007 The First Rise of Sin

THE FIRST RISE OF SIN 38.

NEITHER FROM A HOLY NOR SINFUL CAUSE; UNAVOIDABLE WITH GOD, BUT AVOIDABLE WITH CREATURES. EXHIBITED IN AN EXPOSITION OF THE FIRST THREE CHAPTERS OF GENESIS; IN WHICH A NUMBER OF CONJECTURES, CALCULATIONS, AND MATHEMATICAL OBSERVATIONS ARE MADE With novel error men engage; At novel truth they always rage. - MERLUCIOUS.

PREFACE.

LONGITUDE and perpetual motion have employed the prying thoughts of the ingenious for a long time; great premiums are offered to the man who shall first find them out. The apparent advantages of such discoveries would be great; but whether the world will ever enjoy those advantages or not, is a matter of present uncertainty. The first rise of sin has also been a subject of much speculation. Orthodox divines, poets, and mystics have employed their pens to investigate the point; but not being satisfied with the elucidation of any piece that I have seen, I have presumed to offer the following tract to the public, which will speak for itself.

Those who have read Dr. Gill on Genesis, will see that I have borrowed some remarks of him; but, in some instances, I have dared to differ from that great man.

If the conjectures are considered extravagant, or futile, the reader may remember that he is at his full liberty to invent anything better. The whole of it is offered to the world in modesty and diffidence, by the author. J. L. AN EXPOSITION OF THE FIRST THREE CHAPTERS OF GENESIS, ETC. THE history of the world, before the flood, includes only one hundred and seventy verses: from the first of Genesis 7:11. It is very short, and, therefore, very sublime and significant. The term of time, that this short history treats of, is no less than sixteen hundred and fifty-five years, one month, and seventeen days. From this history, we learn that there was one murderer, one man-slayer, one martyr, one prophet, and one preacher, before the deluge; and that the imaginations of men’s hearts were, in general, evil, and only evil, continually. No more than twenty-seven personal names are given us in this account, viz.: Adam, the first man, and Eve, his wife - Cain, and eleven of his posterity- Abel - Seth, and eleven of his descendants; and yet, we are told by some, that there were eleven, and some say, eighty thousand millions of people destroyed in the flood. No doubt but what there was a large number, but this account seems extravagant, beyond all reason; for this would be more than six souls to every acre of land on the face of the globe; which, perhaps, is eighty times as many as have ever been on the earth, living at one time, since the flood. 39. The name, God, is used seventy-three times before the deluge, and the name, LORD, or Jehovah, thirty-five. No direct promise is given of the Messiah, in the whole history, but the conquering seed of the woman is made known in the denunciation of Jehovah God to the serpent.

But, what lies before me at this time, is to confine my observations to the first three chapters of Genesis, containing eighty verses.

CHAPTERS 1. AND 2. IN the first chapter, the phrase, and God said, is found ten times. A short account of creation is given, which is more fully explained, in a supplementary way, in the second; for which reason, both chapters are explained together; introduced by the words, THE FIRST DAY. In the beginning. Not of eternity, which had no beginning, but of time. If the history of Moses respects the whole creation, this clause destroys the notion of the pre-existence of angels, or the human soul of Christ; but if his history only treats of the solar system, and there are other worlds, and systems of worlds in existence, let their histories be produced, and they shall be regarded. Creation had, some time, a beginning; and no sufficient reason has yet been offered, that it ever had a beginning anterior to the Mosaic account. He who wrought in the beginning, was God. The Elohim, here used, is a noun of plural number, and seems to express a trinity of persons in the divine Essence: by this triune Creator were all things created, visible and invisible. The word Elohim, is said, by some, to signify all Power, to show that creation and formation were the effects of omnipotence; that the world, both as to matter and form, was the creature of God, and did not emerge by the fortuitous motion and conjunction of pre-existing matter. Others say, the word represents a being, in whom all fulness centres. This is true of the Creator; but as the same name is given to angels, and the rulers of this world, who are not centres of all perfections, the first signification seems best. The things that God made in the beginning, were, the heavens and the earth. All created heavens are here intended, at least in substance, though not as yet spread out like a garment, or tent. It is most likely that the Heaven for angels was first finished, and then peopled by angels; for it is certain that the heavens, earth, and seas, and all things in them, were made in the six days; and as angels were present on the third day, when the foundations of the earth were fixed, and sang for joy; where is a more likely time to assign for their creation than the first day? The word heaven, here used, signifies above, as the word earth does below, so that whatever is above or below, in substance, was made on the first day. But when the earth was first made, it was without form and void. Not without some form, which always attends gross matter, but void of the form which it now has - which it had when Moses wrote - which it had before the flood - and particularly which it had on the third day, when it was new-moulded and decorated by God. Had man been then formed, he could not have discerned what form it was in, for, darkness was upon the face of the deep. The particles of the earth being as much heavier than water as twenty exceeds twelve, of course, sunk the lowest, while the particles of water rose uppermost, resembling a deep sea; and as no light had then been made, (at least to appear,) darkness covered the whole mass; but it did not long remain in that predicament, for, the spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. By the spirit of God, some understand the wind, which is volatile, like spirit, which they suppose moved on the face of the waters; if so, then the air was made on the first day. If this does not intend the wind, no account is given of its creation in the Genessian history; and as fire cannot exist in a visible manner without air, it looks as if the air must have been made before the light appeared. But it is more generally believed, that the infinite spirit of God is meant. The clauses before this, treat of the creation of all above and below, and the dark situation all was in; and this clause speaks of the working of God’s power, to produce things and creatures out of what was already created: and, indeed, it appears most likely, that what the Hebrews call To-hu and Bo-hu, and the Greeks call chaos, was made in the beginning of the first day, and that out of this crude mass all things were formed. And when the spirit of God thus moved, God said, let there be light, which was the first time that God spake. It appears most probable, that God, the Son, was the speaker; from which it is said, in the beginning was the Word - all things were made by him - in him was light: and the first word was obeyed, for there was light; likely in the form of a pillar of fire, which answered the use of a sun, until the fourth day, when the sun was formed. And God saw the light that he had made, and it was good in itself, and would be useful to men. The almighty Architect examined his work, to see if it was well done, and pronounced it good. And God divided the light from the darkness, by causing the light to move round the rough mass of matter, or, more likely, the rough mass, to turn round the light. In either case, the shadow of the dark ball made darkness, and the light shining upon it made it lucid, and the division depended upon the diurnal motion, which has lasted to this day. And God called the light day, and the darkness, he called night; which times are to continue, alternately, as long as the earth remaineth. And the evening and the morning were the first day. Darkness preceded the light, likely, about twelve hours, which was succeeded by twelve hours light, which evening and morning made the first day. Various philosophers say, that darkness was before light, and many nations, such as the Romans, Athenians, Druids, etc., began their days in the evening, as also, did the Jews their holy days. THE SECOND DAY. And God said, let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters. This firmament is called heaven; the visible heavens are intended, which were spread out like a curtain, on the second day. The use of this expanse was to divide the waters from the waters; from which, some have supposed that there are fountains of water above, anti that these fountains of the great deep were broken up, in the time of the flood, when the waters descended in awful cataracts; or, it may signify nothing more than that the firmament was to divide the waters which were in the seas, lakes, rivers, etc., from the waters which were in the clouds. Obsequious to the Almighty fiat, it was so; and the evening and the morning were the second day. That the second day’s work was well done, there is no doubt; but there is no account that God inspected it and pronounced it good. THE THIRD DAY. And God said, let the waters under the heavens be gathered together in one place. Before this, they covered over the whole face of the earth, but now God broke up, for the sea, the spacious channel, and ordered the waters to retire to their destined habitation, and said, "hitherto shalt thou come, and no further, and here shall thy proud waves be stayed." This was done that the Lord might appear. At this time the pillars of the earth were fixed, which made "the morning stars sing together, and all the sons of God shout for joy." And God called the dry land earth, and the gathering together of the waters, called he seas. The earth includes the two continents, and all the islands, but it is highly probable that the face of it differed widely, at that time, from its present position. There were seas before Moses wrote, and perhaps there were before the flood, and most likely before the fall, for God called the waters, seas. The seas at present have a communication with each other, but as they wash different shores, and for that cause, bear different names, the plural is kept up among us. The earth and seas, together, form the terraqueous globe, supposed to be a spherioid, though generally treated of as a sphere. The ancients conceived the earth and seas to be as flat as a trencher, and those who believed in antipodes were called heretics. The earth seems to be governed by the law of gravitation, subordinate to God; and though small, in comparison to some of the globes, is yet great and wonderful in itself, to show forth the mighty works of God. The diameter of the earth is computed at seven thousand six hundred and thirty-six miles; the circumference twenty-four thousand miles; .the surficial contents to be above twenty-eight millions of miles; which, if reduced to acres, would be above eighteen thousand millions: but, if a third part of the face of the globe is allowed to be sea, the acres of land would be more than twelve thousand millions: which would make about twenty-one such empires as that of the United States, 41. one hundred and seventy-five such states as Virginia, or four thousand five hundred and fifty such as Connecticut. And, if ten acres of land is sufficient for an individual, the earth will support more than a thousand millions of souls.

It is difficult to tell what is in the globular centre of the terraqueous ball, whether earth, water, rocks or mineral; and as difficult to put the point of a needle on any part of its ambit, which is not the superficial centre; nature having fixed it under such laws, that every part of it is central. The annual motion of the earth determines the length of a year, which is about three hundred and sixty-five days, and six hours: and the diurnal motion fixes the length of a day, which is twenty-four hours. The surface of the earth is unweariedly moving, in her diurnal course, about the equator, the distance of one thousand miles an hour, and carries all her inhabitants with her: and as the distance between the earth and sun is ninety millions of miles, the earth is moving, with her inhabitants, in the direction of her annual circuit, about sixty-four thousand miles an hour. Does this surprise you, and make you cry out, impossible? If so, only consider, that if the earth stands still, according to the vulgar notion, and the sun moves round it, the sun must fly at the speed of above five hundred and sixty-five millions of miles each day; or, three hundred and ninety-two thousand eight hundred and fifty-seven miles each minute, in his diurnal course; which is about fifty-six thousand times as swift as a ball flies from the mouth of a cannon. The earth is girt round with a girdle of circumambient air, which closely adheres to her in all her motions. Should a cannon be placed on the earth perpendicularly, and discharge a ball into the air, if the ball should be gone two minutes before it returned, the cannon would have removed, in that space of time, thirty-three miles, consequently the ball would return that distance from the cannon’s mouth; but, as the air adheres to the earth, the ball would return to the very point from whence it went. The solid contents of the terraqueous globe, is above three hundred thousand millions of miles, which, if reduced to inches, would be more than eight hundred thousand trillions. An inch of common sand weighs about an ounce, Troy, but an inch of water weighs only twelve penny-weights. Rocks and minerals weigh much more than sand. If sand may be considered as a medium, the globe weighs as many ounces (Troy) as there are inches in its contents. Fifty-one ounces, Troy, are equal to fifty-six, avoirdupois; and fourteen pounds avordupois, are equal to seventeen Troy. The earth, by this rule, weighs more than ninety-seven quatillions of ounces, Avoirdupois, or, above three hundred trillions of tons. And God said, let the earth bring forth grass, herbs, and fruitful trees, yielding fruit after their kind, whose seed are in themselves, upon the earth. The spirit of God, that brooded upon the terraqueous globe on the first day, had, on the third day, not only separated the waters from the earth, but also impregnated the earth to produce vegetables for beasts and fruit-trees for man: and this provision was made before the creatures were formed to eat them. So, likewise, it is in the new creation, all spiritual blessings are provided in the New Covenant for men before they are new made to receive them. The grass, herbs, and trees, had seed within themselves to produce their kind, which has continued in order down to this day. After God had made the earth, he made it vegetate and bring forth fruit; even so when men are created in Christ Jesus and put on the new man, they work for God and bring forth the fruits of the Spirit. On this third day, the Lord made to grow out of the ground every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the Tree of Life, also, in the midst of the garden, and the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil, though not spoken of until afterwards: from which we learn that creation furnished objects to please the senses, as well as to support the rational creature with food. Likewise, in religion, not only safety, but pleasure is found; the ways thereof are ways of pleasantness, and all her paths are peace. And God saw all that he had done, on the third day, and it was good; no evil had yet appeared: angels retained their integrity, and filial subjection to their Maker. THE FOURTH DAY. And God said, let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven. This firmament includes all that space between the earth and third heavens; but that part of it called the starry heavens, seems to be particularly intended. No new light was made on this day; but that pillar of fight, made on the first day, was, on this day, formed into the various luminaries, afterwards spoken of, to divide the day from the night, to be for signs and seasons, for days and years. Day and night are governed by the sun; while the sun shines on the face of the earth, it is day, and when it goes down, it is night. The length of the day is equal to the presence of the sun, and the length of the night equal to his absence. The moon, in her fulness, arises upon the setting of the sun, and enlightens the earth during his absence; and, therefore, is said, to rule the Night. When the moon fails us in her nocturnal visits, the twinkling stars pay their officious aid, and, by reason of their number, cast much light upon the inhabitants of the earth.

