could terminate on lifeless, senseless earth! To understand this curse otherwise than as terminating upon man through the ground, would be as senseless as to suppose the meaning to be, The ground shall be punished and shall be miserable for thy sake. Our author interprets the curse on the ground, of its being incumbered with noxious weeds; but would these weeds have been any curse on the ground, if there had been no inhabitants, or if the inhabitants had been of such a nature, that these weeds would not have been noxious, but useful to them? It is said, Deut. xxviii. 17, "Cursed shall be thy basket, and thy store ;" and would he not be thought to talk very ridiculously, who should say, "Here is a curse upon the basket, but not a word of any curse upon the owner; and therefore we have no reason at all to look upon it as any punishment upon him, or any testimony of God's displeasure towards him." How plain is it, that when lifeless things, which are not capable of either benefit or suffering, are said to be cursed or blessed with regard to sensible beings, that use or possess these things or have connection with them, the meaning must be, that these sensible beings are cursed or blessed in the other, or with respect to them! In Exod. xxiii. 25, it is said, "He shall bless thy bread and thy water." And I suppose, never any body yet proceeded to such a degree of subtilty in distinguishing, as to say, "Here is a blessing on the bread and the water, which went into the possessors' mouths, but no blessing on them." To make such a distinction with regard to the curse God pronounced on the ground, would in some respects be more unreasonable, because God is express in explaining the matter, declaring that it was for man's sake, expressly referring this curse to him, as being with respect to him, and for the sake of his guilt, and as consisting in the sorrow and suffering he should have from it, "In sorrow shalt thou eat of it. Thorns and thistles shall it bring forth to thee." So that God's own words tell us where the curse terminates. The words are parallel with those in Deut. xxviii. 16, but only more plain and explicit," Cursed shalt thou be in the field," or in the ground.

If this part of the sentence was pronounced under no notion of any curse or punishment at all upon mankind, but on the contrary, as making an alteration in the ground, that should be for the better, as to them; that instead of the sweet, but tempting, pernicious fruits of paradise, it might produce wholesome fruits, more for the health of the soul; that it might bring forth thorns and thistles, as excellent medicines, to prevent or cure moral distempers, diseases which would issue in eternal death; I say, if what was pronounced was under this notion, then it was a blessing on the ground, and not a curse; and it might more properly have been said, "Blessed shall the ground be for thy sake. I will make a happy change of it, that it may be a habitation more fit for a creature so infirm, and so apt to be overcome with temptation, as thou art."

The event makes it evident, that in pronouncing this curse, God had as much respect to Adam's posterity, as to himself: and so it was understood by his pious posterity before the flood; as appears by what Lamech, the father of Noah, says, Gen. v. 29, "And he called his name Noah, saying, This same shall comfort us concerning our work, and the toil of our hands, because of the ground which the Lord hath cursed."

Another thing which argues, that Adam's posterity were included in the threatening of death, and that our first parents understood, when fallen, that the tempter, in persuading them to eat the forbidden fruit, had aimed at the punishinent and ruin of both them and their posterity, and had procured it, is Adam's immediately giving his wife that new name, Eve, or Life, on the promise or intimation of the disappointment and overthrow of the tempter in that VOL. II.

51

matter, by her seed, which Adam understood to be by his procuring life, not only for themselves, but for many of their posterity, and thereby delivering them from that death and ruin which the serpent had brought upon them. Those that should be thus delivered, and obtain life, Adam calls the living: and because he observed, by what God had said, that deliverance and life were to be by the seed of the woman, he therefore remarks that she is the mother of all living, and thereupon gives her a new name, calls her Chavah, LIFE, Gen. iii. 20.

*

New

There is a great deal of evidence, that this is the occasion of Adam's giving his wife her new name. This was her new honor, and the greatest honor, at least in her present state, that the Redeemer was to be of her seed. names were wont to be given for something that was the person's peculiar honor. So it was with regard to the new names of Abraham, Sarah, and Israel. Dr. Taylor himself observes, that they who are saved by Christ, are called the livers, or Cortes, 2 Cor. iv. 11, the living, or they that live. So we find in the Old Testament, the righteous are called by the name of the living, Psalm. Ixix. 28, "Let them be blotted out of the book of the living, and not be written with the righteous." If what Adam meant by her being the mother of all living, was only her being the mother of mankind, and gave her the name life upon that account; it were much the most likely that he would have given her this name at first, when God first united them, under that blessing, " Be fruitful and multiply," and when he had a prospect of her being the mother of mankind in a state of immortality, living indeed, living, and never dying. But that Adam should at that time give her only the name of Isha, and then immediately on that melancholy change, by their coming under the sentence of death, with all their posterity, having now a new, awful prospect of her being the mother of nothing but a dying race, all from generation to generation turning to dust, through her folly; I say, that immediately on this, he should change her name into life, calling her now the mother of all living, is perfectly unaccountable Besides, it is manifest that it was not her being the mother of all mankind, or her relation as a mother, which she stood in to her posterity, but the quality of those she was to be the mother of, which was the thing Adam had in view, in giving his wife this new name; as appears by the name itself, which signifies life. And if it had been only a natural and mortal life which he had in view, this was nothing distinguishing of her posterity from the brutes; for the very same name of living ones, or living things, is given from time to time in this Book of Genesis to them; as in chap. i. 21, 24, 28, ii. 19, vi. 19, vii. 23, viii. 1, and many other places in the Bible. And besides, if by life the quality of her posterity was not meant, there was nothing in it to distinguish her from Adam; for thus she was no more the mother of all living, than he was the father of all living; and she could no more properly be called by the name of life on any such account, than he; but names are given for distinction. Doubtless Adam took notice of something distinguishing concerning her, that occasioned his giving her this new name. And I think it is exceeding natural to suppose, that as Adam had given her her first name from the manner of her creation, so he gave her her new name from redemption, and as it were, new creation, through the Redeerner, of her seed; and that he should give her this name from that which comforted him, with respect to the curse that God had pronounced on him and the earth, as Lamech named Noah, Gen. v. 29, "Saying, This same shall comfort us concerning our work, and toil of our

