed, only, in the manner that 
 I have expressly declared. | 
 
 Now the connexion between the sin of Adam, and 
 the state of his descendants, which makes the latter 
 holden to the endurance of its penal effects, is the single 
 point I shall assert in this discourse. And declaring the 
 view entertained of it, it may be well, first of all—and 
 in view of existing prejudices—to state particularly, 
 what is nof implied in our sense of imputation. 
 
 It is not implied in it then, that there is a community 
 of aet, as relating to that sin; or literal oneness with the 
 
— pee 2 oli 
 
 a me 
 
 111 
 «& 
 That were an absurd dogma, 
 
 historically teed’ iia we can safely imagine, was — 
 
 never sincerely embraced by any body.., Yet the absur- 
 dity of it, is not more glaring, than its opposition to the 
 relation, which Adam is thought to have borne to his 
 offfpring. With regard to that point, you are aware, it 
 is twofold—natural bt federal: the rele 
 
 denial of all personal sameness aA. le proge-» * 
 
 nitor. Again: for the reason that this is piously insisted 
 on, we add} that in the bearing of his sin, there is pro- 
 perly no tre isfer of moral character. Nothing, that is, 
 implying a consciousness of transgression : or, any ima~ 
 ginable way, by which the race could , literally speaking, 
 sin in Adam; and by an exertion of such agency, in the 
 consequence of it, derive in their own experience a sense 
 of personal ill-desert. And th 101 igh some have discoursed 
 teva on the topic, who professedly adopt the 
 same belief, it is quite untenable; for it is utterly at 
 variance, either with fact, or any fiétion that we may in- 
 dulge of the moral administration of the Creator. « 
 
 And if this be denied in regard to our notion of impu- 
 tation, and the query is He what is certainly embraced 
 in the view taken of it, I answer, as intimated clearly— 
 that the grand feature, is a federal oneness with Adam, 
 in the stipulations of a covenant transaction; and conse- 
 quently, a part with him in the first viohition of it: a 
 community of interest, rather than coefficacy in the act, 
 embracing the features of his fault, which become the 
 
 relation of a representative, acting on behalf of those in- 
 
 4 
 
 e 
 
 % 
 
 “~*~ 
 
* 
 
 % 
 
 ¥ 
 
 i 
 
 © , imputation, I 
 
 112 
 
 a ae 
 cluded in the same dispensation. This is the prominént 
 
 character it bears; and every thing essential in its na- 
 
 ture, in my view, can be made plain to the apprehension . 
 
 of a child. It is purely on the ground of this oneness, 
 as subsisting truly between the Head and the members 
 under a righteous constitution, that the sin of Adam is 
 the sin of aly and on prncinee of strictest equity, with- 
 
 emark in the mean time, that it»is not 
 
 _ material, whether the fact be clearly marked by the 
 
 term impute in the sacred writings. Though a use of 
 
 the word in that sense were denied, it can never dis- 
 
 prove the thing itself, If the penal desert of that de- 
 parture be set down in law-judgment to the species, it 
 hat manner precisely, it is 
 reported. & In God’s si s charged. And if provea- 
 ble from Scripture, wil firm what is urged im respect 
 to a covenant established with the first pair. a while 
 I do not allow, that this use of the word is wholly for- 
 eign from Scriptuae, I may add, that the propriety of it, 
 yet fyrther appears, from its use on other subjects, where 
 its application by the sac 
 be questioned. Of the! 
 or two, which may be yery suitable, in the outline I 
 have attempted. | pan 
 
 First. The word impute, is used in the New Testa- 
 ment, in ascribing acts to an individual, which are not 
 properly his, but putatively, or in. a law dispensation. Of 
 this description, is the case of Paul, in regard to Onesi- 
 mus. For writing to Philemon, on behalf of the latter, 
 
 is nothing to the point, in 
 
 ), penmen will not seriously 
 er, I will name an instance 
 
 ak: 
 
113 
 
 he apprehends, that his master might have a doudle ac- 
 
 tion against him: that he might table a charge against 
 
 him of debt and of trespass ;—declaring, Jf he hath 
 
 wronged thee, or oweth thee ought, put that on mine ac- 
 count: Or, as the word is elsewhere translated, If he 
 hath wronged thee, or oweth thee ought, meure it to me.* 
 A use of the term, which is fairly concerned wetls its 
 propriety on the subject of inquiry. — 
 tain to a civil transaction, if ¢i 
 
 moral justice, there is a radical AeSS s her ey gehioh / 
 may serve in some measure, to illustrate the some fit= 
 ness of the sentiment maintained. ~~~ | 
 
 Again. Another use of the word in Scripture, is very 
 important. »It is this: When sin is imputed in.the Bi- 
 ble, it is Be much with an eye to a sense of ill-de- 
 sert, as it is, with a, primary respect to. its punishment. . 
 An example of what I intend, is the following: Says Da- 
 vid, Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth not ini- 
 quity :} that is, whose iniquity, instead of being avenged, 
 is actually forgiven. Also, the prayer of Shimei to David, 
 sey not my Lord impute iniquity unto me :{ thatis, 
 inflict on me personally, deserved wrath, for an offence 
 that I have rashly incurred. And this being the manner, in 
 which the word is freely applied in this connexion, it 
 may serve in regard to usage, to settle the propriety of 
 retaining it in existence pe of vindicating it in like 
 manner, from what appears. a most unwarrantable de- 
 traction. 
 
 But from what I have proposed on the subject of our 
 discussion, you cannot mistake, what in our opinion, is 
 implied in an honest view of imputation ; or fearful con- 
 nexion between the first transgression, and a threatened 
 
 *Verse 19, + Psalms xxzii, 2. {IL Samuel xix. 19, 
 
 10* 
 
 % 
 “5. S< 
 + _ 
 
ee 
 ait ‘i T14 
 
 e calamity that has visited our race. That it arises ir owr 
 _ impression, not) from a personal identity with a. third, 
 ss *. ; Pind responsible character—but from something more in= 
 ea _» telligible—a similarity of personal standing in a cove- 
 * nant. And the relation between the Head and mem- 
 bers being:a federal one, asT have asserted, the imputa- 
 sion refertat isi as some have eo. is pHa 
 
 not only ezsy of comprehension, but, as I think, whieh is. 
 * not remote from what oceurs in experience, or is wit- 
 ; -nessed in the most common transactions of lite. 
 ia So far from it, I may add, that the agency which: 
 eo’ Adam exerted, and by which in a public relation, he 
 be governed the destiny of all, is only that, which is met 
 . ; with every where. Is that ecisely, in regard to its: 
 principle, by which-every eerporate body on earthymoves,. 
 the proceedings of which are based upon, a common: 
 charter, and who. are in. the: habit, of transacting any 
 part of their affairs, through the medium of a special 
 deputation.* oli) bb: 
 *Erom the Hens of wer. referred to. Awebie commence-- 
 
 men, Linsert barely the followi 
 
 _ THE Conrnssion oF Bonemra oR THE WALDENSES. 
 
 “The grace, of God and those good gifts of justice, andthe image of 
 
 God, which in his creation were engraved in. him, he partly lost them, 
 
 ‘ and partly corrupted and defiled them, as if, with horrible poison, one 
 should corrupt.pure. wine, and by this means, he cast headlong both. 
 
 e & himself and all hée, offspring into sin; death, and all kind of miseries in. 
 
 , this life, and into punishments eternal after this. life.” 
 a Arrrcigs oF Dort. 
 “ Their, sense is strongly, declared by the Synod who drew: them. up;. 
 
 “ 
 
 2 
 ra 
 a 
 es 
 
But { will not detain you longer on this part of 
 subject: and I go on to establish the fuct of such anim. cm 
 putation, by a.respect to the word of God. # ‘ 
 
 With regatd to the testimony of the sacred volume, Pe + 
 eall your attention in the first place, to the text, and a . 
 part of the very chapter, from which the text is taken. 
 For the moral demonstration, of which it is i sum, vee ¢ 
 gins more formally with the 12th ye 
 to a very serious termination. 
 
 From the text then, and what immediately precedes 9% 
 in the chapter, generally viewed, we derive presumptive 
 proof in favor of the sentiment advanced 
 plainly from the fact, that such exclusive importance, is ‘ 
 there attached to the first sin, that was ever committed 
 
 Df 4 
 
 when “noticing some perversions of it, they rejeet the error of those 
 who hold that, “It cannot properly be said, that original sin, (pecea~ _ 
 fum originis) suffices of itsetf, for the condemnation of the whole hu 
 man race, or the desert of temporal and eternal punishments: For they . , ° 
 eontradict the apostle, who says,’ 
 tered into the world, and deat 
 
 men, a all have sinned.”. 
 
 offence tered unto condemnation.” 
 
 m.v. 12. ‘* By one:man sin enter- 
 
 ; and so death passed upon all * : 
 id verse 16th, “By one man the 
 
 THe WEsTMINSTER CONFESSION. - 
 ‘“« They being the root of all mankind, the guilt ofthis sin was imputed, 
 and the same death in sin and corrupted nature, conveyed to all their 
 posterity, descending from them by : ordinary generations.” 
 
 Toe wee me Conression,. 
 
 “They being the root, and by: God's appointment standing in the room + 
 and stead of all mankind, the guilt of this sin was imputed, and corrupt 
 mature, conveyed to all Sat posterity, descending from them by ordi- 
 nary generations.” - 
 
 From the testimony of eminent il, Ewill insert two or three 
 plain examples. 
 
 *«So the sin of Adam while he was a public person, pee represented 
 ~ his whole posterity is imputed unto. us all, as if we had committed that 
 actual sin.” 
 
 LB ek 
 
» 116 - 
 in our w If regard to this point, we find in a range 
 of five verses, a testimony of this emphatic description. 
 “ “tis said, for example: Jf through the offence of one, many 
 be dead. The judgment was by one to condemnation. If 
 
 by one man’s offence death reigned by one. By the offence 
 of one judgment came on all men to condemnation. By one 
 man’s disobedience many were made sinners.* And the 
 prominency given i Jt e singular number, toa single 
 act of our forefather, indicates strongly; his relation to 
 fie mankind. It argues more than the influence of a natu- 
 4 - ral parent. As in virtue of a relation, merely natural, 
 ’ “ his posterity had been equally concerned in the sins he 
 ¢ eee after the first; and the disability which de- 
 a 
 
 } 
 
 > -~= 
 
 ‘ 
 
 Again. “ Adam’s sin, as imputed to us, is not the sin of a representa- 
 tive, though it be, of him that was so; but is the particular sin of every 
 one of us.”— Owen on Just-pp. 376, 380. 
 
 Referring to the 5th chapter of Romans, J. Edwards remarks.—“ The 
 doctrine of the corruption ofnature as derived from Adam, and also the 
 Sey imputa tion of his first sin, are both clearly taught in it. ‘The imputation 
 
 ” of Adam’s one transgression, is . el directly and frequently as- 
 j serted, Weare here assured, that by one man’s sin, death passed upon 
 all; all being adjudged to this punishment, as having sinned (soit is | 
 
 implied) in that one man’s sin.” 
 Again. ‘Itseems to me fully manifest, that none can in good con- 
 sistence with themselves, own areal imputation of Adam’s first sin to 
 his posterity, without owning that they are justly viewed, and treated 
 as sinners, truly guilty, and children of wrath on that account; nor, 
 unless they allow a just imputation of the whole of the evil of that 
 transgression ;—at least, all that pertains.to the essence of that act, as 
 a full and complete violation of the covenant which God had establish- 
 ed; even as much, as if, each one of mankind had the like covenant I 
 established with him singly, and had, by the like direct and full act of 
 rebellion, violated it himself.’”— Original Sin, pp. 400, 462. 
 ‘ Adam, by divine appointment, stood and acted as our public head. 
 He stood a representative, in the room of all his posterity ; and accord- 
 ingly, acted not only for himself, but for them. His sustaining this char- 
 
 * Verses 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19. 
 
‘ iy 4 
 
 of their Eninngts wickedness to the he of his aha 
 But that ismo view, which is fostered by the strain I 
 have adduced. And the expression of the apostle, taken 
 
 at first sight, must conv ey an impression, that Adam sus- x 
 
 5 
 
 tained a higher relation to them; and by reason of | 
 
 which, his natural offspring come to share respectively . ~ a 
 in the legal maladies of that fatal delinquency. | 
 This being the impression madevon the ‘mind, by a. 
 
 bare notice of scripture, it may be profitable to examine | 
 
 a portion of the 5th Feiss of Romans with some detail. * 
 We begin then with the 12th verse. It runs thus : im 
 Wherefore as by one man sin entered inio the world, and 
 
 death by sin, and so death passed upon ail men, for that * ‘ 
 all have sinned. at : 
 _ But in coming to a fair examination of this passage, t 
 and the reasoning pursued in what follows it, I remark, 
 that from the 12th verse the apostle contemplates, and 
 in ‘the sense of it virtually institutes, as appears in. the 
 sequel, a noted parallel between Adam and the Savior. 
 
 0s 
 
 : 0 By 
 
 acter, Peinieved him a type of Christ, the second Adam, who has laid 
 
 down his lifein the room and stead of sinners. And his being spokeu 
 
 of in Scripture, as a type of Christ, with respectto this character of a 
 
 public head, proves that he did actually sustain such a character. 
 
 Rom. v.14. And, therefore, as by the obedience of Christ, many are 
 
 made righteous; so, by the disobedience of Adam, many are made 
 
 sinners, ver. 19th, i. e. by the imputation of Christ's obedience, belie- 
 
 vers become legally righteous in the sight of God, by virtue of anes- _ & 
 tablished constitution ; and,so have the reward of eternal life. So, by Pr 
 thei imputation of Adam’s first sin, his posterity, by ordinary genera- 
 
 tion, became legally sinners ; sinners in the sight of God, by virtue of 
 
 an established constitution, and.so are exposed to the punishment of 
 
 eternal death, the proper wages of sin. Now, it is true, we did not 
 
 personally rise in rebellion against God in that first transgression, but f 
 
 “he, who did do it was our representative.”—Bellamy’s Works vol, 1. : 
 
 p. d01. 
 
- 
 
 . 118 | 
 One, ; of them, as the Head of influ- 
 
 ence to other agents. And with respect to the former, 
 
 what is uttered, is naturally suggested by the epistle 
 
 itself. For in what precedes this chapter, the apostle 
 had not only described the universal corruption of our 
 - race in darkest character ; but viewing it, not merely in 
 
 itself considered, but also, as connected with justifica- 
 tion by the merit of Jesus Christ, first, under the Jewish 
 dispensation, and again, in the times previous, as in 
 the caseof Abram; it wasnatural, in that instance, that 
 
 _ proceeding a step further, he should rise in imagination 
 
 to the source of all our misery: and from the character 
 of its origin, if ought appeared, derive any thing what- 
 ever, that might explain the manner in which its remo- 
 val is effected in the glorious history of redemption. 
 
 But of the nature of this parallel, we may have ex- 
 press information by and by. And I go on with a con- 
 sideration of the statement of Paul; to wit, Wherefore 
 as by one man sin entered the world, and death by sin, and 
 so (even so) death dau upon all men, for that all have 
 sinned. 
 
 To shew what bearing this assertion has on the impu- 
 tation of the first offence, you may fix an dy particu- 
 larly on the following suggestions. 
 
 First. In regard to those who sin, here styled all 
 men, though it be granted, there is a special regard to 
 actual transgressors before God, as some may strongly 
 insist, I can see nothing in the nature of the epistle, or 
 phraseology itself, but it may intend all mankind: may 
 embrace every one that is born of woman, though in the 
 earliest period of infantile existence. And as Witsuis 
 observes, if taken in that sense, it will impart an ener- 
 gy to the apostles declaration: yea, leaving out a proper 
 
 th, é 
 ae 
 
 ¥ 
 S) 
 | 
 
Bu, x 
 ss 119 Sh 
 
 J 
 
 * 
 
 syllogism, or any respect to it whatever, far a I ima- 
 gine, than to represent him as merely saying, “That 
 like as the sin of Adam is followed by death, so, the ac- 
 tual offence of his posterity is attended by the same con- 
 sequence ”. Which is a very tame assertion, to come 
 from the lips of one, whose mind was teeming with new 
 discoveries of our state, and of the nature of redemption 
 by an almighty Mediator. ae. 4 effeeteof this 
 sinning, as given in the past tense, inc 
 
 ble connexion with our forefather. He says, Death 
 passed upon all men for that all have sinned. yAs Owen 
 
 remarks: “ Death passed on all men, for that all have 
 
 sinned. Death on the first entrance of, sin passed on 
 all; that is, all men oe aig and obnoxious tot, 
 as the punishment due to sin. _ All men that ever were, 
 are, or shall be, were not then existent in t eir own 
 persons. But yet were they all of them, then, upon the 
 first entrance of sin, made subject to death, or liable unto 
 punishment.?* And finally: corroborative of this 
 statement, it is believed, that the fact of sinning ina 
 final Head, is plainly taught in the last clause of the 
 passage. And with respect to that member of it, though 
 it be variously rendered ; either, for example, “ for that 
 all have sinned,” or otherwise, “in whom all have sin- 
 ned,” we shall not abandon the impression. But in 
 deciding the mind of the apostle, I intimate, that in har- 
 
 mony with the prevailing sense of the churchin an ear- 
 
 _ lier period, we conceive that the latter is the fair con- 
 
 struction of his words; the exact and honest translation 
 of it ;—not to say in fact, what all readily confess, that 
 the proposition epi is often used by the sacred pehmen 
 
 *See on Justification. 
 
 ¥ 
 “se 
 
 cates a responsi-~ 
 
Fi 
 
 the chapter, viz., For until the law sin was in the world, — 
 
 * be, . 
 w 
 . * th 
 “ie i 
 3 
 ». 
 f 
 we 
 
 igs 120 
 % ” r é 
 as synonimous with en, and in the writings of the New 
 Testament is rendered accordingly.* | 
 In reference to the-verse that immediately ensues in 
 
 but sin is not imputed where there is no. law, T barely no- 
 
 tice, that whether the sin imputed or reckoned here, 
 
 be ours antecedently to it, or is made so by the fact, 
 will equally suit the exposition of what preceeds. And 
 without delay, therefore, I shall summon your attention 
 to the meaning of the 14th verse of the chapter. 3 
 “The swords are: But (nevertheless) death reigned 
 
 from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned 
 
 after, ihe similitude of Ada 
 ure ‘of him that was to 60: 
 _ In the declaration 
 
 ’s transgression, who isthe fig- 
 
 have named, two ideas invite 
 your very serious meditation. 
 
 First. Death reigned from Adam to Moses, even 
 over them who had not sinned after the similitude of 
 Adam. 'The very ex¢eption here found, viz., the like- 
 ness of Adam/’s offence, supposes that they had sinned 
 in some other poner and for the obvious fact, that 
 “¢ death by sin’? 
 if you ask what the likeness of his offence may be, or 
 rather, what is implied in not offending, as he did, I 
 answer then—That death reigned from Adam to Mo- 
 ses, even over them that had not sinned personally like 
 him, and still less, in the particular circumstances of 
 
 is a connexion clearly observed. And 
 
 * With regard to the use of these terms, as often equivalent, the 
 reader may glance for a partjal illustration at, Matt. xiii. 14, xxiv. 30. 
 Mark vi. 25, xi. 4, Luke i, 47, x1. 22. Rom. v. 2, vill. 20, ix. 28, i, 
 Cor. ix. 10, xiii. 6. Heb.'i. 2, ix, 10, ix. 26. Notice itsjuse particular 
 
 ly in the following, Matt. vi. 10, Phil, iv. 10, and Acts ii, 38. OS com, : 
 
 pared with Matt, xvi. Lo. 
 
 = 
 
, 
 a 121 
 
 the act itself. Astatement, from which it is inferred, 
 that he had a particular regard to the case of infants: for 
 though chargeable with no actual fault, they die; and 
 suffer the penal consequences of sin. An historical fact, 
 which must have engaged his feelings, as his mind re- 
 verted, in thé very period that he names, to an awful 
 destruction of them by the deluge ; and.on another oc- 
 casion, to what is mournfully revealed in the destruc- 
 
 tion of Sodom and Gomorrah, and the populous cities of if 
 
 the plain. 
 
 Again: a query of alarming import is*immediately | 
 
 suggested to the mind, to wit, In what way is the early 
 death of these beings, reconcileable with the principles 
 of the divine administration 2A sober intimation, to 
 which Paul replies, as I imagine, in stating a fact of an= 
 bounded importance, viz., that > Adam wage igure of 
 him that was to come.” In the original twpos,—a type 
 ér figurative representation of Jesus Christ: of one 
 who was early predicted of, and even by his personal 
 foes on earth, familiarly conversed about, as an extra- 
 
 _ ordinary’personage that was to come. 
 
 But in respect to a type, taken fitly as such, it will be 
 admitted, that it must typify something in a manner, 
 which no other person or thing does. a if that fea- 
 ture be retained in regard to this declaration, and no 
 shadow of cause appears why it should not, I ask, is 
 not the application of it evident? If any can doubt it 
 for a moment, I ask then, in what respects could Ad- 
 am bea type of the Savior? Was it barely.in the fact 
 
 of possessing humanity, a true body and rational mind? 
 
 That can hardly be insisted on. Sure I am, there is 
 nothing peculiar in that presumption. Was it then, 
 in virtue of a relation which he sustained to some other 
 
 11 
 +i 
 
 - 
 4 
 
 - 
 
 = 
 
 “a 
 
 a 
 
 ’ 
 2 
 » 
 
‘ie | 122 * 
 
 agent ; or any part, whether of the material or spiritual 
 creation ? It is equally vain to pursue the inquiry any 
 further. And we come therefore to the necessary con- 
 clusion, that he could not have typified our gracious 
 Lord but in a public relation,as the proper representa- 
 tive of his own descendants. That as Christ acted on 
 PS behalf of his people, obeying, dying, and rising again 
 
 . for them, he assumed, in compliance with the will of 
 a God, the “weal or woe of his natural offspring. And 
 ad 
 
 ? 
 
 ’ while the one party wasin Adam naturally, as the other 
 party was in Christ supernaturally ; as connected with 
 the event of their agency, in a specific regard to its na- 
 ae ture, the former communicated a curse while the latter 
 
 a : communicates, undoubte y, 2 blessing to his seed. 
 » And while life and « sath, misery and happiness, are 
 Me, respectively con eheNe nr these Agents, there ‘are two 
 things to be distinctly urged in regard to this explication. : 
 First: that the curse and blessing, in respect to theif” | 
 proper essence, or primary end, are not the same thing ; 
 » @ and with an. eye to perspicuity, as concerned in the 
 . parallel alluded to, must not be confounded. As Pre- 
 sident a oot : “The one is spoken of sim- 
 
 ply as good, the other as evil: one as the effect of right- 
 eousness, the ‘other of an offence; one as the fruit 
 of God’s favor in consequence of what was pleasing and 
 acceptable to him, the other of the fruit of his displea- 
 ie sure in consequence of what was displeasing and hate. 
 fal to him ;—the latter coming by justification, the for- 
 mer by the condemnation of the subject.”* And the 
 «distinction between them, though disregarded by some 
 in our day, must be understandingly retained in the ex- 
 position of that epistle. Again: in regard to the mode + 
 
 * OnictnaL Sin. Exposition of the dth of Romans, 
 
 = ae 
 
ee a 
 
 123 
 
 of conveying these properties respectively to our ruined 
 race, so far as the plan is touched, it was the same un- 
 doubtedly in both cases. It was purely a representa- 
 tive transaction ; and by no exposition’of acknowledged 
 facts, can be presented to the human mind in any other 
 
 ‘light. And as the value of obedience is strictly impu- 
 
 ted in the one case, so the penal desert of transgression, 
 is reckoned in the other. As the ill-desert of Adam 
 eame even on infants who are incapable of sinning, so 
 it is plain, the obedience of Jesus Christ is set down to 
 his people irrespective of any personal merit. And as this 
 is the only way in which our blessed Master conveys 
 
 life and happiness in the varia of grace, we. infer,. 
 
 it is that alone, in which , can be “acknowledged 
 a type of Christ, if in sty r spect he can be said to 
 have typified him at all. m * 
 
 But this exposition of an important declaration of the 
 
 Mosite, will be greatly confirmed by aregard to the 18th 
 verse : for what is justly implied in the preceding part 
 
 of the chapter, is there made a point of express devel- 
 
 opement. Itis this: Therefore, as by the offence of 
 
 one, judgment came upon all men to cone aiion, even so, 
 by the righteousness of one, the free a upon ali 
 men to justification of life. am ¥ 
 “¢ By the offence of one judgment came on all men, ” 
 &c. Or, as appears from a close adherence to its phra- 
 seology, all men are brought under a condemnatory act, 
 purely i ay virtue of the first transgression. The*apostle 
 
 names an effect; and also, assigns a cause that is com- 
 
 mensurate with it And from the most impartial sur- 
 vey of the terms, he adopts, it appears to our entire 
 conviction, that the doctrine of strict imputation is as- 
 serted here in a most unequivocal manner. 
 
 i 
 
 Di 
 
¢ 
 
 4 “_ 
 
 is proper to give the éea? itself a distinct notice : and the 
 
 a Pé 
 
 ‘¢ 
 
 high 24 
 
 Yet, if any doubt existed in respect to it, I should 
 suppose, it must be entirely dissipated by regard to 
 the word katukrima—translated condemnation. It is a 4 
 term of decisive import, and used plainly in a forensic 
 acceptation. In relation to its bearing, if any thing 
 could denote an effect produced by the imputation of 
 sin, this is the word. And considering that there is no 
 » evidence of its use in any other sense in the New Tes- 
 tament, but always in this manner; if it be correctly ap- 
 plied in this instance, as all admit, that acknowledge 
 an “inspiration of God,” it substantiates the point that | 
 I have aimed fully to illustrate.* | 
 
 And giving a brief outline of what is contained on the 
 subject, in the chapter from which the text is taken, it 
 
 m re 80, it will recur to you, because it is formally 
 drawn up, as the conclusion of some regard to the Pay 
 
 * With regard to this passage, I observe that the phrase, judgment 
 came, is not in the Greek, but is supplied from verse 16th. According- 
 ly, as the form of it looks back a piece, some prefer a resort to the | 
 12th verse, and in the room of that clause would substitute 4 apapria | 
 
 evonAVe—sin entered, &c. 
 
 the original, it 
 
 whole race A just desert of that delinquency. Yet, in respect to 
 
 the 16th verse, itisworthy of consideration what is intimated [by Guyse, 
 
 Pee can be more pointed, or simple in construction, than the 
 ergetic clause, ro xpipa e€ évds exc Katakptpa, ViZ., the judgment was 
 
 by one to condemnation. For katakrima is not only used for ensically, | 
 
 but it must be confessed that “rima, signifies properly, not an act of , 
 
 mere sovereignty, or, the natural consequence of sin, but a legal sen- 
 
 ence on its account. It supposesalaw-charge of guilt; or such con- 
 
 cernin the sin, as in a moral understanding, makes it some Way ours, 
 
 And on this footing, ifthere be any meaning in words, a penal sentence 
 
 is here righteously pronounced, a executed in some manner upon all 
 
 Adam’s seed. ry 
 The various forms of the same root, where an affinity of sense ap- 
 
 pears, confirms this statement; as, for example, Tis 6 xaraxpiver, 
 
 But so far as I perceive, ina close view of 
 3 to the same thing ; and equally implicates the 
 
 ‘ 
 
 * 
 
125 
 
 » 
 
 allel inviting our solemn attention. The words ares 
 For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, 
 
 so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. 
 Y ine true exposition of this passage, I will merely ad- 
 vert to some leading considerations. 
 . The word rendered made, I may remark, has com- 
 - monly in the gospel the sense of constitute. I can name, 
 a fair example of its use. It is said then: Who made 
 [constituted] me a judge or divider over you ?* Again: 
 He shall make [constitute] him ruler over all his goods.y 
 Further: The law maketh (constituteth] men high priests 
 which have infirmity.{ And its prevailing use in the gos- 
 | pel, to say the least, as denoting asingle act or measure 
 _ that is purely official, is no despicable idea in regard to 
 its bearing on our sense of imputation. 
 