These lights were to be for signs; not for deluded necromancers to prognosticate by; no, those dull masses, ignorant of their own existence, can never foretel things future, respecting men; but for signs of good and bad weather, for the times of plowing, sowing and reaping. And seasons of summer and winter, spring and fall. For days, by the diurnal motion, in twenty-four hours; and years, by the annual circuit, in three hundred and sixty-five days and a few hours. The greater light to rule the day; i.e., the sun, called by the ancients, Ur, which word signifies both light and heat; and, it is evident, that the sun is the fountain of heat as well as light. This stupendous orb may well be called great, being about nine hundred thousand times the bigness of the earth; placed at the distance of ninety millions of miles from the ball that we inhabit; yet capable of darting a ray of light to us in the space of seven and a half minutes. This amazing luminary is the centre of the solar system, and once in twenty-eight years, all the worlds that play around it, come again to the same point and condition. This sovereign of nature, rules the day with such resplendent lustre, that no other orb is seen to shine in his presence: but instead of being an object of religious adoration, is but a speck of Jehovah’s works, placed in the heavens, to show forth the wisdom, power, and goodness of the Almighty. The smaller light (the moon) to rule the night. The moon is called a light, but she borrows all her bright ornaments of the sun. That the moon is an opaque body of some kind of matter, is evident, otherwise she would not eclipse the sun when she intervenes.

One entire day of the moon is almost equal to thirty of our natural days; consequently, the moon’s night is nearly equal to fifteen of our days and nights.

If the moon is inhabited, it is matter of conjecture, whether her inhabitants sleep so long at a time, and work as long without sleeping: and how much the men of the moon must eat for supper, upon this supposition, is matter of speculation. The moon in bulk, is as follows: diameter, two thousand one hundred and seventy-five miles; circumference, six thousand eight hundred and sixty-four miles; ambit, above three and a half million, which, if reduced to acres, would be more than two thousand millions. But, if one third part of the moon’s surface, is allowed to be seas, it leaves upwards of one and a half thousand millions of acres in land: and, if ten acres of land are sufficient to support an individual, the moon will support above one hundred and fifty-eight millions of souls. The size, complexion, dress, manners, language, laws, and religion of those people, we are ignorant of, (although the moon is called our neighbor.) Swedenburgh’s account gains but little credit among us; the air-balloons have not yet answered the purpose of forming an acquaintance; what future experiments may do, is uncertain,

He made the stars also. Some, who believe in the existence of worlds and systems of worlds, prior to the solar system, suppose that this clause respects the creation of those stars, which are worlds or centres of worlds, and, that though by their inconceivable distance, 42. they appear to us but small points, like the diamond on a lady’s ring, yet they are of themselves, globes of amazing magnitude. They conclude, that the same hand that made the sun and moon, on the fourth day, had made these stars long before. But it seems rather to respect those stars, that were made at the same time that the sun and moon were.

Others restrain it to the planetary stars, viz., Mars, Mercury, Jupiter, Venus, Saturn, and Herschel. Some of these stars have their moons, rings, and satellites playing around them, of which I cannot at this time be particular.

It is best, however, by these stars, to understand not only those already mentioned, but likewise Arcturus and his sons, Pleiades, and the chambers of the south, as well as all the constellations and stars in the heavens. And God saw his work and it was good; free from evil, which had no being as yet, and the evening and the morning were the fourth day. THE FIFTH DAY. On the fifth day, God gave orders to the waters to bring forth living creatures. On the first day, gross nature was made; on the third day, vegetable life sprung out of chaos, and discovered itself in the grass, herbs and trees; and on the fifth day, animal life was produced. Fish of every kind were created, from the largest kraken to the smallest minnows; and fowls to fly in the open air, from the eagle to the fly. These, it seems, were produced out of the water, and yet, if we cast our eyes on Genesis 2:19, it is pretty plain that they were made out of the earth. To reconcile both places together, and both to the nature of things, it is supposable that they were both made out of the earth at the water’s side; or, more likely, out of the mud, under the water. It is also probable, that the fish were made in the fore part of the day, and fowls in the after part. There is a considerable likeness between these two species of creatures: both steer their courses by their tails; fins and scales to one, are as wings and feathers to the other, and both are oviparous. After God had made them, he blessed them with the power of procreation, and bid them be fruitful, and fill their destined elements. This day’s work, also, was well done: God saw that it was good; and the evening and the morning were the fifth day. And God said, let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind: i.e., let the living creatures be made out of the earth, and live upon it; for, notwithstanding, the earth was impregnated by the spirit of God, and warmed by the sun, yet these causes could not create beasts without omnipotent power; and so it follows, God made beasts, cattle, and creeping things after their kind: by which is meant, wild beasts, tame cattle, serpents and reptiles; and God saw it was good.

Thus the earth was made for man to dwell upon, the heavens to cover over him as a canopy, the sun to enlighten him by day, the moon and stars by night, herbs and fruit-trees for his food, and every living thing for his service, before he was formed. Moreover, a garden of pleasure was planted in the east part of the land of Eden, with all kinds of useful and pleasant trees; and, to consummate his earthly enjoyments, a river of water went out of Eden, and ran through the garden, to water it, which spread out in four branches, as it left the garden, and formed the four rivers, Pison, Gihon, Hiddekel, and Euphrates. The first of these rivers is nowhere spoken of in scripture besides. The second is spoken of, 1 Kings 1:33; 2 Chronicles 32:30, or, more likely, another river of the same name. The third ran through Persia, near Shushan, the palace, and the fourth ran through Babylon.

Almost all parts of the world have contended for this garden, and seem to be at as great loss about it as chronologers are about the time in which Job lived. Whether it was in Ceylon, Armenia, the land of Judah, Mesopotamia, or in any other place contended for, it certainly was a delightful spot, and seemed to invite an occupant; but as beautiful as things appeared, it had not rained upon the earth. But there went up a mist from the earth, being exhaled by the sun, from the seas, rivers, etc., in very small particles, and forming a cloud, sprinkled down water upon the whole face of the ground. And God said, let us make man after our image and likeness, and let them have dominion over fish, fowl, cattle and creeping things. These words were not spoken to beasts, that could not understand; nor to angels, who were neither of the privy council, nor co-workers with God in creation; but the phrase bespeaks a co-operation of Father, Son and Holy Ghost in creating man: and man immediately was made in the image of God: not in the image of his deity: that God who cannot lie, could not make a being like himself, in that respect. Christ only bears the express image of his Father’s person, as a natural son bears the image of his natural father; but the first man that was made, bore the image of God as the wax bears the image of the signet. He was also in the image of God, in this point of view: the Father, Word, and Holy Ghost are one; so soul, spirit and body, make one man; there is a trinity in man, as well as in God; moreover, he was made in the same human shape and dispositon that Christ was to appear in, a true figure of him who was to come; in these senses, he was made in the image of God, and was lovely in the eyes of his Maker.

Male and female created he them. Both sexes were in one body. The man is not without the woman, nor the woman without the man in the Lord.

It is the opinion of some of the mystic writers, that Adam had power to propagate his own species before Eve was separated from him, having both the masculine and feminine natures in him; but it can hardly be credited, that sin has radically altered the shape of man; and how Adam could multiply with such a shape, without he had the power of creating, is unaccountable; and that he had power to create, no man pretends. It is best therefore to suppose that God made both natures in one body, with an intention of separating them before they procreated. Matter was first made, on the first day, afterwards it was remoulded; then Adam was made out of it; and lastly the woman out of man; so that women are the most refined from dross matter - removed the furthest from clay of any of the lower creatures.

After God had made man, he put him into the garden to dress and keep it, and immediately constituted him a subject of moral government, by enjoining a law (not a covenant) on him, with a penalty annexed thereto. This indulgent father and divine legislated, or gave him free liberty to eat of all the trees in the garden, and regale himself with all the pleasures of paradise; but as there was one noxious tree, 43. he would have him avoid it; and said,

"My son, you may eat of all the trees in the garden, save one, the fruit of which will poison you to death; and lest my caution should be ineffectual, I command you not to touch it; and to make my law forcible, I add the penalty of death to the breaker of it, which shall be inflicted the very day that the law is broken." This law therefore may be considered as a cautionary command, and it appears most likely to me that there was a poisonous quality, a physical evil in the tree, that would have mortalized Adam, if God had not prohibited it. This prohibition was also a test of Adam’s obedience, to train him up in moral subjection.

After God made Adam and placed him in the garden, he did not choose idleness for him, but brought unto him all the beasts and fouls to name; and Adam gave names to them all, by which they were afterwards called.

Some think that this is a great proof of Adam’s primeval wisdom, in giving names to the creatures, the signification of which exactly agreed with the nature of the creatures to whom they were applied: but it is not likely that the names that Adam called them by, had been received into his dialect before, (for this affair happened within a few hours after his formation,) and if not, I cannot see how the signification of a name could exist before the name itself. But among all the creatures that were brought before him to name, there was not found a helpmeet for him, not one that he could converse with; none to help him keep and dress the garden; nor any to help him procreate. This wonderous creature, man, of whom so much is said, was made out of the dust of the earth, in or near Eden; and after God had formed him in human shape, he breathed into him the breath of life, and he became a living soul. Vegetative and animal lives were made out of the earth, as distillers extract the spirit from grain, etc.; and therefore when they die, their spirits return to the earth from whence they came; but the soul of man was breathed out of the mouth of God, and therefore when men die, their souls go to God from whence they came. At the time when God quickened Adam’s dust with animal life, he infused the immortal soul into him. Though Eve was in Adam, as has been said, yet it is not likely that the soul of Eve was in Adam’s soul, much less in his rib. And the Lord God said, it is not good that man should be alone, I will make an helpmeet for him. It may here be observed that the name Lord or Jod-he, vahhe, used in this clause, and indeed eleven times in the eleventh chapter, is expressive of the eternity of God. Gross nature, animals, and the mortal lives of men had a beginning, and will have an end; but there is one being who never had a beginning, and will never have an end; and this being is Jehovah, here translated Lord. This eternal God saw that it was not good for man so to dwell alone. This clause has led some to believe that the defection had begun; but it designs nothing more than that God saw that man could not propagate by himself alone, nor be as happy as he might be with an associate. Moral evil is indefatigable here, because after this God pronounced all things very good. The way in which the Lord God made Adam a helpmeet, was as follows: He caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, which was the first time that he ever slept: it was near the close of the sixth day, and perhaps, Adam was weary with his day’s work in naming all the creatures, (as the second Adam often was in travelling,) and his senses were all locked up for rest. This was a deep sleep; common sleep would not have kept the senses dormant enough to bear the operation that Adam went through; but this was so deep that Adam felt no pain while his side was opened, a rib taken from thence, and the flesh closed up again. This rib the Lord formed into a woman and brought her to Adam.

