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 CORImunion 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.

To an

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 us, to know good and evii." Is "one of us" totally depraved? swer 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 attriBut 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

bute.

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 totally 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, any more than it can signify a state of death before that day; therefore, can only imply this, that in the 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 Jed 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 rejoiceth 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

of sin, then surely there is in personifying a propensity in man to sin; but such language often occurs in the holy scriptures, and therefore must be considered very proper, in this place And so God also said to the serpent, "I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed," &c. Here suffer me to remark, that as the seed of the woman could not mean the woman herself, even so, neither can the seed of the serpent be the serpent himself: but the seed of the woman is the truth, which is Christ, who says, "I am the truth and the way." And the seed of the ser pint, is error or falsehood, as we read again, St. John 8. 44: "For he is a liar, and the father of it." Yes, surelv, error is the offspring of the spurious reasoning of the carnal mind. And again, I would make some remarks on the words "I will put enmity between thee and the woman." Old mother Eve is not the woman here meant; but the virgin Mary is the woman according to the flesh, as Christ is not the seed of the man but of the woman. For he was conceived of the Holy Ghost. and born of a virgin, so that he was her seed according to the flesh. However, spiritually, the virgin Mary is not the woman meant in the text, but that free woman from above, the spiritual mother of us all, and also figuratively called Jerusalem, the true covenant of God, as described by St. Paul, Gal. 4. 23, to the end of the chapter. This is the woman between whom and the serpent, God has put enmity and whose seed shall spiritually bruise the serpent's head. Yes enmity be tween them, as certainly, as that wisdom from above, can never unite with that serpentine wisdom from be neath, any more than truth and error can walk togeth r. For as Aaron's rod swallowed up all the rods of the wise men of Egypt, even so we learn the seed of the woman shall bruise the serpent's head, i. e. bring to nought the wisdom of this world which spurious wisdom is the head of all error, and must be destroyed, that truth may prevail as a triumphant conqueror, over death hell and the grave. The subject of mercy rejoicing against judgment, is further to be illustrated from

:

the allegory of Cain and Apel: the first was an emblem of the sinful world of mankind; the second was a type of Christ. Therefore, Cain was a tiller of the ground, but Abel was a Shepherd. They both presented off rings unto the Lord, Cain offered of the fruits of the ground, but his righteous brother dedicated the best of his flock unto the Lord: Therefore, God had respect unto Abel and his offering, but unto Cain and his offering he had not respect. Why not unto Cain's offering? Because it was of the ground earthly, which signifies self righteousness proceeding from the ground of the earthly mind, a mere ceremony of vain works in that wisdom which is from beneath.

But righteous Abel who was a type of the great shepherd of souls, presented himself before God with the best of his flock, Christ like, who also offered the best of his flock, even the holy apostles who suffered for righteousness sake and God had respect unto Christ and his offering, but not unto the burnt offerings and sacrifices of the Jews. Cain was wrathful towards his brother and slew him, even so the Jews were angry with Christ and put him to death.

The voice of righteous Abel's blood cried from the ground unto God, even so the voice of the great Redeemer's blood intercedes with God for man, it cries aloud for vengeance on the enmity of the human heart, to the saving of souls, as we read "The Lord will come with vengeance even God with a recompense and save thee." The voice of Abel's blood so far succeeded with God on behalf of Cain, that God set a mark on Cain lest any meeting him should slay him. But as the substance, or autitype is made to excel its shadow or type, even so as we read, "The blood of Christ speaketh better things than the blood of Abel." Even so I say God has not only set a mark on man that he should not be annihilated, but also that the whole life of his existence should not be a final vagabond state of misery. Cain in the allegory represents the world. "And the Lord said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen? If shou do well, shalt thou not be accept