 Again: those who take a different view of the pas- 
 
 e, destroying its putative character entirely, are cer- 
 | tai inly at war with the phraseology of inspired truth. 
 ‘Nor is it difficult to make this point clear to the under- 
 standing. For if an imputation of the first offence be 
 denied, and its influence accounted for , by supposition, 
 merely through example, imitation and, 
 plainly, it is incongruous with the styl 
 speak of any becoming sinners in that 
 
 Ripe to 
 vanner as 7 
 
 " 
 Who is he that condemmeth ? Rou viii. 34. ~ Also, Axaraxptros, iw Acts 
 im xvi. 37, and xxii. 25, &c. So that if kvima, according to the sugges- 
 } tion of Guyse, signifies judicium in general, yet, in connexion with kata, 
 
 as @ compound term, it signifies what may be-fitly termed, judicium 
 adversus aliquem, or condemnatio. 
 
 Doubtless, any minister of the gospel, who would explain the scrip~ 
 tures inaregard to the words which the Holy Ghost teacheth, so far 
 , as this topic is named, would be admitted by his fellow disciples and 
 a helpers in Christ to be thoroughly orthodox ! 
 
 * Luke xii. 14, Matt. xxiv. 47. { Heb. vil, 28. 
 s 11* 
 
 ike; I assert 
 
ere 
 
 126. 
 
 or constituted such. It can easily be shown, that it is: 
 a perfect anomaly i in the sacred volume; nay more, there 
 
 is‘no shadow of proof derived from that source which — 
 
 can be made to countenance it. I am aware indeed, 
 what is said of Jeroboam, that by an influence of the 
 
 _ like sort he made Israel to sin. pubs at is not the same, 
 
 I humbly conceive, as saying “merely that they were 
 made sinners. Very far from it indeed, if I mistake not: 
 and least of all, by the influence of example that may 
 be predicated of the first sin ; an act committed thou- 
 sands of years ago ; and the person to whom it is properly 
 charged in the sight of Heaven, confessedly unknown 
 to any considerable part of the entire human family! - 
 BPurther: it is no fair objection to this view of the 
 passage, that men are found sinners, by the imputation 
 ofwhat is nota personal quality. Even in that light, the 
 phrase, as employed with that intent, is not singular in hu- 
 man affairs: and I may add, what is worthy of respect, 
 is not without a parallel instance on the inspired page.* 
 But be this as it may. Whether a customary use of the 
 phrase, or not, is immaterial. In the present case, not 
 only the congas dictates it, but the antithesis -of our 
 text certain y requires it. And dif the terms righteous- 
 ness, condemnation, and the address generally that com- 
 
 ports with it, be used in this chapter as in other parts of 
 
 the epistle—that is, in a forensic bearing—it appears not 
 
 only that the righteousness of Christ is truly imputed to 
 believers, but the sin ‘of Adam is ascribed to his ee pting: 
 
 * Kings i. 21. Otherwise it shall come to pass when my ee the king: 
 skall sleep with his fathers, that I and my son Solomon shall be coUNTED 
 offenders. That is, shall be dealt with as if, or whatever is right in it- 
 
 self, be made in law-judgment, to sustain the character of them that are 
 certainly in a fault. 
 
 b 
 
 | elie 
 she: ‘ 
 
127 . 
 
 in the very same manner? and if the effect of the for- 
 ; mer, as concerned with final acceptance before God, is 
 . . a justification of life, as declared, it is very obvious, that 
 the penal desert of the latter is everlasting death. And 
 on no othe P aciple, can the idea of made or constituted 
 
 y 
 
 sinners be » i at ved, .'S my opinion, without seriously ory 
 
 conve’ an inquiry into this matter. In no other — ; 
 # 
 im. 
 
 light can it be viewed, without enervating the apostle’s 
 argument; throwing a dreadful mist on this chapter, as - 
 well as its connexion with the whole epistle; and what © 
 is worse than all, yea ever to be regretted by us—mani- 
 i festly depreciating the merit of that satisfaction to viola- 
 ted justice, which was made in the law-place of the 
 despairing sinner, by our highly exalted, yet infinitely 
 compassionate and condescending Redeemer. 
 : This, we conceive, is the mind of the Spirit, im the 
 : chapter to which your attention has been verte 
 ‘referred. 
 
 In connexion with an exposition of the apostle’s méan- 
 ; ing in that place, I cannot dismiss the testimony from 
 i the word of God, without some respect to one or two »~ 
 : declarations which have’ a bearing omg subject of our 
 
 ey eee ee ee ee ee Ne 
 
 * discussion. > sat 
 
 if In the first epistle to the Corinthians, we meet swith 
 
 4 a testimony of decisive import. It is this: For as im 
 
 Adam all die, so in Christ shall all be made alive.* : 
 in tegard to the all spoken of by the apostle, whether 
 
 literally, all of our galty race, OF; the allesiioply of 
 
 will ‘ie be inquired after. Thus far it itis admitted, that = 
 7 the death of all men must be traced in some manner to 
 id the apostacy of Adam. Andif the inquiry arise,inwhat 
 
 * Chap. xv. 22. 
 
 > 
 *. $s, 
 * 
 
Tr 
 
 —_— 
 
 128 
 
 manner one fact, is certainly made the consequence of 
 the other, the apostle explains it, by drawing a parallel 
 between Adam and Christ, in regard to a dispensation 
 of life and death. And in respect to the latter, as life is 
 derived from Jesus as a public person; in virtue of the 
 
 » NRication of saving influence, so again, the comparison 
 
 %”, implies, yea, the very terms of the Greek, that death 
 
 rg must be derived from Adam in virtue of a federal rela- 
 
 tion to mankind: that as the merit of the latter is set to 
 
 our account by a real imputation, the demerit of Adam 
 
 is laid to our.charge in the same manner. And in re- 
 
 spect to the former, or relation sustained by our first 
 
 father, as such imputation is equally direct with the oth- 
 
 er, the apostle declares with propriety, that we die in 
 
 him. And dying thus, it is said correctly, however un- 
 
 palatable to some, that we sinned in-him. For to a de- 
 
 monstration it will appear, either as an instance of sound 
 
 logic, or the fair interpretation of Scripture, that this is 
 
 * the sense of the place, if the simple exposition of his 
 
 declaration, dictag? be the parallel itself, shall be a 
 sustained.* 
 
 Nor can it be a trifling seisplesaeie to the reason- 
 
 | counsel of peace, and an eternal a Ke: ; and in the 
 ; administration of a new covenant, by the direct commu- 
 eS 
 
 * From explanitory notes by Fraser, annexed to an edition of Wit- 
 sius on the Creed, I extract an elegant comment. . 
 
 “The words in the original,” says Dwight, “are gy rw’ A dap, and 
 sv rw Xpicrw. The Greek preposition ev signifies very often, as any 
 person acquainted with the language must have observed, exactly the 
 same with the English phrase by means of. The passage ‘woul here- 
 fore have been explicitly and correctly translated: As dy means of ‘Adath 
 all die, even so by means of Christ shall all be made alive. Adam is 
 therefore only asserted here, to be an instrumental cause of the death 
 
 » — specified,” &c. Now thatthe preposition éy does not unfrequently signi- 
 ; fy by means of, or simply by, as Dr. Macknight has thought proper to. 
 
 ‘ea ‘ 
 
 * 
 
 s 
 
129 
 
 ing founded immediately on the passage, what is cer- 
 tainly deduced from an idea succeeding this impor- 
 tant intimation: For the apostle, as you know, and no 
 doubt, with a primary respect to the believer, winding 
 up an argument for a future resurrection, based fearful- 
 ly on the representative character of Christ, adds : The 
 first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the 
 Lord from heaven.* For in a proper view of what is in- 
 timated, I would barely ask—In what respect is Christ 
 termed the second man? In reply to the query, we say 
 
 - then. not in virtue of any private character that he sus- 
 
 tained. As to his person, he was more than mere man: 
 and in relation to humanity itself, was born after an in- 
 terval of time, in which millions of human beings had 
 enjoyed a fading existence upon earth. In no other 
 manner therefore, is he properly styled the second can, 
 
 render it in this same verse, jis readily admitted. But the native and 
 ordinary sense of the prepositon, is confessedly in; and it should be 
 inquired, whether the connexion of the words, and the scope of the pas- 
 sage, do not render it more probable that the preposition ought to be 
 rendered so in this verse, than that itshould be translated either by or 
 by means of. That ev when connected with rw Xoiorw, and with other 
 names and characters ag: Savior, should in no case be rendered by 
 means of, we shall not? m. But “any person acquainted with the 
 language” of the New Testament “‘ must have observed,” thatin a vast 
 majority of instances where ey is thus joined with Christ, it would be 
 highly improper to render it :n any other way than by the English pre- 
 position ix. A few expressions from the epistles to the Corinthians may 
 suffice for examples: ‘But of him are ye ix Christ Jesus”’—‘Tf any 
 man be in Christ, he is a new creature’—‘‘I knew a man zn Christ.”’* 
 Thee xp ression ev yore occurs even twice just preceding the passage 
 under consideration. Why then ought we not to retain this instance, 
 as it stands in the common version; ‘‘ For as iz Adam all die, even so 
 
 _ in Christ shall all be made alive?” The apostle had said in the verse 
 
 * J) Cor. xv. 47. 
 
tod cide iS 
 
 *& 
 130 
 
 er Adam, than from a circumstance, common only to 
 him and our progenitor. And if that he resolved into 
 a public relation sustained by Adam as a type, and that 
 is fulfilled in the person and office-work of the Media- 
 tor, all is very plain; and in a full investigation of the 
 subject, the mind is relieved at once, from what ap- 
 pears a most unwelcome uncertainty. 
 
 And on that ground, I may observe, that what im- 
 mediately follows the declaration just named, will pos- 
 sess an unrivalled interest. No pen can certainly de- 
 scribe, or mortal tongue express, the grandeur of the 
 thought. For as these Agents are named, and thexpar- 
 ties which they fitly represent are ranged by their 
 side, the design of mercy is tenderly appreciated. The 
 light of eternity breaks in on the prospect, and to the 
 ear of faith, the truth is uttered with rapturous emotion : 
 
 immediately preceding; ‘For since avpurov, byman came death, 
 dt ayIowmov, by man came also the resurection of the dead.” He had 
 thus already taught that by, through, or by means of man death came, 
 and also the resurection of the dead. He had already shewn that Adam 
 is ‘fan instrumental cause of the death specified,” and that the man 
 Christ Jesus, the Son of God in human nature is the author of that bles- 
 sed resurection which awaits the just. W 2en he proceeds to his next 
 sentence, he changes the preposition in bothits parts. In place of dra, 
 by, by means of, he says ev, in, hat he alters the preposition merely 
 for the sake of variety of expression, ought not readily to be conceded, 
 Is it not much more probable that the design of the apostle, and of the 
 Spirit by whom he was inspired, was to throw additional light upon this 
 subject, and to suggest something relative to the manner in which death 
 comes by the one man, and the resurection by the other 1 Isit not 
 clearly intimated, that Adam was not merely ‘an inetomet ae 
 death,” but that we died in Adam as our common root and federal ep- 
 resentative, in whom we sinned and so became liable to death ?—This 
 view of the meaning divests the passage of every appearance of tauto- 
 logy.—Vol. II. p. 495, 
 
 *1Cor. i..30, ii, 1, iv. 17, IT Corey. 17, 2ie2, 
 
 ef 
 
Ba a I i al ae EN ag ahs Dy Ee = 
 Be eer pee es - ee ete 
 
 ee Be a En oii 
 
 * ¢. 
 181 
 
 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy; ~ 
 
 and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heav- 
 enly. And as we have borne the wnage of the earthy, so 
 shall we bear the image of the heavenly.* — - 
 
 But again. Another declaration is found in the epis- 
 tle of Paul to the Ephesians ; affirming, in respect to 
 
 himself and other believers, that they were by nature 
 
 children of wrath even as others.+ 
 
 If your attention be turned to the phrase child of. 
 
 wrath, it implies in our apprehension, not barely a vi- 
 cious inclination anterior to sinning, but something in 
 the very act, exposing a being to the penal displeasure 
 of the Most High. In regard to the sense of it, you 
 must be aware, that it is synonymous with the phrase, 
 son of perdition. And conveys an impression, that the 
 creature in that pyedicament is liable, not merely in 
 moral equity, but by a judicial infliction, to a certain and 
 righteous displeasure of God against human folly. 
 Again: In respect to the phrase by nature, as designa- 
 ting the time when the danger is first impending, I may 
 state, that it cannot be explained to mean barely this, 
 
 viz., that prior to their professed conversion to christiani- _ 
 
 ty, they sustained really, or without mistake, the cha- 
 racter reported. For however pleasing the interpreta- 
 tion may be to many, there is no ingenuous mind but 
 vol confess, that it is not a fit usage, to render that 
 information observably emphatic. Indeed, those who 
 take this stand, very consistently resolve the depravity 
 
 of m , purely into acquired habit ; asif, from its early 
 
 anil ‘sett ed influence, it might be denominated in some 
 manner a second nature. But in reply to that assump- 
 tion, I could name a variety of considerations. I could 
 
 — *Y. Cor. xv, 48, 49. + Eph, ii. & 
 
 =? a an 
 
 a 
 
 a 
 
a ae ee a 
 
 zy, as connected more especially with the treatn 
 
 152 
 
 urgein regard tothis very passage, that Paul having 
 spoken of his ‘“‘conversation in time past,” seems to rise 
 to an earlier date in passing on to the place before us. 
 But dispensing with it in this relation, I will only re- 
 mark, that by the phrase in question, is intended plain- 
 ly in the gospel, a natural effect; or, what appears sim- 
 ply through a uniform law of being. In this sense you 
 must understand it, when it speaks of one that isa Jew 
 
 by nature ;* of an olive tree wild by nature ;,—and of 
 
 them that by nature are no gods.t And doubtless, if a 
 vicious propensity, apart from open transgression, can 
 justify this wrath, even in the case of new born infants, 
 itisno uncharitable presumption, if I urge at least, that 
 a major part of the curse, connected with the bare exist- 
 ence of a child, should be ascribed to a representative 
 error :for while it gives the passage an easy exposition, 
 it is that aléne, that may possibly consist with the im- 
 pression made by it on any unprejudiced mind. ’ 
 
 I may add, the spirit of it agrees with the sense of 
 our English Poet— 
 
 In me, all posterity stands cursed ! 
 Fair patrimony: that I must leave ye, sons.§ 
 
 With this exposition of the sentiment advanced, I re- 
 mark in conclusion, that not only under a docirinal as- 
 pect isit capable of illustration, but there is nothing what- 
 ever in the inspired record, that respects our race as lost, 
 yet the subjects of divine commniseration ; that may im- 
 peach the evidence I have insisted on. “On: fageeane- 
 
 unrenewed sinners under.a dispensation of mercy, 
 is much, that taken in a. different light, may serve to 
 corroborate the doctrine I intended scripturally to ex- 
 »° Gal. ii, 15. +Rom. xi. 24. {Gah iv. 8. § Mirrom 
 
1338 
 
 plain.——The state in which ourrace is left by a violation 
 
 of the old covenant, is obvious. It is one of condemna- 
 
 tion. And respecting the covenant itself, in the precise 
 
 form it was declared, we grant, that in the enforcement 
 of its sanction, all embraced in its terms, are under it in 
 an absolute form. But if a distinction is made in that 
 covenant between its natural and positive state, which 
 is often done, it is evident as to the condition, that we 
 may separate what is accidental in it, from what is es- 
 sentially binding in its spirit: thatis, what is positive in 
 the bare enforcement of a precept, from what is purely 
 moral that respects the aim of its requirement. No doubt, 
 the condition of that covenant, materially considered, 
 
 was perfect and unceasing compliance with pe law of 
 Heaven. 
 
 a 
 z f —- 
 
 yas) te ert re * 
 eh ee 
 
 This admitted, we see no cause, why sinners ‘of man- 
 kind are not ushered into the world, under tlie entire 
 bond of that covenant: why they come not under it in 
 a natural state, as certainly, for example, ds Christ was 
 if made under the very same law, and in a federal form, 
 obeyed it on the behalf of a peculiar people: and until 
 they escape from its grasp, are bound as sincerely to ob- 
 serve its requirement, as they are personally to endure 
 its awful penalty. In favor of the idea, one or two con- 
 siderations may be very decisive. 
 
 It is a fact then, that sinners in their natural appre- 
 
 ait. are under the law of Jehovah in a covenant 
 Be ; an all the effort they make to secure an interest 
 
 1 the divine favor, is based entirely on that supposition , 
 : And whether the conviction be ascribed solely to their 
 | depravity, or a state of things corresponding’ with fact, 
 it is very plain, that they are not under the law of God 
 merely, as a Tule of manners in the hands of Christ; as 
 {2 
 
 a Ed eee 
 
—-_ 
 
 > 
 
 = 
 
 iF 
 
 a ¥ 
 134 
 
 Paul intimates—not under the law but wuder grace :* for 
 they have yet no just acquaintance with the sense of the 
 gospel, nor have given the consent of a wicked heart, to 
 the aim of a more benevolent dispensation. 
 
 Again. They are not only there in their own imag- 
 inations, but are dealt with on the same principle, in 
 what relates actually to their preparation for a future 
 the world. Of proof that may be advanced in favor of 
 the impression, I will name an example or two. 
 
 As respects then the transaction of Mount Sinai, where 
 something is found to illustrate the subject—It Was pro+ 
 perly a miaed dispensation. it was so, largely considered. 
 What I intend is simply this: In a fearful iaterview, the 
 law and the gospel were conspicuously exhibited. And 
 while said mixture implies no confusion of the two, on 
 the one shhand, it was justified by the mixed character of 
 the congregation assembled there ; and again, by its im- 
 portant use, as touching the Jaw, not only in urging the 
 convinced sinner to Christ, which it does at this moment: 
 but especially, in regard to the nature of a new ritual, 
 which was then published for their advantage, of pre- 
 paring them fitly to discern Christ Jesus and salvation in 
 a figure. And that the law and gospel on the occasion 
 referred to, were not barely uttered, but either in a co- 
 venant form, we have convincing proof. In Paul’s epis- 
 tle to the Galatians, where an allusion is made, it is 
 affirmed expressly: or-these are the two covenants 
 one jrom Mount Sinai which gendereth to donde yy a 
 is, Ag ar. For this Agar is Mount Sinai in Ara 
 answereth to Jerusalem, which now is, and is in He 
 
 na 
 
 ‘with her children. But Jerusalem which is above is Iie y 
 
 which is the mother of us all.} And in the explication of 
 
 *Rom. vi. 14, + Gal, iv, 24, 25, 46. 
 
| st 
 } 135 
 
 | his meaning, on the only ground that may be admissi- 
 i ble, it is a plain suggestion in its bearing on these cove- 
 nants, that confounding the one from Mount Sinai, with 
 the other which is from above ; or, describing the chil- 
 dren of the one, as though truly pertaining to the other, 
 3 is entirely to erase all distinction between them; and 
 what is equally clear, to mistake the nature of the apos- 
 tle’s entire reasoning throughout that most admirable 
 epistle.—The truth is, the covenant of works was de- 
 i clared on that occasion, not as its first publication, but, 
 f as a new manifestation; and was subscribed by a free 
 declaration of the people. With regard to Israel, you 
 are aware, that they say to Moses; “ All that the Lord 
 ; hath spoken we will do.”’* And to reason against the 
 q essence of a covenant transaction, where evidence of the 
 fact is so glaring, is, in my solemn conviction, to trifle 
 with the sense of an honest and simple narration. 
 
 The same, in substance, might be urged from a case 
 _ that occurred under the personal ministry of Christ ; that 
 _ of a young man, which has already been Hickdhee to 
 y= your notice. As we observed, in the advice given him 
 : to Keep the commandments, as the ground on which to ex- 
 : pect eternal life, our Savior advised him in a legal man- 
 a ner. He counselled him to that, which had precisely 
 ' suited the circumstances of Adam. And while it is 
 improved in that manner by Calvanistic preachers of the 
 : el is clear toa spiritual mind, that as one, tho- 
 4 rs 
 ! 
 , 
 
 ste a law-spirit, and disposed to pharasa- 
 ical on, our Saviour dealt with him on princi- 
 ples, that are no way indicative of salvation purely through 
 his gracious interposition. 
 
 To all which I might subjoin, that hen Paul as- 
 
 * Exod, xix, 8 
 
 & 
 
 Se 
 
ee 
 
 ts Bit Re Ri ai i a 
 
 Si 
 136 
 
 serts, in a view of our natural state, that ‘¢as many 
 as are of the works of the law are underthe curse ; 
 we should not restrain that punitive wrath, in my 
 opinion, either to original or actual delinquencies. 
 There is nothing in the nature of the case that certainly 
 requires it. But while the legal desert of a sinner, on 
 the principles I have fully established, is concerned with 
 either, it will simplify our views of this matter, if the 
 curse spoken of, may be taken rather in a cumulative 
 sense ; and every overt iniquity, as a continued slight of 
 the same perpetual provision. A view of the subject, 
 not only consistent with what is intimated of the pemalty, 
 or glorious sanction of the covenant, but that is conso- 
 nant, if I err not, with the simplicity that pervades the 
 instructions of the gospel.—But in view of the whole 
 
 -affair, so far as it is made distinctly a theme of contem- 
 
 plation, permit me to say, That respecting every breach 
 of the covenant of life, commencing with its first viola- 
 tion in the garden ; the condition in which it leaves the 
 race, in regard to its proper effect, is well compared to a 
 vessel at sea: the crew of which, though embarked ina 
 laudable design, having lost their pilot, and caught in a 
 driving storm, are no way prepared to manage for their 
 good: and while every gale in that very state, threat- 
 ens an immediate wreck, it is painfully obvious, unless 
 an arm of mercy is sent speedily to their relief, all hope 
 shall forever depart from them, and they must sink down 
 to a certain and irretrievable ruin. 
 
DISCOURSE VI. 
 
 Romans vy. 19—For as by one man’s disobedience many were made 
 sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. 
 
 Your attention was directed in the preceding dis- 
 - course, to the consequences of the first sin in its bearing 
 
 on mankind: and with an eye to a public connexion | 
 
 between Adam and his offspring, its influence on the 
 latter was considered as imputed, or reckoned to their 
 account by the supreme Law-giver. , 
 
 Regarding it in that light, we explained the yiew en- 
 tertained of the subject; and having done so, endeavor- 
 ed to establish from the scriptures the faet of such an 
 imputation ;—noticing in conclusion its correspondence 
 with a scriptural respect to the race as. ost—lying un- 
 der the wrath of a prior defection—and yet favored with 
 a temporary reprieve, that they may escape the penalty 
 of transgression through Jesus Christ, our everlasting 
 surety. 
 
 If the proof then advanced be relevant to my purpose, 
 and I trust it will claim a mature consideration, I go on 
 in a single attempt to remove, objections, commonly 
 brought against this belief, by those who do not acqui- 
 esce in the principles I have urged. | 
 
 And in reference to the legal desert of the first of- 
 , as reckoned to the natural offspring of the first 
 
 there, we are admonished, in regard to moral, account- 
 ableness, that every man shall bear his own burden.” 
 
 Concerning the general principle contemplated $ 
 . 12* 
 
 ~ 
 *. 
 mi 
 4 
 ‘> 
 ss 
 > 
 oe 
 é st 
 \ 
 ) F 
 é 
 os 
 _ 
 ¥ 
 t 
 “i. 
 * 
 
Pe eC mer eee en ee 
 we Ty 
 
 , 
 4 ew, . 
 ri Ie 
 » 
 %y ) 
 
 ‘ ancestors, as confirmed in their own apprehension 
 
 w fs 
 
 this objectiony we certainly acknowledge its obvious: 
 propriety ; and must think too, that on a large scale, it 
 is characteristic of the divine administration throughout 
 the universe. But in regard to this lower world, or the 
 particular event embraced in this discussion, I am not 
 aware that it is made to assume a proper application. 
 
 If there be any thing however, derived from, the live- 
 ly Oracles, which wears the appearance of this excep- 
 tion, I trust it will be generally admitted, that it ap- 
 pears in the prophecy of Ezekiel. And in respect to 
 that prophet, as a declaration recorded by his instrumen- 
 tality, i often urged as the very gist of the objection, 
 confining myself to it, in a few thoughts, it may be suit- 
 able to sive it at least a candid consideration. 
 