Anatomists say, that men have twelve ribs on each side; if so, we should judge that Adam had thirteen, at least on one side, and that the superfluous, unmated rib, was taken out for the purpose of a woman. The part of Adam that was taken to form a women, was neither from his head nor feet; to teach us that women should not attempt to rule their husbands, nor be trodden under foot by them: but the rib was from his side, under his arm, near his heart; to show that the woman is to be by her husband, under the arm of his protection, near the heart of his love.

It looks as if God carried off the rib to a little distance from Adam, while he formed it into a woman; perhaps to the same place where Adam was formed; and when God had formed this lovely creature, he brought her to Adam; who upon first sight knew her, at least from whence she came, and said, "this is bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh." Her bones and flesh were taken from him, and this he knew. Perhaps while he was asleep, he was taught it in a dream; or God might reveal it to him by impulse; or we may suppose, that though Adam was in a deep sleep when the ribs were taken from him, yet he awaked before it was formed into a woman, and stood not far off to see God form it into a human shape; but let him come by his knowledge one way or another, he knew from whence she came, and called her name woman, because she came from man.

Even so, when souls are new made by divine grace, they are brought to the second Adam, the Lord Jesus Christ; being drawn by the father, not against, but with their wills; and when they come, Jesus knows them and calls them by a new name. Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and shall cleave unto his wife, and they shall be one flesh.

If these words were spoken by Adam, at the time when he received Eve, they were either prophetic of, or preceptives for his posterity; for they were not applicable to Adam’s case, who had no father but God, and no mother but the earth, neither of which was he to leave for his wife.

If they are considered as the words of Moses, they were not spoken at the time when Eve was brought to Adam, but between two and three thousand years afterwards, when the Hebrew historian wrote; and this he gives as a reason why men should cleave to their wives and take care of them. But rather the words were spoken by God himself, who, at the time of instituting marriage, gave directions about it. In Matthew 19:4-5, where Jesus quotes this passage, he informs us that he who made the male and female at the beginning, said for this cause, etc. And God blessed them with the tokens of his favor and love, and with the power of procreation, and said unto them, be faithful and multiply and replenish the earth with your offspring, and subdue it, by tilling the ground, sowing and reaping, and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the foul of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the face of the earth. As man was to be in subjection to God, so all the creatures below were to be in subjection to man, who was appointed vicegerent of the world. To the beasts, God gave every green herb, but to man he gave seed and fruit-trees. There is no account that God gave the beasts, birds and fish to man, for the purpose of eating, or that ever the antedeluvians did eat any of them before the flood; but it is certain that this divine charter gave man the dominion of them all, and very likely he and his children ate thereof, before the days of Noah. In the day when they were made, they were both naked and were not ashamed. It is supposable that the air was temperate, and therefore they needed no clothing; and it is very doubtful whether the elements would ever have raged, and fomented storms, if sin had never entered the world. However, if it was the design of God to have them wear clothes in future, it is probable that he intended that they should manufacture for themselves. As sin and guilt were strangers, so shame was unknown. Since the fall, God calls upon men to be ashamed of their ways; and grace teaches men to be ashamed of those things that do not profit; but that which is a virtue in a guilty man, would be mean and insignificant in an innocent being. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day. Upon the close of each day before (the second excepted) the Lord pronounced all good; but upon the close of all his creation work, de declares all to be very good. Nothing sinful or disorderly had yet appeared; angels, man and beasts, all stood in their p6oper order and obedience.

Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, all the hosts of them. THE SEVENTH DAY. And on the seventh day God ended his work, or had ended his work, for all things were made in six days; and he rested the seventh day from all his work which he had made, not that he was fatigued with labor, as men are, but he ceased from his work, as it is expressed Hebrews 4:10. And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it. Although there is no account that ever man regarded the seventh day of the week more than any other, until the giving of manna in the wilderness, yet this is given as a reason, in the fourth commandment, why the nation of Israel should rest on the seventh day of the week.

If the decalogue (the ten commandments) is all of a moral nature, the injunction is binding on all nations; and if all nations were under the bond of regarding the seventh day in a holy manner, it is strange that St. Paul never had occasion to reprove the Gentiles, for the breach of it, as the Jewish prophet had to reprove their own nation; and besides, if the observance of the seventh day was a moral obligation upon all nations, God either designed that the poles of the earth should never be peopled, or the moral law required a natural impossibility; for, at the poles, there is but one day and night in a year. Yea, further; how is it possible for persons, under opposite horizons, being antipodes to each other, to keep the same day? The most, therefore, that can be said, (at least proved,) is that God rested on the seventh day; and that after above two thousand four hundred years, he ordained that the nation of Israel should keep the same day of the week, throughout their generations. If, in the New Testament, Christians are commanded to keep the first day, by Christ or his apostles, that divine appointment is sufficient; human legislatures have nothing to do in ordaining fixed holy days, establishing creeds of faith, requiring religious tests, certificates, or anything of the kind.

Having made some remarks on the six days’ work, and the seventh day’s rest, the history of which includes the first and second chapters, I shall proceed to some observations on the third, which treats of the entrance of sin into the human world; but, as Satan seems to be a leading character in this chapter, it appears necessary to say something about angels, and by what means they were turned from celestial spirits to infernal devils. But before I enter upon the dark arena, I shall premise a few things. First, on the nature of God, and secondly, on the nature of his decrees. And who is sufficient for these things? Can man, by searching, find out God, or the Almighty, unto perfection? Clouds and darkness are round about him, yet righteousness and judgment are the habitation of his throne. Verily, he is a God that hideth himself, and giveth not a full account of any of his matters. Remember, O my soul, how vengeance fell on the Bethshemites, for prying too curiously into the ark. "Man was not made to question, but adore." Yet, with all submission to divine power and wisdom, let me attempt to speak of my God, and the glory of his works.

First. The Almighty exists of necessity, and yet willingly: he is of that nature that he cannot but exist, and yet that necessity does not destroy his infinite freedom; for he is under no necessity, but that of innate law. Should I affirm that all God’s works are works of necessity, it would convey this idea: that God cannot do anything, more or less than what he now does; which, perhaps, would be an idea unbecoming Omnipotence; and yet it may be safely affirmed, that many of his works are necessarily done. If God is under no necessity to speak, yet, when he speaks of choice, he is under necessity to speak truth, for he cannot lie. He is under a necessity of showing forth the glory of his perfections in his works, (when he works of choice,) for he cannot work beneath himself. And if creation was a deed of choice, and not of necessity, yet judicial works are works of necessity; God’s nature being such, that he is under the necessity of innate law, to judge and punish for the glory of his perfections. If it should be thought presumptuous to say, that God cannot punish sooner, otherwise, or more severely than he does; if we consider that love and goodness counterpoise power and justice, and that, sometimes, mercy rejoices against judgment, it will not appear more presumptuous, perhaps, than true. The great question is, whether God could have prevented sin or not? If the works of creation were works of necessity, i.e., if the nature of God was such, that he could not but have made the world when he did, and as he did, I conclude that it was not possible for God to have prevented sin; but if creation was a work of will, and not of necessity, then God could have prevented sin, by having not made the world, and creatures in it, to sin. But more of this hereafter.

Second. Did God decree that angels and men should sin, or not? A decree is the law of a court to accomplish same purpose. No such law was given to angels, to Adam, or to his children. The decree, through the Bible, is that creatures should not sin. But I do not wish to criticise on phrases. The general idea of a decree, among Calvinistic writers, is the eternal design of God; the question is, therefore, whether it was the eternal design of God that sin should have birth, or not? If it was the design, decree, or secret will of God, that creatures should sin, how can it be sin? for sin is a transgression of his will. If God decreed sin, he decreed that which is opposed to his nature, contrary to his law, and what he could not effect himself, nor make his creatures effect. Some make a great difference between his secret and revealed will. Is not this charging God with duplicity? That there is a difference between the law that God works by, and the law given to his creatures, is granted. The rule of God’s working, is either the law of his nature, or sovereign will; for there was no anterior existent to impose a law on him; but the law of his creatures, is his moral and absolute precepts; and simple obedience, without gainsaying, is indispensable from all rational intelligences. But the question is, whether it was the secret will of God, that sin should (in a direct or indirect manner) enter in among his creatures, and at the same time forbid it? If so, it is no wonder that all the philosophic divines are puzzled to reconcile the goodness of God with the misery of his creatures. But why do men talk so? Have they learned their theory from Scripture, or divine teaching? If from either, then it is revealed to them, and, therefore, is no longer his secret will. It has been observed, that the rule of God’s working, was either innate law or sovereign will. That sin is agreeable to the law of his nature, I presume, no man vindicates; and if it was his sovereign will that sin should emerge, it was then unavoidable; either God or creatures must effect it: God could not, and, therefore, it follows, that creatures unavoidably must. If sin then is sin - the parent of sorrow - the cause of death and eternal misery, who can justify the goodness of God upon, this principle? If sin is according to the secret, sovereign will of God, it is to answer some noble purpose; for all God’s appointed works will praise him; but what angel or man can point out any general good effected by sin? If sin is the cause of general good, all creatures should love it; and if creatures should love it, why are they called upon to repent of, and hate it? The first character that God ever discovered himself in, to Adam, (and likely to angels,) was that of a moral governor, and he treated him as a subject of moral government: first as a legislator, in giving a law; and afterwards as a judge, in punishing crimes. And as it was not possible for God to sin, or make creatures sin, so, likewise, (considering him in the character of a moral governor,) it was not possible for him to prevent it. Should a legislator do anything more than make laws, forbidding crimes; should he make places of confinement, and shut up all his subjects, to prevent their crimes, what a kingdom of miserable subjects he would have; but if he makes them happy, with the freedom of thinking, speaking, walking and working, and only gives them a law of good behaviour, it is not possible for him to prevent their transgression: the only means that he could make use of to prevent it, would make them entirely miserable. So it was with God; he loved his creatures, and sought to make them happy; and, as rational creatures cannot be happy without the freedom of their will, this freedom was established in them by God; and, in this point of view, it was not possible for God to have prevented their sin; as the only means that would have secured them from sin, would have made them completely miserable.

Here, then, we see God, all goodness, seeking the happiness of his creatures, and the very essentials of rational happiness, by their inadvertence, proved their overthrow.

If the question then is asked, whether sin was unavoidable, or avoidable? the answer is, unavoidable with God, but avoidable with creatures. For creatures, in their moral agency, had sufficient power to stand and obey, as well as freedom to rebel. If, then, creation is acknowledged to be a good work, and that God had a right to command the creatures that he made, the character of God is clear in the apostacy of creatures; for his foreknowledge of their fall, had no influence on their wills, nor in any way occasioned their sin, any more than the foreknowledge of David made Judas sell his master. The new divinity, (so called,) which declares God to be the efficient author of sin, and that sin, eventually, is the cause of great good, represents Jehovah as a cruel being, and cuts the nerves of repentance; for what idea must we form of a being, whose nature was such, that he could not discover the full glory of it, without the transgression of his creatures, which eventually brings on the damnation of many of them? And, if the truth of God is to abound more by the lies of his creatures, and the wrath of man is to work the righteousness of God, how can men be convinced and judged as transgressors? Every honest heart, unbiased by system, upon hearing "that God designed men to sin, and that sin will effect great good," will confess, that the natural conclusion is, let men sin. That the Divine Legislator has given many laws to fallen creatures, which were not from the beginning, in which he, (in some sort,) accommodates himself to their condition, requires no proof but just to cast our thoughts on all laws of civil government, laws of war, and laws of putting away wives. These laws were not, and could not be from the beginning. In the execution of these laws, he makes use of one wicked man, or nation to punish another; and as the instruments act voluntarily from a wicked heart, (although their wrath, in action, praises God,) he punishes those instruments for what they do. Now, if from this consideration, it can be proved that God is more glorified, and men, (upon a large scale,) more happy than they would have been, if sin had never entered the world, then we may say, that sin is the cause of great good: otherwise, the circumstance of Joseph’s being sold by his brethren, and Jesus being hated and crucified by the Jews will not prove it. But to descend to the enquiry respecting angels. It has been observed, that no good reason has yet been given to prove that angels were made before the first day; but if they were made ten thousand years before, the difficulties are still the same in accounting for their first sin.

