less punishment is an infinite punishment, though it be not to the utmost in degree. Therefore, when Dr. C. says, "According to this way of arguing, all sinners must suffer to the utmost in degree, as well as duration, otherwise, they will not suffer so much as they ought to do;" he merely asserts what he ought to have proved. Therefore he fails in his attempt to fasten on the doctrine of the infinite evil of sin, the absurdity that the punishment of all the damned will be equal. He might as well have argued, that because all saints shall receive an infinite or an endless reward; the reward of every one will be to the utmost in degree, and the reward of all will be equal.

Or if the meaning of this argument be, that the wicked will all be punished equally, not because they will suffer an endless punishment, but because they all sin against the same infinitely glorious object, and therefore their sins are all equal: the answer is, that the consequence by no means follows from the premises. Though it be true, that the wicked all sin against the same God, and on that account all deserve endless punishment? yet it no more follows thence, that they all deserve the same punishment in degree, than if a number of subjects should rebel against the same excellent prince, it would follow, that they are equally guilty, and all deserve an equal punishment.

The expression, infinite evil of sin, seems to be very offensive to some gentlemen. They seem to conceive that it means as great an evil or crime, as it is possible for a man to commit, the moral turpitude of which can in no respect be increased.-This idea of the infinite evil of sin is very different from that which is entertained by those who hold, that sin is an infinite evil. All they mean is, that sin is in such a sense an infinite evil, that it may be justly followed by an endless punishment.

It no more follows hence, that the moral turpitude of any particular sin cannot be increased, than that the endless punishment of it cannot be increased; or than that the endless happiness of the saints in heaven cannot be increased. Indeed, neither the happiness of heaven, nor the misery of hell can be increased in duration : nor can the turpitude of sin be so increased, as to deserve a greater duration of punishment, than that which is endless. But as both the happiness of heaven and the misery of hell, though endless, may be increased in degree; so may the turpitude of sin be so increased, as to deserve a greater degree of punishment.

When it is said, that if the evil of sin be infinite, it is as great as possible, and so all sins are equal; it seems to be implied, that all infinities are equal in all respects, than which nothing is more false. An infinite line, an infinite superfices, and an infinite solid, are all infinites, and they are all equal in one respect or dimension, that of length. But a line though truly infinite in length, is not in the dimension of breadth equal to an infinite superfices. Nor is a superfices, though truly infinite in the two dimensions of length and breadth, equal in depth to an infinite solid.-To apply this, sin may be infinitely aggravated with respect to the object against whom it is committed, and in that respect it may be incapable of an increase of aggravation. Still it may not be infinite with respect to the degree of opposition, or virulence and malignity to the object, against whom it is committed.

By the infinite evil of sin therefore is meant, that sin truly deserves an endless punishment, as it is committed against an infinitely glorious object, against God himself, his authority, his law, his government; and as it enervates the laws, violates the peace and safety of his kingdom, introduces confusion and ruin, and would actually

ruin entirely that kingdom, and the happiness of all who belong to it, were not measures taken by God to prevent its natural effect. In this respect it is infinitely evil, and in this respect, in which it is infinitely evil, the evil of it cannot be increased, because the object against which it is committed, cannot be greater, more important, or more excellent; and in this respect all sins are equal. But by the infinite evil of sin, is not meant an evil, which deserves an infinite degree of punishment; or an act of opposition to God and his kingdom, which is infinitely virulent or malicious. In this respect the evil of sin may be increased, and in this respect all sins are by no means equal. The evil of any one sin is not so great, but that on the whole it may be increased, as the happiness of heaven is not so great, but that on the whole that may be increased.

Though the turpitude of sin is infinite with respect to the object opposed, yet it is not infinite as to the degree of opposition. If a subject rebel against the most excellent sovereign on earth, his crime is, in respect to the object, as great as he can commit in rebellion against a temporal prince; because by supposition he cannot be the subject of a better temporal prince, and therefore he cannot rebel against a better. Yet this rebellion may be more aggravated by greater degrees of opposition, abuse or insult to this same excellent prince.

What has been now said concerning the infinite evil of sin, has been in the way of explanation, and in answer to Dr. C's objections. The positive proof, that sin is an infinite evil, has been so largely and ably given by others, that the reader will allow me to refer him to them.*

* President Edwards's sermon on the Eternity of hell-torments, and his tract on Justification. Dr. Bellamy's Essay on the Gospel, Sect. v, Mr. Hopkins on the Future State, Sect. iv.

Thus I have particularly attended to the arguments brought by Dr. C. to prove, that the endless punishment of the wicked would not be just.-I shall now proceed to a more general consideration of the justice of endless punishment consisting in misery, and to some arguments in proof of it. The first argument to which I wish to direct the attention of the reader, is, that if endless punishment be the curse of the divine law, or the punishment threatened in the divine law, as the wages of sin, or as the proper punishment of sinners; undoubtedly it is just. It is impossible, that a God of perfect and infinite justice should threaten an unjust punishment.-I am indeed aware, that it is not a conceded point, that endless misery is threatened in the divine law: I therefore purpose to attempt the proof of it.-The curse of the divine law is either endless annihilation, or it is that misery which the wicked in fact suffer in hell, or it is some temporary misery of greater duration than that which is actually suffered in hell, or it is endless misery. These several hypotheses shall come under consideration in the following chapters.

But before I proceed, it may be proper to explain in what sense I use the word law, in this inquiry concerning the curse of the divine law. By the divine law, I mean not merely any positive, revealed law, as that given to Adam concerning the tree of knowledge of good and evil: but what Dr. C. calls "the moral law of God," and "the law of works, as requiring perfect, actual, indefectable obedience." The Doctor allows, that "he" [Adam] "was, without all doubt, under strict indispensable obligations to obey every command of God, wherein it should be made known to him-and must have rendered himself obnoxious to the righteous resentments of his God and king, had he expressed any disregard to any of them."*

*Five Dissertations, p. 55.

This he speaks concerning the moral law, as may be seen by the context. And doubtless as Adam was obligated to obey "every command" of the moral law, and in case of disobedience, was "obnoxious to the righteous resentments of God," the same is true of every other man. The righteous resentment of God for disobedience to this law, is that very curse of the law, from which Christ hath redeemed his people, and which is the proper object of our present inquiry. By law taken in this sense, Dr. C. abundantly holds, that no man can be justified." By law, the apostle sometimes means law in general, both the law written in men's hearts, and in the books of revelation-sometimes-the Mosaic law in special. But whether he understand by it natural or revealed law, or law including both; works done in conformity to it, when mentioned with reference to justification, he always sets aside as totally insufficient for the procurement of it."* Here the Doctor tells us in what sense he uses the word law, which is the same in which I use it, in the present inquiry: and as he asserts in this context, and in very many other passages, that no man, "Jew or Gentile," can be justified on the foot of law taken in the sense just explained; of course all men are condemned by the law, and the punishment to which the law condemns all, is the curse of the law; or the curse of the law is that punishment to which the moral law condemns every man who transgresses it.