CHAPTER II.

The Basis of the Doctrine of Redemption as it is usually set forth, Genesis, Third Chapter; St. Paul on Death and Original Sin, Epistle to the Romans, v. 12-19; Christ and the Fall, John, iii. 3, 5; viii. 44; Man is not Fallen, St. Paul, Romans, ii. 14-15, and Genesis, ix. 6; Man must be Free to sin otherwise he is not Amenable to Law.

PARAGRAPH I.

The Basis of the Doctrine of Redemption as it is usually set forth, in the Third Chapter of Genesis.

ORIGINAL SIN, as it is denominated and set forth in orthodox creeds, it is asserted owes its existence and introduction among mankind, to the Fall of Adam and Eve, the hypothetical progenitors of the human race. The Fall, emphatically so called, may in a few words be defined to have consisted in the disobedience to a Divine prohibition not to eat of the fruit of a tree situated in the midst of the Garden of Eden, quaintly designated as "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil." A serpent-not the Devil, as hyper-orthodoxy falsely teaches, in the form of a serpent, of which silly chimera the account of the Fall knows nothing, "more subtile than any beast of the field," it seems tempted the so-called first-parents to eat of the enticing fruit, which we are naively told, "was pleasant to the sight and good for food." Fruit thus defined and eminently distinguished, could not fail to excite in the inexperienced beholder keen desire of possession, and when therefore it is further added that it moreover possessed the

astonishing property of greatly enlarging and exalting the powers of the human intellect, and that, in short, those that partook of it "should be as gods-Elohim, knowing good and evil," the temptation to break the law, it may be presumed, must have been irresistible. The ensuing catastrophe is accordingly summed up in a few, brief and decisive words-they yielded to the tempter, ate, fell, and "thus," says the advocate of total depravity, "brought sin and death into the world!"

*

Let us now endeavor to ascertain whether the consequences deduced from this violation of a commandment of the Elohim, produced such dreadful results as is taught in most of the catechisms and books of dogmatic theology. The first thing that happened after the consummation of the transgression, according to the statement of this most veracious history, in which the author fancies or simply narrates the likely cause of the extreme prevalence of evil in the iron age of society in which he happened to live, and which he was led to think was exceedingly corrupt in comparison with the fabled golden era of the world, of which poets dreamt and historians wrote, was that, as the serpent had promised, "the eyes of them both were opened," and it is to be presumed, that they were now able like gods or the Elohim, to "discern between good

Elohim is the plural of Eloah, and signifies gods, not as is usually taught, a pluralis excellentia or majestatis, expressions implying pre-eminent might or grandeur. As already stated, Elohim means gods, but the translators, modestly sacrificing truth to orthodoxy, rendered it God. The piece clearly shows a struggle for the ascendency between Monotheism and Polytheism, and it is thus proved to be a remnant of ancient heathen tradition, that found its way into Genesis as offering the most plausible solution of a Theodicy of the time.

and evil," as it had been foretold. This distinction the Elohim clearly did not wish to have conferred upon them; for it appears that they were not altogether exempt from the frailties of mortals, as they were evidently affected with the ignoble sentiments of jealousy on account of the restless and aspiring genius of the youthful couple, and that therefore they forbade them the use of the extraordinary food upon which they themselves-it seems, subsisted: it was decidedly a food in character similar to the famous "ambrosia of the gods" in classic antiquity. The subtile serpent, endowed as is asserted, with the remarkable faculty of human speech, and aware of the envious feeling which animated the Elohim, boldly tells Eve, who led the van in this scientific enterprise, that instead of dying by eating of the forbidden fruit, as Elohim the gods, not god, had said, they should be even like the Elohim themselves, etc. Who-under such flattering circumstances, would not have been tempted to enter the lists?

How, it is pertinent to inquire, can the opening of the eyes, that is, the attainment to superior knowledge, be reasonably classed under the category of evil, an evil too which, it is widely asserted, has fatally damaged the spiritual integrity of the entire human race? All I have to offer in reply to this grotesque and ridiculous notion, is, that it is a great pity we cannot have more sins like this, exalting man in dignity and intelligence to the enviable rank and power of Divinity! As to most of the other consequences, said to have sprung from this fictitious transgression, they are simply such as are naturally inherent in the relation of the sexes to each other, and abso

lutely inseparable from the transmission of offspring: in this respect, it may be observed, there is perceptibly no essential difference in the physiological phenomena as witnessed between man and the inferior animals, the latter of which can hardly be supposed by any one of sane mind, to have suffered deterioration in their organic functions, as the sad result of human guilt. That Adam's agricultural labors were thenceforth to be retarded and marred by the presence of unsightly and obnoxious weeds, known under the familiar names of "thorns and thistles," and that besides he was doomed in future to "eat his bread in the sweat of his face," was not so very grievous a destiny as might at first be supposed; for a long and varied experience teaches the valuable lesson, that there is nothing which is more conducive to the promotion of health and cheerfulness than to earn one's bread by honest industry, and any physician of ordinary candor and intelligence will testify that to sweat occasionally is necessary to ensure permanence of the normal sanitary condition of the human system.

As to the thorns and thistles as punitive agents, they are indeed a little troublesome, when they are too closely or roughly handled, but they seldom possess poisonous properties, and besides being valuable fertilizers, it may be observed that if they did not exist, it would not be so easy to distinguish the industrious, neat, thriving agricul turist from his idle, slovenly, and unesthetic neighbor. To eat "the herbs of the field, "which his own hand had cultivated, Adam could scarcely deem a mark of degradation or an insuperable hardship, as whole nations have from choice as well as religious scruples, exclusively subsisted

upon a vegetable diet. The thought too is consoling and deserves to be especially noticed here, that some of the minor threats may not have been literally carried into effect, as we find was the case with the main penaltydeath, denounced against the unfortunate culprits; for instead of having "surely died," according to the strict letter of the sentence, "in the day they ate of the fruit," they lived yet many hundred years, and seemingly made a very good beginning to replenish the earth with their descendants. To enter into more minute detail or to resort to elaborate exegesis, in this remarkable disquisition, is deemed unnecessary, as the piece is familiar to most readers, and is besides, quite free from any obscurity.

PARAGRAPH II.

Has Christ made any Allusion to the History of the Fall, or premised the Existence of Original Sin, in the Gospel?

It may be fairly presumed that if mankind are tainted with the virus of Original Sin, as is commonly believed, and that this deadly taint is the primary cause of the necessity for the introduction of the Christian plan of redemption, that Jesus Christ, professedly assuming the execution of such plan, would most positively and unequivocally call attention to the fact, and thus plainly and forcibly state the motive of his errand, and define the object of his labors, leaving no room to doubt that it is his sublime mission to restore man to his pristine state of presumed innocence and holiness. But nowhere in the copious and amply diversified record of his prolonged and ardent ministry, do we find a clear, indisputable reference to this subject, or an emphatic recognition of its truth, which-I conceive,