Beasts are all brutal, angels are all spirit; but men are part brute, and part angel. It is a point of dispute in these days, whether materiality belongs to all creatures or not; if so, then angels were made spiritual matter, but whether they were made spiritual matter, or spirit, distinct from matter, it is presumable that they were made beings that could neither pro-create nor die: and yet it is certain that they were subject to moral mutability.

There is no way, in idea, possible to account for the entrace of sin among rational creatures, but by considering their wills entirely at liberty; as the contrary would destroy the very notion of vice and virtue, good and evil, right and wrong. It must, therefore, be supposed that angels, as subjects of moral government, were considered under a law, with the freedom of their wills, to obey or rebel. But how it was possible for sinless creatures, without a tempter, to choose to rebel, is a matter of great weight yet, as difficult as it appears to us, it has certainly been the case with angels. The best way that I can conceive of it, is as follows, and which is partly conjectural.

One reason why Jehovah was six days in forming the worlds and their inhabitants, was, that angels might see what he could do; who stood by, as spectators, and sang together, and shouted for joy; and it looks most likely that not one of them had sinned before the third day, for they ALL sang for joy; which would not have been the case, if any of them had commenced rebellion. And further, it is probable that none of them had rebelled on the sixth day; for God, at the close of that day pronounced all very good. It is a further conjecture, that sin had not raised any commotion in the universe until after the seventh day; for, on that day, God rested; seeing nothing out of order in all his works. But, soon after this, (perhaps on the eighth day,) the rebellion broke out. The last of creation-work, was man; at the sight of whom, angels were filled with wonder, to see a body so noble, erect, and possessed with such endowments of mind; but while angels were wondering, said God to angels, "my Son shall assume the nature, and appear in the form, of that man, whom ye now behold; and I command all of you to worship him as an incarnate God. " This was the first time that Christ was brought into the world, by name; and when Jehovah brought his first begotten into the world, he said, "let all the angels of God worship him. " This appears to be the test of their obedience; and the trial was, whether they would worship a being in a nature inferior to their own, merely because God commanded them to. At this juncture, angels had full power to obey, and yet their wills were free to rebel; for God treated them as subjects of moral government, and exercised no coercion over them.

Angelic wisdom now began to reason. "What," said angels, "shall we worship a nature inferior to our own; why not worship a beast as well? It will be idolatry to worship a creature, and man is but a creature; our wisdom tells us, therefore, that it is best not to obey." Here rebellion arose. The wisdom of angels could not comprehend how divinity and humanity could be personally united; and, therefore, to prevent idolatry, they transgressed a divine command. Let our views be ever so good - let our reasoning be ever so fair - yet, if we refuse to obey a plain command, because we do not understand every thing contained in it, we are guilty of that crime which turned celestial angels into infernal devils. To say that the first sin came from a sinful cause, is absurd; and to suppose that it came from a holy cause, is contrary to the order of nature. It is best, therefore, to conceive of it as arising from the limited wisdom and inadvertent conduct of sinless creatures. Sin, then, is the creature of beings, who are, themselves, the creatures of God. It is highly probable, from the order of God’s works, that some angels were more noble and capacious than others, and that one of the high rank, perhaps the highest that God made, took the lead in the rebellion, and used his angelic oratory to persuade the rest to follow him, who, to this day, has a kind of subordinate government over others. When they are called devils, he is called their prince; and when he is called the devil, they are called his angels. But let it be observed, that angels acted personally for themselves; one was not a representative for another; and, as they do not procreate, corruption of nature is not communicated by generation.

If it should be objected,

"that if the first cause of sin was the limited wisdom of creatures, it impeaches the goodness, or wisdom and power of God: for, if God was infinite in goodness, and sought the happiness of his creatures, he would certainly have made their wisdom so extensive that they could not have erred in judgment, provided his wisdom and power could have effected it." The answer is, infinity belongs alone to God. Had angels been endowed with ten thousand times as much wisdom as they were, their wisdom would still have been limited to a point, infinitely inferior to the immense circle of Jehovah, and their trial would still have been the same. And will any man cooly say, that the great first cause - the cause of all causes and things, (sin excepted,) - is wanting in goodness, power, and wisdom, because he did not - could not, make things equal to himself. The truth is, angels were endowed with wisdom, sufficient to make them as happy as the angels now in heaven are; and with power to do as much as God required them to do. And that creatures, as holy and wise as the angels, could be inadvertent, needs no proof, but to think of their fall.

It was an essential of angelical existence, that they should have the power of going through matter, and entering any material creature: and therefore, though they lost their moral excellences by the fall, yet they were not deprived of that power and wisdom, essential to their existence; had they been deprived of these - their hell - their very existence would have been extinguished. That Satan still retained these things after his fall, appears evident, by what follows.

CHAPTER 3.

Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. The prince of devils, having been so successful among the angels, made his attempt upon man. The serpent here intends either that reptile, called a snake, or the devil in a real body of a snake, or else the devil in the form of a snake. Various Jewish authors say that animals had the power of conversing, before the fall, but this wants proof; without which, this seducer must have been more than a snake, for he spake: and further, the Scripture seems to hold forth that the seduction of our first parents was by the devil.

If this serpent was the devil in a snake, the question is whether the snake acted voluntarily and understandingly, or involuntarily in ignorance? If he understood what he was about, and formed a confederacy with the devil to go into the malevolent enterprise, he then deserved the judgment and punishment he met with; but if we acknowledge this, it proves too much, for by this rule the snake was a sinner before Adam or Eve was. If the snake acted involuntarily, i.e., if the devil assumed and used his body, merely as a machine, and the snake was ignorant of the intrigue, of course he must be innocent of the crime: why then should he be punished? To escape this difficulty, some have thought that the devil, only in the form of a serpent, was the seducer: the name that some serpents are called by, signifies seraph, and perhaps the devil might appear, at this time, in the form of a fiery flying serpent or seraph, which form good angels had appeared in before to Eve, and thereby transforming himself into an angel of light, might deceive Eve the more readily: and yet some of the denunciations to the tempter, seem to suit the snake better than the devil, and look as if God meant to punish the devil as the agent, and the snake as the instrument.

Supposing the snake guilty of no crime, yet he who made the earth, and all that is in it, for the use of man, might subject the snake to what he did, for the service of man, by putting enmity between them, that whenever men see a snake they may be put in mind of the fall, and be humble for it. That God has ordered the death of beasts for the service of man, is evident from the sacrifices. If animal death was occasioned by the sin of man, surely the snake may suffer a little for his good; and if it is true that beasts would have been slain for the support of man, had man never sinned; that God made them purposely to lay down their lives for men; who can impeach the goodness of God for putting the serpent to a little disgrace for the profit of man, although he had been guilty of no crime? It is best therefore to suppose this serpent was the devil, in a real snake. This serpent was subtle. Serpents are famed for their wisdom and subtlety, and, although the fox may be more crafty than serpents in general, yet this serpent, being actuated by the devil, was more subtle than any beast of the field that God had made. And he said unto the woman, who perhaps was a little distance from her husband, or if they were both together, he first attempted Eve, being the weaker part. The devil spake in the serpent, as the angel of the Lord did in Balaam’s ass: the words he said, were, "yea, hath God said, ye shall not eat of every tree in the garden." He begins with a yea to affirm it, yet speaks afterwards by an interrogation, in which his subtlety appears. Some suppose that the evil first arose when Eve wandered away from her husband in the garden, without his knowledge of it; but it is not certain that she was alone when the serpent accosted her, nor is it likely that the mutual love between them would admit of their being far apart, without the labor in the garden called for it: and if duty called for it, there could be no crime in it. Others think that the disease began when Eve gave the serpent audience, but it does not appear that she suspected him to have been a deceiver. If, as has been conjectured, the devil appeared in the same form that good angels assumed before, where was the imprudence of the woman in receiving him? And, even supposing Eve to have known him to be a deceiver, yet she answered him well, in these words, we may not eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden, freely.

God is so far from restraining us, that he has given us free liberty to eat of all the trees but one, which is in the midst of the garden, which tree bears a poisonous fruit, of which God has bid us beware; and lest his caution should be disregarded, he has made it the test of our obedience, and threatened us with something awful, which he calls death, if we eat thereof. Some imagine that Eve was guilty of adding to, and taking from the words of God, in her reply to the serpent. The words that she added, were, neither shall ye touch it: and instead of saying, ye shall surely die, she said, lest ye die. But it may be observed, that Eve had orders second handed; when they were delivered by God to Adam, it is most probable that Eve was not formed, but Adam gave her information thereof, and if he had not been particular in detail, it was his error and not the error of Eve. But the words themselves convey no idea, (that I can see,) distinct from the words spoken to Adam by God himself: and, if men or women are guilty of a crime for not quoting words exactly, Peter, and Paul, and the Son of God, too, were guilty. Then said the serpent to the woman, ye shall not surely die. These words were in direct contradiction to the words of God; in them he gives God the lie. From this, he is said to be a liar from the beginning. These words, no doubt, shocked Eve to the heart, and I think the shock was fatal. The deception here began. Eve called in question the immutability of God, and supposed that this shining form had brought her some intelligence that God had revoked his threatening. But if the contagion had not yet taken place, it did before the serpent had done speaking; for when he had done, Eve was disarmed of all her confidence, and answered the serpent no more. The serpent proceeded. For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as God’s, knowing good and evil. Here the devil speaks highly in commendation of the knowledge of God, but not so of his goodness. He had before insinuated that God withheld from them what might make them happier; and now he represents God as doing it designedly: that as he knew the quality of that tree to make them wise, he prohibited it to keep them in ignorance. It looks as if the devil, before this, had told Adam and Eve (the latter at least) that they were naked, and that it was very indecent; but, when they examined themselves, they saw no cause of shame in their nakedness, which the devil imputed to their ignorance, and told them that if they would eat of that tree, their eyes would be opened to see their shame as plainly as the Gods (the angels) did, and would know that what he had told them was true; or that they would be as Elohim, the divine Creator, and know abundance. As Eve before suspected the immutability of God, she now had her ears opened to hearken to anything, and credited what the serpent said so far as to examine for herself. The deception had prevailed so far, that her mind was blinded. For when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and pleasant to the eyes, her taste and sight took the lead of her mind, and preponderated against the divine prohibition: which proves that her senses were vitiated before she ate of the tree. And what mainly influenced her to eat, was that the fruit of the tree was desirable to make one wise. And surely, said Eve, God, who is so good, never wishes us to live in ignorance: what we know of God already makes us admire him; how great then will be our wonder and adoration, when our eyes are opened, and we are as God’s, knowing good and evil. "Gold may be bought too dear." It is wisdom in creatures to live ignorant of those things that cannot be known but by rebellion; but false reasoning had so much weight on Eve, that she withstood the tempter no longer, but took the fruit of the tree and did eat; in which action she broke the divine command, and became culpable. And as soon as she had eaten, she used her voice to persuade her husband to do likewise; who, it seems, was near at hand, if not on the spot. St. Paul informs us, that the man was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. In which words the supplement first seems to be left out; for, without that supplement, the man was not in transgression at all. His meaning, therefore, is that the woman was first deceived and first in the transgression; for if Adam was not deceived by the words of the serpent to Eve, (who might stand by as a spectator and hear all that passed,) yet he was deceived by Eve. Some think that it was conjugal love that made Adam eat; who, rather than lose his wife, would disobey his God; if so, the excess of his conjugal love was his first depravity; so that the beauty and charms of Eve deceived him. But it is most likely that Eve, by extolling the sweetness of the fruit, and its excellent effects, deceived him. As Eve was persuasive with her voice, so she was officious with her hands; for she gave’ to her husband and he did eat. If Eve was not a part of Adam, as federal head, then her transgression was only personal, for herself, and God could have killed her, and’ made Adam another helpmeet; and, if this was the case, then our fall depended upon Adam’s transgression alone, and what Eve did in no way effects us; but I think that the whole man (Adam and Eve) was federal; and that when the defection began in Eve, the female part, the total apostacy was not to be prevented. And after they had transgressed, The eyes of them both were opened; to see what good they had lost, and partly what evil they had incurred; to see themselves stripped of their original righteousness. Innocence was now gone, and guilt began to swell their breasts. And they knew that they were naked; by such a knowledge as to be ashamed of it. At first, they were not clothed with hair, feathers nor scales; their clothing was their moral virtue, and when that was gone, they saw themselves more naked than the animals, more vile than the beasts that perish. And they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves aprons. Not with needles, which were not then in existence, but either fastened them together with thorns, or, what is more likely, wreathed them together, and bound them around their waists, and let the longest leaves hang down before them, like aprons, to hide their nakedness. The fig-leaves they chose because of their large size. Equally foolish are men, who strive to make a clothing for their naked souls, with their own works. What follows, is the appearance of the Lord God in the garden - his arraigning Adam, Eve, and the serpent before his bar - their trial and respective dooms. Rut before I enter upon these heads, I shall inquire into the nature of the penalty, annexed to the law that was given to Adam. The law was: "Thou shalt not eat of the tree." The penalty threatened, in case of transgression, was: "Thou shalt surely die. " The time in, which the penalty was to be inflicted, was: "The day that he should eat thereof."

