Of the circumstances of their trial, we are bound to judge, independently of its consequences. Had Adam stood, we should never have questioned the equity of the trial. We cannot, consistently with reason, any more question it now. Our estimate of this subject ought clearly to be formed on the conditions and circumstances themselves; as we should have formed it, had the conditions and circumstances been presented to us before the issue. In this case, we should not have hesitated to acknowledge either the justice, or the goodness of the Creator. Whenever we now judge otherwise, our judgment does not proceed from reason and evidence; but is the mere offspring of prejudice and feeling.

2. These considerations teach us also the extreme error and perverseness of those men, who, in the language of sneer and contempt, declare that God cannot be supposed to have condemned mankind for the mere eating of an apple.

I have here adopted the language which has been often used concerning this subject, not by Infidels only, but by multitudes of such as profess to believe the Scriptures. It is however, not the language of reason and common sense, but of partiality and passion; of a most unhappy nature, and existing in a very censurable degree.

Nothing in which God is concerned, or is supposed to have been concerned, can be the proper object of contempt or sneers, of sport or ridicule. Every thought concerning this great, pure, and awful Being, ought to spring from the most profound reverence; and whenever expressed, ought to be uttered only in the most reverential terms. Especially are we bound to exclude all levity of mind from a case of such deep importance and amazing concern, as the Apostasy of man: an event which not only exposed the immediate subjects of it to the divine wrath, and the final sentence of reprobation, but entailed also an endless multitude of miseries, as well as an endless course of depravity, on their sinning progeny. The exposure of a single human soul to the anger of God, and to the miseries of perdition, is a subject too solemn to be taken up by a trifling mind, or discussed with a thoughtless tongue. When we are considering sin and condemnation, the guilt and miseries of the present life, or the endless corruption and sufferings of the life to come; whatever else may be in unison with these subjects, sport and sneer are only discordant; and

jar and grate upon the ear of a sober man with a harshness, equally unsuited to the nature of the subjects, and distressing to every rational feeling. He who can adopt sentiments of contempt and ridicule; and still more, he who can utter them, in a case where his all is at stake; is a madman, much fitter to grope in bedlam, than to mingle with rational society.

The phraseology here adopted is totally unjust and unfounded, totally false and hollow. It insinuates, and intentionally insinuates, that God was influenced in his condemnation of our first parents by a resentment, excited only by the value which he placed on the forbidden fruit; and that, as exhibited in this part of the Scriptures, he was moved by those weak and pitiful passions with which men, at times, violently and foolishly resent the loss of their own property. As the value of the fruit was insignificant, and in a sense nothing; these men conclude, that God could not prize it so highly as to be angry at the transgression, or to inflict punishment, much less so dreadful a punishment on the transgressors. Were the principle just, on which they profess to argue; I readily admit, as every other man will admit, that God cannot be supposed to have punished them at all for the reason alleged.

But the principle itself has no connection with the subject: the argument derived from it is therefore without a foundation. The Scriptures neither here nor elsewhere present us with any such views of God. Nothing is more remote from the story actually told, or from the doctrines really expressed. Every thing which is taught by the bible concerning this subject, is highly solemn and affecting.

Our first parents were condemned, because they disobeyed their Maker, revolted from his authority, and rebelled against his government. Whatever was the mode, whatever was the instrument of the rebellion, the sin was substantially the same. The same authority was denied, the same obligation broken; and of course, the same guilt was thus far incurred. There is however a difference in transgressions, and a plain one, which renders the guilt greater in proportion to the smallness of the temptation. That disposition which disobeys under the influ ence of a small temptation, is certainly worse than that which, resisting such a temptation, yields only to inducements which are very great. This rule of judging is universal; and in other cases, is acknowledged without a question. It ought to

be acknowledged here. Had Adam disobeyed, to gain the dominion of the universe, or admission into heaven; these men would have pronounced the trial unreasonable; because the temptation was evidently too great for his faculties, and disproportioned to his ability to resist. On the same principle they ought now to acknowledge, that the trial was wholly equitable; because it allowed of no temptations, except such as were insignificant and trifling. Thus the argument is directly against them, and unanswerably refutes their favourite doctrine.