 Adverting to the declaration itgelf, it is this: The 
 
 son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither’ shall 
 
 the father bear the iniquity of the son ; the righteousness of 
 the ‘righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the 
 wicked shall be upon him.* And in regard to its true 
 bearing, I observe generally, though a plausible intima- 
 tion on the subject, taken unqualifiedly, if the design - 
 of it however be sought for, it wears wholly a new 
 garb. And the redson can be easily suggested. We 
 find it refers entirely to God’s peculiar people of old, 
 and mainly, to his dealings with them at a period, 
 that rolled away prior to the captivity in Babylon. We 
 find also, that the immediate occasion 
 this: a complaint of the Jews during 
 
 ame to the ear of the prophet ; and one | 
 rit on the confessed imputation of the sir a 
 
 retributive dispensation of Providence. The complaint 
 
 % 
 
 * Chap. xviii, 20. 
 
" 
 
 138 all 
 
 ‘is: The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s 
 teeth are set owedge ;* or, the fathers sinned, and their 
 descendants endure the wrath that it merited. 
 
 But more particular, in regard to the subject, L may 
 add, first: that there was good foundation for the fact, 
 -couslied i in the declaration, viz., that the fathers break- 
 
 consequence of their folly. For not only the sad record, 
 of their historical career, but what, may be noticed, the 
 
 its bearing on this topic. ‘Being called, as he evidently 
 was in divine Providence, to counsel the churgh in that 
 day of affliction, he affirms plainly : Thou Di racs 
 the iniquities of the fathers into the\ bosoms of their chil- 
 dren after them.~ He declares also—and the words were 
 penned during that very exile— Our fathers sinned and 
 are not, and we have. borne their iniquities :{ Or, our fa- 
 thers transgressed and we are made to bear the punish- 
 ment, that it properly deserves. And I will barely in- 
 quire, whatever reply shall be given it, if any thing can 
 be viewed as more decisive than this strain ; when it is 
 seen, that. the prophet Jeremiah, is speaking to the very 
 point embodied in the allegation of the repining Jews? 
 Again: if there was solid ground for the verity of this 
 complaint, it is equally clear from the divine record, 
 
 in what light it was taken up by Jehovah. In’ re- 
 ply to their m@rmurings, he assures them strongly, that 
 ore have occasion for any thing of that 
 ter, the general principle of his moral gov- 
 ment should ce observed in regard to them, viz., 
 They should bear every one “bis own burden :”§ and 
 in respect to his own purpose, and sovereign dispensa- 
 
 * Chap. xviii, 2. t Jer. sxxii,18. tLam,v.7. SGal. vi. 5. ¥ 
 
 $* 
 
 ‘ing covenant with God, the ues bear the mournful . 
 
 testimony of the prophet Jeremiah, is very pertinent in 
 
 Rs 
 x ee 
 = ia 
 
 -% 
 
 ef 
 
 & 
 
e 
 
 - 140 
 
 tions respecting them, would be guided himself mani- 
 festly by that profession. | 
 And, brethren, what is all this to do, one way or tie 
 other with the imputation of Adam’s sin? Ina direct 
 manner, nothing I judge, more than the first verse in 
 the book of Genesis. And speaking of any bearing it 
 may have, it will strongly appear at a single glance. 
 For what is the prophet there attempting ?-In reply to 
 this interrogation, as intimated already, he is treating in 
 that place simply of private offences: and not only that, 
 but the sins of indivivuals, who constituted a small part 
 of the earth’s population, and who were bound together 
 rina no other tie than mere consanguinity. Yet 
 éven then, namely, as concerned with God’s people un- 
 der the former dispensation, he grants, in reporting the 
 will of the Most High, that heretofore, he had deviated 
 from that principle of his moral administration. And 
 the very confession itself, justly implied in the narra- 
 tive, really turns it into an argument of no trifling weight 
 in favor of the imputation that I have aimed to estab- 
 lish. For it must appear to an unbiassed mind, not only 
 that the point in debate is there allowed, but.as I shall 
 
 _ insist on’ it, under circumstances, by no means as justi- 
 - fiable, to say the least, in sight of mere man, asin the 
 
 stipulations and parental kindness of that covenant which 
 hes claimed for a season your impartial investigation. 
 
 I could subjoin on this topic, that if the p 
 the elie eHoded fo in oi to *, 6 
 
 is hard to prove from the word of God, tha at the satisfac 
 tion of Christ is truly vicarious. The exposition of such 
 passages has a vital connexion with that doctrine; and 
 though lightly regarded by some, will not remain with- 
 \ 
 
 wig eS ae 
 
out its influence on our experience. And in relation 
 to its bearing on that subject, I can only say, if it import 
 nothing of a proper curse, nay, in the eye of impartial 
 justice itself, as used in the latter instance ; it were easy 
 to shew what has not. been disproved, that there is no- 
 thing in the gospel of the grace of God, by which that 
 feature of a perfect atonement is more decisively incul- 
 
 “ 
 
 cated. 
 
 2. I go on therefore in respect to an interest in the - 
 
 apostacy to observe, secondly : itis objected toa fellow- 
 ship in the first sin, that ‘‘ the accursed evil of it, as sty~ 
 led, comes on us merely in the way of natural. conse- 
 quence ; and it cannot, therefore, ig an ‘executed 
 threatening of the covenant alluded to.’ 
 
 In remarking a circumstance which is assumed in 
 the objection, viz., that the evil of the apostacy is felt 
 only in the operation of natural causes, it will hardly be 
 presumed that I should give it an unqualified support. 
 But not agitating the point very carefully, I will state 
 in regard to the objection, that there is something ex- 
 tremely suspicious in its very appearance. It augurs 
 ill in a due respect for the established agency of the Su- 
 
 preme ; and what is plain as to the nature of his uni- | 
 
 versal dominion. It can hardly be accounted for char- 
 
 itably, but in supposing that the person making it, has 
 overlooked a grand distinction on which it is properly 
 based ; that is- betwixt original and actual transgres- 
 sic ne usion to the latter, Viz. actual sins, it 1s 
 
 ly confessed, that concerning their penal ef- 
 —as they are modified by civil society, or retribu- 
 tive instances of Providence—that is, by our particular 
 state for the time being, the distinction couched in the 
 objection is appropriate : and if restrained to our own 
 
> 
 
 a ) 
 442 
 agency, or immediate effects of it in given circumstan- 
 ces, whatever they are, it can all be explained doubt- 
 less, without a formal and detailed resort to our connex- 
 ion with a representative Head. 
 
 But that all evils flowing from the apostacy by natu- 
 ral consequence, should be considered on that ground 
 as no part of God’s displeasure against sin, is not evi- 
 dent to a well balanced mind. On the contrary ; it is 
 as unphilosophical, I think, as contrary to plain scrip- 
 ture, if we respect only the constitution of nature ; or op- 
 eration of fixed principles, by which God is pleased to 
 recompence the transgression of his creatures. In 
 speaking of that thing, it may be easily declared, that 
 natural law, is the instrument which God chiefly em- 
 ploys in the present world for punishing iniquity. That 
 the immediate effects of sin, which are penal, arise only 
 in that manner. And I may add, while a presumption 
 exists that even in the world of despair, this law, as dis- 
 played in the effect of crime, will pervade the state of 
 the damned forever ; you will discover meanwhile, in ‘ 
 regard to itself, that the law is one of a most searching 
 
 description. On this play it falls out experimentally, 
 
 a sin is its own avenger; and the relation of cause 
 
 and effect so very intimate, as was shewn,* that sin, 
 
 under one aspect, is the act itself, and under another, 
 the infliction of its own proper desert. And while the 
 order of nature therefore is unchanged by the supreme 
 Arbiter, it naturally follows, yea, the fact is sug € 
 by evidence of the inspired record ; that without the: 
 tervention of:a positive miracle to the contrary, God 
 may, and does punish sin palpably in the natural con 
 sequences of human guilt. 
 
 * SEzp. 40, etseq. | 
 
we. ~~ ae b al 
 ¥ » 
 143 
 
 If this be allowed then, what becomes of the objec= 
 tion respecting the evils of the apostacy, as flowing to 
 mankind in the way of natural sequence? How can 
 
 _ the mode of communication, as urged in the objection, 
 affect the doctrine of imputation? If sin may, and cer= 
 tainly is punished in this manner, upon what plan is its 
 validity sustained ? Without debating it a moment, in 
 my own view, it is quite foreign to the purpose. And 
 not only is that perceivable, but I can suggest, while it 
 is inscrutable in what manner the mode of punishing sin 
 has any bearing whatever on the argument; if 1s equally 
 vain, to argue against the greater severity of its execu 
 tion, on one plan or the other; either then by direct in- 
 
 _.  fliction, or through the medium solely of secondary cau- 
 
 ses. . Not to say, it is no point, that we are called to 
 agitate at this time, I may observe, that while the ele- 
 ments of nature, as freely made use of, are the same 
 confessedly wielded in special interposition, as subject to 
 natural law, it can be shewn that the most perfect forms 
 of misery are seen in the effect of the latter. And were 
 the influence of either precisely the same, what, I may 
 ask modestly, is gained by a-preference of the former? 
 
 a a ie Ha as 
 
 To employ a simple illustration, ia explanation of the 
 thought, suppose for once, which is suggested by Scrip- 
 ture, that Korah and his men, had been swallowed up by 
 an earthquake ? that is a fair instance—or the priests of 
 been struck dead by the forked lightning, and 
 , unted, for, merely, upon natural principles ? 
 he Certain perdition of those sinners been equally 
 and unexpected ?—Sure I am, the point cannot 
 
 be doubted fora moment. And always mindful that 
 natutal law, or the course of nature, operates with the 
 same uniformity in one case, as the other; in the pun- 
 
 ry ths ey 
 v7 
 - “ie 
 ¥ 
 
| 144 
 ¥ 
 
 ‘ae ishment of original, as well as actual transgressions, it . 
 follows plainly, that the objection based on the mode of 
 executing the divine will, must certainly fall to the 
 ground. 
 
 Indeed, were the objection available at all, it would 
 be easy to prove, that it takes too large sweep; and 
 with regard to actual sin, as punished in an hereditary 
 
 ‘ ‘ manner, the sin of a parent in the maladies of.a child, a 
 | very common case, that it wears an unfavorable aspect. 
 . And yet, it is difficult to show, if the desert of a parent 
 | & ¥ in one instance, in compliance with a just threatening, is 
 
 ie ae materially undergone by a child, that under a righteous 
 
 constitution, the sin'of Adam, as ours federally, and 
 
 through the operation of natural law, may not be aven- 
 
 ged in his natural posterity: But not enlarging on the 
 
 point in connexion with this topic, I barely observe, 
 
 that the notice taken of this scruple may be important, 
 
 if we discover its bearing on a principle not to be yield- 
 
 ed up: 2 position, which cannot be discarded, without 
 
 violating not only the sense of Scripture, but in discus- 
 
 sions of this nature, plunging the human mind into an 
 
 .. inextricable labyrinth of error. It is this: ‘ That the 
 
 * ~ consequences of penal suffering are themselves punish- 
 
 ment, so far, as the effect of. it is taken in view by the 
 
 Judge in denouncing the sentence, and comprehended 
 
 . within the scope of his: real design.” A principle as 
 
 capable of defence by analogical reasoning, as accordant 
 
 with unsophisticated common sense ; and every ‘thing 
 
 - disclosed to us, respecting the effects of an act of dating A 
 
 rebellion, commit ed by the parent of a degenerated off- 
 spring. 
 
 3- But I remark thirdly: it is objected to our view of 
 
 imputation, that “the evils arising from the apostacy, 
 
wae ; + g 
 q 
 
 a 145 :" ‘ 
 j ee . 
 | may be overruled under a dispensation of mercy to our 
 
 greatest good; and they cannot, therefore, be a judicial 
 F manifestation of the divine displeasure against a part in 
 
 that transaction.” eo ae ; 
 With regard to the objection, stated in the most plau- , 
 7 i 
 
 . sible manner, it appears to be inapposite: orrather,it == | 
 ; confirms the ground I have taken, by admitting a disa- i © 
 
 . bility, which may be subordinated, not always in point He . 
 ( of fact, to the highest advantage of a sinning progeny. 
 
 ) And to shew the utter weakness of the exception 
 here taken, I observe, first—That nothing is more fully 7 > 
 established in the whole Book-of God than the point, 
 that in regard to their situation, mankind are by nature 
 in a state of condemnation.* They are born under a law 
 that worketh wrath.~t In regard to both soul and body, 
 and particularly the latter, prior to a saving interest in 
 Christ, they are dead in trespasses and sins.{ And 
 though sinning “ without law,” or written admonition, 
 it is said that they shall perish in that predicament :§ 
 yea, that not only by nature, but against its glimmer- 
 ing light, are they sensible on their own part, of doing 
 things, that in the eye of eternal justice are worthy of 
 death.|| This, is the condition of the human family, as | « 
 denoted with superior exactness, and described in the ee 
 
 pathetic strain of inspired asseveration. Again: the 
 
 administration of a new Covenant, is exactly in tone 
 
 with the point of this representation. In the offers of 
 
 salvation to all men through faith in its stipulations, you 
 
 notice w t is very decisive, that it promises deliver- 
 
 ance truly from a deserved destruction. Whatever be 
 
 the result therefore of a positive treatment of the race 
 
 bal 
 
 Fe eee ee 
 Se Ie ee 
 
 © 
 
 Sas 
 
 eS a Oe a ae ee ST ae ee Pe 
 se tie Se ae Seng — =» Sa i ee 
 
 i * Gal. iii. 10. John iii, 18 +Rom.iv. 15. +Eph.ii 1. § Rom. i. e 
 12. || Rom, i. 32. va i. 
 
 13 
 
Z " 146 
 
 on these prineiples, it will amount to the same thing ; 
 and evidently so, as connected either with the welfare 
 of the church, a fuller display of the baseness of sin, or 
 the final salvation of the offender himself. Viewed in 
 aby respect whatever, it is a fact beyond controversy, 
 
 ul 
 
 that the gospel accosts us as beings condemned univer- 
 sally to die. It finds the race prisoners at the bar of 
 justice. And till offered mercy is accepted, nay, the 
 # full consent of the heart yielded to a new proposal, the 
 sinner lies under the curse of an incensed God. And 
 if ’ with respect to his prospects, you are painfully aware, 
 that instead of profiting+by the forbearance, orrequiting 
 the kindness of his sovereign, according to Scripture, 
 his heart is fully set in him io do evil.* Tehas no sense 
 of his condition, or a sincere desire to escape its dread- 
 ful allurements. And itis very certain, that if the child 
 of God often suffers the severe marks of fatherly anger 
 for undutiful regard, a sinnerof the character described, 
 must be viewed, as eminently treasuring up wrath, a- 
 gainst the day of wrath, and preparing himself for a 
 more aggravated doom. 
 Nor can it be shewn from eta facts in the 
 . administration of Providence, that the statement is in- 
 WD cocsision with a presumption of its truth: for many 
 things in the latter end of depraved man, are not made 
 obviously to wear a benevolent aspect. Do you ask for 
 proof of it? I can name a variety of considerations. 
 
 Take, for example, the case of infants, yea, millions of 
 
 them in that period of being, cut off from the earth as 
 their powers begin to bud. Among children of the 
 same common’ parent, espy one from its infancy which 
 at is fearfully snared by Satan, and in every part of its ca- 
 
 * Eccles. viii. 2. “ 
 
 ¥ 
 
 ® 
 
147 
 
 reer, madly pursuing a fatal course. Observe also, in 
 every stage of life, how many are deprived of their rea- 
 son, and the noblest attributes of our frame, without re- 
 sorting to any culpableness of theirown. And consider 
 too, as decisive of the point to be illustrated, how large 
 a portion of the species are strangers to. the work of sal- 
 vation ; and of them who hear the gracious tidings, 
 how many in like manner, are disabled from attending 
 on, or, are wholly deprived of the established means of 
 restoration by a Redeemer. And in all these dispen- 
 sations of the Eternal hand, it is hard to see the equity 
 of the plan, without a due regard, and serious admission 
 of an individual share in the desert of the first delin- 
 quency.* 
 
 Yet, if any persist in decrying the connexion, or evi- 
 dence frem respect to the actual dispensations of Provi- 
 dence, passing by other particulars, I turn merely for a 
 moment, as well as fit elucidation to the curse falling 
 on the earth for man’s sake. Itis given in this man- 
 ner: Cursed is the ground for thy sake.} Its import 
 plainly, the same asin Deuteronomy: Cursed shalt thou 
 
 *Itis plain and evident, from facts; that Adam was considered and 
 dealt with under the capacity of a public head, and that death, natural, 
 spiritual, and eternal, were included in the threatening ; for all his pos- 
 terity are evidently dealt with as if that had been the case. ‘They are 
 born spiritually dead, as has been proved in the former discourse.— 
 They are evidently liable to natural death, as soon as they are born 
 And if they die and go into eternity with their native temper, they must 
 necessarily be miserable in being what they are, unlike to God, and in- 
 capable ofthe enjoyment of him, and contrary to him. And God must 
 necessarily look upon them with everlasting abhorrence; for he can- 
 not but abhor creatures whose tempers are contrary to him: so that 
 
 here is eternal death; and all in consequence of Adam first sin.—Bel- 
 damy. 
 
 eaten. site 17. & 
 
} - yr, 
 §- 
 | * /* 148 
 
 be in the feld.* And considering that prior to a sweep-~ 
 ing deluge, it was felt to be a painful verity;+ and from 
 that day to this, in its nearer and remote consequences, 
 is connected with a most dreadful waste of human ex- 
 
 _ to dispose of the fact, on a principle that will bear the 
 test of fair examination. If he says, in opposition to 
 # our belief, that this and other evils, as they are thought, 
 coming on the first pair; must be viewed, not as an 
 
 . exhibition of punitive justice, but rather, as the com- 
 passions of a reconciled Being; I then inquire—if it 
 be indeed characteristic of Christ’s kingdom and the ad- 
 mirable provision of the gospel, to hold out unspeakable 
 blessings, dictated piteously, and dispensed by a gra- 
 cious hand, as coming to mankind in this manner: not 
 only by a settled constitution, as it were, but what is 
 more—denounced upon them literally with the formal- 
 ity of a sentence !—If this be a usage of the sacred 
 penmea, it has escaped our observation. And [ shall 
 acquiesce in the impression of Jonathan Edwards, what- 
 
 . ever may appear, that it is a style of address which sa- 
 vors little of the grace of God that bringeth salvation ; 
 ¢ “or, the vital spirit of that word, in which the blessings 
 of the Messiah’s reign, are kindly urged upon the ac- 
 
 ceptance of our dying race. 
 4. Fourthly. It is objected with an air of plausibil- 
 ity to the imputation of Adam’s sin, that “his posterity 
 rg not subscribe the stipulations of ‘the covenant I con- 
 template : therefore, it must be unjust, to require them 
 individually to abide oy the consequences of its viola- 
 tion.” : 
 * Deut. xxvii. 16, ¢ Gen. vy. 22. ¥ 
 
 * istence and happiness ; I ask en opposer of imputation: 
 
 Re 
 
 * 
 
7 
 
 149 
 
 In regard to a covenant made with an individual, 
 which is binding on his posterity, the equity and moral 
 fitness of it, in the case of our natural Head, has already 
 been discussed. Some proof, however, corroborative 
 
 of its fairness, may be drawn particularly from the na- — 
 
 ture of covenants, I think, which are presented to no- 
 
 tice in the sacred volume, and that involve in our ap- 
 
 prehension the same leading characteristics. | 
 In relation, for instance, to the covenant made ‘with 
 
 Abraham, and recorded in the 17th of Genesis—it in- 
 
 volves every principle I have insisted upon: especially 
 the right of God to intimate, anda prerogative of parents 
 to bind their posterity to a personal act, For the cove- 
 nant that God made with the patriarch, was made not 
 only with Abram, but with his offspring or seed after 
 him.* His unborn descendants were embraced in the 
 stipulations of the charter. And as the direct conse- 
 quence of it, we are informed truly that the man child, 
 which was not circumcised on the eighth day, was con- 
 sidered to be a violator of its terms. With regard to an 
 offence therefore, if that be the case, it should certainly ° 
 have incurred in some fashion: and in respect to ‘the 
 penal consequences of it, it can hardly admit of more 
 than one aspect, if explained merely with an eye to 
 Scripture-phraseology. As it is. written, and was de- 
 signed undoubtedly for a practical use: The uncircum- 
 cised man child, whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumci- 
 sed, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath 
 BROKEN my covenant.t It will certainly occur at first 
 sight, that whatever is the precise nature of this exci- 
 sion, it cannot affect the principle, for which it is addu- 
 ced in the present relation: 
 * Verse 7. } Verse 14, e Pool’s Synopsis in Loc. Pi 
 ¥ 13” | er, 
 
 * 
 % 7 . 
 
150 
 But leaving out at this time, what may be termed « 
 
 covenant transaction. between parties, there is striking 
 proof in the Scripture to justify the fact—of one man’s 
 
 being treated in law-reckoning, in given circumstances, 
 
 as though he had incurred the offence of another. And 
 
 _ perhaps a satisfactory illustration of it, is taken from the 
 
 dispensation of God toward private families. I have in 
 mind households, dealt with after the manner, occurring 
 in the instances of Achan, Saul, Jeroboam, Baasha, Ahab 
 and some others. Where the parent not only, was a 
 sufferer for his own fault, but in a more exemplary man- 
 ner, his natural and unoffending offspring. 
 
 If we have respect to the very cases referred to, that 
 of Jeroboam, perhaps, is invested with peculiar interest. 
 It is so, as a striking demonstration of displeasure against 
 sin. Foratthe expiration of twenty-four years, from the 
 time of settingtup the calves in Dan and Bethel, he re- 
 ceived fully that recompense of error which is meet. 
 And the measure was a painful one. All his natural 
 posterity, according to the saying of Ahijah, part of 
 
 “ which were unborn at the utterance of it, were perpetu- 
 
 ally cut off from the face of the earth. And in regard 
 toa ease, so decisively traced in the sacred history; even 
 made the pattern of most terrible acts of retributive ven- 
 geance ; it is not only vain, but, as I verily think, an 
 outrage on common sense, to speak of it, as dictated 
 purely by the tender mercy of our God. Nothing can 
 “be more evident, than it was not so considered by saints 
 in that age of the world; either indeed, in its bearing 
 on Jeroboam, or, upon the welfare of his family. And 
 though some have aimed lately to convince us, that all 
 this pain and deprivation came on his posterity, solely as 
 his punishment, not theirs, it cannot affect the main 
 
 a 
 
151 
 
 point at issue. Not to say that he died himself, a very 
 impresssive circumstance, before the threatening was 
 completely asserted, the principle remains unimpaired. 
 And it appears so in an affecting manner. Forallowing 
 the fact, (which shall not be disputed,) that the sufier- 
 ing of the children was a punishment to himself, decides 
 a point, viz., that under the moral government of God, 
 it is no singular case, that the ill-desert of one agent is 
 fully realized in the experience of another. ‘And if that 
 shall be supposed, whatever is doubted, is comparatively 
 irrelevant: for though we make a distinction in regard 
 to punishment, between its matter and publication, it is 
 the former, no doubt, that makes the grand trouble in 
 vindicating the ways of God to man. And in the in- 
 stance of Jeroboam, as far as the fate of his household is 
 considered, in whatever light it is viewed ; or, however 
 softened down by the name of misfortune, calamity, or 
 even fatherly anger—is very immaterial. The main 
 feature is still the same: that one person actually en- 
 dures the legal consequences of another’s transgression ; 
 and in circumstances less happy, it appears, than can 
 reasonably be pretended in respect to @ part in the apos- 
 tacy, as flowing primarily through a proper relation to 
 an acknowledged representative. 
 
 If the principle, therefore, on which the fact of impu- 
 tation is built, is elucidated in cases analogous: if the 
 grand point, the infliction of misery without personal ill 
 desert, is clearly manifested : it may serve, at least, in 
 regard to its sacred origin, to vindicate the doctrine avow- 
 ed, from what is most plainly an unhallowed perversion. 
 5. Again. It is objected to the sentiment advanced, 
 that ‘we are not required in the scriptures to repent of 
 
 ¢ 
 
 2 
 iia « a 
 a 
 co EI Nig 
 = Sh ; : fee 
 
 2 li ee ane * 
 
‘at 
 
 152 
 
 Adam’s sin: and we cannot, therefore, be thought to 
 have an interest in the proper desert of that iniquity.” 
 With regard to any sorrow for that sin, as involving a 
 charge of personal trespass, the very thought, is not only 
 foreign to my heart, but I know nota judicious Calvinist 
 
 on earth, that ever adopted the invidious belief. On 
 
 the contrary, it is strenuously affirmed, in respect to our 
 fellowship in that matter, that there is no consciousness 
 of personal aberration: on no pretence whatever, is 
 there any transfer of guilt before our Maker. So far 
 from that, the very notion of it, as I fully intimated, is 
 utterly at war with the nature of the doctrine inculcated ; 
 and manifestly so, in the single circumstance, of its be- 
 ing founded mainly, not ona natural, but upon a fede- 
 ral relation to the great progenitor of our fallen race. 
 But though a consciousness of sinning be peculiar to 
 the soul of our representative, we are not on that ground 
 uninterested observers of his folly. As his own off- 
 spring, embraced in a settlement of some description, 
 and sustaining a relation to him, we share the painful 
 consequence of the act: and instead of pleading a singu- 
 lar indifference to ity there is no earthly reason imagina- 
 ble, why we ought not, rather, to mourn the dreadful 
 character of that deed. And if you inquire, what is the 
 nature of the lamentation, that we should exhibit in re- 
 gard to it, I answer then, it is a real and holy grief. It 
 is such, to employ a scriptural incident, in explanation, 
 qs the saints at Corinth displayed about the incestuous 
 person ; ; & Case, you are aware, strongly marked—for 
 the consequences of whose conduct were suited to bring 
 reproach, if not to inflict a lasting injury on them all.* 
 And such being its character, I could urge, that it is pre- 
 *IL. Cor. vii. 12, 
 
 Hy 4 mr 
 4 
 
 = 
 
i » wail 
 fs 
 i 
 
 a a Ee, ne a 
 
 ee eee ee ee 
 
 153 
 
 cisely the same which'a people manifest in a public ca- 
 pacity, when they bewail with fasting the sins of rulers ; 
 and earnestly deprecate the judgments of Heaven, just 
 ready to be scattered upon a land, that is bleeding under 
 a fatal prostration of moral principle. 
 