It is most commonly believed that the death of the body - the death of the soul - and the eternal death of both body and soul in hell are included in the threatening, and that all these would have been inflicted on Adam, on the day of his fall, if a mediator had not appeared; but these things require investigation. By the death of the body, is understood the exit of the soul, the extinction of the animal life, and a putrefaction and rottenness of the earthy parts. This death, I believe, was contained in the threatening, under this restriction, that all of it was not to be inflicted on the same day. The words of the threatening are rendered, by some, dying thou shalt die; and seem to convey this idea: that in the day that Adam should eat of the tree, he should be mortalized - made subject to vanity, pain and sickness, which should never quit him till he should be reduced to death; and in this light God seems to explain it, when he says, In sorrow shalt thou eat all the days of thy life, until thou return to dust. This was fulfilled on Adam, and is fulfilled on his progeny. Whether the seeds of death were occasioned by the poisonous fruit, (which is probable enough,) or planted by God in a judicial manner, they have certainly raised a war in the elements that compose man, that will not cease their rage till he expires- there is no discharge in this war. The objection to this doctrine, is this: If the Death of the body was any part or all of the penalty annexed to the law, and Jesus, the security of his people, suffered death for them, with what propriety can justice punish them with death, when their security has paid it? To this it may be replied, that Jesus died, not to free men from it, but to follow death to his last retreat, in order to destroy death and raise men therefrom. Further, though Jesus laid down his life, yet he did not turn to dust, which seems to be the penalty annexed: this the real debtor pays, and not the surety; and besides, it is not certain that Jesus ever undertook to bear or palliate the penalty of that law; but it is most likely that the whole of the annexed penalty was inflicted on Adam and his posterity, and was no way mitigated by the Mediator. But more of this hereafter.

If by the death of the soul is meant alienation of affection and enmity against God, it is not rational to conclude that this death was any part of the penalty; for this reason: alienation and a carnal mind had taken possession of Adam and Eve before they broke the test of their obedience; and if `spiritual apostacy preceded the transgression, it could not be the penalty inflicted for the crime. Nor would it sound very well to read the words of the Lord thus: "In the day that thou eatest the fruit of the tree, I will make thee an alienate, carnal, hardhearted enemy to thy Creator." Those who believe that spiritual apostacy was any part of the penalty, and that Jesus, the surety of his people, endured the penalty for them, would do well to ask themselves this question: Was Jesus ever made an alienate, carnal, hardhearted enemy to God? If not, how could he have borne the penalty, if spiritual death was included in the penalty? But if by the death of the soul is understood simply its separation from God, the conclusion is not so absurd, that it was part of the penalty. The souls of Adam and Eve first wandered away from God, after Satan and sin, before they ate the interdicted fruit; and, therefore, God, in a judicial way, withdrew himself, and gave them up to the fury of Satan and sin as a just punishment. This Jesus endured for his people; he was forsaken of God, and given up to Satan, sin and sinners. That something more than natural death came by the fall, is certain; and it is as certain that much sin was committed by Adam and Eve, exclusive of eating of the tree; it seems most elegible, therefore, to suppose that morality was the penalty, and that other evils arise, either as the attendants of sin, or the natural consequences thereof, many of which are communicated by ordinary generation.

It is pretty plain that many deaths spoken of in the Scripture, such as famine, pestilence, captivity; and the deaths that St. Paul and others were often in, as well as the death of Abel, Absalom, Haman, etc., were not contained in the threatening of God to Adam; because Adam and ten thousand times ten thousand besides never felt them: and yet it is certain that all the complicated miseries of this life, death and damnation, come in at the door of sin, either as the attendants or natural consequences of sin, or what are inflicted on men in a judicial manner, for the breach of the laws of nature and revelation.

How is it possible that corporeal and eternal death were both contained in the threatening? The first says, the body shall die and turn to dust, the last says, that the body shall endure eternal pain. It cannot be well supposed, that God told Adam, that if he should eat of the forbidden tree, his body should die, and that he would send his son into the world to die and destroy death, and raise up his body again to endure eternal pain: If so, then the whole plan of salvation was made known to Adam, in the precept given, and the penalty annexed; which would be strange divinity to imagine. The above observation therefore seems best; to consider damnation as the effect of sin, in a final issue, and as not being contained in the threatening.

Having made these observations, I pass on to the chain of history, which speaks of the Judge of all the Earth coming into the garden, and arraigning the criminals at his bar: which is introduced, thus: And they heard the voice of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day. From which we learn that sin did not destroy the sense of hearing. By the voice of God some understand thunder, and suppose that sin having entered the world, set the elements at war in peals of thunder: but rather God spake with his usual tone, which Adam and Eve knew; and as he spake, he appeared to be walking among the trees of the garden, and drawing towards them. This was in the cool of the day. Satan’s temptations and man’s rebellion were both performed before on the same day; and in the cool of the evening, when the sun was nigh down, and the cool breezes began to blow, God came walking towards them. And Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God amongst the trees of the garden. As they had lost the image of God they could not be happy in his presence, and (if Adam spake the truth,) they were afraid of him, as well they might be, since they had broken the law which an omnipotent God had given them. Guilty fear appears to be the first evil that raged after the fall; and this still remains in all Adam’s posterity, until they are reconciled by the blood of the Lamb, and are made partakers of that love which casts out fear. This fear made them flee from the presence of the Lord, which all men are prone to while unregenerate: they go astray as soon as they are born, giving God the back and not the face. Blindness of mind is seen in this procedure, that they should imagine that God was local, like themselves, and that they could hide from him: But of this error they were soon convinced, for the Lord God called unto Adam, and said unto him, where art thou? I placed you in the garden, and appointed you your labor, but where are you now? God knew where Adam was, but chose to make Adam confess what he had done. And Adam said, I heard thy voice in the garden and I was afraid, because I was naked, and I hid myself. The sins that appear in Adam’s answer, were dissimulation and self-excuse. His dissimulation is seen in endeavoring to conceal from God the real cause of his fear, which was his eating the forbidden fruit; whereas Adam represents it to be his nakedness; in which he would excuse himself, and charge God with the cause of it, in not making him with a covering. And God said, who told thee that thou wast naked? Not I. When thou wast first made naked, I never accused thee with it; your nakedness did not prevent your access to me, nor cause me to reproach you; nor were you ashamed of it before: who then has told you of it in a sneering manner? If any one, he must be an enemy to me and my government, and a seducer to you; and therefore I ask you the question, Hast thou eaten of the tree whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldst not eat? And the man said, the woman whom thou gayest to be with me, she gave me of the tree and I did eat. Here Adam makes use of nineteen words instead of saying yes. Fifteen of them are used as an apology, and four as a confession. Long apologies and short confessions have prevailed among men ever since. What Adam said, was true; and yet it is spoken with such an air as to cast blame on the woman, and finally upon God himself. He sought to screen himself by the seduction of the woman, and finally intimates that if God had not imposed that woman upon him, he should not have eaten. The Judge then proceeded to examine the woman, and hear of her, whether she owned the charge of her husband, and what defence she had to make; and said unto her, what is this that thou hast done? If you acknowledge the accusation of your husband, what is this great wickedness that thou art guilty of? The woman did not deny the charge of Adam, but, like him, excused herself, by accusing her tempter, and said, the serpent beguiled me and I did eat. As fond as she was, before this, of the serpent, (as is supposed by many) being naked like herself; yet being beguiled by him, and exposed to punishment, she would fain excuse herself and expose the tempter. The serpent, who had received his doom before, was not interrogated at this time by the Judge; but was proceeded against with some denunciations in addition to his former punishment. In transgression, the Devil was first- next, the woman - and last, the man. The inquest began first with the man- and then the woman; no inquiry being made of the serpent. But judgment was denounced on them according to the order of their crimes, - first, on the serpent; next, on the woman; and last, on the man. The judge addressed the serpent as follows:-

Because thou hast done this, i.e. beguiled the woman, thou art cursed above all cattle. Those that were tame, and to live among men, and above every beast of the field, such as were or should be wild; living in the forests and mountains, not to assist or be assisted by man.

Upon thy belly shalt thou go, without wings or legs, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life. As this respects the instrument (the snake) it strongly indicates, that before this, the serpent was the favorite of Eve, among all the cattle and beasts; but now it should be abhorred above them all: and also, that before this action, the serpent used to fly, go on legs, or creep erect; but now he should be degraded to creep his whole length on the ground, and lick the dust as long as he lived. And as it respects the agent (the Devil) it sets forth the abhorrence that he should meet with; being ever spoken of with contempt; that he should never soar to heaven or walk with majesty on earth, but be despised by all, and feed on the sordid lusts of men: and as he will live for ever, he never will rise from this abject state. And I will put enmity between thee and the woman. Before this there was great friendship and intimacy between the serpent and woman; but now the friendship was broken, never to be restored again. Serpents are ever fearful of men, and men are at constant variance with serpents: women, in particular, cannot endure the sight of them. And with regard to the Devil, though men are fond of his ways, yet they are always averse to his name and character, and are prone to call every disagreeable thing that frets and plagues them, by his name: and the Devil is the common enemy of men, and cannot love them, even when they weary themselves to death in his vassalage. And between thy seed and her seed. The whole serpentine race, and all the posterity of Eve are at enmity, as has been observed; but by the seed of the Devil, we are not to understand his angels, who joined him in the rebellion, but wicked men, who are called the children of the wicked one; and are said to be of their father, the Devil: particularly Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother; and all of his character. By the seed of the woman, is meant, not only the generation of the godly in every age of the world, between whom and the ungodly, there is always an irreconciliation, but principally the Messiah, who was a descendant of Eve, and the child of the Virgin Mary; who took not on him the nature of angels, but the nature of man; that through death he might destroy the Devil. At this seed the heathen rage, the kings of the earth set themselves at war, and all the ungodly are at variance.