Note annexed to § 287

hands, because of the ground which the Lord hath cursed." Accordingly he gave her this new name, not at her first creation, but immediately after the promise of a Redeemer, of her seed. See Gen. iii. 15-20.

Now as to the consequence which I infer from Adam's giving his wife this name, on the intimation which God had given, that Satan should by her seed be overthrown and disappointed, as to his malicious design, in that deed of his which God then spake of, viz., his tempting the woman. Adam infers from it, that great numbers of mankind should be saved, whom he calls the living; they should be saved from the effects of this malicious design of the old serpent, and from that ruin which he had brought upon them by tempting their first parents to sin; and so the serpent would be, with respect to them, disappointed and overthrown in his design. But how is any death or ruin, or indeed any calamity at all, brought upon their posterity by Satan's malice in that temptation, if instead of that, all the death and sorrow that was consequent, was the fruit of God's fatherly love, and not Satan's malice, and was an instance of God's free and sovereign favor, such favor as Satan could not possibly foresee? And if multitudes of Eve's posterity are saved, from either spiritual or temporal death, by a Redeemer, of her seed, how is that any disappointment of Satan's design in tempting our first parents? How came he to have any such thing in view, as the death of Adam's and Eve's posterity, by tempting them to sin, or any expectation that their death would be the consequence, unless he knew that they were included in the threatening?

Some have objected against Adam's posterity's being included in the threatening delivered to Adam, that the threatening itself was inconsistent with his having any posterity; it being that he should die on the day that he sinned.

To this I answer, that the threatening was not inconsistent with his having posterity, on two accounts.

Those words, "In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die," according to the use of such like expressions among the Hebrews, do not signify immediate death, or that the execution shall be within twenty-four hours from the commission of the fact; nor did God, by those words, limit himself as to the time of executing the threatened punishment, but that was still left to God's pleasure. Such a phrase, according to the idiom of the Hebrew tongue, signifies no more than these two things:

1. A real connection between the sin and the punishment. So Ezek. xxxiii. 12, 13, "The righteousness of the righteous shall not deliver him in the day of his transgression. As for the wickedness of the wicked, he shall not fall thereby in the day that he turneth from his wickedness; neither shall the righteous be able to live in the day that he sinneth; but for his iniquity that he hath committed, he shall die for it." Here it is said, that in the day he sinneth, he shall not be able to live, but he shall die; not signifying the time when death shall be executed upon him, but the connection between his sin and death; such a connection as in our present common use of language is signified by the adverb of time, when; asif one should say, "According to the laws of our nation, so long as a man behaves himself as a good subject, he may live; but when he turns rebel, he must die:" not signifying the hour, day or month in which he must be executed, but only the connection between his crime and death.

2. Another thing which seems to be signified by such an expression, is, that Adam should be exposed to death for one transgression, without waiting on him to try him the second time. If he eat of that tree, he should immediately fall under condemnation, though afterwards he might abstain ever so strictly. In this respect the words are much of the same force with those words of Solomon

to Shimei, 1 Kings ii. 37, "For it shall be that on the day that thou goest out, and passest over the brook Kidron, thou shalt know for certain, that thou shalt surely die." Not meaning that he should certainly be executed on that day, but that he should be assuredly liable to death for the first offence, and that he should not have another trial to see whether he would go over the brook Kidron a second time.