 Such then, is the sorrow, and these the emotions that 
 should arise in the heart, in view of the guilt contracted 
 by the first man. It is simply a genuine emotion—an 
 unaffected expression of pity and deep self-abasement— 
 marked by a disposition to justify the ways of God, and 
 a simple desire that it may be improved to our good. 
 And this isthe sum of it. Any thing more, as implying 
 personal aberration, is as inconsistent with the doctrine 
 of imputation, in other aspects, as in the point of suppo- 
 sed connexion with Adam. For if that repentance, 
 which is marked by self-accusation, be implied in this 
 instance ; undoubtedly, the imputation of our sins to 
 Christ, would require that he repent of them in like 
 manner: nay more—it must follow on the same princi- 
 ple, that his perfect obedience, set to our account in the 
 point of acceptance with God, would allow us to cherish 
 a feeling of self-delight, as though by our own goodness 
 we had secured the inestimable blessing. For the prin- 
 ciples of transfer are the same in either case ; and none 
 will assert an opinion, I imagine, that is so foreign from 
 the light of sound reason, and utterly at war, with every 
 dictate of a pure and sanctified heart. 
 
 6. I will only add, therefore, in the last place: an 
 objection is often urged against the doctrine of imputa- 
 tion, that in my view, should never fall from the lips of 
 a dying man, viz., ‘‘ Were I in the place-of my first pa- 
 rent, or had a similar trial, I could not have disobeyed 
 the command of God as he did.” For on what ground, 
 
 =? 
 
 , *. sa 
 
oo ee ee 
 
 er a ell 
 
 154 
 
 it is retorted, is the assertion made, or deserving a mo- 
 ment’s respect from a serious inquirer after truth ? 
 
 If the natural offspring of Adam, instead of a respon- 
 sible relation to him, had been tried merely in.a person- 
 al reckoning ; they had possessed, in the premises, the 
 same advantages, or chance of standing and falling that 
 he did: and as far as their state therefore is considered, 
 it had been precisely the same thing. If they stood, 
 well ; or, if they fell, there is no disparity in the case : 
 the same impunity the one could flatter himself with, is 
 all the other can claim on that hypothesis. And while 
 it cannot be made out, that God dealt unfairly with our 
 first parents in regard to the requirement /he laid upon 
 them ; or, any grace he withheld or bestowed in the 
 matter; the objection itself, so far from meriting re- 
 spect, is a base insinuation, that the administration of 
 the Almighty in a particular instance was partial and 
 oppressive. 
 
 Besides: there is not only a slur cast on the histori- 
 cal fact respecting the trial in the garden, but the ex- 
 ception wears an uncomfortable aspect, in regard to any 
 trial whatever, touching plain truth, that our race are 
 favored with, in the circumstances of their stay in this 
 world. With respect to that point, I can only insist 
 upon it—ifit be the economy of the Most High, that a 
 probation be enjoyed in some manner—it is capable of 
 proof, that a chance of securing life in the person of Ad- 
 am, was infinitely greater, than in any manner we be- 
 gin to exercise a moral agency upon earth. As some 
 have insisted on the topic, or the advantage of an in- 
 terest in representative faithfulness—and the fact is in- 
 disputable: The first man was created in the full per- 
 fection of our nature. He possessed all splritual gifts 
 
, 
 
 a ee 
 
 . 
 
 155 
 
 and opportunities. With clear views of truth, and of 
 good and ill-desert, motives of superior weight, as con- 
 cerned with his own part in the event, urged him to ex- 
 act compliance with the divine will. And what can 
 never eseape your recollection, in a view of his outward 
 state—as adepraved stock were not then upon the 
 stage, he was not impeded, by the prevailing and accur- 
 sed influence of their corrupt conversation. 
 
 On the contrary, how unspeakably remote from this 
 description is the case of his offspring, when they begin 
 to act their own parts as capable agents. Ushered into 
 the world with much natural infirmity, and constant li- 
 ableness to death itself: deriving from a common stock, 
 as we shall soon prove, a morally impure and corrupt 
 nature: beset on every side by the fatal influences of 
 the flesh, the world, and of the devil :—and in the judg- 
 ment of all serious christians, laboring under a disability 
 of some kind that will secure the certainty of sinning, 
 and that may be relied upon in the outset—it verily ap- 
 
 ‘pears, that no parallel can exist in the cases in question. 
 
 And that any one, who could prefer a trial in a predica- 
 ment so inauspicious to a representative standing ih our 
 forefather, must labor under a physical weakness of 
 weighing evidence, or appreciating sober fact: for none 
 I shall presume, ever imagined, that if the result of that 
 trial had turned out actually the reverse of what it did, 
 that any child of a corrupt extraction, had been found to 
 complain of the spirit of that constitution. 
 
 Such are the objections commonly urged against an — 
 
 imputation of the first sin ; and reiterated with renew- 
 ed ardor against a sentiment, which I think, is already 
 established by evidence of an unanswerable deserip- 
 
— ee 
 
 156 
 
 tion.* And with the entire conviction in the attention 
 I have paid them, I close what is briefly laid be- 
 fore you, with merely adding: That the dialect em- 
 ployed in my remark, as involving a federal sameness, 
 crime and punishment, is not only correct in principle, 
 but on no account whatever should be wholly discar- 
 ded. | 
 
 An argument to this effect is evidently involved in 
 the discussion I have passed through. It arises from 
 the fact, as relating to that point, that it not only agrees 
 with the style of corporate bodies, but you will bear in 
 
 *Perhaps this is the consideration which most commonly first leads 
 poor sinners to see that they do actually lie under the cuilt of Adam’s 
 firstsin; and that their ruin thence took its rise, viz.. their finding, by 
 
 experience, when the Spirit of God brings home the law, and awakens 
 
 conscience, that they are, by nature dead in trespasses and sins; for now 
 no conclusion can be more natural than that they are, by nature, chil- 
 dren of wrath, And this will naturally lead them to inquire, whence 
 this has come to pass? and they will puesently find the Scripture express 
 and plain in it, that by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners ; 
 and by the offence of one, judgment came upon all men to condemnation : 
 and their own experience will give them the most natural comment upon 
 the words, while they feel themselves to be, by nature, dead in sin, and 
 exposed to eternal ruin, 
 
 But until men are awakened, at least to some sense of their natural 
 corruption, they are commonly very blind and deaf to all the Scripture 
 says about this matter. It ishard to make men believe contrary to their 
 ownexperience ; to make them believe that they fell in Adam, when 
 they do not feel that they are, by nature, fallen creatures. ‘Let the 
 Scripture speak ever so plain, yet they cannot believe that it means as it 
 says. It must mean, they think, something else. The best method | 
 therefore, to convince sinners of the doctrine of original (imputed) sin, 
 
 ‘and to silence all their cavils, is to open the true meaning of the moral 
 ? Pp £ 
 
 /aw, and shew them their native depravity. This is the method which 
 God takes inthe Bible, He says but little about Adam’s first sin, bu, 
 says much to shewus what we really are, as knowing that. if we are 
 but once convinced of our native corruption, afew words are sufficient 
 to shew us whence our ruin originally took its rise. —Bellamy. 
 
 I 
 
157 
 
 memory, is certainly warranted by the freedom of the 
 holy penmen. And employed on various occasions, as 
 in Scripture, where the leading views are unquestion- 
 ably the same, so far from discarding, I think that we 
 should conscientiously retain it; and in respect to our 
 brethren, who dissent from us, may reply, that the alle- 
 gation is vain, viz., “‘ No matter what becomes of mere 
 expression, if the thing itself is fairly acknowledged.” 
 Not to say, that it is built on the unphilosophical base that 
 in ordinary use, words and ideas exert wholly an inde- 
 pendent influence, the assertion under any aspect, is 
 unsustained by experience, and is disowned by the result 
 of exact observation. For if any thing whatever is 
 learned by the effect of preaching, it must appear, that 
 this language is certainly adapted to answer an invalua- 
 ble purpose. To render prominent in the perception of 
 people the absolute connexion between sin and misery, 
 a consciousness of sinning and a share in the maladies 
 that certainly accrue from it: is wisely fitted to convey 
 to the understanding simple and elevated views of the 
 divine administration ; and what relates in the inspired 
 volume, and in their completest harmony to the justice 
 and mercy of the divine dispensations :—and if we are 
 not mistaken, it serves infinitely better than any other, 
 to discipline the mind to habits of serious examination ; 
 to a quicker conception of inspired truth ; and to a more 
 lively and patient descrimination of the ways and coun- 
 sels of the infinite One. 
 
 Nor can we think it less favorable, on the whole, to an 
 increase of vital piety. Not disparaging it in that light, 
 if we judge properly, its influence is peculiarly happy 
 in that respect. And the grand secret of it, may be 
 easily perceived. For the strain of doctrine which is 
 
cherished by this address, does certainly merit some re- 
 gard in one aspect: and that, I trust, can hardly have 
 escaped your attention. It is this: it encourages a re- 
 spect, for what are styled the severer graces. Not I 
 would intimate, at the expense of any of softer tempera- 
 
 ment. But while it is favorable to all the elements of 
 
 true holiness, I greatly wander, if its superior influence 
 is not felt, in producing in the heart, an hatred of all sin ; 
 in rendering God’s people averse to trampling upon the 
 authority of Christ; and very clearly, in exciting a re- 
 verence for the humane virtures—those crossing to our 
 carnal inclination—as the forgiveness of faults, self- 
 denied charity, the reparation of injuries and like things: 
 traits of character, as we are often admonished, feebly 
 displayed in this infatuated world: which are not per- 
 petuated, where a kind feeling is apparent, but through 
 a holy fear of God in the solemn relations of Legislator 
 and Judge. And without an awe impressed on the spi- 
 rit, which arises naturally, and is fostered by their daily 
 presence, religion can never exhibit on earth her celes- 
 tial purity; and we may easily discover, though re- 
 stricted to our immediate acquaintance, that there is very 
 little stability in the principles and aspect of the chris- 
 tian character. | 
 
 — 
 
&. 
 
 OF DEPRAVITY. 
 DISCOURSE VI. 
 
 John iii. vi—That which is born of the fleshis flesh. 
 
 In tracing the bearing of the apostacy on the state of 
 our guilty nace, with a due respect 4 the constitution 
 under which Adam was placed, we considered the first 
 sin, as imputed to us; or, the fearful interest that we 
 have, though certain relation to the latter, in the penal 
 effects flowing from its commission. 
 
 We shall next regard thé influence of it, considered 
 as inherent; not merely as a judicial dispensation, 
 which it manifestly is, but in the present attempt, as 
 embracing a charge of personal demerit ;—especially, a 
 nature morally diseased, derived to each individual of 
 the race in the way of ordinary generation. 
 
 In a more definite respect to what is offered on this 
 branch of the subject, a point of immeasurable impor- 
 tance in our day, I will state first, the view entertain- 
 ed of the position avowed: and then, confirm the doc- 
 trine I shall explain, by evidence derived principally 
 from the sacred scriptures. 
 
 First. I design to state clearly, the view entertained 
 of the sentiment adopted: or, what is declared of a na- 
 tare morally corrupt, derived through the medium of 
 ordinary descent. 
 
 Tn pursuing this aim, I refer barely, to the state of our 
 first parent at the creation. And with regard to that 
 topic, morally examined, it is judged consonant with 
 
* 160 
 
 Scripture, no less than sound reason, that he was ferrm- 
 ed ina state of perfect rectitude. That he was created 
 not only morally pure, but the purity of his nature cor- 
 responded with an umerring standard—the absolute 
 requirement of the decalogue: the spirit of a code, 
 which not only in the tenth precept, but in its vital and 
 extensive application, demands in the service of God, 
 the equal and perfect exercise of all our powers. [tis 
 conceived, in fine, that in harmony with the spirit of 
 that standard, our progenitor at his formatiofiy was sub- 
 jectwwely, in every thought and desire, as well as sense and 
 habitual deportment, vitally confirmed to the mora} 
 pleasure of the Creator.* : 
 , This freely admitted, we believe in like manner, and 
 in view of what has been suggested, that it is vastly im- 
 portant to conceive clearly of the nature of sin: and as 
 connected with a communion in the apostacy, that much 
 confusion may arise from lightly regarding this intimation: 
 If the inquiry is urged then—What is sin? A reply 
 is furnished by the-apostle John: Sin is the transgres~ 
 sion of the law. The word rendered « transgression,”’ 
 is @ compound term, taken literally, signifying withoui 
 law; or, that has the property of illegality. From the 
 ditinition of the sacred penmen, you perceive in rela- 
 tion to. its nature, that sin is formally a disagreement 
 with the divine law: a general fact, as you will perceive, 
 that in a due respect to this matter, embraces: sins of o- 
 mission as well as sins of commission: a statement too, 
 from which it naturally arises, that'there is properly, 
 but one standard of moral developement ; one measure, 
 I willintimate, of sin and holiness, considered as things 
 
 * See an admirable view of man’s primitive state in BERRY-sTREE'T 
 SeRmons.—Vol. I. p. 153, etseq. + Johniii. 4, 
 
16] 
 
 that are fairly opposed. And respecting those attri- 
 butes, viz., sin and holiness, though confessedly at va- 
 riance in a specific regard, the opposition between them. 
 is not that of things generically disagreeing ; not that for 
 instance of body and mind, fire and water and the like ; 
 or, things which have a real subsistence, and are wide- 
 ly distinct in their comprehensive relations. 
 
 This distinction then, being warranted by the pas- 
 sage, it follows that sin has no existence, but im a re- 
 lative respect to law; and cannot be viewed in the sight 
 of the Lawgiver himself, save merely, as conformity, or 
 non conformity with a rule of conduct. But held forth 
 in that light, the nature of it, itis very clear, mustbe con- 
 
 concerning its opposition to holiness, the chapcter of it, 
 is fitly shadowed forth in the eye of the law rather, by 
 the repugnance of light to darkness—of alth to sick- 
 ness—of a soil under a genial influency/bearing some- 
 thing good, and under the reverse n ing of that de- 
 scription. An idea, that is very ey of apprehension. 
 For in the spirit of the apostle’s ertion, you perceive 
 in regard to the metaphors pres ed, or, what is justly 
 opposed in them, that if the od be taken away, the 
 
 evil spoken of, in every ca immediately appears. A 
 
 representation, meanwhile ot designed in any manner, 
 
 to cloak the native defor ty of sin; but as concerned 
 with the loss of the ine image in Adam, and the 
 bearing of it upon hi atural seed, will assume in our 
 opinion a real and ‘nowledged importance. 
 
 And adverting /the divine image possessed by our 
 forefather, meay’S thereby, not so much his moral ca- 
 pacity, as his ritual perfection—all admit, that he was 
 
 deprived of the consequence of rebellion. By one 
 : 14* 
 
162 
 
 f 
 ime 
 
 act of disobedience he lost a perfection, which is properly 
 described by the phrase original righicousness. That at~ 
 tribute of a moral agent, which constitutes the image of 
 God in the heart, or what is implied in it—a faint sketch 
 of his intense and immaculate: purity. And whatever 
 there is figurative in the phraseology of it, by which a 
 holy nature is often styled an image ; it is readily ac- 
 knowledged, that in the breast of a dependent creature, 
 and in the sensible experience of it, it implies doubtless 
 a Variety of things. It denotes not only a correct spiritu- 
 ai apprehension of truth—but this again, Stix of 
 holy affection in the heart—and the whole accompanied 
 by & cotrespondent conduct, and visible manifestation of 
 their infltence on the whole character. And if this was 
 the image which was certainly lost by transgression, 
 particularly in the way of a judicial bereavement, you 
 can easily se in what manner, the nature of Adam, be-~ 
 came morally wrrupt before God. In virtue of a legal 
 infliction, his sol was made like the earth which is 
 cursed. He was “prived of communion with the Most 
 High, and any preserative careof his happiness. With- 
 out the pity of an almihty Father, nothing was required, 
 but the leaying him to smeself, and his nature must be- 
 come vile and unprincipsd before him. Without an 
 infusion of positive Wickedasgs, his heart must be sub- 
 ject to a most deteriorating-nfuence. As a mutable 
 being simply, and bereft of in-arq jNumination, the in- 
 ferior appetites of his frame wor seize the reins; and 
 blindfold, would urge him on fronone aot of iniquity to 
 another, until the day of almigh. venseance should 
 dawn upon his polluted, and justly “°lemned soul. A: 
 view of his situation, you will notice . 4, way, that 
 leaves no room for making God the WN or of sin: or 
 
linea 
 
 a 
 
 ee yer 
 
 SF ne ee 
 
 Et Se ee a ee ny 
 7 z 
 
 163 
 
 holden in equity for the consequences of it, to use a faint 
 simile, more than a sheriff is, for the offence of a prisoner, 
 who, through bare irritation, on being cut off from some 
 immunities, not by just countenance of the magistrate, 
 rises up against the arm, that deprives him of a desira~ 
 ble possession. 
 
 Now if it be inquired, what connexion there is be- 
 tween this statement and the subject of innate depravity, 
 you will perceive very soon. . In regard to the posterity 
 of seni it is supposed that they are born into the 
 world, in the state that he was himself, consequent on 
 rebelling.* ‘They possess the faculties, that is, of morat 
 agency, or capacity to love and serve God, forming a 
 bona-fide basis of moral duty, but not a habit of original 
 righteousness. And the ground on which they are de- 
 prived of the blessing, is the established fact, as was 
 said on the subject of imputation, that they sinned truly 
 in the person of a representative; and in virtue of that 
 relation, are ushered into the world, under the curse of 
 a covenant transaction. Yet, while this is carefully in- 
 sisted on, in respect to this defect, or loss of the superior 
 qualities that constitute a likeness of our Judge ; we do 
 not remark it, in the life of the new formed infant, as 
 involving a personal offence. This we have utterly de- 
 nied. Butit is viewed simply, as God’s holy displea- 
 sure against iniquity, and embraced unquestionably, in 
 the penal threatening denounced against our first parents. 
 
 _ But as we observed in connexion with the person of 
 Adam, so I may, in respect to his natural seed, that the 
 loss of God’s image is instantly, yea, inevitably followed 
 by a corruption of moral character. Something will 
 
 * Gen. v. 3. 
 
 — and begat ason in his own likeness, after his im- 
 age; and called his name Seth, 
 
 ———— ——- —_— = - Pe ee 
 
164 
 
 bear sway over the rational mind. © The legal desertion: 
 of any soul, must give way to the certain influence of 
 vile affection. And the time when this deterioration be- 
 gins, is undoubtedly the period of union between the 
 soul and body ; for then, an inceptive tendency to moral 
 evil, theoretically at least; pervades our situation: a 
 moral infirmity, arising not primarily, still less I think 
 wholly, as some will have it, from the relation of Jiesh to 
 
 spirit ; but more clearly, through an early deprivation of 
 
 that influence, by which the soul is safe, and its infant 
 energies are cherished: an effect, or process in fact, 
 could we thoroughly scan it, like what is displayed in 
 regard to the body; ora deprivation of the parts, flowing 
 purely from penal wrath, and manifested in an early, an 
 invariable tendency to actual disorder. A view of the 
 subject, I must think, that should be entirely satisfacto- 
 ry. For in regard to our spiritual part, it is generally 
 confessed, that as soon as we are capable of overt trans- 
 gression, we display an evil inclination; and one, in our 
 opinion, which cannot be accounted for, in the energy 
 of its influence, but in a single respect to the doctrine 
 of inherent and inborn depravity.* 
 
 *I say, an inceptive disposion to moral evil, exists in human nature, 
 from the moment of union between the soul and body. There is no- 
 thing whatever‘in the position, which is at war, with the purity of divine 
 agency. For in creating the soul of man, and forming the union con- 
 templated, God acts in a twofold relation; not merely as the Author 
 of being, or in a creative capacity; butas the Executor of an existing 
 compact. In performing the act, therefore, he creates the soul in the 
 body and not out of it: in the moment of doing it, it is united to its 
 partner, and forms immediately a child of our common ancestor: and 
 therefore, from the very dawn of existence, it sustains a relation toa 
 representative, in virtue of which, it is dealt with by just imputation 
 as a sinner. 
 
 On this plan, no difficulty arises from the fact, that God eannot cre- 
 ate the soul inherently vile. I grantit. Yet two things are here very 
 
Se ee, Seg 
 
 Se ee ee ee 
 
 165 we, 
 
 rae 
 And if the sentiment be established in your hearing, 
 that men are naturally depraved in the sight of God, it 
 is very certain, that whatever name be given to an evil 
 principle, or habit, it cannot affect its influence upon our 
 moral state. It is not unfrequently the case, and parti- 
 cularly at this day, that men of clear understanding, 
 adopt an incongruous address about it, and yet mean un- 
 doubtedly the same thing. And naming the principle, 
 from which the evil acts of a child proceed, I will ob- 
 serve, that we may designate it variously ; saying, as 
 thought suitable, that from its appearance in the world, 
 it is the sin of our nature, yea, that we are born in sin— 
 and leave it just there: or we may add more, if it be re- 
 ally advantageous, and say, that in our infantile state, sin 
 exists in affection, will, bias, propensity, peccability and 
 the like. It will come to the same thing, if I mistake 
 not, even in the perception of those who most freely ad- 
 mit them. For both as a punishment, and at the same 
 time, the consequence of the first offence, it is real. It 
 lays us under a sad disadvantage, in regard to moral ac- 
 ceptableness. And from the earliest discovery of its 
 deep rooted influence, we shall see in the most unex- 
 
 apparent. First: though not vile, as coming directly from the hand 
 of God, yet any purity it has, or is thought to have, must be merely 
 negative ; arising, that is, not from actual compliance with the require- 
 
 ments of law, which cannot be, by reason of. the inceptive inclination - 
 
 referred to. Itpossesses not therefore the attribute of original right 
 eousness. Again: there is no impropriety whatever, in speaking ci 
 the soulitself, as naturally depraved. Though in the order of nature, 
 philosophically speaking, ‘ts ereation must precede amoral defilement, 
 yet, in the order of time, and therefore of fit usage, it is absolutely no- 
 thing. And as one has well remarked, whatever difficulty we have in 
 allowing thatthe soul is strictly depraved by nature, that our corruption 
 at least is native, or coeval with our entrance in the world, may not 
 occasion a’ firm believer in the doctrine any reasonable ground of sus- 
 
 pion. & 
 
 a 
 
 sad 
 
er 166 
 ) at \ 
 
 ccptionable manner, before I have done with this topic, 
 that men are natively incited, and without a single ex- 
 ception, invariably prone, to transgress the revealed 
 pleasure of a moral Governor. * 
 
 * On the subject, from the Harmony of Confessions, to which I have 
 previously referred, I will give the followmg. 
 
 » 
 
 THE ConFrEssion or AuGSsBURG. t 
 
 “We mean by original sin, that which the holy fathers, and all of 
 sound judgment and learning in the church du so call, namely that 
 cuilt, whereby all that come into the world, are through Adam’s fall, 
 subject to God’s wrath and eternal death, and that very corruption of 
 man’s nature derived from Adam. And this corruption of man’s na- 
 
 ture comprehendeth, both the defect of original justice, integrity, or obe- 
 dience, and also concupiscence.”’ 
 
 Tor Larrer CONFESSION oF HELVETIA. 
 
 _ “We therefore acknowledge that original sin isin all men: we ac- 
 knowledge that all other sins, which Spring hereout, are both called, ’ 
 
 and are indeed sins, by what name soeyer they may be termed, whethi- 
 er mortal or venial,” &c, . 
 
 Tur FRexcH CoNrEssion, 
 
 “‘ We believe that all the offsprmg of Adam is infected with this con- 
 tagion, which we call original sin, that is, a stain spreading itself by 
 propagation, and not by imitation only, as the Pelagians thought, all 
 whose errors we do detest. Neither do we think it necessary to search 
 how this sin may be derived from one unto another,” *s 
 
 ARTICLES OF THE CrturcH or ENGLANp. 
 
 ‘* Original sin standeth not in the following of Adam (as the Pelagi- 
 ans do vainly talk:) but it is the fault and corruption of the nature of 
 every man, that naturally is engendered, of the offspring of Adam; 
 whereby man is very far gone from original righteousness, and is, of 
 bis own nature inclined to evil; so that the flesh’ Justeth always, con- 
 trary to the spirit: and therefore in every person born into this world, 
 it deserveth God’s wrath and damnation.” 
 
 THE CoNFESSION OF Brewers, 
 
 ‘‘ Now original sin, is a corruption of a whole nature, and an he- 
 reditary evil, wherewith even the very infants, in their mothers womb 
 
icy en 
 
 With this declaration of what is intended by ihe doe- 
 trine of inbred depravity, we shall establish the view 
 entertained of it, by an appeal to the sense of the holy 
 Oracles. And in a principal respect, to what is deriva- 
 ble from that source, in the present attempt, we shall 
 prove in the most direct manner, that our course on earth, 
 is begun with a nature morally tainted, and, by certain 
 
 implication, materially the worse for the sin of our natu-' 
 
 ral progenitor. 
 
 In the prosecution of this purpose, or what is learned 
 on the subject of remark from the volume of inspiration, 
 { shall name in the first place, the proper sense of the 
 
 are polluted: the which also, as a mostnoisome root, doth branch out 
 -most abundantly ali kind of sin in man; and is so filthy and abomina- 
 ble in the sight of God, that it alone is sufficient to the condemnation 
 of all mankind.” 
 
 THE Conression or BOHEMIA, OR THE WALDENSES. 
 
 “A second kind is original sin, naturally engendered in. us and he- 
 reditary, wherein we are all conceived and born into this world. ‘ Be- 
 hold,” saithDavid, Ps. Sist. ‘Iwas born in iniquity, and in sin hath 
 my mother conceived me.” And Paul, Ephes. 2d. ‘We are by na- 
 ture the children of wrath.” Let the force of this hereditary destruction 
 be acknowledged, and judged of by the guilt and fault,‘by our prone- 
 ness and declination, by our evil nature, and by the punishment which 
 is laid upon it.” 
 
 ARTICLES OF Dort., 
 
 “ And such as man was after the fall, such children also he begat: 
 namely, being corrupt, corrupt ones; corruption having been derived 
 from Adam to all his posterity, (Christ only excepted,) not by imitation, 
 as the Pelagians formerly would have it, but by the propagation of a 
 vicious nature, through the just judgment of God.” 
 
 Tse WastMinsTER CONFESSION. 
 
 “ By this sin, they fell from their original righteousness, and commu- 
 nion with God, and so became dead in sin, and wholly defiled im all the 
 faculties and parts of soul and body. 
 