It shall bruise thy head. When men encounter a snake, they are never contented till they have crushed his head; even after ever so many blows upon his back: so it was with Jesus; after all the blows of doctrine and miracles that he gave Satan, while he was living on earth, yet he never ceased till he bruised his head on the cross; where he destroyed all the projects, disconcerted all the schemes, and broke the power of the Devil, and took the wise in his own craftiness; and will never cease till he has levelled his kingdom to the ground, and brought down his horn to the dust. And thou shalt bruise his heel. As this refers to the snake, by reason of his creeping on his belly, he can only strike the heel, at most; the lower part of man; and as it concerns the Devil, he could only bruise the heel of Christ; i.e. his human nature, which is inferior to his God-head. This heel Satan bruised with his temptations, and raised his instruments to bruise him to death on the cross. The Judge next proceeded against the woman, and said unto her:-

I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and conception; or in thy conception; for it is not to be understood that Eve was to conceive more children for her transgression; but that her sorrows, in conception, should be greatly multiplied. It is not likely that women would have had many if any sorrows in bearing children, if sin had not entered the world; but now they bring forth their children with multiplied sorrows. But, notwithstanding their sorrows are so great in bearing and bringing forth children, yet, (said God)

Thy desire shall be to thy husband. That women in general have a desire to enjoy husbands and conceive by them, is evident, from the discontent of those who have no husbands; and those who have husbands and no children. But as the same word is used in the affair of Cain and Abel, Genesis 4:7, it seems rather to respect her subjection to her husband. Rulers address their subjects by command; but subjects address their rulers by desire, in a supplicative manner; and as Eve was first in the transgression, and a tempter to Adam, she, and all her sex are reduced to the subjection of desiring their husbands instead of commanding them. Indeed, by the order of Nature, the man being first made, the woman was to be in some subordination; but by reason of the order of sin, the woman being first in the transgression, this subjection is greatly increased; for so it follows,-

He shall rule over thee - In a lordly, cruel manner; which is the case of women in general, and a great curse it is; and when they meet with it they should remember that it is for their sin.

Next the man is called to the bar, and proceeded against as follows:-

Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife. This shows that Eve used her voice to persuade Adam to eat. To hear the voice of a wife, as a counsellor, is becoming a husband; but to be enticed by a wife to transgress a divine command, is the first imprudence that Adam was charged with. It is no crime for a man to be tempted, if he withstands the temptation; but the guilt of the tempter will not expiate the crime, of the man who is overcome by the temptation. And this was Adam’s case. See what follows: And thou hast eaten of the tree of which I commanded thee, saying, thou shalt not eat of it: meaning the tree of knowledge of good and evil, of which so much is said. It is not likely that this tree bore the same name before Adam ate thereof, but took its name from the crime of Adam: Adam and Eve knew good before the fall, but by eating of that tree they were brought to the knowledge of evil.’ It is true, that the tree is called by that name before the fall, but it is most likely it was so called by anticipation - Moses giving it the same name that it was called by after the fall. This tree stood in the midst of the garden, near the tree of life; but the fruits of the two trees differed widely: the first bore fruit to mortalize, the last to immortalize.

It is evident that Adam and Five apostatized before they ate of the tree, but the prohibition of that tree being the test of their obedience, for the breach of that, God gives out the doom: Cursed is the ground for thy sake.

Some suppose that, if sin had never entered the world, the earth would have produced her increase spontaneously; but, in Genesis 2:5, it looks as if man at first was made to till the ground; and yet it is clear that sin has brought a great curse upon the earth. I conclude that a little labor for recreation would have been sufficient, had not sin marred the face of the earth: but now, says God, In sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life.

Adam lived nine hundred and thirty years; and so many years he ate the fruits of the earth in sorrow, sweat, labor and pain; which grievous debt is entailed on his offsprings. The profit of the earth is for all - the king himself is served by the field - all live upon the fruits of the earth, and all eat thereof in sorrow. Let men live where they choose, follow what calling they please, yet sorrow attends them all the days of their lives.

Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee. The earth brings forth herbage for beasts spontaneously, but men have to till the ground, labor in the field, toil and sweat to kill the thorns and thistles, and noxious weeds in general, to raise vegetables and bread for themselves; and this fatigue lasts until they return to dust. For dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return. Adam’s body was made out of the earth, his animal spirit distilled from it; and when God recalled the soul that he breathed into him, the animal spirit was extinguished, and his body turned to dust. The same fate follows all his off-springs. In this manner God explains the threatening that he gave to Adam before, and he is not a man that he should lie, but was as good as his word; and it appears to me, that whatever was contained in these words, "In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die, " was fully inflicted on Adam, and was not mitigated by the Mediator; for God appeared as a judge to execute his law, and never so much as mentioned a Mediator to Adam and Eve in the whole process. I am also as well convinced that many evils befel Adam, and do befall us, that were never contained in the threatening, as I have observed before. The seed of the woman was spoken of to Satan, not as a saviour, but as a destroyer; to convince him, and all his species, that though they refused to worship an incarnate God, and had prevailed over Adam and Eve, yet he should proceed from the woman, and wear a human form, and prove an over match for them all.

Adam and Eve, who stood by when God spake these words to the serpent, might yet hope at least of temporal life, and perhaps of eternal life, through the seed; but this no way diverted the threatening. And Adam called his wife’s name Eve; which name signifies to live or she liveth. As she was not annihilated, as he might expect, with himself, he gave her this name to perpetuate the action. Adam, before this, had given names to all the beasts, and the name of woman to his wife; but now, hearing that she was to bear a seed, and seeing her still alive, gave her a new name - Eve.

Because she as the mother of all living: i.e., of human kind. These words were added by Moses, which he offered as a reason why Adam gave his wife that name, or spoken by Adam, knowing that she was the only woman in the world, and that from her the whole human race would proceed. All nations upon the face of the earth, though bearing different colors and shapes, and in a multitude of conditions, must own Eve for their mother. And the Lord God made coats of skins and clothed Adam and his wife. These skins were taken from beasts; but on what account the beasts were slain, is uncertain. It is the opinion of some, that before Adam fell the beasts came to him by instinct, and willingly offered their lives to serve him; and that, if sin had never entered the world, man would have lived upon animal food; and this opinion is supported, by observing that the earth would soon have been overstocked with beasts and fowls if none of them had died; and further, they remark that some beasts and fowls were made to slay others, and live upon them; that the very shape of some of them indicates that they were made to devour; that claws, long teeth and hooked bills, would have been useless and troublesome to creatures designed to live alone upon vegetables; and, finally, they cannot believe that the sin of man should bring death upon beasts.

If these things can be maintained, it is not difficult to say where God found these skins to clothe Adam and his wife with. Adam and Eve having killed these beasts to eat their flesh, flayed off their skins, in some such way as savages do, without knives, and laid them by as useless; but now God taught them that their skins were as good for clothing as their flesh was for food. But these things are questionable.

It is not certain that animal flesh was ever eaten by man till after the flood. The fruits of the garden, the herbs, and every tree yielding seed, are all that were given to Adam and Eve to eat, in their first charter; and after the fall, they were to eat their bread by the sweat of their brows. And how beasts could lay down their lives without pain, is inconceivable; and to suppose that they would have come instinctively and laid down their lives, without pain, for man, is strange. But one thing further is certain, that the sin of man occasions the death of brutes; if not causally, in the first instance, yet it does eventually - the cruelty and wantonness of man reduce the beasts to death. And it seems to strike as directly against the goodness of God, to suppose that the species of brutes should toil, groan and die, to satisfy the pride, lust and cruelty of man, as it does to suppose that animals at first were made to be mortal, and die to satisfy the hunger of man. But if beasts were not eaten before the fall, nor even before the flood, it is supposable that these beasts were slain for sacrifices, which ceremony was certainly in force in the days of Cain and Abel, and likely was ordained soon after the fall, but not before the beasts had begun to multiply; for if the first beasts had been slain, their species would have been extinguished. From this early institution of sacrificing lambs, Christ is called a Lamb, slain from the foundation of the world. How long it was after the fall before God clothed Adam and his wife with skins, is unknown; but the first clothing that he made for them was out of skins, from which, it is most likely, the hair was not taken off: so the Tartars, Laplanders, and various nations clothe themselves unto this day. As the fig leaves that Adam and Eve sewed together to make themselves aprons of, were emblems of the vain ways, foolish hopes, and self-righteousness of the ungodly; so these coats of skins were figurative of the righteousness of Christ, that robe of righteousness and garment of salvation, with which the Almighty adorns the souls of penitents. And the Lord God said, behold the man is become like one of us, to know good and evil. This phrase respects both Adam and Eve, though but one of them is mentioned. If these words were seriously spoken, the sense is, that now Adam and his wife had become like one of the divine persons in knowledge. Before the fall, God knew good and evil, and good from evil; evil, not by possession, but by understanding its nature and consequences; but Adam and Eve did not; they knew good, by possession, but had no just idea of evil; but now being fallen into evil, and convinced of its nature and effects, in that respect they became as God. How applicable are the words of Solomon in this affair! He that increases knowledge, increases sorrow." Or else the meaning is, that now, since the Lord had graciously made known to them the Messiah, the seed of the woman, and brought them to a sense of their sin, and also clothed them with skins, (representing the righteousness of Christ,) that they were like the angels, being in favor with God, and ready and willing to obey him; or rather that they were like God himself, being created in Christ Jesus; having put on the new man, created in righteousness and holiness, after the image of him who created him. But it seems best to understand the words, as spoken ironically; reproving while they seem to applaud. It was the vain hope and wish of Adam and Eve, that, by eating the forbidden fruit, they should be as Gods; and here God retorts upon them: "Now the man is become like one of us, is he? look and see his wretchedness! see what his pride has reduced him to! His knowledge is increased, it is true, but wherein is he the better? Innocence was far better: nor has his misfortune humbled his heart entirely; aspiring thoughts yet dwell within him." And now, lest he put forth his hand, and take of the tree of life and eat and live forever. God first treated Adam as a free agent; he left him to his own choice, to eat or not to eat of the tree of knowledge, using no other means to keep him from eating, but a moral prohibition, as a test of his obedience; but not so with the tree of life. That tree was guarded with cherubims and a fiery sword. God, in the character of a legislator, never forces or prevents the human will; but in the character of a judge, dealing with culprits, he subjects them to afflictions contrary to their wills. As it is probable that the fruit of the tree of knowledge was poisonous, and that it naturally reduced Adam to pain, sickness and death; so also it is likely that the fruit of the tree of life was of the nature to immortalize. And now, Adam having eaten of the first, by which he incurred death, (both physically and judicially,) was prevented from staying in the garden, lest he should take of the tree of life, and thereby immortalize himself and so live forever. Some have thought, that if sin had never entered into the world, yet men would have been subject to decay; to remedy which the tree of life was planted, and bore fruit of that quality to remove or rather prevent all weakness of the limbs, wrinkles in the face, and every thing of the kind.

Another reason assigned as the cause, why this tree was called the tree of life, is, that it was ever verdant, constantly circulating sap and bearing fruit all the year; and this seems probable enough from Revelation 22:2, where reference is had to this tree. And the Devil might have suggested to Adam, that there could be no malignity in the prohibited tree, which grew so near the tree of life, and if there was, they might easily take of the fruit of the tree of life, which would be a sufficient antidote; but to prevent all such vain hopes in Adam and Eve, and to convince them that they were not at liberty to follow the machinations of Satan, The Lord God drove them out of the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence Adam was taken.

Before this, I conclude Adam had not begun to till the ground, but had lived upon the spontaneous fruits of the garden, what time he had lived, which was not long, as it seems. The garden was planted in the east part of Eden, and it looks as if Adam was driven entirely out of the land of Eden; for the cherubic guard was placed at the east of the garden, to keep Adam and Eve from returning to the garden and eating of the tree of life. The Lord drove them out of the garden (which they left with reluctance, as is probable) to till the ground from whence Adam was taken, and raise their bread in sweat, labor and pain. The ground that he was to till, was that out of which he was taken: from which it appears, that Adam was made out of the ground east of Eden, and taken from thence by the Lord, and placed in the garden of Eden; but as he was rebellious in the garden, he was driven back to the place where he was made, to spend his days in sweat, sorrow and pain, until he returned to dust. From Adam’s being taken from the spot where he was made and placed in Eden’s garden, (if he had been obedient,) it is probable that he would have been raised, in gradual stages, to the same enjoyment that the glorified saints will eternally enjoy; but the life he possessed in the garden, did not capacitate him to rise any higher than he then was; nor had he any reason to believe that his best obedience would merit a higher station: yet, I conclude, it is not extravagant to suppose, that God would have exalted him to the same pinnacle of glory, that all the ransomed of the Lord will hereafter inherit; for, as sin will never prevent the purposes of God’s grace, so likewise, it is never the cause of human exaltation, before God. Sin is the cause of pain and sickness, want and woe, horror and shame, hardness and impenitence, anger and rage, strife and contention, war and bloodshed, death and damnation. If sin had never entered the world, there would have been no cause of Christ’s death; but sin was not the cause of the incarnation of Jesus Christ, nor does it cause the communication of eternal life into the human heart. No man will ever return to the state that Adam was in while in the garden: those who are regenerated will rise much higher, and those who die in rebellion will sink much lower.

