mankind by their fall lost communion with God, are under his wrath and curse, and so made liable to all the miseries of this life, to death itself and the pains of hell for ever."

I feel constrained to notice an objection which has been frequently, and vehemently urged against this doctrine of christianity. The enemies of revealed truth have pronounced it" injustice in the extreme to inflict calamities so awful for an offence so inconsiderable; to doom a world to everlasting misery merely because an individual* tasted a little fruit that was forbidden.' They have confidently asserted, “that there is not even the shadow of proportion between the crime and the punishment." To

*Paine, in his age of reason, assails this article of christian faith with raillery, his common and most successful weapon: He speaks in the most wanton and contemptuous manner of the "story of Eve and the apple :" He pronounces it a most ridiculous "conceit that the Almighty should come to die in our world, because they say one man and one woman had eaten an apple :" Men generally form their estimate of the enormity of sin, rather from the tenor of their own conduct, than from the dictates of sound reason or divine revelation.. It is therefore reasonably to be expected, that a man, who has indulged, to a proverb, all conceiv able filthiness, both of the flesh and spirit, should think little of ordinary crimes. But supposing that Paine had considered "the story little and ridiculous," ought he not to have spoken, and written of it, in a style more decent and respectful? Waving the consideration that this event is recorded by inspiration of God as the origin of all our misery, has it not been firmly believed by millions of his fellow men; by millions who were as capable of examining its evidence as himself, and were, at least, as honest to: acknowledge the result of their examination? Has it not been publicly vindicated with the mouth, and the pen, by hundreds in different ages? By hundreds who have equally outshone himself in the elevation of their understanding, and the excellence of their morals. But he who does not fear God will not regard man. That bosom which is an utter stranger to the generous emotions. of love or reverence for the majesty in the heavens, cannot en.. tertain much respect either to the feelings or judgment of mortals..

all these reasonings and murmurings of man it might be sufficient to reply, that the Lord God is best acquainted with the nature of his own government, with the majesty of his own law, and is therefore most capable of determining what particular punishment ought to be inflicted on the offender; and the mortal who insolently finds fault, who arrogantly asks by way of cavil or complaint, what doest thou? uses such liberty at an infinite peril. Besides, shall the living God be denied a prerogative which is readily allowed to all legislators upon earth? They claim the privilege of enacting their own laws; they determine, without consulting every subject, what penalty shall be executed upon the transgressor of these laws; and shall HE," whose throne is in the heavens, whose kingdom ruleth over all," who is universally acknowledged as KING ofall other kings, and LORD of all other lords, shall HE be denied a prerogative which is claimed by every petty prince and potentate on earth? Must HE, by whom kings reign, from whom their authority is now derived, and to whom they are responsible for the exercise of that authority, must HE enquire of every moral agent what laws should be enacted, or with what penalties these laws should be sanctioned ?

But the transgression of Adam, if duly examined, is not so inconsiderable in its demerit as may at first appear. An offence always rises in aggravation in proportion to

the dignity of the person against whom it is committed, and our obligation to love and obey him. An insult offered to a magistrate or prince is deemed a greater evil, and consequently exposes to severer punishment, than an insult to an ordinary man: An of fence therefore committed against Jehovah, who is a being infinitely glorious, a being infinitely entitled to our love and obedience must be an infinite evil, and expose the of fender to an infinite punishment. Besides, the act of our first father in eating the forbidden fruit, which is frequently thought a trifling offence, when examined in all its circumstances, must be considered as manifesting ingratitude and insolence in the extreme. Let us suppose that a parent favored one son above every child in his family; gave him authority over the rest, appointed him the sole heir of his estate, and allowed him the unlimited enjoyment of all that he possessed, with the exception of a single article; but commanded him under the severest penalty to leave that untouched, merely as an expression of love and subjection Ñay, let us suppose that the father engaged to this son that, upon condition of his refraining from that article, he would entail the estate upon him and his offspring for ever. Should this son, thus highly fa vored, immediately and wantonly intrude in the instance prohibited; who would not reprobate at once his ingratitude and infatuation; who would not justify the father

in immediately disinheriting both this son and his issue. This is only a faint representation of the favor manifested to Adam, and his ingratitude and infatuation in abusing it. The Lord God formed him after his own image, admitted him into the most intimate fellowship with himself, gave him "dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth; placed him in the garden of Eden, causing to "grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight and good for food, the tree of life also in the midst of the garden" as a visible pledge of that eternal life which he should receive as the reward of obedience; " of every tree of the garden" gave him liberty "freely to eat" with this single restraint, "of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou shalt not eat of it." As the Egyptian monarch addressed Joseph, Jehovah virtually addressed the first Adam," thou shalt be over my house and according to thy word shall all my people be ruled, only in the throne will I be greater than thou" "I make over as thine this lower world, the cattle on ten thousand hills, and every thing that moveth upon the earth to be ruled by thee; all the fruits of paradise to be at thy disposal and for thine enjoyment, only in excepting the tree of the knowledge of good and evil I claim the pre-eminence; in this instance I must manifest, that, although thou art lord of the earth, I am Lord over thee." When all these circumstances are

impartially considered, the high dignity to which Adam was promoted, the exalted privileges which he already possessed, and the still greater which he might have secured for himself and his countless posterity, must we not pronounce his intrusion upon that tree as the most shameful abuse of the divine bounty, and a most daring contempt of the divine authority and prerogatives? Had some difficult service been required which it was almost impossible for man to have performed; had some costly sacrifice been demanded, or had the reward proposed been unworthy his reception, the sentence might appear more rigorous: But nothing was enjoined only abstinence from a single tree, the fruit of which he could as well have wanted, and this restraint to continue for a limited* time, while never-ending happiness was assured him as a reward for his submission. All murmuring against the sentence as severe must therefore be instantly silen ced. We are left to deplore the frailty of human nature in its most perfect state, to be humbled for the ingratitude, the presumption of our first parents in boldly trampling

* It is an opinion entertained by some that the command to refrain from this tree of knowledge respected only the fruit of that season, and that had Adam obeyed during that year, the restraint would have been removed, and he confirmed in happiness. But as the inspired historian does not particularly mention how long the prohibition would have continued, all that can be said as to the period, amounts to no more than conjecture; but it is probable that the probationary state of man would very soon have terminated and that he, upon condition of perfect obedience, would have been promoted to a higher degree of glory and joy.