 From this original corruption, whereby we are utterly indisposed,_ 
 
 | 
 
 ~~ = 
 
ae: ‘168 
 
 ‘ext. In an earnest conversation with Nicodemus, you 
 are aware, that it fell from the lips of Jesus. He says: 
 Thai which is born of the flesh is flesh. The entire de- 
 claration is familiar to you: That which is born of the 
 
 Jlesh is flesh ; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. 
 
 {n the exposition of what is immediately selected for 
 our teat, I remark in the first place: that by the birth 
 spoken of in the passage, as referable in any sense, to 
 soul and body both, cannot be intended the bare produc- 
 tion of human nature; or, state of man merely at his 
 birth, as consisting doubtless ofa sensitive and spiritual 
 nature. ‘T’his position, which is frequently taken up, is 
 
 disabled andmade opposite to all good, and wholly inclined to all evil, 
 do proceed all actual transgressions.” , 
 
 From able writers on the subject, the following is worthy of a notice. 
 
 “That little children have a negative virtue or innocence, in relation 
 to the positive acts and hurtful effects of vice, is no argument that they 
 have a corrupt nature within them: For let their nature be ever so cor- 
 rupt, yetsurely itis no wonder that they be not guilty of positive wick- 
 ed action, before they are capable of any moral action at all. A young 
 viper has a malignant nature, though incapable of doing a malignant 
 action, and at present appearing a harmless: creature.”—Edwards on 
 Crigunal Sin, p. 875.—More largely pp. 129, 138, 137. 
 
 “From all which, it isa plain matter of fact, that we are born into the 
 world entirely destitute of the moral i image of God: so certain as that 
 the moral image of God radically consists in such a temper, ond makes 
 it natural to have ‘such like views and dispositions; so certain we are 
 in fact born without it.”—Bellamy. ‘Works, vol.1 »p- 200. 
 
 : And that I may avoid handling the subject systematically, and te- 
 diously, I join together original and actual sin. Every one who isable 
 to understand what I say, is concerned in both: and indeed they are 
 inseparable the one from the other. . The deplorable wickedness in 
 which the world in general is overwhelmed, hath flowed in a continued 
 stream from the first sin of Adam; and the sinfulness of every person’s 
 practice, has the corruption of his nature as its fruitful source,” — With- 
 erspoons Works, vol, .1 p. 408. ‘ 
 
 “Tf mankind are born with neutral characters, not inclined either to 
 sood or evil, the difficulty will not be seriously lessened. In this ease, 
 
4 
 i 
 g 
 
 . oe 
 
 ci ae SS 
 
 a —_— 
 169 We 
 
 ‘atterly foreign from any purpose, which our Savior could 
 have had atthat interview. And what is equally plain, 
 the construction is fairly disproved, by a fixed impres- 
 sion of Nicodemus himself, viz., that the phrase “ born 
 of the spirit,” or what relates immediately to the soul, 
 occurring in the same breath with the text, implied in 
 our Savior’s mind a new, or second birth: one, that is, 
 in the condition of 2 sinful creature, as you are impres- 
 sed, by a single glance at the chapter, that in a very 
 Serious respect, was not only distin-t from, but that 
 might be very certainly contrasted with the other. 
 Again. We cannot speak of the birth in question, 
 a8 relating simply to the flesh; or which is the same, 
 denoting barely a quality, and then represent it as a thing 
 Sorn. To speak of it merely as an accident, and not as 
 a subject of the birth referred to, is not only inconsist~ 
 ent, as will appear, with the authorised use of the 
 
 men ought now to be as generally virtuous as sinful; because this char- 
 acter furnishes exactly the same probability of the prevalence of virtue, 
 asofsin. But no such equality has at any period of time existed.” 
 
 ‘* Uniform sin, proves uniform tendency to sin: for nothing more is 
 meant by tendency, in any case, but an aptitude in the nature of a thing, 
 to produce effects of a given kind With this meaning only in view, 
 we say, that it is the nature, or tendency, of an apple-tree to produce 
 apples; and of a fig-tree to produce figs. In the same manner we must, 
 T think, say, if we would say the ‘ruth that it is the tendency or nature 
 of the human heart to sin.’—Dwight. System of Theol. Ser 32. 
 
 “The best of men whose lives are recorded in holy scripture, have 
 always confessed and lamented the depravity of ‘their nature; and I 
 never knew a character wuly penitent, but he was convinced of it. It 
 is astrong presumption against the contrary doctrine, that the light- 
 minded and dissipated part of mankind are generally its advocates; 
 while the humble, the serious, and the godly, as generally ackuowl- 
 edge with the Apostle, that fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the 
 mind, they were dy mature, childron of wrath even as ethers,” —Fuller. 
 Works, vol. 4. p. 44. 
 
 15 
 
oe. 170 
 
 term; but it is obvious on a moment’s reflection, that 
 it clearly conveys a palpable absurdity. And it must 
 appear therefore, in any view which is taken of the 
 passage, that by the flesh spoken of, whatever be the 
 consequence in this instance, is intended the whole of 
 man’s nature; or that derived to us unquestionably, in 
 the established medium of propagating the race. 
 
 This being settled, the only point decisive in the ex- 
 position is merely the following: Does the term flesh, 
 as used by Christ, import a nature on our part, mor- 
 ally impure? Does it embrace, as elsewhere intimated, 
 and in a moral acceptation, all filthiness of the flesh and 
 spirit? We think it does; and shall aim to establish 
 that belief, by some conclusive evidence in respect to it. 
 
 ‘First. As there is nothing in the chapter, where the 
 text is found, that certainly debars the supposition, we 
 deem its common acceptation in the gospel, as convey- 
 ing that sense, presumptive proof in favor of its bearing 
 in the present instance. 
 
 Asa specimen of its ordinary use in the New Testa- 
 ment, I shall name simply the following. It is said: 
 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God: and 
 the reason is hinted in the connexion ;—because that 
 in me—a particular instance for a general fact—that is, 
 in my flesh, dwelleth no good thing.* Itis the same thing, 
 or a morally impure nature, of which the apostle speaks, 
 
 saying, The carnal (sukikos,) or fleshly mind, is enmity 
 against God, is not subject to the law of God, neither in- 
 deed can be.t It is the same also, on which he expa- 
 tiates, declaring that the works of the flesh are the follow- 
 ing, viz., adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, 
 idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, wrath, strife, sedi- 
 
 * Rom, vii, 8, and vii, 18. +Rom. vii. 7. 
 
ye 
 
 lca 
 
 171 * 
 
 fons, heresies and the like ;—which are immediately 
 opposed, to the fruits of the Spirit’s redeeming work 
 on the human heart.* It isthe flesh in a word, against 
 which we must wrestle manfully, as enlisted in a pain- 
 ful warfare ; and in the opposition we carry on to its 
 hurtful influence, should not give over, until it be crv- 
 cified with the affections and lusts.t 
 
 It is the very same, indeed, which is expressly term- 
 ed sinful in that impressive manner—“ For what the 
 law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, 
 God sending his own Son, in the likeness of sinful flesh, 
 and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh; that the right- 
 eousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk 
 not after the flesh but after the spirit."{ And though 
 the word is taken in a comprehensive bearing, it is naf- 
 urally explained if we keep in view, that the soul, as 
 the grand seat of moral disorder, is derived mediately 
 from the flesh: that a body of flesh exerts an inflence 
 on it, which is debasing, and that is too readily recipro- 
 cated: and likewise, that the body itself, is not only 
 the certain medium of extending that influence’ to oth- 
 ers, but is, in its own vileness, an outward and expres- 
 sive semblance of the very depravity that I am faintly 
 describing. — 
 
 Again. Presumptive proof derived from this source, 
 is materially strengthened by an antithesis, which is 
 truly suggested by the text. The whole assertion, re- 
 veals it plainly : That which is born of the flesh is flesh ; 
 and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. For if we 
 have judged properly, on a narrow inspection of it, an 
 opposition of a moral kind, is evidently couched in the 
 declaration of Christ. And to a mind, settled on the 
 
 * Gal. v. 19, 29, 21, 22: +Eph. vi. 12. Gal.v. 24. {Rom. viii. 3, 4. - 
 
; PH 6 
 
 * 
 
 > 
 
 nature of spiritual renovation, as requiring a higher 
 power, it cannot be difficult to name it precisely. The 
 import of it is clearly of this character: ‘ That as we 
 derive by ordinary descent a morally weak and defiled 
 nature, reminding us of our original, soit takes place, 
 
 by the agency of the Spirit, under a new constitution, 
 
 we inherit that called spirit, or spiritual: that is to say, 
 
 the soul considered as renewed, or made a partaker of 
 
 spiritual aliment; as you perceive, deriving its name 
 very properly from the almighty Spirit, in that respect, 
 im which it is formed anew by its influence. A view 
 
 of the passage, as Doddridge remarks, not only required _ 
 
 to discover the beauty of the antithesis, but in a near 
 respect to the sense—or distinction between flesh and 
 spirit, and the generation of either—that is necessary it 
 is evident, to vindicate the truth, er even discover the 
 propriety of the declaration itself. 
 
 And if this be the honest impression, produced by the 
 scope of the assertion, it is a fact, and one of paramount 
 importance, I shall think, that this is a common usage 
 with the sacred penmen ; forif that point be allowed 
 in regard to it, the meaning of the passage should be 
 considered as settléd. 
 
 In relation then, to the opposition between the flesh 
 and the spirit, as here developed, you discover it clearly 
 in instances of this nature: for example—it is said, that 
 the flesh lusteth against the spwit, and the spirit against 
 the flesh, and these are contrary, the one to the other, so 
 that ye cannot do the things that ye would.* Again: 
 Though we walk inihe flesh, we do not war after the flesh ; 
 or, are guided by principles that are altogether spiritualt 
 Likewise, in respect to the excommunicated person, 
 
 Gat weds + LeCor., = 72. 
 
OF en gD ca EOE Pe Ie een = 
 » ern = 
 
 who is cast out of the church by the authority of Jesus. 
 
 Christ—it is said expressly, that such an one is delivered 
 up to Satan for the destruction of the flesh.* Andin what 
 sense is that perdition to be taken? Does it mean mere- 
 
 ly, and without a qualifying clause, the destruction of 
 
 the body 2 or rather, of the sinful and fleshly control, 
 which sin, with the countenance of i it, exercises over all 
 the faculties of our being? With regard to that query, 
 it is fully replied to,in what immediately ensues ;—that 
 
 his spirit—his spirit or himself, may be saved in the day of 
 
 the Lord Jesus., 
 
 And though I seem to dwell on this tenis) conformed. 
 with this whole strain, I cannot but intimate, that the 
 use of the word natural by Paul, designates the same, 
 which is implied by our Savior in the term flesh. An 
 instance of it, appears in the first epistle to the Corin- 
 thians. He says: “The natural man receiveth not the 
 things of the Spirit of God, for they are. foolishness to 
 him: neither can he know them, because they are spi- 
 ritually discerned.”~ That is, a man by nature, is des- 
 titute of religion; he is blind, and is utterly unqualified 
 “or any spiritual work. But observe, the following chap- 
 ter opens in this manner. “And JI brethren could not 
 speak unto you, as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, 
 evenas unto babes in Christ :”? evidently implying, that 
 
 _ carnal and natural with the apostle, as relating to cha-~ 
 
 racter, are convertible distinctions. And toestablish the 
 point completely, that either, is opposed to the spirituality 
 of the gospel ; it is added in a verse or two, following: 
 in the chapter: “ For whereas there is among you en~ 
 vying and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and 
 walk as men?” orif you please, according to the princi- 
 “I. -Cor.v.5. +Chap.ii14, Chap. iii. 3, 
 15* 
 
 4 
 
 ei 
 
174 
 
 ples that influence our conduct in a natural and unre- 
 newed state ‘—This, it will appear, is in keeping with 
 
 what I have insisted on. And as corroborative proof, in 
 
 favor of a point, already secured, we are inclined to 
 think, that the sense of this important passage, is esta- 
 blished on a basis that ought not to be discarded. 
 
 Yet, if it were denied by any one, that this is a just 
 exposition of our Savior’s meaning, I would modestly 
 hope, that the moral aim of Christ, in his address to Ni- 
 codemus, might not leave in their souls the vestige of a 
 doubt. In relation to that point, as intimated already, 
 it was no part of his plan to inculcate views of general 
 interest, or even to explain to that man the philosophy 
 of grace. It was simply to lead an inquirer after truth, 
 one concerned for the welfare of his soul, and as appears 
 in the sequel, to very good purpose, to put his trust in 
 the Savior of sinners. And with an eye to that result, 
 it shall not be denied, that our Savior might labor to era- 
 dicate from his heart, an undue reliance on the state and 
 privileges peculiar to Judaism. But to explain his dis- 
 course merely, as some have done, on that principle, is 
 unauthorised. Itis manifestly so, if there were no other 
 circumstance than this—that it does not come up to, or 
 account in any manner for the use of the phrase, exactly 
 rendered, born again; will not respond to any view that 
 we may take of it, or the solemn strain, with which cur 
 divine Master urged it on the attention of that ruler. 
 And to refer the whole thing, as others are inclined, to 
 a reformation of conduct merely external, in my opinion, 
 is still less plausible. If that were the professed design 
 of Christ, we must all admit, that he chose a singular 
 strain, to convey the instruction required: and no won- 
 der that. Nicodemus, though a teacher himself by pro~ 
 
ie : 
 
 1%5 
 
 fession, was really lost in an immoveable fog !—But dis« 
 missing all such conjectures, if on the contrary, he 
 meant to teach plainly, asthe language does in the New 
 Testament, that the case of the man was alarming, and 
 that his guilty soul must be renewed by grace, all is 
 plain toour apprehension. On that supposition, making 
 the phrase “born again,” synonimous with godly re- 
 pentance, or importing a radical change’in the moral 
 taste, cur Savior was insisting on a point of acknowl- 
 edged importance. He urged a sentiment, and the only 
 one, I suppose, which naturally agrees with a fair expo- 
 sition of the text. And though foreign from the imagi- 
 nation of a Jew, and with a public teacher of religion, 
 could only be conversed upon by night, it was unques- 
 tionably, the very doctrine that Peter preached at the 
 Pentecost ; and a most distinguishing part of that gospel, 
 which in its transmission throughout the world, was 
 accused of turning it upside down; and what is equally 
 plain, in regard tothe most cultivated understand- 
 ings, was seen by sad experience, to be to the callous 
 
 Jew a stumbling block, and to the aspiring Greek fool- 
 
 ishness. 
 
 We infer, therefore, from the phraseology of the text, 
 as confirmed by the aim of our gracious Master, that the 
 assertion he made, viz., “‘ That which is born of the 
 flesh is flesh,” inculcates the belief—that mankind de- 
 rive by ordinary generation, a nature, that is morally de- 
 based and unholy in the sight of the infinite God. 
 
 But the same point, may be illustrated in a most: de- 
 cisive manner, by some reference to other passages of 
 Scripture. 
 
 I will call your attention, then, in pursuing my object, 
 toa declaration in the eighth chapter of Genesis. It is 
 
 ro 
 
ws 
 
 «176 
 
 this: Aad the Lord said in his heart I will not curse the 
 ground any more for man’s sake; for, the imagination of 
 mans heart is evil from his youth.* A fact is here as- 
 serted in regard to our race, soon after the deluge, which 
 has an important bearing, on our sense of native depra- 
 vity. But to take the complete force of it, I shall refer 
 to another declaration of the sixth chapter of Genesis, 
 and which has respect to a generation of mankind, that 
 were actually destroyed by that deluge. The latter in- 
 stance is this: And God saw that the wickedness of man 
 was great in the earth, and. that every imagination of the 
 thoughis of his heart was only evil coniinually.} 
 
 In the declaration of the 6th chapter, the entire unho- 
 liness of our race is. plainly insisted on. No form of 
 words could teach the fact, if it be not there, that they 
 “were all exceedingly depraved before God. Their 
 hearts, if we shall accredit the representation, were a 
 perfect sink of iniquity. And without resorting to an 
 hyperbole, which is very unjustifiable without palpable 
 cause, but merely observing, an affinity between the 
 soul, and what emanates from it; it is declared express- 
 ly, that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart, 
 yea, every figment of thought and desire, and a com- 
 plete tissue besides, if I may so speak, were evil and 
 unceasingly so in the sight of their Maker... A circum- 
 stance by the way of peculiar, nay, of unbounded inte- 
 rest in regard to those who were capable of aciual sin- 
 
 ning, in bringing upon them, in God’s righteous displea- 
 
 sure a most appalling dispensation. 
 But while this doctrine is susceptible of proof from. 
 
 the other testimony referred to, the passage in the eighth 
 
 chapter, conveys an additional intimation, viz., that the 
 
 *Verse 21. +Verse 5. 
 
 ' » 
 
 C3 5 
 < Me 
 
 — 
 
Ba nk ati Te 
 
 Pn Whi on 
 
 iT 
 
 depravity spoken of was a native property. It did not 
 exist merely in acquired habit, as some understand it, 
 butin respect to that, its sickening influence, was coeval 
 with their very existence upon earth. With that view, 
 it is naturally introduced, as a reason, why God would 
 certainly vary his proceeding hereafter: and though 
 wickedness should prevail, as before, that he would 
 
 not visit it, in the same desolating manner. And view~ 
 
 ing the corruption of our nature as inbred and invete- 
 rate, surely, that sense of the passage is relevant ; and if 
 allowed, must have an important bearing on the theme 
 of our meditation. The words are plain: And the 
 Lord said in his heart I will not curse the ground any 
 more for man’s sake; or, with a chief respect to pre- 
 sumptuous folly. And why not? it is replied then—for 
 the imagination of nan’s heart is evil from his youth. 
 
 And in regard to the passage, as conveying the sense, 
 I have supposed, be it suggested, that the term man is 
 not only generic, asin the other case, but I may add, in 
 
 _ relation to naar—in our version translated ‘ youth”— 
 
 that it has a certain allusion to the very commencement 
 of buman life; and embraces clearly, not only the days 
 of childhood, but looks back the whole duration, elaps- 
 ing from the moment of our personal entrance in the 
 world. It is used observably in the Old Testament, not 
 only of a youth, but likewise of a mere bade, or suck- 
 ling. And as spoken of an infant in that period of exist- 
 ence, you may call to mind, it is applied to Moses, but 
 a few days old ;* also, to Sampson, Samuel, Isaiah, and 
 any others, during that period of-their stay upon the 
 earth.| And undoubtedly, if any thing in Hebrew 
 
 * Ex, ii. 6. +Judges xiii, 5. ISam,i.22. Isaiah vil. 16, UU Kings 
 w 14, 
 
 ~~ tear > 
 
 os 
 
eee aed 
 
 ee 
 
 4 a hs 
 
 usage, or any other form of speech imaginable, in the 
 way of a date, can teach the sentiment of innate depra- 
 vity, the evidence derived from this passage, must appear 
 on the whole to be preeminently satisfactory. 
 
 This being disposed of, a testimony equally pertinent, 
 in its bearing on my design, is found in the 14th chap- 
 terof Job. Itis this: Who can bring a elean thing out 
 of an unclean? Not one.* 
 
 The first member of the passage I have named, im- 
 plies something desirable in itself, but which cannot be 
 performed however, or at least with extreme difficulty. 
 The latter part of it teaches, that by no feasible method 
 whatever, can the thing itself be certainly attained. 
 
 Now if the question arise, what is that point desira- 
 ble in itself, it is said, to bring a “clean thing out of an 
 unclean.” And if it be asked without delay, what 
 sense we shall ascribe to the term “ clean,” I answez 
 plainly—moral purity. And in respect to the sense of 
 it, as it has a decisive influence, I shall endeavor to 
 evince it, by a number of important suggestions. __ 
 
 First. It is the immediate object of Job in the place, 
 and what precedes it in that chapter to, deprecate the 
 divine displeasure against sin. And respecting himself, 
 as the subject of such prayer, without palliating his own 
 errors, to furnish an argument at the mercy seat, suita- 
 ble in itself, why God should regard his case with a 
 lenient hand. His address relates therefore to good and 
 ill desert: without any misapprehension, to something 
 in accountable agents, that involves moral worth or un- 
 
 amiableness, in the sight ofthe Creator. Again: that by 
 
 the word “ clean,” is intended what is urged, I will sug- 
 gest in the way of explanation, that the ideas of pure 
 
 * Verse 4. + Heb, on. 
 
179 
 
 and just, cf cleanliness and righteousness, are often in- 
 terchanged by Job ; and from the manner in which they 
 occur, it can easily be shewn, that they are certainly 
 used, as synonymous. In proof of the intimation, I will 
 adduce an instance or two, and you may discover in a 
 moment, their bearing on the topic before us. It is said 
 then: ‘ What is man that he should be clean? and he 
 which is born of a woman,, that he should be right- 
 eous 2* Again: ‘Tam clean without transgression, I 
 am innocent; neither is there iniquity in me.’> Fur- 
 thermore : ‘“‘ How then can man be justified with God ? 
 or how can he be clean, that is born of a woman.’’t 
 This is its use by that eminent patriarch. And so far 
 as it may go, I could add by the way—that it is also 
 corroborated, by a very familiar acceptation of it in the 
 tender effusions of David.§ 
 
 Again. If moral purity be intended by this word, 
 what, it may be asked, is the proper aim of the verb to 
 
 bring ?/| As concerned with its bearing on native de- | 
 
 pravity, if it be replied, (taken in the utmost latitude of 
 it,) that 1t means simply, Who can bring, or present rath- 
 er, a fellow creature before God that is sinlessly perfect, 
 I shall certainly demur ; for f cannot think, thatit agrees 
 with the aim of the patriarch. As respects that allu- 
 sion, it is hardly a probable fact, that sense of it being 
 called up, that he had earnestly started any thing of the 
 kind. . The man who disowned perfection himself, with 
 instinctive fear of the attempt ; and who knew, as much 
 as any other, of the deceitfulness of every heart; can 
 
 * Chap. xv. 14, + Chap. xxxiii. 9, {Chap. xxv. 4. § Psalms xii. 
 6. xix. 19. li. 7,10. Compare too Prov. xv. 26. xx. 9. xxx, 12, 
 § Heb. jn: signifying primarily, to give, lay, place, allow, yield or give 
 fozth, &c. 
 
 “te 
 
noe 
 
 180 
 
 hardly be thought, more than David had done—espe- 
 cially, when his thoughts were fixed on himself and upon 
 his own prospects, to have awakened the query at ail: 
 and what is more, to-have debated it feelingly—by in- 
 terrogationand strong negation too—though it might no 
 doubt, in regard to a fit plea, have had some remote re- 
 lation to his particular design. 
 
 And if that be allowed, which I think, can hardly be 
 disproved, we shall give the clause a very different turn. 
 And according to a received impression, no less than 
 correct usage, it refers to a nature morally vicious ; and 
 with a qualified respect, to its attainment in the way of 
 ordinary generation. And ref-rring to a nature, not 
 only, as morally diseased, but as early a subject of de- 
 pravation, the words of Job are very appropriate. No- 
 thing could make it plainer, I imagine, to the weakest 
 apprehension. Under an acute sense of his own vile- 
 ness, and ineffectual endeavors after greater holiness, 
 
 he looks painfully within ; and he finds in his heart a 
 1 s “ ? 
 
 deeply-seated, and what certainly appeared to him, an 
 
 innate propensity to sinful practice. It was something: 
 
 which caused him exquisite pain, for it was a point of 
 distinct consideration. And with respect to himself, 
 viewing it as a great calamity, no less than a sin, in re~ 
 gard to its derivation however, unattended by actual 
 blameworthiness, he would fain hope, that God might 
 
 not be severe against him, but that his case under that 
 
 ee might excite his most tender commiseration. A 
 vie. of the passage, and the only one, it will be seen, 
 that falls 3 in with the absorbing nature, and the accu- 
 mulating #nterest, which are impressively displayed to 
 our notice, and that certainly characterises the supplica~ 
 tory strain of Job from the very commencement of the 
 chapter. 
 
 | 
 
18] 
 
 And with this exposition of the place, in its bearing 
 on my purpose, I will barely note, that to what ‘is urg- 
 ed agrees well the exclusive importance attached 
 to the phrase or circumstance, born of a woman.* For 
 as all know, that there is but one mode of gaining a per- 
 sonal existence on earth, it follows inevitably—in con- 
 nexion with a moral taint or corruption of heart—that 
 the uncleanness which is made to hang decisively on 
 the act, is improperly reiterated in this manner; or held 
 out by Job himself in that very light, if it have no in- 
 fluence at all, as some pretend in our day, in bringing 
 about the disparagement in question. 
 
 The passage therefore, if I am not mistaken, as the 
 one in Genesis, makes a propensity to sin coentaneous 
 with our introduction into the world. 
 
 ‘Another testimony of unanswerable force, I shall de- 
 rive from the fifty-first Psalm: and I will invite your 
 serious attention, to its proper bearing on the subject of 
 inquiry. | 
 
 The Scripture contemplated, is a declaration of the 
 Hebrew monarch. He says: Behold I was shapen in 
 iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.t A pas- 
 sage of inspiration, which is generally admitted by se- 
 rious expositors, to teach the doctrine of original sin. 
 And relating to our nature in any manner as inherently 
 defiled, an unprejudiced mind might well exclaim, by 
 what plausible trick can its seeming relation to that 
 thing be explained away ! 
 
 But in destroying its influence, on our views of mor- 
 al depravity, some meagre evasion of its bearing is de- 
 serving, at least, a transient respect. 
 
 I remark then, that by the “ iniquity”? and “sin” re- 
 
 * Chap. xv. 14, xxiv. 5. + Verse 5. 
 
 f 16 
 
182 
 
 ferred to in the passage, some insinuate thoughts of the 
 psalmist, in regard ton illegality of birth ;, and such as 
 would seem particularly, to reflect on the purity and cor- 
 rect deportment of his mother. But not to say, that a 
 position of et nature should not be@ashly taken up, it 
 must seem in this instance to be an unnecessary, if not 
 in plain truth, a free and wholly an infamous conjecture. 
 In justice to his mother’s character, it is made in the face 
 of clearest presumption to the contrary ; of proof, that 
 presents her in an attractive light, as a child of the living 
 God ; and that warranted her own son, in pleading with 
 unequalled ardor, his relation to such afemale. He speaks 
 
 of her, you will call to mind, under this aspect ; saying. 
 ‘7 am thy servant, and the son of thy handmaid; thou ~ 
 
 hast loosed my bonds.”* And in another place: “‘O 
 turn unto me and have mercy upon me; give thy 
 strength unto thy servant, and save the son of thine 
 handmaid.”y; And as this view'of the passage, cannot 
 _with propriety be urged, it sometimes happens, that the 
 “advocates of it dispense with it entirely. 
 