Or, perhaps, the meaning of the clause, To till the ground out of which he was taken, does not respect the particular spot where Adam was made and taken from; but the ground in general, out of which element Adam was formed. And the Lord God placed at the east of the garden of Eden cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life. Frequent accounts, in Scripture, are given, both of living and lifeless cherubims. About the ark and mercy-seat, and on the walls of the holy place, in the temple, were lifeless images, called cherubims. The living cherubims are called seraphims, living creatures, four beasts, and cherubims. These creatures, in Scripture, generally intend gospel ministers; but not always. Where it is said that Jehovah rode upon a cherub and did fly, it is better to understand it of an angel, than of a human minister. Perhaps the name may be given, with propriety, to any messenger of the Lord, from the greatest angel to the smallest insect. In the text now under consideration, they seem to intend angels, and not ministers of the gospel. Angels were then in existence, but gospel ministers were not. These angelical ministers were made a flame of fire: streams of fire proceeded from them, resembling swords, like the beams of the sun, in every direction, to strike the rebel through who should dare to approach the tree of life.

Some think this wonderful appearance was designed by God, to convince Adam, and keep in his mind, that no life was ever after the fall to be had by the deeds of the law. That the flaming sword of justice stands pointed against every soul that seeks salvation by works of righteousness that he can do.

Others are of opinion, that as the tree of life was an emblem of Jesus Christ, (who is often compared to the tree of life,) so these cherubims were heiroglyphical of gospel ministers, who handle the word of God, which is quick and powerful, sharper than a two-edged sword; which turns every way to detect the hypocrite, alarm the profane, and point out to penitents the way of salvation, by faith in the Redeemer. But it appears to me, that these cherubims were not merely visionary appearances, but real subsistences, and therefore the first sense given seems most probable.

How long these angels continued there, as guards to the tree, is uncertain. If the tree of life died as soon as common trees do, (in about one hundred years,) or if they guarded the tree until the flood, when men were removed from that part of the world, they were happy in their post, doing the will of God. The flood has so altered the face of the earth (together with earthquakes and other causes) that no man can tell where the garden or any part of Eden lay; and what became of the trees in the garden, particularly the tree of death and tree of life; whether they were used for firewood or timber - whether they died with age or are now living - or whether the first was transplanted in hell, and the last in paradise, to me, is unknown.

APPENDIX. - MISCELLANEOUS. THE nature of God is just, and therefore his ways are all equal; and as love and goodness proceed from him, consequently malevolence and sin cannot; otherwise, his ways would be unequal.

Some suppose that it was necessary that sin should emerge among the creatures of God, that the divine glory might be more effulgently displayed than otherwise it could have been. But is the supposition well founded? what idea should we form of a man who should charge his son not to run into the fire, and with one hand brace him from it, and at the same time, with the other hand, secreted by a screen, pull the forbidden child into the flame, that he might show his compassion to his little favorite in pulling him out of the burning coals? Would such compassion be amiable? But suppose the same man should serve ten sons in the same manner, and pull but five of them out, and leave the rest therein forever, that those five who were graciously delivered, and the five who were unfortunately forsaken might see his justice, could God or man love such, a character?

If goodness, love and justice, cannot be displayed, known and enjoyed, without a previous knowledge and possession of evil, then Adam, in innocency, could not; angels in heaven, and the God of angels, cannot either know, enjoy, or display goodness, love and justice. That sin adds anything to the glory of the Divine Essence, is inadmissible. If any beings, therefore, are profited by it, sinners themselves are; and if infinite wisdom could contrive no way to add to creatures, but a way that damns a great part of them, what shall we say of such wisdom? Could not justice shine to men as transpicuous without their guilt as it now can? Is it not as great justice to clear the innocent as it is to condemn the guilty? These things are so.

What has goodness to say, if the justice of God could not so fully be made known without the damnation of millions of millions? Is it possible for the best of creatures, yea, for God himself, to love such sovereign justice?

How can the mouths of the damned be stopped by that justice which could not be displayed without their exquisite torment? And how can the saints triumph in that character which wantonly glories in the misery of their fellow creatures? Had sin never entered the world, the justice of God could have appeared as glorious as it now does, or ever will; and if creatures are to be raised to a higher state of glory than they could have been without sin, all the praise of this superabundant glory belongs to sin, and all creatures should love the death of the wicked, which the Creator takes no pleasure in. The Lord God is omnipotent: nothing (consistent with his nature) is too hard for him to effect; but he acts upon a scale so exalted, from a principle so good, that he cannot do those mean, dirty things that men can. If it should be thought a pesumptuous impeachment of divine power to say that God could not have prevented sin in the first instance," it certainly operates as much against his goodness, to say that he could have prevented it. The omniscient Jehovah made creatures without their own consent, and foresaw all the evils that ever they would fall into. Now, if he could have prevented their sin by one of his fingers, and would not put that finger forth, who can justify his goodness?

Eternal power is limited by nothing but the nature of the divine Esse, which is so good and benevolent, that Omnipotence could not make creatures miserable by destroying the liberty of their wills, which was the only way supposable to prevent their crimes.

"But was it possible for the Almighty ever to discover the attribute of mercy to his creatures, without their apostacy? Does not mercy always presuppose need or misery? If so, then sin, on the creature’s part, has proved the way for the discovery of that perfection which otherwise would ever have been dormant." This remark has real weight, and merits a fair investigation. It is a principal hinge for turning the disputes of the present day; and, therefore, is not to be slightly canvassed. The word attribute, is as great a stranger in the Bible, as the word moral; and what two words are more frequently used by divines, or more variously understood.

If by an attribute is understood an essential property of Deity; that, without which the Almighty would be imperfect; and further, if it is supposed that all the attributes of Jehovah can have an ample circulation in the divine Essee, without the existence of creatures, so that the infinite God is independantly glorious: I conclude that mercy is not an attribute. For if mercy always presupposes need or misery, how could it circulate in a being where no need or misery was to be found?

Learned men say that the attributes of God are ever spoken of in the single number, thus: love, power, holiness, &c., and will not admit of their plurals, loves, powers, holinesses, &c. If this observation has any weight in it, then mercy cannot be an attribute, for mercy is plural (mercies) in a variety of places in the Bible. In the above view of things, if mercy is an attribute, God was dependant on creatures to do that which was contrary to his nature and law - that, which he could not do himself or tempt them to - to bring themselves into a situation in which alone he could make a full discovery of himself unto them. How dependant was God, in this point of view!

God is a spirit of light, life and love, and some think that his attributes are naught but the manifestations of himself to his creatures, in his word and works. The invisibility of the eternal power and godhead was made known in creation, and is clearly seen by the things that are made. Wisdom, power and goodness, were exhibited in creation, but grace and mercy were not. Here then the question arises: viz., was not sin necessary? etc. Can any man suppose that fury, wrath or vengeance, are essential properties of the God of love and goodness? Are they not the displays of justice on criminals? Just so mercy is the stream of love. God is love, and eternally loved his people; nor could all their sins either heighten or destroy it. And love, the fountain, could and would have raised them to the same enjoyment, that mercy, the stream, now will, if they never had sinned.

If, therefore, creation was a work of necessity, for a display of the perfections of God, yet sin was not; for no perfection of God is now made known to creatures, but what could have been, made known as fully without sin: justice could have shone as effulgent, and love appeared as strong as they now do. The universe is as much worse for sin, as all the groans of the creation and all the damnation of men and devils amount to, and in no instance, upon a general scale, the better for it.

Those who go to heaven are raised entirely upon the scale of love and goodness, but saved from hell upon the scale of justice.

Another question arises, which is this: "Do not the saints in heaven admire redeeming love more than angels do, or more than they possibly could have done, if they had not sinned and been redeemed?"

Redeeming love, by that name, would never have been known on earth or in heaven, if creatures had not sinned; but from this it does not appear that creatures on earth or in heaven are happier than they could otherwise have been. That saints in heaven will be more exalted than angels, is what I believe; but this exaltation arises from the likeness of nature, and not from the redemption from sin; for Jesus Christ has done the human nature more honor than he has the angelic, in that he put on the first and not the last. To solve the question, let me ask any godly man, who understands the nature of grace in his heart, whether (in times when his soul is most full of the love of God) he admires redemption from hell or the enjoyment of God’s love the most? If I judge right when souls enjoy most of God, they are the most swallowed up in admiring the perfections of God, without poring so much upon what he has done for them. That the act of redemption calls loudly upon all on earth and all in heaven to adore the Redeemer is unquestionable; at the same time, if we trace things to their origin, the principle that this act proceeds from, is to be principally adored; and this principle could have been as well known and as fully enjoyed without sin, as it now can.

ALL the works of God are the effects of divine power and goodness, love, and justice in concert; and he always acts from motive in himself; and is noways biased by the conduct of his creatures: yet the actions of men vary the operation of his hand in numberless instances. A benevolent father loves his child, and always acts from a principle of love towards him; but as the behaviour of the child is sometimes filial and sometimes froward; the same stimulus of love that moves the father at some times to give a plaudit and bestow an encomium, at other times induces him to give a reproof and inflict a punishment. The application is easy. To say that Jesus Christ did not die for sinners, but for the glory of God, is just as good divinity, as it is to say, that rain, and fruitful seasons, bread, and all the blessings of nature, are not given to men for their good, but for the glory of God. That Jesus shed his blood for the remission of sins, was wounded for transgressions, and bruised for iniquity, died for sins, and laid down his life for his sheep, is abundantly proven in scripture. The nature of God, and the nature of sin are such, that sin must be punished somewhere, in some being; for it cannot be punished in itself: the criminal or the surety must smart for it. If the surety pays the whole debt, bears the full punishment, then the criminal is freed, upon the scale of law and justice; and the creditor cannot demand the sum, nor the law its penalty from both the debtor or criminal, and the surety. Now if the satisfaction of Christ consists in suffering for sin, (which is the light in which the New Testament holds it forth,) he either made universal satisfaction to God, for the sins of all Adam’s race, or he did not. If the atonement is universal, how can any be damned, upon the scale of justice? If the answer is, "because men will not repent, believe, and return and submit to the deliverer." The next question is, are the acts of impenitence, unbelief, inattention and obstinacy, sins or no sins? If no sins, then men can be saved in them. If they are sins, then they were atoned for, or they were not; if they were atoned for, how can men be damned for them? If they were not atoned for, then the atonement was not universal. If, therefore, the atonement is proved to be universal, it follows, of course, that salvation is universal; but if the last is confuted, the first inevitably falls.

It is a question, whether Jesus the son of Mary went to heaven upon the scale of nature, obedience, God-head or grace. His nature was free from sin, but not spiritual enough for heaven, till after his resurrection. His obedience was as perfect as the law required; he magnified the law and made it honorable. The searching eye of omniscience could see no imperfection in him; but his obedience entitled him to no higher station than Adam was in before the fall. To suppose that he overcame and rose to heaven merely by his own God-head, would destroy the idea of his perfect human virtue, and represent the man of sorrow as having no trials at all: for what proof of a giant’s skill would it be to conquer a pigmy, or what danger would a hero be in, beset only by a child. It seems best therefore to suppose that Jesus went to heaven by grace. That the babe that was conceived in the virgin’s womb, was in the same predicament and texture of innocent Adam, we have great reason to believe; but without the grace of God, it is more likely that he would have fallen than that Adam should, as temptations had increased a thousand fold. That John the Baptist was regenerate in his mother’s womb, is pretty clear; and likely it is the case with many others. So likewise the child Jesus, came into the world an innocent Adam and a regenerate soul, and in that character was proof against all the temptations that befell him, and perfectly obedient to the law; and after dying and suffering for sins, not his own, he was raised with a spiritual body capable of entering heaven, which was not the case of Adam’s body before the fall. If these things are facts, then Jesus called God his father, as Christians do, being his son by regeneration, (I mean in some places,) and I shall leave the reader to judge, whether the words, "ye who have followed me in the regeneration of this life," are not applicable to the above sentiment.