And then besides:

II. If the words had implied that Adam should die that very day, within twenty-four or twelve hours, or that moment that he transgressed, yet it will by no means follow, that God obliged himself to execute the punishment in its utmost extent on that day. The sentence was in great part executed immediately he then died spiritually: he lost his innocence and original righteousness, and the favor of God; a dismal alteration was made in his soul, by the loss of that holy, divine principle, which was in the highest sense the life of the soul. In this he was truly ruined and undone that very day, becoming corrupt, miserable and helpless. And I think it has been shown that such a spiritual death was one great thing implied in the threatening. And the alteration then made in his body and external state, was the beginning of temporal death. Grievous, external calamity is called by the name of death in Scripture; Exod. x. 17, “ Entreat the Lord that he may take away this death." Not only was Adam's soul ruined that day, but his body was ruined: it lost its beauty and vigor, and became a poor, dull, decaying, dying thing. And besides all this, Adam was that day undone in a more dreadful sense : he immediately fell under the curse of the law, and condemnation to eternal perdition. In the language of Scripture, he is dead, that is, in a state of condemnation to death; even as our author often explains this language in his exposition upon Romans. In Scripture language, he that believes in Christ, immediately receives life. He passes at that time from death to life, and thenceforward (to use the Apostle John's phrase)" has eternal life abiding in him." But yet he does not then receive eternal life in its highest completion; he has but the beginning of it, and receives it in a vastly greater degree at death; but the proper time for the complete fulness is not till the day of judgment. When the angels sinned, their punishment was immediately executed in a degree; but their full punishment is not until the end of the world. And there is nothing in God's threatening to Adam that bound him to execute his full punishment at once, nor any thing which determines that he should have no posterity. The law or constitution which God established and declared, determined that if he sinned, and had posterity, he and they should die; but there was no constitution determining concerning the actual being of his posterity in this case; what posterity he should have, how many, or whether any at all. All these things God had reserved in his own power: the law and its sanction intermeddled not with the

matter.

It may be proper in this place also to take some notice of that objection of Dr. Taylor's, against Adam's being supposed to be a federal head for his posterity, that it gives him greater honor than Christ, as it supposes that all his posterity would have had eternal life by his obedience, if he had stood; and so a greater number would have had the benefit of his obedience, than are saved by Christ.* I think a very little consideration is sufficient to show that there is no weight in this objection; for the benefit of Christ's merits may nevertheless be vastly beyond that which would have been by the obedience of Adain. For those that are saved by Christ, are not merely advanced to happiness by his merits, but are

Page 120, &c., S.

saved from the infinitely dreadful effects of Adam's sin, and many from immense guilt, pollution and misery, by personal sins; also brought to a holy and happy state, as it were through infinite obstacles, and are exalted to a far greater degree of dignity, felicity and glory, than would have been due for Adam's obedience, for aught I know, many thousand times so great. And there is enough in the gospel dispensation, clearly to manifest the sufficiency of Christ's merits for such effects in all mankind. And how great the number will be, that shall actually be the subjects of them, or how great a proportion of the whole race, considering the vast success of the gospel, that shall be in that future, extraordinary and glorious season, often spoken of, none can tell. And the honor of these two federal heads arises not so much from what was proposed to each for his trial, as from their success, and the good actually obtained, and also the manner of obtaining. Christ obtains the benefits men have through him by proper merit of condignity, and a true purchase by an equivalent; which would not have been the case with Adam, if he had obeyed.

I have now particularly considered the account which Moses gives us in the beginning of the Bible, of our first parents, and God's dealings with them, the constitution he established with them, their transgression, and what followed. And on the whole, if we consider the manner in which God apparently speaks to Adam from time to time; and particularly, if we consider how plainly and undeniably his posterity are included in the sentence of death pronounced on Adam after his fall, founded on the foregoing threatening; and consider the curse denounced on the ground for his sake, and for his and his posterity's sorrow and also consider what is evidently the occasion of his giving his wife the new name of Eve, and his meaning in it, and withal consider apparent fact in constant and universal events, with relation to the state of our first parents, and their posterity from that time forward, through all ages of the world; I cannot but think, it must appear to every impartial person, that Moses' account does, with sufficient evidence, lead all mankind, to whom his account is communicated, to understand, that God, in his constitution with Adam, dealt with him as a public person, and as the head of the human species, and had respect to his posterity, as included in him and that this history is given by divine direction, in the beginning of the first written revelation, to exhibit to our view the origin of the present, sinful, miserable state of mankind, that we might see what that was, which first gave occasion for all those consequent, wonderful dispensations of divine mercy and grace towards mankind, which are the great subject of the Scriptures, both of the Old and New Testament: and that these things are not obscurely and doubtfully pointed forth, but delivered in a plain account of things, which easily and naturally exbibits them to our understandings.

And by what follows in this discourse, we may have, in some measure, opportunity to see how other things in the Holy Scripture agree with what has been now observed from the three first chapters of Genesis.

CHAPTER II.

Observations on other parts of the Holy Scriptures, chiefly in the Old Testament, tha prove the doctrine of ORIGINAL SIN.

ORIGINAL depravity may well be argued, from wickedness being often spoken of in Scripture, as a thing belonging to the race of mankind, and as if it were a