 But when they have done so, what is the main shift,’ 
 
 for doing away its light, in favor of original corruption ° 
 It is common then to object to our belief, that by the 
 “ sin’? and “¢iniguity”’ spoken of, may be intended, as by 
 a figure, the cause being placed for the effect, barely, 
 the various ills, to which we are naturally exposed in this 
 depraved world. But as no such use of the terms, sin 
 or iniquity is intimated in the context, or by the spirit 
 of the whole psalm; I may declare, what is easily made 
 evident—that it is uncommon in Scripture, to propose 
 them in that light, unless they are actually, a legal mani- 
 festation of hatred toward transgression. Itis not agree- 
 * Psalm lxxxvi. 16, + Psalm cxvi. 16. 
 
 SS 
 
183 
 
 able to the style of the holy penman, where they occur 
 in the very relation suggested. A view of the passage, 
 
 as concerned with the psalmist himself, that in the room 
 of doing away original sin, will plainly serve to cherish, 
 
 if not to establish fully, the views we have ‘adopted re- 
 
 specting it, both as imputed and innate. 
 
 It remains then, that the phraseology observed, have 
 respect to his own experience ; to the,moral ‘state and 
 relations of David himself. And what beating it has in 
 a specilic, and especially, a personal interest in 1 its,aim, is 
 very clearly revealed to us, on his own part. He avers: 
 “Behold I was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did my 
 mother conceive me.”* And with respect to the pas- 
 sage, I can only insist, that if the psalmist inculcates any 
 thing; he teaches doubtless, that his whole frame, in the 
 
 material of it, was in a fallen and ruined state. That 
 
 from its first coherence, a death of some sort began to 
 prey, not only on the body ; ‘but what was more fearfully 
 true, upon its guilty and spiritual inhabitant. Nor has 
 any thing imaginable been suggested on the topic, if | 
 err not, which may serve to impugn that exposition of its 
 import. For in whatever manner the original be trans- 
 lated, or the sense of it critically viewed, it certainly 
 
 embraces—as any scholar in the Hebrew tongue mus‘ 
 
 admit, and none can deny on the closestinspection—the 
 whole duration, that is naturally taken up, in the forma- 
 tion and nativity of our being. 
 
 I may also subjoin, that no possible motive could have 
 induced him to name these circumstances, except a more 
 humble confession of his sinfulness before God. It is 
 
 the only thing, which invited his regard. It is that 
 
 * ¢ With a sinfnl nature (;»y) Iwas born, yea, even in my mother’s 
 womb I was possessed of it.’”— Storr and Flatt. 
 
 Tod 
 
 » -~ 
 
184 
 
 alone, which had completely absorbed his soul. And 
 having spoken of overt iniquity, in the preceding part of 
 the psalm, it was natural enough, that like holy Job, he 
 ‘should retire within, and ponder the source from which 
 it arose. And conscious for himself, ona faithful inqui- 
 sition, that the force of inbred corruption was incalcula- 
 ble; and deeply aware, how insidious was its influence 
 in counteracting the entirements to a godly life—he 
 eould not refrain from uttering it in his prayer. And 
 while no other exercise of mind is displayed in that par- 
 ticular devotion, or accounts in any sort for what is pre- 
 sented ; it will not escape notice, how well it accords, 
 with what follows this assertion : with what is intimated 
 by the psalmist, in relation to the ‘‘ inward parts ;” and 
 an earnest aspiration of soul, that God would purge him 
 ‘‘ thoroughly from sin,” and perfect in his guilty heart, 
 and by a renewed application to that end, an incipient 
 and glorious work of renovating grace. 
 
 But dismissing this declaration of the psalmist, it may 
 not be unimportant, perhaps, to look at the bearing of 
 ‘another; ; as intimating in respect to himself, that his own 
 experience was by no means peculiar. 
 
 In the 58th Psalm it is declared: The wicked are es- 
 tranged from the womb ; they go astray as soon as they be 
 born, speaking hes.* | 
 
 In this representation, which is one of no trivial mag- 
 nitude, we may notice two things. First: it is said in 
 respect to the wicked, that from the date of their exist- 
 ence on earth ; even from the moment of their natural 
 birth, they are unendowed with spiritual qualities. 
 They are ‘ alienated from the life of God’?—the exact 
 sense of the word estr anged #4 and are not only without, 
 
 * Verse 2. + Heb. ov. 
 
 % 
 
 ia aE nas 
 ee ne ee 
 
185 
 
 but in some manner are bereft, of areal likeness to their 
 almighty Preserver. And in regard to this word, im- 
 porting what I declare, you will notice particularly, as a 
 secondary sense in sacred usage, that it conveys an idea, 
 of enmity; a certain disrelish of heart on the part of a 
 sinner for the ways of God: and what is evidently true, 
 in its largest extent, a fatal giving way, and an increa- 
 sing propensity of mind, to an actual complinge with the 
 temptations to iniquity. Again: it is ne that ai- 
 ter their birth, they are disposed immedia siray 
 away from the path of divine feguiviemani more 
 
 does the psalmist truly convey by that ? Whelber nl 
 
 is taken of it, it is clear to an ingenuous mind, that itis’, — 
 designed to be an exposition of the fact in question ; or 
 
 vindicate the imputation, under which a child is laid 
 from the earliest date, of being unlike ‘a gracious God, 
 and possessing a temper, that invariably inclines i to 
 the service of Satan. And, as designed to urge it on 
 our notice, and for no other purpose too imaginable, it is 
 the last use, it should ever be made to promote—the 
 daring aim of literally explaining it all away! I am 
 aware indeed, that much is said by an opposer of native 
 depravity, about the absurdity of a child’s telling a lie 
 from its birth. But without dwelling largely on a 
 thought which may naturally arise here, that a leaning 
 to this vice, is a character, which renders a creature 
 most unlike a Being “that cannot lie”; and likewise, 
 it is rather by a figure of speech, a single instance is 
 here put for a large expression ;—it is enough to say, in 
 accordance with the impression made on any unbiassed 
 heart—that by sinning from that early period, is meant 
 simply, what the nature of the case obviously requires, 
 viz., from the earliest stage of life, whatever it may be), 
 16* 
 
 ef 
 
 a 
 . 
 
 “he 
 
=e ane 
 
 186 
 
 4 Tay in which are manifested an obliquity of awn, feeling, and 
 ay. ruling appetite in their infantile deportment. And as 
 is i this period is early, as their activity is displayed, nay, 
 
 ze earlier generally, than most of us are probably aware; 
 hadi it must be acknowledged, that the scripture I have ad- 
 , , |» duced, gives a lively perception of the real, innate, and 
 ’ » universal depravity of the whole human family. 
 
 With this exposition from the word of God, in respect 
 
 2 " tot the corruption of our nature; and its desivation from 
 P, ’ a the,same stock, as far as implied in such proof, I shall 
 By ee wt / desist: and not tax your patience in a view of this sub- 
 ie } es ject, by multiplying, evidence of the same description. 
 * lf what I have asserted, be according to the mind of the 
 nl Spirit, it is enough ; and the doctrine may be honestly 
 “% 4° considered, as clearly maintained in a scriptural manner. 
 
 3 
 
 Were it consistent with my plan, I could easily add 
 much of decisive character, from other sources. Par- 
 t ticularly, in the investigation of this subject, I could ad- 
 duce the opinion of the Jews in a former age.* . Also, 
 h ; every form of speech in which the point could be de- 
 i “clared, that is found in profane authors, who have at- 
 
 tempted to describe the character of the species.} 
 by But [ close what is offered at this time, with merely 
 * On this point, the reader may ‘constlt Edwards on “ Original 
 Sin.” p. 485, etseq. [barely notice the IBook of Esdras, ili, 21, 22. 
 Itis worthy of attention. Says the writer: ‘For the first Adam 
 bearing a wicked heart transgressed, and was overcome; andsobe =~ 
 ‘: all they that are horn of him. The cnfirmity was made permanent ; F 
 
 and the law (also) in the heart of the people, with the malignity of tite 
 root ; SO that the good departed away, and the evil abode still.” 
 
 + On this topic I am content with merely giving the-fcllowing. 
 Heathens themselves have felt and acknowledged that they were 
 depraved beings, and depraved, not by imitation only, but by nature ; 
 or as the Church of England well expresses it, by birth-sin. Hence, that 
 _ celebrated saying, so usual among the Greek Philosophers Lupguror 
 
ee ee 
 
 od 
 
 187 
 
 remarking—That nothing in the training up of children, 
 contradicts what is taught in the sacred volume ; but 
 confirms it, in reality, with a force of evidence that is 
 singularly coincident: ° 
 In relation to that topic, as involving at first sight, a 
 final appeal to observation, I will state; that in spite of 
 all parental control can effect, or, parental anxiety can 
 supply ; in opposition to the nnyiediteg kindness of su- 
 periors, and even studied concealment of their vices 
 which is often practised, children manifestwery early oe m3 2 : 
 marks of a depraved temper. eke fee ti 
 
 With regard to their behavior genenlly Ab imoule® & i an 1 f 
 ly certain, that if left to their own choice, they. will Cy n = 
 copy an evil example in preference to a good one. With- at 8" dh 
 out any shewing to that end, or admonition to the con-— _* Al 42) 
 trary, the progress they make in this work is rapid. *: i 
 And the result of it, in designating the exact features : 
 of vice, as seen only in the power of “looks and ges- aie i 
 tures,’’ baffles all anticipation. In respect to relative - 
 
 ties and social obligation—sufflered to associate together, ~ < 
 it appears, that they soon fall into strife; and passions .» © “y_ ; 
 of unearthly nature, yea, mischief devised within are 
 
 avOpwrous ro ayagravewv, thatis, moral evil is implanted in men, from the 
 
 first moment oftheir existence. Plato goes still further, in his treatise 
 
 De Legibus; and directly affirms, that man, if not well and carefully 
 
 cultivated, is Zwov ayprwrarov érosa Gvet yn, the wildest and most sav- 
 
 age ofallanimals. Aristotle asserts the same truth, and almost in the 
 
 same words with Plato. The very poets asserted the doctrine of hu- : 
 man corruption. So Propertius: Unicique dedit vitium natura creato ; © 
 
 that is, Nature has infused vice into every created being. And Hor- ' 
 ace observes, that youth is cereus in vitium flecti ; or, ‘‘admits the im- 
 
 pressions of evil with all the ease aad readiness of yielding wax.”— 
 
 And why? Let the same poet inform us. Nemo Vitiis sine nascitur: 
 
 The seeds of vice are innate inevery man.— Toplady. Essay on Orv 
 
 ginal Sin. 
 
 ah 
 , % 
 
 ALS : = ee aie 
 
4 ‘, : 
 fee 
 iia 
 i. 
 
 . + " » 
 
 188 
 
 mournfully-displayed by them. If those mingle who 
 
 ‘belong to the same charge, we find that their selfish in- 
 
 terests will clash ; and should one be at variance, per~ 
 Haps, with a brother or sister, though literally “bone of 
 their bone, and flesh of their flesh,” what coldness ap- 
 pears, and often an unforgiving temper! And what is 
 particularly offensive, as an act of singular enormity, in 
 regard to those who bear, and who cherish them also 
 amid severe id ; very frequent is the case, that in- 
 
 ’ stead ‘ot appreciating their tenderness, by their hard ~ 
 
 “thoughts, and ungracious conduct, they do often con- 
 vey anguish to a parent’s heart. These are things of 
 _ daily occurrence, and cannot escape the notice of a dis- 
 
 interested mind. And who, that has reared a family of 
 children, exclaims not: How difficult to train up one 
 child in the fear of God! To guard it against the infiu- 
 ence of the flesh and of Satan: to preserve iteven from 
 scandalous vice, and an immediate exposure to endless 
 
 “perdition | How much toil, care, anxiety, restraint and 
 discipline; how many prayers, sighs and painful expe- 
 p j y prayers, Sig Pp Pp 
 
 dients are required to effect the purpose. And in the 
 vexation of mind; in the frequent, nay, utter disappoint- 
 ment which marks the best concerted effort, how deep- 
 ly are.we constrained to acknowledge that vice is an 
 hereditary plague ; and according to the familiar pro- 
 verb, that what is bred in the bone, will certainly ex- 
 ert an influence on the flesh, and manifest its vile and 
 withering influence in all the affairs and relations of hu- 
 man life. 3 
 
 ‘Consonant with this view, and worthy of respect is 
 the testimony of Dwight.. “Children in the morning 
 of life, (he intimates,) are unquestionably amiable; 
 more so, in many respects, than at any future period ; 
 
189 
 
 that is, whenever they do not at some future period, 
 become the subjects of sanctification. Some children 
 also, we’ are taught in the scriptures, are sanctified from 
 the womb. Yet even these in some degree, and all oth- 
 ers in a greater degree, exhibit from the dawn of mora! 
 action, evil affections, and evil conduct. They are re- 
 bellious, disobedient, unkind, wrathful and revengeful. 
 All of them are proud, ambitious, vain, and universally 
 selfish. All of them particularly destitute of piety to 
 
 God; the first, and far the most important exercise of — 
 
 virtue. They neither love, fear, nor obey him ; neither 
 admire his divine excellence, nor are thankful for his 
 unceasing, loving kindness. Vast multitudes are taught 
 these duties, from the commencement of childhood ; yet 
 they cannot be persuaded to perform them, by any spe- 
 cies of instruction hitherto devised. A virtuous mind 
 would, of course, from the mere knowledge of God ; 
 without any known law ; without any other motive ex- 
 
 ges * 
 cept what is found in his greatness, excellency, and 
 
 goodness to us—admire and love, reverence and glorify 
 Him with allthe heart. But no instance of this nature 
 ean be produced. Ihave been employed in the educa- 
 tion of children and youth more than thirty years, and 
 have watched their conduct, with no small attention 
 and anxiety. Yet among the thousands of children 
 committed to my care, I cannot say with truth, that I 
 have seen one, whose native character, I had reason to 
 believe was virtuous ; or whom I could conscientiously 
 pronounce, to be free from the evil qualities mentioned 
 above. In addition to this, it ought to be observed, 
 that no child unspotted with sin, is mentioned in the 
 records of history. This, I think, could not be, had the 
 fact ever existed.” 
 
 il at iL 
 
 ee ee 
 
 — 
 
 - 
 
DISCOURSE VIL. 
 John iii. vi —That which is born of the fleshis flesh, 
 
 In the last discourse, your attention was called to the 
 influence of the first sin on mankind, viewed as inhe- 
 rent; or derivation by ordinary descent, of depraved ap- 
 petite from the parent of the species. In discussing the 
 
 subject, we considered particularly certain passages of | 
 
 Scripture ; those which have a direct bearing on this 
 topic, and whose import is clear, in respect to the par- 
 ticular end for which they are adduced. | 
 
 Whether the testimony advanced, and it is but a bite 
 example, teaches that the depravity in view is entire, 
 importing an utter destitution of holiness, is not very ma- 
 terial in regard to my object. As a qualifying circum- 
 stance however, if the fact is important, it can easily be 
 
 proved by the whole scope of divine inspiration on the’ 
 
 topic: for the oracles of truth deseribe our’ sinful race, 
 as by nature, “turned aside, every one to his own way” 
 —“having no fear of God before their eyes”—and as 
 being “given up to uncleanness through the lusts of 
 their own hearts, to do those things which are not con- 
 venient ;”’? and in words to the same effect. But it is 
 comparatively useless, to urge the point in a formal ar- 
 ray of evidence, as those who hold to original sin, are 
 easily convinced, that its dominion over our nature is 
 complete ; and that nothing actually remains to the soul, 
 in consequence of its wide spread contagion but a bare 
 immortality. 
 
 If the discussion on the ground of scriptural proof be 
 
 satisfactory, as well, as confirmed by the result of proper 
 observation, I close what was designed with laying down 
 
 SSiry 
 
192 
 
 two or three propositions respecting it. And what is 
 
 offered in this attempt, may be viewed, both as an in- 
 ference from what is scripturally asserted, and at the 
 same time, admitting of a more Poet and ample de- 
 velopement. : 
 
 1. First. From what is proved in the last discourse, 
 
 I infer, philosophically speaking, that a propensity to 
 moral evil is a constitutional propensity of our race. 
 
 _ By such a property of our moral frame, I do not mean 
 
 to teach, that sin is infused into our being, in virtue of 
 
 a judicial infliction: or, that in respect to its faculties, 
 as pertaining in any manner to its own essence, sin is 
 any thing more than-an accident of the soul. But the 
 point afirmed is simply this: that a natural tendency, 
 bias, habit, or whatever you please to term it, is a co- 
 existent-principle of our very nature. It pertains, that 
 is, to the first formation of it, not in a primeval state, but 
 in a fallen state: and as a co-existent principle, irre- 
 
 spective of the particular circumstances, in which you 
 
 can imagine it placed by God, will certainly lead on to 
 sinful gratification.* 
 
 * 'The zeal which has been arrayed of late against the phrase physi- 
 cal depravity, as occurring in old writers, (adopting it in a particular 
 sense in opposition to Arminianism,) is very singular: and most of 
 all, that it should be garbled with to the admiration of thousands, who 
 were wholly ignorant ofits use inthis manner; and prosecuted with 
 such life by a class of men, who profess to embrace in substance, the 
 very creed which they inculcated! ‘ 
 
 Butto my own mind, itappears, on the whole, a perfect piece of lo- 
 gomachy ; at least, as called up by those who professedly admit that 
 almighty power isrequisite to change the heart. Making all allowance 
 for our ignorance of metaphysical causation, or keeping in the range of 
 sober inquiry, itis easily perceived, that the quality of an action may 
 be considered apart, either from the subject, mode, or the act itself. 
 The sinfulness of an act arising from its illegality, may be viewed as 
 
 te { abe. tee 
 
ee oa Tr. = a> , sgl — , 1, hi - an piel 
 : . 
 
 in taking this position, we are countenanced, as 
 thought, by a kind of analogical reasoning, which on to- 
 pics of this. nature, is wholly unexceptionable. This, 
 I should suppose, can be made very apparent. It in- 
 volves merely one principle, viz., “ That that propen- 
 sity belongs to the nature of any being, which is a cer- 
 tain consequence of its nature, in the circumstances in 
 which it naturally is.” And what can be more obvious 
 indeed, or even with the more captious, demand the 
 immediate assent of an enlightened mind? 
 
 In applying this principle to any other subject of in- 
 quiry, we have no difficulty whatever in admitting its 
 force. Take, for example, the properties of our nature 
 which are ‘confessedly constitutional. ‘ So far as they 
 
 foreign from the action ; as certainly, no doubt, as many other quali- 
 ties of acts performed by the soul which may be suggested: as much 
 so, for example, as the qualities derived naturally from its simplicity, 
 spirituality, incorruptibility, or any inherent attribute it may possess. 
 The difference between the act of an agent, and the sinfulness of it, is 
 
 blaspheme his Maker: hut while the act abides the same, as its oppo- 
 sition to law, in that instance disappears, the sinfilness of it no more ex- 
 ists. It may also be elucidated, though ina humble analogy, by ‘a re- 
 spect to material bodies, which daily retain qualities separable from 
 their nature; as, for instance, the quality of heat ina man’s hand, or 
 in the atmosphere he shallinhale. But this may be quite sufficient. 
 
 Itis hardly necessary to say, that the distinction between the act of 
 any being and the sinfulness of it, should be retained for a very impor- 
 ‘tant purpose, viz., it may equally preserve the independence and sanc- 
 tity of our Maker as concerned with the affairs of acorrupt race. For 
 in regard to that’ concurrence’ in human events, which pertains to his 
 
 God is not the author of any act, viewed complexly, as a sinful 
 act ; but that the qualifying epithet, derives its existence and impor- 
 tance purely i in a relative respect to law. ; 
 See Wesselii Diss. Acad. XX. de natura Peccati ; et Wesselit 
 Pref. 
 17 , 
 
 shewn in.a deranged person, who, 1 in virtue of mental deprivation, may | 
 
 providential rule, it follows in its proper bearing on the creature, that . 
 
“Be 
 
 194 
 
 exist in that form, or operate with natural freedom, they 
 are the same in all circumstances whatever. A fact, 
 
 clearly developed, for instance, in the appetites of hun- 
 
 ger and thirst; the sexual inclination, a desire of society 
 and the like. Such elemental principles of our nature, 
 universally displayed by mankind, wherever they are, 
 owe not their existence, or even properly their perpetui- 
 ty, to any prov ision barely of time, place and cirecum- 
 stance. In the same manner, we affirm from most care- 
 ful observation, that a tendency to moral evil, or an evil 
 disposition of heart, is a natural principle of action with 
 mankind. And with regard to its constitutional charac- 
 ter, it is sustained on the same ground, in the one case 
 as in the other. ' We judge it, then, deserving the ap- 
 pellation, because it operates precisely in that manner ; 
 
 or if you please, with alike spontaneity of action, and an | 
 
 energy of display, that renders it difficult, 1 will not say 
 
 ‘to destroy, but even to counteract measurably its predo- 
 
 minant influence. And while such tendency, of our na- 
 ture, as its necessary consequence in all circumstances 
 imaginable, is called innate; this very tendency or bias, 
 viewed also, as a habit on our part opposed to the divine 
 law, nay, what the law indisputably forbids—may be 
 
 regarded at the same time, both as an inherent and 
 
 blameworthy propensity to sin. 
 There is no objection, that I know of, which can be 
 
 opposed to this train of reasoning, but what is philoso- 
 phicallyt fallacious; and generally embraced, would sub- 
 vert the nomenclature, of the most simple ee in 
 the offices of life. 
 
 _ To object in the manner of some, that acti a dispo- 
 sition to sin is no principle of our nature, because the 
 
 fact is not manifested strikingly on our birth, will not 
 
195 
 
 answer the purpose. The same may be said of other 
 principles of our frame, which are plainly constitutional ; 
 
 and yet are not displayed till a subsequent period of 
 
 life: and the reasoning employed in the one case, wil! 
 be equally wise ‘and appropriate in the other... Again : 
 
 the same objection might be arrayed against every 
 tribe of the animal creation, and ev ery appetite or qual- 
 ity they possess, that is innate. In illustration of the 
 
 fact, take any of them you choose. Behold the “« young’ 
 lion” and the “adder ;”?. some of them that’are natural- - 
 
 ly poisonous, others that are equally voracious and cru- 
 el. And with respect to the detestable qualities they 
 exhibit, I merely ask, if they appear so uniformly, from 
 the first moment of their existence in the present world? 
 I trust that you will say—by no means. So far from it, 
 some of them possess at the first, apparently no doubt, 
 all the i innocence, pliancy, and obsequiousness ; which, 
 lamentable to think, in. the judgment of discerning men, 
 constitute in our day the perfection of moral’ virtue! 
 But nevertheless, are not these creatures, as the case 
 shall be, in the primary tendencies that they ever mani- 
 fest, poisonous or rapacious? No doubt, you will reply. 
 But how are they so? We answer simply, because they: 
 possess a principle of nature ; one which is internal, fixed, 
 and powerful in its operation, and that leads them inva- 
 riably to adopt the course they pursue. So it is in re- 
 gard to the human race; for there caw be no vestige of 
 difference whatever in respect to this circumstance. 
 They are subject doubtless, to the same laws with the 
 whole animal creation, so far as constitutional traits are 
 observed ; and the reality of their existence in the for’ 
 mer, must be decided by the same general principies,* 
 which are fitly applicable to the latter. And if that be 
 
 C 
 
196 
 
 e Sy admitted, and practically retained in thought, we can 
 F never doubt in the ‘least, that men. are born into the 
 world with a certain propensity to vice. 
 
 2 Furthermore. It is a law of universal being, of the 
 , animal and the vegetable kingdoms, that every thing 
 propagating itself, shall produce its like: a rule, from 
 which it can never be proved, that there is the least de- 
 
 parture, in the propagation of mankind. , 
 
 But this principle, beit remarked, confitmed by every 
 analogy’ that can be named, is opposed to an opinion 
 which has been industriously circulated of late, viz-, 
 That the race are born into the world actually pure ; 
 and by some internal change, as it were, which nobody 
 ean well explain, nay—as unphilosophical in the produc- 
 tion of it, as discreditable to the beneficent administra- 
 tion of Deity—we come to lose our birthright ; and with 
 a nature, strangely indeed corrupted, lie under the curse 
 of animpartial God... And the ground on which it shews 
 My the falsity) of it, if vestreined merely to the result of ob- 
 servation is unquestionable. Fornothing is clearer from 
 that source, if we rely on that fully, than the solemn fact, 
 that no vestige of real holiness is discovered among men, 
 apart from the renewing grace of God; but that in the 
 first ttial of accountable agency, they discover a nature, 
 utterly “¢ alienated from the life of God.”” And the point 
 being capable of ample vindication, ‘as shall appear, we 
 
 wee ean easily discern in regard to this law, what is the ef- 
 8 fect of it, in its bearing on the generation of the species. 
 For to say nothing in the application, of nice sympa- 
 
 . thies, bodily and spiritual, which often exist between 
 Picents arid their offspring, Bmay suggest in respect to 
 
 - w mit, what is invariably true—that no eminent virtue, 
 tae which i is not in the person of a parent, can be transmit- 
 
197 
 
 ted by him to his children. Whatever his immediate 
 
 charge may attain, or however they shall arrive at its 
 
 possession, it cannot be in defiance of that principle. 
 