The fruit, whatever it was, was plainly of no importance in the possession, to Him who, at his bidding, can in a moment call into existence a world, or a million of worlds, with all their furniture and beauty. Nor has it, in this sense, the most remote relation to the subject in hand. The guilt of our first parents lay solely in 1ebelling against the will of God, their Creator, Sovereign, and Benefactor. For this rebellion they were justly condemned, if God can justly condemn a rebellious

creature.

3. We are taught by this passage of Scripture, in one important particular, the views which God entertains of sin. The sentence here denounced against disobedience, is denounced against the first act. In the day that thou eatest thereof, thou shall surely die.' The death threatened in this law, is threatened to a single transgression. Accordingly, for a single transgression they were afterwards condemned.

How different is this exhibition of the mind of God, concerning this subject, from the views which we are accustomed to cherish! We are prone to believe, that even after numerous transgressions, nay, after the sins of a whole life, God will still regard us with so much favour, that we shall scarcely be condemned. Our first parents ate the forbidden fruit, and were condemned. How many things, apparently much more aggravated, have we done. Yet how greatly are we at ease concerning the divine anger, and our approaching destination. Under the persuasion that we are not so sinful as others, and indeed, that we are scarcely sinful at all, we hear the law, the transgression, and the penalty, awfully resounded in our ears; and hardly suppose ourselves interested in either. To the final judgment, and the final condemnation of the wicked, we turn a careless, self-satisfied eye; as objects which,

however interesting to others, have little or no reference to ourselves. Thus flattered and supported by views of our guilt, utterly opposed to the Scriptures, and wholly contrary to those of God, we go on in the commission of sin, without any serious alarm; and persuade ourselves, that whether the Lord will do good' to us or not, he' certainly will never do evil.' In this deplorable manner life is spent, the day of repentance trifled away, and the hope of redemption and forgiveness lost for ever.

But let every sinner in this house remember, that he was condemned for his first sin, for the second, for the third, and for every one which has followed. Call to mind then, I beseech you, the amazing number of transgressions actually charged to the account of every sinner present. Think how many have been committed in a single day; how many more in a week, in a month, in a year. How astonishing must be the sum of those which are committed in a whole life! The same God, who condemned Adam for one transgression, regards every sin of which you have been guilty, with the same abhorrence. How awful was the sentence of condemnation pronounced on him! What then can remain for you in your present condition, but a fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation!'

PROVIDENCE.

THE TEMPTATION AND FALL.

NOW THE SERPENT WAS MORE SUBTLE THAN ANY BEAST OF THE FIELD, WHICH THE LORD HAD MADE. AND HE SAID UNTO THE WOMAN, YEA, HATH GOD SAID, YE SHALL NOT EAT OF EVERY TREE OF THE GARDEN? AND THE WOMAN SAID UNTO THE SERPENT, WE MAY EAT OF THE FRUIT OF THE TREES OF THE GARDEN: BUT OF THE FRUIT OF THE TREE, WHICH IS IN THE MIDST OF THE GARDEN, GOD HATH SAID, YE SHALL

NOT EAT

OF IT, NEITHER SHALL YE TOUCH IT, LEST YE - DIE. AND THE
SERPENT SAID UNTO THE WOMAN, YE SHALL NOT SURELY Die:
FOR GOD DOTH KNOW, THAT, IN THE DAY YE EAT THEREOF,
THEN YOUR EYES SHALL BB OPENED: AND YE SHALL BE AS
GODS, KNOWING GOOD AND EVIL. AND WHEN THE WOMAN
SAW THAT THE TREE WAS GOOD FOR FOOD, AND THAT IT
WAS PLEASANT TO THE EYES, AND A TREE TO BE DESIRED TO
MAKE ONE WISE, SHE TOOK OF THE FRUIT THEREOF, AND
HUSBAND WITH HER;

DID EAT; AND GAVE ALSO UNTO HER
AND HE DID EAT.

GENESIS III. 1-6.

IN the last Discourse, I considered the situation of our first parents in the state of trial, in which God was pleased to place them; and the conditions of the law, or covenant, under which they were placed. These, I endeavoured to show, were just and reasonable; and such as clearly spoke the benevolence of God.

In the text we are informed of the result of this trial; viz.