CHAPTER 5.

THE STATE OF MAN IN THE DAY OF TRANSGRESSION, OR ON DEATH BY SIN

EXPERIENCED.

"FOR in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." Gen. 3. 9, 10, 11, 12." And the Lord God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou ? And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; and I hid myself. And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldst not eat? And he said, I did eat.” v. 13, " And the woman said, I did eat."

It appears to me, that if man had answered to the interrogation, "where art thou ?" "Where am I, why I am dead according to thy word." This answer would have been true according to what God foretold him, saying, "In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." This supposes man to become dead at the ve ry time he eat; in the same day, he experienced a change of condition, as certainly as the word, death, always implies nothing less than a real change. But what is the nature of this change, called death? Ans. As when the body dies by disease, it is changed from ar active state in earthly things, to an inactive state in the same, even so, when in the day of transgression, man died, it implies his mind became inactive in heavenly things, he experienced a change from one state of mind to another; from a state of innocence to an unhappy condition of guilt; his eyes were opened to see his own nakedness before God; he had no robe of innocence to cover his guilty soul. So that mun saw his own nakedness in this respect, and his guilty soul was tormented with slavish fear, and this induced him to go to work in forming up garments of self-righteousness, figuratively

signified in the sacred history by fig-leaf aprons, but all his sham works were to no purpose. For when the still small voice of God was heard, walking in the garden of his soul in the cool of the day, (which implies in the time of serious reflection,) he was then afraid, and sought to hide himself amongst the trees of the garden, allegorically signifying, man strove to hide himself in crime, under covert of the flesh. as too many do in this degenerate age of the world. Whereas, it is the mind or soul which is guilty, and not the tree that springs from the dust. The intellect alone is amenable to the law of God, as has been shown in the third chapter of this book. Therefore, mankind are unwise in supposing the trees of the garden will receive the blow of punishment for crime, in being cut down, and turning again to the dust as they were before formation. In this place let us remember, that when the blind man's scales fell from his eyes, he said, "I see men as trees walking." What did he see as trees walking? Surely not the spiits of men, but the earthy forms which intellectualists inhabit. Now as it is the spirit in man to which the inspiration of God gives the understanding of the law and not to the animal body, and as "Where no law is there is no transgression," Adam and Eve were very foolish in thinking they could hide themselves from crime a mongst the earthy forms of the garden. Because, as certain as the law was never given to those trees, just so sure, no transgression could be justly charged to their account. For where no law is given, there is no transgression, and therefore, no punishment could possibly be due to the earthy formation. Hence it will follow, that natural death makes no part of the punishment for sin, but it comes in consequence of the natural constitution of the body as formed at first of perishable matter: this agrees with the reasons God gives why it must return to the dust. "For out of it (the ground) thou wast taken: For dust thou art and unto dust thou shalt return." Gen. 3. 19. Here are two reasons given why man as relating to his earthy form, will return to the dust, But sin is never made the cause of natural

death by the word of God. But first, because man is taken out of the ground, and second, because he is dust, be shall return to the dust.

However, we find that sin is the cause of inexpressible sorrow of mind; in consequence of transgression, man has experienced an unhappy change of mind: from a state of innocence and communion with his God, he has become by sin guilty and ignorant of the divine nature, so far as to be incapable of enjoying a happy conmunion with God, until restored by a happy change in Christ. That first miserable change in sin, is called, "death by sin which passed upon all." The second, which is a glorious change in Christ, is also called death. But is man in his miserable estate of death by sin totally depraved? The word of God will decide this all important point in question.

It appears from the sacred history of man's sinful estate, that he was ashamed of himself; or he would not have strove to hide from the presence of the Lord God. Now how could total depravity have any shame? Or how could man be totally depraved, and at the same time possess a principle of shame for a sinful estate ? We learn he was afraid and hid himself. But if totally depraved, could man feel any fear of God? I think

not.

And again, what says the answer of God to this question? Chap. 3, verse 22. "The Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of ùs, to know good and evil." Is "one of us" totally depraved? To answer in the affirmative would be blasphemy. For it would suppose knowledge in God to be a totally depraved attribute. Here I would observe, that when God says "The man is become as one of us to know good and evil," by "one of us," is meant one of the divine attributes personified; and as man's knowing is the subject treated upon, I think knowledge must be that attribute. But here is the difference, between the infinite mind, and the finite, God foreknew the existence of both good and evil in man without the painful necessity of experiencing evil in himself. But man could not know the same, but by unhappy experience in his own

soul. Now how could he know good by experience, at the same time that he knew evil, if altogether depraved ? It appears he could not. Then it will follow, man was not to ally depraved by transgression. Now the next question on the table is, how far does death by sin extend as it respects duration? The text says, "In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." I would have the reader notice that no qualifying word is here or any where else in the bible, connected with the word, death, that signifies endless duration; and that in this text in particular, the contrary of endless duration is clearly implied in its form of expression. "For in the day thou eatest thou shalt surely die," can signify no state of death after the day of transgression, of death before

any more than it can signify a state is, that in the

that day; therefore, can only imply

day, i. e. in any day man shall sin, in that very day, he is in a state of death as before described. The text therefore leaves room for after reformation, and consequently freedom from death, although in itself, it promises no such recovery. However, this much may be fairly inferred from the text, that as many days as a man continues in transgression, so many days he must continue in a state of mental death. Now as sin cau only consist in the wrong exercise of the mind, and not in the act of the body, as has been shown, it will follow, that whether in the body or out of it, if the mind remains in a wrong exercise, it is still in a state of mental death, unreconciled to God, and consequently unhappy. Yes, reader, this is the nature of that death which comes by sin. Then let us be careful not to be led away by the wisdom of this world, so far, as to indulge ourselves in pride, self dependence and self exul tation. For, "There is death in the pot."

CHAPTER 6.

["MERCY REJOICETH AGAINST JUDGMENT."

Gen. 3. 14, 15, 16. "And the Lord God said unto the serpent, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field: upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed: it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel."

First, we are hereby to understand this, that the serpentine subtility in man is far worse, and in this respect also, above the sagacity or cunning of any beast of the field. Therefore, said to be cursed above them all.

Second, that this serpentine wisdom from beneath, feeds itself on things beneath such as are earthy, sensual and devilish until it shall be no more, therefore, God says "Upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life;" i. e. having 'affections placed on things beneath and not on the things which are heavenly above. It is truly happy for mankind that God in his most just judgment on the serpent, has limited the duration of his existence. Thus, "Mercy rejoi ceth against judgment." For in this, sin is destroyed and man is saved.

It is however, true, that the propensity in man to do wickedly, which I term sensual and earthly wisdom, is personified in the text, as though God were speaking to a distinct personality from man. But this is no more mysterious to us, than the fact is, that sin, which is a transgression of the law, and no creature, should be spoken of in the 4th Chap. 7th verse, as an intelligent person, distinct from man: observe the words, "If thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door: And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him." Now, if there is propriety here, in the distinct personification