it will be indispensible to weigh the sentiment in the balances of the sanctuary, and to see, whether what we have affirmed be truths revealed in the Scriptures. On this point, a celebrated divine, no less solidly than ingeniously remarks, 'that God, as it were, said to Adam, as once to the Israelites, (Deut. xxix. 14—15) Neither with you only do I make this covenant and this oath ; but also with him that is not here with us this day;' and adds, 'the whole history of the first man proves, that he is not to be looked upon as an individual person, but that the whole human nature was considered as in him.' For it was not said to our first parents only, ' increase and multiply;' nor is it true of Adam only— "it is not good that the man should be alone :' nor does that conjugal law,—therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh,' concern him alone, which Christ still urges, Matt. xix. 5.-nor did the penalty threatened by God upon Adam's sinning, —thou shalt surely die,' affect him alone; but 'death passed upon all men' according to the Apostle's observation, Rom. v. 12—19. We affirm that Adam was a public person and that therefore he and his posterity are dealt with as one. Let the reader fairly then consider what the apostle here says, and then we think he will admit that the subject in debate is clearly determined in our favour, so far, at least as the word of God is permitted, to be the judge which ends the strife. And we will add, if the debate, must be settled by an appeal to the

H

sword, let it be the sword of the spirit, and not the sword of reason- —I mean carnal reason. Inspired and infallible reason speaks thus on the subject. 'Wherefore, as by one man, sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men,' (all we are sentenced to die)' for that all have sinned 'even infants (viz. in Adam, which the apostle proceeds to prove,) For until the law, sin was

in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law.' And therefore, there was a law before that given by Moses-even that law which Adam was under, as a covenant head. And by this law, because Adam broke it, sin was imputed, and death inflicted upon the whole human race, even upon infants. For as a proof of this 'death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them' (viz. infants) 'that had not sinned' (actually) 'after the similitude of Adam's transgression,' who (as a covenant head) is the figure, (type) of him that was to come, viz. Christ.— Now as infants can actually transgress no lawmust it not follow that they sinned in Adam-and that his sin is imputed to the whole human race? for even infants die. 'But death, says the apostle' ' entered into the world by one man's sin,' viz. Adam's. Adam's sin is therefore, imputed to infants who die for it. It is therefore, imputed to the whole human race-in virtue of union to Adam, and our being together with him under that law, which he broke, and whose existence in the world as the apostle here argues, is implied by the existence of sin, and death, previous to the giving of the law by Moses at Sinai.

6

In short the apostle in the verses under consideration, affirms that all are involved in the guilt of the first transgression, Adam was therefore the federal head of the whole human race.

tle teach what we here affirm?

one.

Does not the aposLet us hear him a

gain. But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one, many be dead, &c. And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift for the judgment was by one to condemna tion. For if by one man's offence death reigned by Therefore, as by the offence of one, judgment came upon all men to condemnation. For as by one man's disobedience, many were made sinners.' Surely it will not still be denied that at all events the apostle teaches the imputation of Adam's sin, to all his posterity-or as we said that all are involved in the consequences of the first transgression. And do not facts teach the same thing. What then is the inference? Why most unquestionably as the apostle here affirms that Adam' was the figure' of Christ i. e. Adam was a covenant head vix. of the whole human race. And therefore to conclude. If sin and death entered into the world by one man ; and by Adam's first sin; if all even infants sinned in Adam; if even infants are not excused from the penalty of that law, which Adam broke; if it be thus manifest, that Adam's sin is imputed to the whole human race; and that therefore the whole human race are involved in the consequences of Adam's sin; if all become sinners by his disobedience; if sentence of death passed upon all men as the apostle

here repeatedly affirms, for having sinned in Adam; if it is through the offence of one that many be dead;' if the judgment was by one to condemnation,'' if death reigns by one man's offence;' and finally if Adam was a type of Christ ;-if these things are so, must it not follow, that Adam contracted, not merely for himself, but for all his posterity - that he sustained their persons, and was constituted their covenant head and representative ? If not, let him who objects, explain the meaning of these passages. And however mysterious or even inexplicable this dispensation of God may appear to us in some respects, yet, as it has God for its author, we may be sure it was perfectly wise, good, and just. And that it was so, we hope to be able in due time to evince. Having considered the contracting parties we proceed,

6

II. To examine into the condition of the covenant of works, which was unsinning obedience during the period of Adam's probationary state. Obedience supposes a law or laws. There were two laws Adam on pain of death was bound to keep, viz.: first, the law of nature, written on his heart: secondly, the symbolical or positive law, respecting the tree of knowledge of good and evil,' mentioned Gen. ii. 17. By the former of these, we mean the moral law, the same for substance as the decalogue, and which was to man, even in a state of perfection, the rule of moral right and wrong. Moreover, by this law, as well as by the supreme authority of God, man was, and still continues to be, obliged to obey

God in every thing which it pleases him to make known as his will. This moral law is, by divines, frequently called the law of nature; thus denominated, because it was coeval with nature-because, as the Apostle hints, (Rom. i. 15) it was written in man's heart by nature, i. e. in his primitive state; and because its injunctions and prohibitions are founded, not as positive laws are, in a great measure, on the sovereign will of the supreme and eternal lawgiver, but upon the nature and moral character of Jehovah—the nature of man, and the relation in which he stands both to God and to his neighbour—a law, in short, arising in a way of such absolute necessity out of the nature of things, that what it enjoins could not but have been enjoined without the most manifest incongruity and even absurdity. Thus we say, it was necessary for God to command his creatures to love him, and to love one another, and to suppose that God could have dispensed with this, is absurd or worse, for it borders on blasphemy. Such being the character of the moral law, or the law of nature, it is obvious that man was necessarily under it—I mean, obliged to obey it from and by his creation. That he was, how can a doubt be reasonably entertained? For, as Dr. Bates admirably remarks, 'The law of nature to which man was subject upon his creation contains those moral principles of good and evil, which have an essential equity in them, and are the measure of his duty to God, to himself, and to his fellow creatures.' How then, we ask again, could