It is the opinion of some, that depravity consists alone in the will, being the reverse to all that is good. That when the blindness of the mind, and the darkness of the understanding are spoken of, we are to form the idea, that the will is so perverse, that men will not attend to the means of information, and therefore the mind is left in ignorance. This observation is supported by great men and great argument; nor am I disposed, at this time, to call it in question; but one thing I shall contend for, viz. that moral agency and the violation of the will, have nothing to do in the work of regeneration. The reception of divine grace, or the new-birth, is not according to the will of man: it is not of him that willeth but of God. To tell a congregation of people, that they may all come to Christ as a mediator, and receive eternal life, if they will, is incoherent divinity; Adam in innocncey had not that power. Paul, whose will was present, could not do as he would; and all the saints in every part of the world, when their wills are most swallowed up in the divine will, find the need of spiritual strength to perform things that they would. That men are moral agents, since the fall, is evident; otherwise they could not sin at all; but let those, who believe that salvation turns upon man’s acceptance, remember that the tree of life in the garden, was not to be eaten of at the will of man after the fall: and those who suppose that the promised seed, (or rather the seed of the woman, spoken of as a conqueror to the serpent,) restored fallen man to free agency, consider that the guardian prohibition of this tree, was after the seed of the woman was spoken of. When will man duly consider, that the most perfect obedience of a moral subject entitles him to no higher station, than the state where he is fixed?

If Christ had died for all, and there is a fulness of grace for all; how comes it to pass that some are saved and not all? "because some will not come." Are there not many who had this will not for a number of years, and afterwards repented and went? "beyond all doubt." Was not their obstinacy of will atoned for as well as the rest of their sins? "To be sure." Are the sins of obstinacy in other sinners atoned for or not? If they are, how can they be damned for sins already atoned for, upon the scale of justice? If they are not atoned for, how can such find pardon? "But the sins of men are atoned for conditionally."

What are those conditions?

"The conditions are, that every one that will repent of his sins and believe in Jesus Christ shall be saved; but every one that will not repent and believe, shall die under the curse of the law, and have an aggarvated damnation for refusing to submit to an offered Saviour." Can men comply with those conditions? If one man can, so can all, except one is made better than another. If God has made one man better than another, how can he require as much of one as of another, in justice? If all men are in one predicament, then one can do what another can; and if all men have power to repent and believe, how comes it to pass that some do and others do not? "Because one uses the means and others do not. " But why does one use the means and not another? "Because one will and another will not. " But how comes one to have a will and not another? Does this better will proceed from nature or from grace? If from either, God is the author of it. 44.

If Jesus Christ was delivered up to death by an original statute, sin was certainly included in the moral system; for on no other account did Jesus die, but for the sins of his people. That he was delivered by the determinate counsel of God, is evident; but that this delivery includes death, is very questionable.

There is no way supposable, that God could have raised human creatures to heaven, but by delivering his Son to become incarnate; for the union of the two natures in the Mediator, is the ground-work of the exaltation of human creatures to the divine glory. The best mode of thinking is this: That God originally determined to deliver his son to be incarnate; and secondarily, from a knowledge of creatures’ sin, delivered him to death; the last being a consequence of the first, depending on the moral agency of creatures, and not arising from an original statute.

There is no kind of violence or cruelty under the sun, but what may bereconciled to tyrannical sovereignty; but has the God of love and goodness a sovereign right to do wrong? "It must be right because God has done it, " is not a sound as harmonical as to say, "It is wrong, and therefore God is not the author of it." The whole universe is composed of a multitude of units; if the human world is therefore the better for sin, the advantage must be found among some or all these units; but where is there a judicious individual in the universe, that can say, he is better for sin? That wicked men are physically impelled to sin, excited thereto by moral suasion; or called upon to rebel by the dispensations of God’s mercies and judgments, is inadmissible. But that their corrupt natures are in that predicament that they are under a natural necessity to sin until they are changed by grace, is incontestible. Consequently if there is a single action of spiritual good to be performed by them, prior to their receiving the grace of God, it will forever remain undone. The truth is, that in the simple work of regeneration, men neither assist nor resist. In the foregoing exposition and appendix, there are a number of hints given, that the predicament of innocent Adam, was different from that of a regenerate saint on earth, and of a glorified saint in heaven; and as this distinction is called in question by many, I shall say something more on the subject.

It is true, God may justly require more of his creatures now, than he required of Adam in the garden. The obedience and faith of a creature, should always be tantamount to the commands and revelation of the creator. If the creator, therefore, commands his creatures any thing more than he commanded Adam, they are under bonds to obey; and that creatures, since the fall, are commanded to make themselves new hearts and cleanse themselves from all unrighteousness, be unfeignedly sorry for their sins and love God with a pure heart fervently, admits of no doubt. And further, if God has revealed more to his fallen creatures than he revealed to Adam in the garden, they should believe more than he did, with an unshaken faith. When Jesus was on earth, he gave as full proof of his divinity and Messiahship, as the Almighty did of his God-head in creation; and therefore people who saw, and those who have heard of him, are as strongly bound to believe in him as the Almighty Saviour as they are to believe in the God-head of the creator. But still the question is, whether grace does not raise men to a higher state than they fell from - do more for them than the law requires?

It cannot be supposed, that the law requires man to rise to a more exalted state than Adam was in, when in Eden: now if it can be demonstrated that grace raises men higher than Eden’s garden, then the hypothesis is maintained.

Adam was on earth: saints will be raised to heaven. Adam was to propagate: saints will be like angels in respect of propagation. Adam was to dress the garden and eat thereof: saints will be fed by God without their hand labor. The presumption is strong that Adam was made to till the ground: saints will live where there will be no ground to till. The point then is proved. As for the predicament of Adam’s soul, before the fall, it is as difficult to describe, as it is to describe where the garden of Eden was, for much the same reason. Sin drove him from that garden, and extinguished that life in his soul, that neither he, nor any of his progeny will ever regain. When wandering souls are brought home to God, it is not to Eden’s garden, or to that life that Adam possessed in innocency; but to a place more exalted, to a life more sublime. That Adam, while innocent, took complacency in the divine character, cordially submitted to the moral government of Jehovah, and cheerfully obeyed his God, is granted: anything short of this, would have been hypocrisy at best. This exercise is still enjoined on all men; for God has not lost his right to command, because men are depraved and fallen. But after all, the life of Adam’s soul was mutable; it was not eternal life, it was extinguished by sin, and ended in death; neither Adam nor any of his children will ever enjoy the same life again: but those who are changed by grace, are made partakers of an immutable, eternal life that can never be extinguished.

Another idea also contended for, is this, viz., that the grace of God, in regeneration, is bestowed in a sovereign manner: that God in giving that grace, works not according to the laws of nature, and treats with men, not as moral agents, but as recipient beings. The system of the Armenians merits regard, so far as it respects moral government; in this point, they have the advantage of those who suppose that sin, and all its consequences, emerge in consequence of some grand decree in Deity; but when they intrude the moral system into the channel of grace, and suppose that salvation depends upon the will and acceptance of the creature, prior to his being born again, they make wretched week. In vindication of the first mentioned part of their system, it may be said, that if angels and men cannot act, but as they are acted upon; if spirits have no kind of self motion, but are always used as pullies, weights and wheels in a machine; and that they act voluntarily also, it not only represents Jehovah as the original agent of their wicked actions, but the author of their corrupt wills; by making use of motives behind the screen, to influence them to act. Should a monarch put a knife into a child’s hand, and directing the child’s hand with his own arm, thrust the blade into another and kill him, who would punish the child and exculpate the monarch? and if the monarch made use of motives visible or clandestine, to influence the child to act willingly, would the violation of the child clear the character of the monarch? But in opposition to the last mentioned part of their system, viz., that salvation depends upon moral agency; let it be noticed, that if the grace of the gospel only re-Adams men, there is a thousand times as great reason to believe that all men will be damned, as there was to believe that Adam would fall. The sure standing or final falling of a soul, rests either upon the unchangeableness of God, or the unchangeableness of the creature; if on the unchangeableness of God, their standing is sure; for God changes not; but if their standing rests on the unchangeableness of the creature, their falling is not only possible, but probable; not only probable, but certain. In this point of sight, every argument that is brought to prove the possibility of falling away finally, operates with a thousand times as much weight, to prove that falling away is certain. The truth is, that holy, mutable creatures had power to do evil, and evil creatures have natural power to do good; to do as much as the law requires, (so far as it respects their future conduct,) for sin has not destroyed their natural powers; but they have no more power than will, to perform spiritual services in a gracious manner. This spring of soul, Adam had not; this spring, sin never broke; this spring is effected in the work of grace; sin is not the cause of it, nor shall sin prevent its being formed in the heart, nor shall sin ever entirely break it. To close the appendix, I shall observe, that sin arose at first, either from the agency of God, or the agency of creatures. If it arose from the agency of God, there is either no evil in it, or an eternal root of evil was in God, for nothing can arise in the agency of God, but what had root in himself; and if God is such a being, and by his power, mixed with love and hate, good and evil, he made creatures, and demands their admiration; then it must be given him: but one thing is certain, if this be the case, viz., the more holy creatures are, the less they love such a character, and when they are made like him, they will not be free from roots of bitterness. Let the wire-drawer, or the hair-splitter, who believes that sin was designed by God, and that it answers valuable purposes, show the difference between cause and occasion, if he can; and how he can maintain his point, without holding to two eternal opposite causes, I know not.

38. This piece was never before published, but was written in, or prior to, the year 1790. The appendix was probably written at a subsequent period, but when, we have no means of ascertaining.

39. If, from the formation of Adam and Eve, to the flood, people doubled once in forty-five years, there had been on earth more than one hundred and thirty-seven thousand millions. And, if they have doubled as fast from Noah, to the present time, there have been in the world nearly forty thousand quatrillions; which would be more than one hundred thousand souls, for each square inch in the terraqueous globe.

. The general computation is twenty-one thousand six hundred, but some make it as great as twenty-six thousand; to form a medium therefore, and to give a round number without fractions, I compute it at twenty-four thousand miles. All my calculations, respecting the earth, are made upon that scale, except the foot-note in the introduction.

41. The American empire contains six hundred and forty millions of acres, of which, fifty-one millions are water.

42. The nearest fixed star is at such a distance from us, that a cannon-ball must fly at the rate of one hundred fathoms a second, and take nearly seven hundred thousand years to reach it: the distance being computed at almost two and a half millions of miles. A line of wheat-grains, from the sun to said star, allowing four grains to the inch, would form a mountain of wheat, more than sufficient to sow forty such globes as this, allowing a bushel to an acre.

43. Some suppose that the best way to clear the character of God from being the cause of every kind of evil, is, to imagine that Adam stood a representative of all the lower creation, human, animal, vegetative and the gross parts of it, and that when he sinned and forsook his moral order, it threw the whole creation into disorder. That as soon as sin raised a war of elements within him, the contagion ran through all the elements without him, and brought a curse upon the fire, air, water and earth. That briers and thistles and all poisonous weeds sprang up, as a consequent thereof; and that the infection rose up in the sap of the tree of good and evil, (which had not this quality before the fall, as they judge,) and that the animals received a cruel, venomous disposition from the source of Adam’s sin, as well as the human world, a wicked stubborn nature.

44. This mode of reasoning is just in the plan of salvation, but inadmissible in the moral system.