 But in relation to the whole human family, as every 
 
 child of Adam, is accounted to descend from a vile stock, 
 
 and their ‘offspring, therefore, sustain positively the same 
 
 character ; it is rightly said, that those, who, by nature 
 
 are destitute of holiness, can only impress upon the souls 
 
 of others, so to speak, the natural and reigning qualities, 
 that they individually possess. : 
 
 2. Butin the second place. From what is proved 
 on the subject of moral depravity, we may scripturally 
 infer, that a presumption exists, in favor of express pro~ 
 vision in the covenant of grace, even for the salvation of 
 infants. It is not said at present, by any allusion of the 
 kind, that all infants are saved; but that’a merciful pro- 
 vision is anticipated, on the ground that they equally 
 need the benefits it contemplates. | 
 
 We are taught in the sacred writings, that if any.are 
 saved from final ruin, it is through a part, in the elect- 
 ing grace and purpose of Almighty God: and in this re- 
 spect, if we can learn any thing on the subject, no 
 ground of distinction between one and another shall ever 
 exist. In the singular compassion of his heart, such in- 
 dividuals are predestinated, to be conformed tothe image 
 of his Son: and when that conformity is altogether per- 
 fect, they enter the mansions on high, only, as suggested 
 in the gospel, underthe name of a “ purchased possess- 
 ion.” But in executing his royal pleasure, or comple- 
 ting his people’s conformity to Christ, ‘it is. believed in 
 respect to the latter, that their vile hearts must be res! 
 newed, by the sanctifying grace of the Spirit; and'« , 
 through his personal et lea working in them, that: 
 
 1 
 
 ¢ 
 
 ¥ 
 
 a 
 
198 
 
 oo! which is well pleasing in his sight, shall be made meet, 
 for the/inheritance of the saints in light. But if there 
 bea necessity for all this, which is as applicable to in- 
 fants, as to those of maturer age; itis plainly on the 
 footing, that the race, as such, is fallen. A ground, that 
 we think, in the light of inspired testimony, is fully 
 maintained, in what I have already offered to your pious 
 observation. 
 
 But connected with this statement, we may look as 
 supposed, for some kind intimation of restoring grace, 
 respecting a portion of mankind dying in infancy: and 
 ee according to the analogy of grace, may even justly pre- 
 
 sume—that some at least, of those dying without actual 
 sin, and on whose behalf especially, the prayers of the 
 church go up as incense, should be counted worthy 
 of a part in the final glories of the Lamb. 
 And here, I may ask, what clearer testimony could 
 be named of the fact, than is actually ei us in the 
 \ divine word ? 
 
 In a proper answer to this inquiry, take for example, 
 the case of infants among God’s people, as presented to 
 our notice under the economy of Moses. Andin the 
 provision of mercy, displayed under that dispensation 
 
 ig of divine benevolence, I ask, if circumcision was not 
 ordained expressly for their advantage? Surely it was. 
 But what did it signify, to a child only eight days old? 
 or if you please, to the faith of the parent, as connected 
 
 — 
 
 » formaily with the spiritual welfare of the child? The 
 apostle declares, that the ordinance was a “seal of the 
 % righteousness of saith ;”* or, blessing of/kind acceptance 
 
 in law-judgment, as effected solely, through the impu- 
 Mi és » ted merit of an almighty Substitute. ‘Nor was that all 
 4. ee ‘ _ * Rom. iv. I. 
 
 y 
 
 , r : 
 
Se ee me ee ge on wre 
 
 _ of it. It signified not barely a change of state, but he 
 adds in regard to it, that it was the sign of an Inward 
 and spiritual grace. It was a proper symbol, represent~ 
 ing the influence of God’s spirit on a regenerated soul. 
 His words are impressive: ‘ Cireumeision is not that 
 which is outward in the flesh, but is that of the heart, 
 in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not 
 of men but of God.”* Now in the face of a statement 
 ‘so explicit, fully explained by our divine Master in re- 
 
 lation to infants, testifying, “ For of such, (or more ex= 
 
 actly,) for of these and such as these, is the kingdom of 
 heaven,” or kingdom of grace under the' present dispen- 
 sation; | may ask—what sense ‘surely is conveyed by 
 it, if infants are not naturally depraved; and yet withal, 
 certainly the subjects of distinguishing grace in the pe- 
 culiar provision of the gospel ? 
 
 - But if such notice is found under the former dispen- 
 sation, of what God graciously ordered for their advant- 
 age ; | may add, as commensurate with it, in its bearing 
 on this topic, that christian baptism, as applied by divine 
 authority to infants, with any other impression, is quite 
 nugatory. It is undoubtedly an unmeaning parade ; or 
 rather, an obvious and singular trifling with an august 
 eeremouy. And as such, you are, aware, that it ocea- 
 sioned Pelagius himself, that renowned heresiarch of 
 the 5th century, no small pain, in his controversy with 
 the orthodox. Denying on his part, the corruption of 
 man’s nature by the fall, or its propagation by ordinary 
 ‘generation, he insisted strongly, that no mere infant 
 was, or could be actually lost—but he would ‘not pro- 
 fess in the mean time “ to what place they may certain- 
 ly go!?. But in opposition to all this, I will ayer, as con~ 
 
 * Rom. ii. 28, 29. | 
 4 
 
 @ 
 
¥ al 
 
 200 
 
 eerned chiefly with those who admit the rite im ques 
 tion ; that with such views, it isnot only vain, if appli- 
 ed—but as connected with the administration of it, 
 there is no ground for delaying it somewhat, that. can 
 fitly be. pretended. Some evasion of the kind, it may 
 be hinted, has been naturally thought of ; and even urged 
 by some, who admit the ordinance seemingly in its wi- 
 dest extent, in order, that the subject might view it par- 
 ticularly in regard to actual sin. It isa thought very 
 clearly, which was not unessayed by Pelagius : and by 
 his followers ever since, it has been thrown out more 
 or less in harmony with a doctrine of the Baptists, that 
 infants are not qualified subjects of this sacrament: are 
 not, for the reason that is commonly suggested, Viz, 
 that faith, as a personal quality, is required to.a com- 
 munion in any ordinance whatever; and they are sup- 
 posed to be incapable of exercising it in that period of 
 their existence. But whatever is pretended on the 
 topic, while we freely grant, that faith, as an ordinary 
 rule of proceeding, is a suitable preparation; at the same 
 time, it is well replied, to whomsoever it shall be appli- 
 eable—that we may say of it, however, as Christ did of 
 the eunuchs in respect to matrimony, to wit, That that 
 saying or requirement, is intended simply for those to 
 whom it is given** And without dooming every child 
 of Adam which dies in infancy, to remediless ruin ; and, 
 as a thing of course, despising all reasonable ground of 
 kind allusion to their case ; we may certainly hope, if 
 all are not embraced in the election of grace, that God 
 in his awful prerogative, at least, has compassion on 
 
 many. That he willsave them from the wrath to come, 
 and has signified it too, in a manner exceedingly im- 
 
 * Matt, xix. EL, 
 4 
 
 is Game: 
 
201 
 
 pressive. And though incapabie in early life, of appre- 
 ciating on their part the end of their baptism, it is great- 
 ly consoling to the mind, that our Father in heaven, 
 and in good consistency with what is intimated, can 
 send his Spirit into their hearts as a Spirit of faith ; can 
 purge them from any stain of original defilement, and 
 deliver their souls from every vile and destructive in- 
 fluence ;—and in the execution of his gracious intent, 
 
 with the tenderest emotion, can prepare their hearts, for 
 
 the endless fruition of an inheritance, that was purcha~ 
 sed for a world lying in guilt, at the expense of the 
 Redeemer’s agonies and death. 
 
 And with respect to this matter as an inference from 
 what is already declared, be it carefully observed, that 
 if what I have proposed from Scripture about those dy- 
 ing in infancy, conveys no encouraging notice respect- 
 ing their final state; as far as the Bible is concerned, 
 or indeed any other source of information whatever, we 
 are left in midnight darkness. And whether they in- 
 herit a nature morally vicious or not, it will appear, that 
 while astern destiny entails on this class of our race 
 a thousand ills, and even the anguish of a parting mo- 
 ment; their state in respect to future happiness, re- 
 mains without a word of explanation, or kind regard, 
 from the eternal Sovereign of the universe. 
 
 Once more. .We assert, in view of what has already 
 been exhibited on the subject of our discussion, that the 
 equity of that dispensation, by which we are born into 
 the world with a nature morally vile; is vindicated 
 more certainly, by regard to a public relation to Adam, 
 and the consequent imputation of his sin, than on any 
 other principle whatever. If I err not, in a polemical 
 manner it is capable of demonstration, that if sin be a 
 
 ée 
 es 
 — 
 Pe 
 
_—  — oeS 
 = 
 * et 
 
 : 202 
 
 natural, as well as a moral evil, the difficulty pressing 
 
 hard enough on any system, is greatly relieved by the 
 thought—that that vileness, viewed as a natural calami- 
 ty, may be considered in the light ofa judicial infliction, 
 and as flowing to mankind primarily through the chan- 
 nel of a public engagement.* ) 
 
 But to assert the principle in a most convincing man- 
 ner, I must advert to the opinions of two or three dis- 
 tinct classes of people, about the state of infants on their 
 birth; and the manner in which they appear, in regard 
 to the views taken of their case, to reflect on the equity 
 of the divine dispensations on earth. ; 
 
 And first. We may take up the matter, in reference 
 to those who believe in an innate propensity to sin ; but 
 who, at the same time, as I think, very inconsistently 
 deny the representative character of the first man. 
 
 In respect to those who embrace this opinion, the 
 first thing arresting our attention is obvious. As it con- 
 
 * With that view, Stapfer: Malum respectu nostri id dicitur quod 
 nos statumque nostrum imperfectiorem reddit: cum vero malum mor- 
 ale sit vere malum hine statum sive corpores sive anime imperfectio- 
 rem reddit.— Jom. I. § DX XVIIL 
 
 To which I will subjoin, that the worst difficulty in regard to the in- 
 troduction of sin into our world, lies back of any system of theology 
 whatever. This fact should be deeply considered. It relates immedi- 
 ately to the incipient workings of itin Adam, so far as manis concern- 
 ed; butmore especially, to the manner in which sin becomes an ele- 
 
 ment of the moral system. With regard to the latter point, I find the 
 
 same difficulty in vindicating its appearance at all, whether its origin 
 
 ‘be traced purely, tothe creative agency of God, and the precise plan 
 
 he adopted; or more properly, to his providential rule, by which the 
 original thought i is practically executed. It comes obviously to the very 
 
 same thing. In the former instance, if God could.not create a world 
 
 in which sin hasnoplace, why did the Infinite Mind create any system 
 
 ‘whatever? Could he do it fitly, and pronouncing his own work “very 
 
 good,” unaffectedly delight in it? Or again : if, in his providential sway 
 
203 
 
 cerns then the disease, or ruined state of the species, 
 they have in general, the same historical facts with us 
 to explain; yet, as touching the equity of the divine 
 plan, I think too, at an unspeakably greater disadvan- 
 tage.: ) 
 I-say they have the same facts, in relation to a vindi- 
 cation of this thing, that pressimmediately upon us. In 
 other words, they believe that according to a law of 
 nature, God brings an infant into the world, with a pro- 
 pensity to moral evil: Respecting the law, by which it 
 happens, he also is the Author of it. And with regard 
 to the moral obliquity itself, implied in the fact—it is 
 infinitely contrary to the nature of God, and to every 
 
 principle of his righteous government. Under these — 
 
 circumstances, and to render the inconsistency the more 
 evident, I ask—with what propriety is a man born with 
 a vicious nature, apart from original sin, any more than 
 
 he could have kept sin from the present attempt,'as I verily think, what 
 should have prevented him from doing it? Was it not a point desirable 
 in itself? And can any effect of sin, either natural or moral, be neces- 
 sary to enhance the manifested glory of God? or, any thing beyond the 
 perfect love and obedience embraced in the moral law, be required to 
 promote the highest happiness of his creatures. These are very sol- 
 emn queries. They are answered only, by the, fact that sin fearfully 
 obtains : ina world which God himself has made ; and which none but 
 an almighty Agent can certainly uphold. Yet, admitting that sin has 
 onee gained an entrance, the difficulty attending its ravages is lessen- 
 ed, if it be viewed under arighteous constitution, as a penal infliction ; 
 and infinitely so, in my own apprehension, ifits penal nature be actual- 
 ly requisite, unto a fair and triumphant vindication, ofthe divine displea< 
 sure against its evil desert. — 
 With respect to the New-Haven dogma, that God is unable to create 
 a world, in which sin (though incidentally,) may not be an emits part, 
 see, Views in Theology. No, VIII: When an opifion so reproachful 
 to the Author of being is seriously weighed, and I think, conclusively 
 
 set aside. 
 
 i, 
 
 un 
 
we 
 
 * 
 
 Adam could have been justly formed, possessing the 
 same attribute, irrespective of that very thing? How 
 can the one be bon that is, any more than the other 
 created so, I inquire,’ in a consistent view of the divine 
 perfection? For none can reasonably pretend, that the 
 pare mode of our entrance into the world, will make 
 che difference ; or clear up positively, the divine agen- 
 cy in one instance, more than in the other; when in ei- 
 ther of the cases, the primary ground of the evil, is not 
 to be ascribed, to a proper agency of our own? If there 
 be therefore an insuperable difficulty here, without ad- 
 ynitting a relation of some nature to Adam, in conse- 
 quence of which the event takes place ; I ask again— 
 on supposition that it happens in virtue of our. relation 
 to him, if the fact however, imply no sin which is ours, 
 at least putatively, and therefore set down to us in law- 
 reckoning, how can the propriety of the measure be sus- 
 tained? “Deriving a corrupt nature from a remote quar- 
 ter does not lessen its deformity, or make it less desira- 
 ble to its possessor, than were it obtained immediately 
 from his own parents. The proximity or remoteness of 
 the source, that is, does not change its real complex- 
 ion. Deriving by natural descent a moral taint, or a de- 
 praved temper of mind, you will equally perceive, I 
 may intimate, in whatever way it be certainly accounted 
 for—whether, for instance, from the desertion of God, 
 or solely through an inordinate influence of the flesh— 
 will not vary the case. For what I insist on simply, is 
 - evident at first sight, viz., if it come not upon us purely, 
 as the. reward of a probationary fault, that we are dealt 
 “vith in a manner, wholly different from the first man- 
 And the reason of it, will not be very distant from your 
 unbiassed perception. For the corruption of his nature, 
 
 - 
 oa 
 
205 
 
 by sinning, which was considered ona former occasion, 
 it is agreed, as pertaining to his fallen state, formed a 
 part of the penalty denounced by the law of God against 
 transgression. ‘And the infliction of it, as it happened, 
 could not have taken place with him, till by some act 
 of iniquity, he incurred the wrath of his Maker ; and P 
 with the tokens of divine compassion, forfeited that ten- 
 der influence, which he is pleased to exert upon the 
 hearts of his unoffending children. 
 
 But to be somewhat more particular, in our attention 
 
 to this topic. 
 fit be the will of God then, that all men have a ftri- 
 al on the ground of merit, with a view to obtaining eter- 
 neal life, as we said, and the sentiment accord with the 
 analogy of the divine dispensations ; where, it is insis- 
 ted, on the ground that men are born with a nature 
 morally impure, do they secure the blessing ?yIf they 
 had no trial in our common parent; if they were not 
 comprehended federally in his loins ; in what conceiv- 
 able manner, do they respectively enjoy a glorious pri- 
 vilege? In my own apprehension, it is very plain, that 
 in their present circumstances, and with a nature spir- 
 itually diseased, they are wholly unprepared, even if a 
 period were assigned them, to enter on such a trial. As 
 Ihave suggested in a previous discourse—born without 
 the image of the holy One, with no inward conformity 
 to a law morally perfect, and even by nature, as desti- 
 3 tute of holiness as Satan himself—the very thought of it 
 must appear chimerical. And to say nothing of a “vile 
 body,’’ by which the powers of the soul are enslaved 
 to earth, and a depressing influence is exerted = rithe 
 holy aspirations of it ; it is presumable, that none will 
 
 pretend in a near view of the subject, that our race, em-— 
 ae i8 
 
ag '¢ 
 Ld 
 . wy 
 ath 
 A a 
 » 
 We r 
 < 
 ii 
 “f 
 % 
 nee 
 a 
 4 
 ae 
 Y 
 } 
 om 
 ns 
 # 
 4 
 i 
 ml yh * 
 ae 
 
 ba] 
 ri 
 id E) 
 ae 
 en 
 
 oe ; 
 bce * 
 we: ¥ 
 
 206 ® 
 
 barrassed in this manner, and dealt with strictly on a ba- 
 sis of good and ill-desert, can be tried in this fashion ; 
 or if they were in fact, ever so long, ean be said with 
 the least propriety, under those auspices, to be really 
 placed in‘an original probation. 
 
 And debating with those, who admit the corruption 
 
 ‘of man’s nature by the fall, yet earnestly persist in de- 
 
 nying representative agency ; I may urge in a certain 
 respect, what has already been declared, viz., that the 
 penal effects of the first delinquency do tay: cluster 
 apon_ all mankind. 
 
 I name the position, not merely. as susceptible of 
 proof, for I think it settled already, but as to its bearing 
 on this topie, if you would know the full extent of it, it 
 is judged that the race, even in infancy, and prior to any 
 conscl iqusness of crime, are certainly the worse for the 
 
 ault i our progenitor. It can easily be proved that, 
 2 Danithed to any actual guilt, they endure many evils 
 springing immediately from that source. And. without 
 an induction of particulars, which may be intimated; I 
 will remark in respect toit; that whatever be the nature 
 of the evils which are contemplated in our perception, 
 
 vhether they refer mainly, as some will have it, to * na- 
 tiv ve pollution”’—others again to *! terhporal death’’—and 
 others, perhaps, according to a late impression, to the 
 bare “ certainty of becoming sinners,’”’—is very immate- 
 rial. It is so, in respect to the particular end I have in 
 view. For in whatever light it be regarded, it still re- 
 
 anains a fact, that prior to actual ill-desert, the offspring 
 ’ of the first man, in a strict allusion to the penal of sin, 
 as ‘we “have fairly explained it, endure the painful de- 
 
 sertof a primary and dreadful dereliction. . 
 And ‘conformed with this whole representation, yea, 
 
: 207 
 
 evidently agreeing with it in the case of infants, I barely 
 add, is the scriptural character of the new birth. Inhe- 
 riting a depraved temper, if an infant in departing this 
 life enters the gates of the celestial city, one thing, lam 
 truly persuaded of —Jt must be born again.* There must 
 be a change, and that ofa radical kind,inthe character 
 that it naturally exhibits. But in the case of such, as 
 well as all others, it appears that the change, of which a 
 they are partakers, is a moral one: it consists plainly, in ose) a 
 being renewed into the image of the Creator.— Butthe — - 
 very mode of expression, “renewed in the tnage’ of r 
 God,” supposes evidently that they once possessed it : 
 
 and the only manner in which it is lost, it is equally % 
 clear, is by a common trial in the person of our ancestor. 
 
 A key of exposition however, which makes the loss of 
 
 it, especially, as involving the deprivation of good, a @ 
 penal dispensation. And with regard to the other evils, : 
 arising purely from the same source, while it disposes ‘ 
 
 of them on the same principle, it opens a view of our =. 
 
 present state, that can never accord for a moment, with 7 
 a denial of representative efficiency in the trial of our 4. a 
 first parents. { 
 
 achat) HOw. 162 | ee 
 
 t I will add to the above, a very pertinent train of thought, from a dis- at 
 course by Guyse. 
 
 To me it seems clear, that God’s subjecting all men to such a depen- 
 dence on the first man, that from him becoming morally unclean, they in | 
 the way of ordinary generation and descent would proceed oan like - ; 4 
 wise, and derive a nature weak to good and prone to evil, far other- | 
 wise and worse than what himself had from God, and they should ah . , 
 have derived from him; that this, I say, necessarily implies in itself his whe p 1% 
 being constituted by God the federal head ofall his seed. oe ie a . 
 ly then, God in suffering, on his sinning, this law and course of nature _ 
 actually to take place in all men, even in the foresight of all the corrup- id. 
 tion which has since overspread the world, appears plainly to ‘treat. | 
 
205 
 
 a But secondly. As some are sensible, that an innate 
 
 & we propensity to sin, unattended by even the form of a trial, 
 
 ah .. is difficult to explain on the principles of justice, they 
 
 are inclined toadopt another position ; and to clear away 
 
 , difficulties, do resolve the calamity coming on infants in 
 
 am . virtue of Adam’s sin, barely into that of temporal death. 
 
 But this, at the same time, as a natural step, in a half 
 
 way persuasion of the doctrine inculcated, will merit at 
 least a proper attention. . 
 
 In relation to those who adopt this belief, they are far 
 from admitting commonly, that the death in question is 
 a legal infliction. ‘That, you may easily discover, will 
 
 a : them as:having a legal interest in his transgression. Had they stood 
 altogether on a personal foot, and been quite independent of Adam and, . 
 his conduef, in point of relation to him as a common representative ; 
 why should they not have the same advantages which God originally 
 
 ae prepared and judged proper for the human nature, as much in case of 
 
 ‘i : his sinning, 2s if he had not sinned? And could not God easily enough, 
 
 ‘ é notwithstanding Adam’s sin, have secured to them these advantages, 
 
 and provided for a more pure conveyance of their nature to them ?- 
 
 Might nota less extraordinary interposition at least, (as we may well - 
 
 ‘ suppose, ) have prevented the bad influences of our first parents sinning 
 
 ae - oh their offspring, than what has since been applied to remedy the evils, 
 
 td which have followed on the permission of them ? Nor can I see how the 
 
 provision of a remedy, even as universal as the malady, (which yet 
 
 cannot be proved to be the case,) solves the difficulty, as long as the 
 
 constitution itself of human nature, is insufficient to prevent the malady ; 
 
 and such itis at present, and has been ever since the fall, nor was it 
 
 ever perfect and effectual to this purpose, but only in our first parents 
 
 before they sinned—who are therefore most reasonably judged, both to 
 
 my * possess and to change it under a common character and relation to all 
 ,mankind.—Berry-Street Sermons. 
 
 5 oe ' % " fAs indeed, the reader may call to mind, was strongly asserted by 
 
 ily Dr; Taylor of Norwich; who, admitting death in consequence of Adam’s 
 
 * 
 a a sin, urgesit ‘only as a favor and benefit, and a fruit of fatherly love to 
 -“ Adam's posterity, reputed not as guilty, but wholly innocent.’’—Quoted 
 @ °  esby.Edwards. Original Sin, p. 208 et seq. Bid a 
 d nd With the above from Dr.. Taylor of Norwich, agree the views asserted 
 
 Se 
 - * 
 a 
 
209 
 
 not meet their expectation. Not regarding it properly 
 as a curse, but rather, on the whole, as a kind discipline 
 of Heaven } they labor under an invincible necessity, of 
 trying to persuade us, it is an admirable thing. And 
 though it is often remarked of infants, particularly in re- 
 gard to their departure from the world, that God can re- 
 move them without inflicting pain, and certainly the 
 pungent distress of dying often a hard death; and again, 
 if it be only a dictate of mercy, it is not a natural way, _ 
 of manifesting his kindness to the pure and accepted—. 
 it is all nugatory. They will argue at all hazards, that 
 it may prove negatively in the sequel, a blessingtothem. _ - 
 And in what manner do they tenderly assertit? Simply «a 
 this: because it may save a part of the whole race, ViZ-, j 
 innocent beings, just formed by the hand of a kind Pa- 
 rent, from the chance of incurring hereafter, thejawful 
 displeasure of a benevolent Protector! +8 4 
 But to shew the erroneous nature of thé position, | 
 may only observe, that death is the most terrible of natu- te 
 ral evils by which we are assailed; or that pertain to a 
 our condition, during our stay on the earth. It is some- a - oy 
 thing, that we look at from our earliest existence, and I 
 may add, the whole animal creation also, with emotions oh 
 of unqualified dread. And it is viewed not only in that . 
 light, but is a form of the curse, as we find in turning to 
 the inspired page, ever most fatal in the hands of Jeho- 
 vah ; when he has, suddenly interposed, and expressed ° 
 his displeasure against the vilest of mankind. Easily _ 
 could we illustrate it from that source; and from re~ © , © 
 
 by the Christian Spectator of New Haven. As far as can be seen, itis | 
 the samelthing ;{the old scheme of “universal pardon” —that every So- « a: 
 cinian in our country, and every latitudinarian, high and low, would Ks aa? ‘ 
 most fervently reciprocate. See Christian Spectator, June, 1801. . : 
 
 ; % 
 
 18* . ‘< 
 
210 | ; a 
 
 peated judgments, name awakening instances of the fact.* 
 
 And without adverting largely in respect to this topic, 
 to the impression made on a renewed heart, by the tes- | 
 timony concerning Christ—that he not only toiled, but 
 
 . in the law-place of the sinner became obedient even 
 
 unto death; it is very easy to perceive from the strain of 
 such testimony, that it is never the style of the holy pen- 
 man, to speak of most exquisite anguish, as inflicted by 
 Heaven on beings perfectly pure; or without an imme- 
 diate, and well deserving cause of these trying dispen- 
 sations. . 
 
 And viewing it, not only as foreign from the repre- 
 sentations of Scripture, but considering too, as Presi- 
 dent Edwards remarks, that a bare retrenching of life, to 
 say no more, is often made God’s displeasure against 
 sin, and required by the claims of unsparing justice; it 
 is a singular token in favor of love to infants, that the 
 Author of ‘our being, can inflict upon them, without 
 it any trial whatever, suca grievous maladies. Nay, if it 
 
 be so, on supposition that they ave tried, before the tri- 
 
 a al is ended, it must even appear, can break loose upon 
 
 them in this surprising manner. Can deprive them 
 
 - 
 
 with consummate ease of the expansion of their nature, 
 
 * Asin the sinners of the old world; in the inhabitants of Sodom 
 and Gomorrah, in Onan, Pharaoh, and the Egyptians; Nadab and 
 Abihu, Korah and his company, and the rest of the rebels in the wilder- 
 
 . ness; in the wicked inhabitants of Canaan; in Hophni and Phinehas, 
 Ananias and Sapphira ; the unbelieving Jews, upon whom wrath came 
 _ to the uttermost, in the time of the last destruction of Jerusalem. "This 
 
 © » galamity is often spoken of, as in a peculiar manner the fruit of the guilt 
 
 (cof sine Exod. xxviii. 43, “That they bear not iniquity and die.” 
 
 j Levit. xxii. 9. *‘Lest they bear sin for it and die.” So Numb. xviii. 22, 
 
 . compared with Levit. x. 1, 2. The very light of nature, or tradition 
 
 Fd from ancient revelation, led the heathen to conceive of death as in a pe- 
 
  euliar manner an evidence of divine vengeance. Thusin Acts xxviii. 4. 
 | ie Edwards, on Original Sin. 
 
8 
 
 te 
 i the most exquisite sources of happiness on eartli. Q % +? ee 
 And purely, from boundless compassion to their help- Beas . 
 less state, yea, earnest care, lest in a hapless moment ¥3 os pe 
 they lose his holy image, he finds itnecessary,inrespect 
 to their situation, to perfect his glorious end in their ex- £ ee ; 4 
 istence, by immediately slaying them! 
 Such doctrine, I may remark,is not consonant with 
 the monitions of natural conscience, any more than with 
 the truth of the inspired record: And as an unaffected_ 
 expression, in favor of its base absurdity ; one that ap- | 
 pears so truly, and will commend itself to an enlighten- a 
 ed taste, I can name the inguiry of Eliphaz the Teman- g 
 ite. For remonstrating with Job, about the ground of 
 the divine displeasure universally against human folly, 
 he says: “ I pray thee, whoever perished being inno- 
 cent ??* or, entirely free from any blame whatever. 
 His testimony is the more remarkable, from having ihe 
 occasion in the course of that debate, to speak particu- 
 ly, of an ungodly world that had just been destroyed by : 
 a deluge. An event, no doubt, that swept off myriads x 
 of infants in the wide spread ruin. And to which he hae Me 
 refers in that interview, very impressively, as you must 
 have observed, saying, “‘ Hast thou. marked the old 
 which which wicked men have trodden? which were 
 cut down out of time, (or by a premature destruction, ) 
 whose foundation was overflowed with a flood ?”’} 
 Undoubtedly there is a cause, brethren, why that ca- 
 lamity overtook even them, who were not guilty of ac- | 3 
 tual sin; and that will justify the divine dispensation, 
 rendering it perfectly clear in the day of judgment. 
 But itis not an act of arbitrary will; or obviously, a po 
 primary respect to the good of the subject. “And any ~ 
 #Jobiv. 7% ¢ Job xxii. 15, 16. . 
 
ne, explanation barely in that manner, cah only subserve 
 
 a? ff end#-as we find in some of the New ;-England states 
 “: Ay? and in other parts of our-land—of leading on very se- 
 
 curely, to adenial of vindicatory pubishment hereafter 3) 
 
 and of promoting alike, the more rapid ee eminction of 
 a disguised and open infidelity. iti 
 
 Further. There are some that deny a representative 
 connexion with Adam, who, finding it difficult to ac- 
 count for depravity by ordinary descent, or even the 
 grounds of temporal death, ave resolved to deny them 
 both ; at least the former, under every aspect, and the 
 
 i latter as any part of the curse denounced against sin, 
 
 ~~ and particularly against the trespass committed 1 in the 
 garden. And with regard to the new born infant, if 
 we express their opinions exactly, ‘they make him in 
 the outset to be entirely from sin ; and whether besides, 
 he have real holiness or not, as a moral agent in very 
 early life, they suppose him prepared, with the dawn- 
 ing of accountable action, for a trial in a personal reck- 
 oning ; and in the certain result of it, to possess the only 
 chance imaginable, on the ground ~ merit, for secur- 
 ing a blessed immortality. 
 
 But while this is the grand outline of it, seognditia to 
 the latest garb which the theory assumes in our day, 
 we are apprised in a moment, of two astounding facts, 
 viz., That ‘all mankind, infants not excepted, have had 
 a “sort of trial,” as expressed in the person of the first 
 man: but at the same time, one of which we have ap- 
 parently no credible account; which it is therefore im- 
 practicable to describe ; and though last, not least—that 
 in respect to any practical purpose whatever, had far 
 better be discountenanced! Again, in virtue of this tri- 
 
 ® al, of which, neither Scripture, nor reason is the ex- 
 
 . 
 
ed, and may be relied on beforehand, in every instance 
 that may occur to the end of time. Mid hotel prop-. 
 er tial, it is affirmed, that all of the human family share 
 in, through the matchless purity and condescension of 
 their Maker! : 
 
 Now with a trial professedly of this description, and — 
 
 promising nothing more, we are inclined to think, there 
 is just ground before God, of “maintaining a scriptural 
 and lasting opposition.* 4. - 
 
 And first. Imay glance at the means, by which the 
 certainty of sinning in this manner is effected. This 
 you will learn, by the very assumption, is the old scheme 
 of Palagius; to,wit, the influence of bad example, 
 
 thought to set by the parents of the subject, or display- ‘ 
 
 ed *by a corrupt society, exerting an ifluence on all 
 about them. ‘ 
 
 _ ‘But in our views of this topic, it is thought capable 
 of strongest proof, that so far as mere example is named, 
 L ‘ f & ae 
 a child, in a trial of this character, is often surrounded 
 by more good than bad example, inviting its regard. If 
 not the case in every instance, in some it is plainly; 
 % ; e 
 
 * The reader is aware, that 1 have given what is called the New- 
 Haven scheme of divinity; or, that view of things, which is cherished 
 in the Athens of the New World! A full and detailed display of it, is 
 found in the Christian Spectator—Review of Barnes. Where such a 
 trial and a comparison of it with the old scheme appears; and I wish 
 I could say, in the simplicity of manner that became.an eminent servant 
 of ahumble Master, rather than the elaborate and jesuitical wire. 
 drawing, that sets the apprehensions of ordinary minds wholly at defi. 
 
 % 
 
 bapigtcepe ny te SY 
 
NSE gale al ce 
 e eee ae ty % —  -’ 
 
 aa, . a igh > ; 
 | es » and certainly, in the very moment! beginning to ex- 
 
 Talat pie os la ency on earth, I can safely infer, that 
 , ae, aii is not unfil quently a fact. And yet, how pure soev- 
 » “Wt er the character may be, which gis offered to fotice at a 
 : ‘ that crisis, you will find at last, ¢ at & good example is 
 cd onerallftelighte , and.a bad one prevalently and easi- | 
 
 | ly acquired, in whatever pertains to an incipient influ- ‘s 
 | ence, in the formation of moral character. Besides : | 
 what is more decisive in its bearing on this matter, an- 
 
 terior to the influence of particular examples, either 
 
 good or bad, children at sf early period, manifesta wick- 
 
 ‘ ed conduct; which in given circumstances, cannot be 
 lig ay * \ accounted for, but in a single regard to innate depravi> 
 ; : ‘4y. Without a sample of their character, they are guil- 
 
 " % ty of many acts, which are very offensive in the sight 
 of Heaven. As the Psalmist declares; and the exam- 
 r "hay pleis a common one, they can tell a lie in order to ef- 
 il ‘ © fect a purpose, and then,-are very ingenious in devising 
 
 ways by which they may conceal it. And many «oi- | 
 
 bles are they. guilty of, as they are frequently styled, ‘ 
 
 ' which cannot escape the eye even of the most careless 
 r observer, and that are not derived invariably, through 
 
 the medium of any demoralizing example " a 
 
 x ‘ And not only in regard to overt acts of.sin, but I will i 
 
 d "urge especially,ythe evil passions of our nature; the | 
 
 pride, selfishness, hatred, envy and revenge display- a 
 
 ed in their conduct ; and discoverable too in their earli- ) 
 
 est experience—there is much indicating an evil tem- of 
 
 per- On anarrow iftspection, the diversified aspect they _ | 
 assume, admonish us clearly of their inbred power: and 
 that, as qualifying our state, they are unquestionably, 
 
 , 
 not any thing more or less, than squalid streams, pro- 
 ' ‘ ceeding directly from an infected fountain. Some il- 
 alt | / 
 i: ' 
 y A 
 
a pe Fill Pe ie, Paget 
 y ‘* ’ ie AP a al . a 
 Justration of the fact, I may remark, is siven by Auguss 5 7 
 tine in respect to anger ; where speaking of its influence © 4 e ; 
 upon our Bature—atid that in very early lifé—he names *s). & 
 in partieular two ints, born actually at one birth, that 
 fought or a with each other, upon their mo- 
 ther’s breast !—-And not a trifling example, for one of . 
 scriptural propriety, is that of Cainja renowned char- ae 
 aeter in the family oi the first pair. A prodigy of vice se 5 
 in various aspects, we can safely say, of envy at least, 
 he is a fairmodel. And though he had cohfessedly pas- re 
 sed the period "of infancy, which is not material in this 
 instance, we are told, that because *¢ hisown works were 
 evil”—all that was necessary——he rose up against his 
 brother Abel, and in a fit of rage, without a’ precedent 
 even in the wide spread universe} he cruelly deprived 
 him of his natural life” Rca et 
 ‘ "But without extending a train of thought, which I 
 had nearly said, is superseded by familiar »imcidents of : 
 life—I will dismiss any thing of this description, and a 
 remark « re 
 Again, That not only the point I have contempla- 
 ted, but in regard to ourjséate on the earth, the circum- 
 stannes generally, tnderiwhich the supposed trial takes 
 place, wears a very improbable aspect. sa r 
 As connected witha trial on the thedry contemplated, { 
 ‘it is ‘not a vain imaginationgl will @bsérve, thatin the —=_« 
 infancy of being; we have a “ sentence of death” in our- 
 selves, through which we are mortal. That we possess 
 a body that i8 infirm, and from the first moment, of our . 
 _ personal stay on the earth, is liable at every stage, to 
 sharp disease, and to a final dissolution, N ay, what is 7, 
 worse than all, that in consequence of its present state, “a 
 the body we inherit, exerts a sad influence ‘_ kind- ‘ 4 
 
 ~ 
 
 * ° 
 ; 
 & = 
 
” 
 
 %, 
 
 * re may 7 », ‘which is not diminutive, chains it down fear- 
 ©» fully to a sordid gratification of tinie and sense. Yet, 
 in harmony with the fact however, in régard to’ a child 
 
 nee ‘thus put upon trial for his life, th must not forget, that 
 ghis residence is not in Eden. So far from that, he en- 
 “ap ters a world which God Almighty has,cursed, and with 
 um ‘ts infantile breath, cannot turn ameye in any direction, 
 
 _ where the fact.is Bo tices displayed. Look where 
 
 he may, in consequence of a terrible destiny, the earth 
 
 is filled, not barely with anxious toil, which were com- 
 
 ' patatively light, but with ire calamityand disappointed 
 
 , a | expectation. And glancing at the various ills, which 
 es arise’ directly or indirectly from the apostacy ; which 
 * pertain to the body or the soul, are real or imaginary ; 
 i they are such at any rate, in the mysterious providence 
 
 ; Wee. _ of God, as have, changed the earth, from being the gar- 
 
 i. © den of they Most High; into what may be termed, with 
 ~ infinitely more propriety a complete lazaretto._ 
 "© Now Lask, if a nature such as I have named, and the 
 ‘cireumstances palpably in which it is placed, to say no- 
 thing of the prevailing influence of depravity throughout 
 the species, correspond with a le that we may form 
 .of aprimary probation? In my own impression, the reply 
 : is, justly made, (that every thought of it, 1s absolutely 
 forbidden in a simple regard to the facts I have sug- 
 ‘gested. # ee ee me ' 
 - And finally. Not only the means, by which the cer- 
 "tainty of sinning is secured, and the circumstances gene- 
 «rally, under which the trial takes place, present nothing 
 _ in’ favor of it : but I will add, there is nothing positively 
 in the result of this trial, it its bearing on the welfare of. 
 the subject, that renders it any more desirable, than a 
 responsible pelanion to the parent of mankind. 
 % if 
 
 7 us, SBT 216 ¥ ia 
 " 4 - be a % hi 
 
 h; r . e 
 " rs : > K, \ ® ° 
 wit ‘ ' lest exercise of the soul ; and ns as its influ 
 
 * 
 my 
 
4 
 » F% as iar, 
 Ry. ith regard to t point, I cannot but obgervayon the © 
 one hand—While this trial supposes that there i is no ne- shy “4 
 tural catise of failing altogether, or at least, pretends so. 
 in the premises ; it isan historical truth, and must spring 
 from an existing cause, that all who,are put on trial i in 
 this manner Retsinly. rebel: and contrary to any analo-, 
 gy of the divine dispensations, where many are ‘fed 
 separately on the same plan, not only fall away 5 but foe e 
 any assignable period, it may be Wit d in the face | id 
 of mere man, eat not one in a million, will retain his * & 
 integrity for a single day. And to suppose ( faculty for | ; 
 obeying the divine will, with a fair hope of triumpHant 
 success, should be attended’ with a result universally 
 disastrous and shameful—cannot agree with any, idea W 
 
 can form of a probation, that shall make it'ev ry in its, . ae 
 pannery aim, ‘an object of divine complacency “e regard. " te 
 
 Again :, while the result of this trial in every instance es 4 
 is fatal, as relates toa vindication of divine agency init, ®  » 
 
 it matters not from what,cause the failure arise, in its’ 
 bearing on our welfare, in case it shall be entirely beyond 
 our control, It matters nothing, for example, whether 
 it is from inherent depravity, or something else inherent; | 
 
 or, whethet it flows immediately through our external 
 
 relations. Itis an idea, I would urge distinctly upon 
 
 your notice: for I will not disregard it, indeed, respect- : 
 ing the former suggestion. _ Isay, touching the inherent «+ % 
 cause of defection. For some in their zeal ‘against phy- 
 
 sical depravity, which no one stands up for, appear to 
 
 lose sight of it. And in speaking of a trial, that we have 
 
 on their own scheme, are very inconsistent in this re- 
 
 spect. While a physical obstacle pains them exceeding- : 
 - dy, though existing barely in imagination ; they are re- 
 
 ‘A 
 ally forced, however inconsistent with their. object, to . 
 19 * Tae 
 Roky ; 6% 
 / , - 
 a 
 
hr oi ps oe a 4 | Y ¢} | 
 ® m, a ‘ae # i sh oS] i 
 
 4 ‘3 # : } ies *® 
 
 - *h y' i fs . ’ i rs Py 
 
 i a . - 4% \ E , : 4 4 
 . ° eB, ge om 
 | safe im. pp tina ga. physical weakness : something at least, which 
 ey" it makes a distinction between man, and other accountable Ne 
 ee \ agents—rendering the apostacy of our race upon trial 
 
 , paayesty certain.* — we Oe 
 
 But on the supposition that there is not ing within, if 
 there be aught in the case, in other aspects, which 
 
 FY makes a failure actually certain ; it is quite indifferent, 
 “as respects our pepgipess, if placed entirely beyond our 
 disposal. 
 
 oe 
 
 In regard particularly . to the relations we sustain to 
 ‘ TN spiritual beings, as the principal fact arising from that 
 
 2 
 > Saaig is the influence which God himself exerts im- 
 sf 
 Pr van. a "i 
 th Bec aint haliove that such is the nature of the human mind, that it be- 
 
 éomes the occasion of universal sin in men in all the appropriate cir- 
 _ cumstances of their existence, and that therefore they are truly and 
 pr operly said to be sinners by nature.””—Doct. Taylor, of Ne w-Haven. 
 7 A proper comment on the above declaration of Taylor, may A wor- 
 ( thy, in my view, a particular observation. 
 
 ‘The first question to which I solicit your notice in regard to this pas- 
 sage, respects the meaning of this statement, that the nature of the 
 rnind is the occasion of its sinning. Is it that its powers and suscepti- 
 bilities are the occasions of its sinning, in distinction from, and irrespec- 
 tively of the moral influence under which they are exerted? If so, 
 wherein does his theory on this subject differ from the doctrine of phy- 
 sical depravity respecting the cause of our sinning ? Or how is tobe 
 
 . reconciled with his belief, that ‘ regeneration is a moral change” sim- 
 7 ply, and “that the necessity of the influence of the Holy Spirit” init, 
 
 ‘‘ results solely from the voluntary evi annie of the sinner’s heart 7” | 
 
 How can it be that the nature of a mind is the sole ground of its sin- 
 
 ning, andits voluntary acts the : ie ground of its need of the Spirit’s 
 
 regenerating influences ? Ifi ite nature is the occasion of its sinning, 
 
 ( what have its circumstances todo in determining the nature ofits mor- 
 al acts? Ifits nature is the occasion of its putting forth the choices, 
 which it does when it sins, is notits nature likewise the occasion of its 
 exerting the acts which it does when it obeys,—and may it not 
 therefore be as “truly and properly said” to be obedient ‘‘ by nature ?” 
 In the next place, I take leave to inquire, whether men ever exist in 
 circumstances that are not “the appropriate circumstances of their ex- 
 
 i! ye 
 
 "h 
 
 oe 
 
c. é wet oe 
 F mediately on the Safety of the soul; I ask tho » wh : 
 insist on a trial o his description, what algal the 
 
 hold out ao the prejudice of a i the first pair? If 
 ee that the state of Adam, n respect to gracious 
 qualifications, was Wiofuly destitute—what is gained sah 
 
 truly on this plan? Are the stern foltes of thatdispen- _ we: 
 sation, as conjectured, measurably softened ? A reply to” 2 
 
 this query presents a gloomy picture. a the 
 child which is put on trial for him: elf, is perfectly sin- 
 less, it is confessedly a subject of grace, as mMuc Aad ‘et % 
 himself. Andif that be allowed, it makes no differefice, ao 
 whether it inwardly. holy or not.. If we can sup- . = 
 pose it, for instance, formed without a bias to good a 
 or evil, it is thus far, like a scale exactly poised: and’ ay, 
 easy is it for God, and nothing easier imaginable, than eas 
 to turn the scale in favor of moral happiness. — And it 
 will certainly occur too, in suggesting the thought, that 6 
 if the child is born with a relish for holiness, the fact is — 
 
 istence?’’ And if they do not, whether all the circumstances in which : 
 they exist, are occasions of their sinning; or whether in other words— 
 as the passage must then mean,—they never exert any obedience? If | 
 they do not, what then becomes of the doctrines which Dr. Taylor pro- 
 fesses respecting election, atonement, regeneration, perseverance ? If 
 men ever do existin circumstanees thatare not “ the appropriate circum- 
 stances of their existence,” who is it that places them in those circum-. 
 stances; God, or themselves? And which, or what are they? Are they % 
 as the passage must then imply—those in which they yield obedience ? - 
 What then is it that constitutes the i ropriateness of those circum - 
 stances? A change of their nature ? can that be a circumstance 
 of their existence? Is it “the suspension of the selfish principle 1” How 
 can that be a circumstance, or at most an ¢éappropriate circumstance | 
 7 
 + 
 : 
 
 of their existence ? Is it then the influences of the Holy Spirit? But can * 
 it be an inappropriate circum stance for men to enjoy his renewing in 
 fluences? What answer can be returned to these inquiries, that can 
 
 give to the passage any adaptation, to allay apprehension respecting. j 
 
 his doctrines, or demonstrate that he is not introducing erroneous senti- . 
 ments into the churches ?— Views in Theology, No. X. ee 
 
 ra e . 
 . =: 4 
 : ¥ 
 x33 . 
 ‘i. <1: 
 ’ # es 
 * . ’ % ° Mi 
 * = 
 
oe sing Fora ee f2 conformity ve: 
 livine ‘lly, 
 
 in that Rent , very ok iously I can ink, even mor 
 
 *. ... gible ‘than that of ‘our ancestor. But notwithstanding 
 Me # thts animating view of the whol fair, desirable as it 
 ve % “Mnay be in itself God withholds chat influence. He 
 erry - Wleaves the child in'this period of being to make his own 
 : ‘ way. ay 1 though he could easily prevent ity in the 
 
 » eertain issue of it [ happens, that falling away univer- 
 i ae Sally fro théir state, the whole race become subject to 
 visto ee 1g ndignation.. | 
 akes place in, the one case, as 
 Doing as in the other, and in regard to its bearing on 
 
 oan estiny, or historically viewed, it is immaterial 
 » ' which, if the cause is really without our influence ; I 
 Si yaa oe add, that the worst of it remains undoubtedly to be 
 Boo he disp sed of. For while this is true, in respect to the 
 fe ? two toa as concerned with a vindication of the 
 -fact—or its connexion, W ith the equity of the divine ad- 
 qoinistration in this world—there is a vast disparity be- 
 tweenthem. There is clearly in regard to the offspring 
 bike of Adam, or manner in which they are presented to no- 
 tice. Jt appears so unequivocally in this light. | For 
 7 while in one case, the creature is born in a state of con- 
 - demnation ; in the other, he is perfectly innocent. On 
 + . one plan, therefore, he cal pot expect a saving influence ; 
 
 on ‘the other, he may fitay 
 one pees) the wi bholding it, is wholly a matter of 
 justice, and based on the acknowledged principles of 
 government ; in the’ c other, it is plainly an act of mere 
 sovereignty. Andyviewed in the latter light, so far from 
 satisfying the complaining and openly vicious of man- 
 ’ kind, I greatly mistake, if Ht be not foreign from any con- 
 
 4 
 
 é 
 | ! # 
 
 * eae 
 
 ; ; uP nem } eo) ' 
 
 if it exist for any tim ‘may render its ¢ ce | 
 
 antici ate it. And while in - 
 
 | 
 
be Ry i 
 isn they form’ of ihe ay iving characters 
 : onsidered oe invariably, bo th as 
 
 ok oo 
 ih 
 y : nd per dtically acknowledged, a rj partial and 
 unpitifuldisplay of almighty prerogati Eek 
 . With these remarks on ew aero which 
 has @medggour a attention in the previous discourse 
 and ‘what relates particularly, to the ruinous effect ofthey 
 apostacy, I commend the whole to your fi ble regar 
 If what I have advanced be in hapmon aoe 
 evidence, it will have a place i in your @evout medita-~ 
 tion; and may serve, I hopeyto enlarge your v vie 
 the divine anal and stréngthen your insight, ‘intel 
 the purity and grandeur of the divine dominion, @, 
 But in pe menaieg a subject of this fearful nature 
 wg 
 is laid before nou in this'menner, by simply. warning, 
 
 to your serious notice, I feel constrained to close 
 
 _ you against a prévailing error: one, that operates ole : 
 in diverting the mind from things of practical interest ; 
 and exciting too in the breast, feelings, that are who ly 
 unbecoming our fallen state. Speaking plainly, itis 
 
 ealities, in a spirit of self- 
 
 a point that is sadly 
 
 the discussion of these awful r 
 
 reliance and extravagant zeal 3 
 overlooked, and if lam not ee d, a disregard of 
 gvhich eminently characterizes the productions of our 
 If there be a subject that we should approach 
 tender sense of religious 
 
 ‘day. 
 with a stibdued feeling, and 
 awe, it is that I contemplate jit is the mournful tale 
 that accounts for the déath and moral condemnation of the 
 species. In these inquiries we should certain feel, » 
 that the exposure of a single soul to the wrath of God, 
 and the miseries of the damned eternally, is a subject of 
 painful remark; but the man who dwells upon this 
 - theme with lightness 5, who oo even refer to these top- - 
 
 a Be: 
 
 U4 
 ® : 
 . ee ee 
 e. , #0 ue g xy 
 he iO % id 
 a 4 ¢ ry : Ee a 
 
 #.;° 
 
> ve 
 
 Wied Rie 
 * 
 7 
 i 
 i 
 & 4 
 ” 
 ie 
 ? é 
 
 5: with a tempe 
 evert ght he m y entertain of his own Nia isa 
 
 ing offender in the sight of God. And though ere oe 
 to discard hag ities—could speak ial of these 
 
 matters—or reason wiselWeoncernfie them, as if to scan 
 
 * the ways of Providence ; if he do it leaning to his own 
 eenggrstanding | he is still far from his” sphere ; and it 
 
 should never be lost lec of, that he is actually i 
 ced in the sacred itings a fool. ° 
 
 vr us beware oon, of the disposition with which 
 
 treat these ae inti ations. As iaptur who have 
 
 qersted rom a gracious | 50 ereign, and who are con- 
 
 scious of crime, let us look at them with de p self-abase- 
 
 ment offeeling. Let us speak of them with the meek- 
 
 . mess and lowliness of mind becoming a little child ; and 
 
 with a lively sense of our fallibility, in communicating 
 
 _ even our clearest discoveries of truth. And praying 
 
 unceasingly, for the illumination of the. Holy Spirit, 
 that we may comprehend ‘what relates to our welfare, 
 so far as it is freely given us of God to know; while we 
 cherish a becoming sense of our ignorance and real im- 
 perfection—are tenderly admonished that we see only 
 through a glass darkly—let us, by all means, in a par- 
 
 ticular respect to the sacred Oracles, be very thank-) 
 
 ful for the light we have already acquired. That while 
 on the one hand, it shall lead us on to highér attain- 
 ments in a knowledge of hese radical considerations— 
 from mY views already a ivancel® as unfolding the pu- 
 rity of Jehovah, and the equity of his dealings with our 
 race, we may not only add to our faith knowledge ; but 
 1 would trust, in a very tender frame, may derive a por- 
 tion of that spirit displayed by blessed Paul ;—when 
 when recounting the mnysteny of God,” as revealed 
 
 ¥. 
 i aete rh 2 hoy 
 r bordering on a a annanea emia 
 
 7. 
 
 ‘< zs 
 a on ee. — oS 
 
v2 
 haet % 
 
 : fi ' 
 
 veer 
 
 nt 
 
 oa. 
 Pal, i. 
 
 ‘ 
 
 ot barely i in our ruin, but porticalg a in rxeovery: eo " 
 Ye ement—he exclaimed % a fahing of rap- ? | sg 
 turous 08 aarement “Oh the depth ap both ee : 
 
 of the wisdom and knowledge dge of coal unsearch- ee 
 ale are his jupemenrs, and his ways past finding head 4 fs 
 For who hath known the mind of he Lord? or ¥ Rae gi 
 hath been his counsellor? Or who hath vive 9 ¥ 
 him, and it shall be retom pence dae "oe Foe e. ; 
 of him, and through him, and to a4 are all thing: , 
 whom be glory forever. Amen.” 
 
 oy 
 rg 
 ®, ” 
 . " 
 % Cae, 
 th ®. ; 
 *¢ 8 86¢ 
 cf 4 
 % % J ch ‘ ‘ 
 , Ge 
 a 
 m. ih 
 
 ae 
 = ‘ P 
 ed NS ‘ 
 ae Pi | 
 -* e 7 
 
 . bad » y *t rs “at 
 
 > « ‘ 
 
 wy os eae +4 
 ’ 7 & F ‘ ® . 
 . a” 
 . # ‘€* Ee e * 
 
hi * ¥ 
 : Pied 15, first Mee ao re 
 Page I 10th line, f a. the ci . er as in the case, 
 Page | , 20th line, a rule of proceeding. ; 
 
 ee 193, last lips for ieaeley purity, read, palais purely. % 
 
&