m to# WSm ft-M V/jon* a V ■'1 /1 ’ ' -s. C C ■ ?■ /'- :■ C / ' • / ■ \ / % Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2019 with funding from Princeton Theological Seminary Library https://archive.org/details/lecturesondispenOOward LECTURES OX THE DISPENSATIONS OF GOD WITH ADAM, V BY RALPH WARBLE, OF THATCH AM, BERKS. THIRD EDITION, REVISED, CORRECTED, AND ENLARGED. Printed for the Author, BY M. \V. VARDY, NORTHBROOK-STREET, NEWBURY. 1S36. Price Five Shillings. ft* 1 • * ' !> | PREFACE. Although the book is small which is here presented to the public, yet it is proper that the Author should conform to the prac¬ tice which custom has made a law, and sub¬ mit to his readers a prefatory remark or two. The following Lectures, the ground work of them at least, were first delivered to the author’s congregation, without the least in¬ tention, however, at the time, to publish. They have since been carefully revised and considerably enlarged—it is hoped improved. And though the following discourses were not hastily nor negligently composed, yet not daring to trust his own heart, or rely on his own judgment, the author thought it proper to put his manuscript into the hand of a candid and intelligent friend for exami¬ nation, but for whose favourable opinion of 4 the work, it is likely the intention of laying these Lectures before the Public would have been entirely abandoned. As this is his first attempt at doing good in this way, the author cannot but be aware that (small as it is) many faults may be detected in his book. Respecting these, he can only say, they are not the consequences of negligence :—the sentiments advanced in the following pages have been maturely considered, and the work repeatedly and earnestly presented to God, by prayer, for his assistance and blessing. The author cannot conclude these remarks without presenting his thanks to those es¬ teemed friends who kindly encourage this publication : entreating them to grant one more favor, namely, to beseech God for his blessing on this humble effort, that it may lessen the quantity of sin, advance the know¬ ledge of of Divine truth, and promote the practice of true piety. R. WARDLE. Thatcham, 1832. LIST OP SUBSCRIRERS Allen, Rev. S. Chinnor Adnams, Mr. John, Thateham Angus, Mr. Newcastle-on-Tyne Andrews, Miss, Shaw Archer, Mr. W. Basildon Barfield, John, Esq. Thatcliam Berry, Mr. J. Speen Brown, Mr. Newbury Butt, Mrs. Ditto Batchelor, Mr. Ditto Burgis, Mr. Reading Billing, Mr. Ditto Billing, Mrs. Ditto Buncombe, Mr. Ditto Burnard, Mr. Ditto Boorne, Mr. J. Ditto Batt, Mr. Ditto Bodmin, Mr. Hungerford Burgis, Mr. Benson Burgis, Mr. Jun, Ditto Burry, Mr. Abingdon Burgis, Mr. John, Ditto Bevan. Mrs. Ditto Badcock, Mr. James, Ditto Butler, Mr. Wycombe Benson, Mr. Newcastle-on-Tyne Benson, Mr. Michael, Ditto Clayton, Rev. G. Walworth Coxhead, Miss, Reading Chipperfield, Mr. Ditto Cuff, Mr. Ditto Clerk, Mrs. Ditto Cooper, Mr. J. J. Ditto Cleaver, Mr. Ditto Champion, Mr. Shaw Compton, Mrs. Speen Coombs, Mr. Newbury Chesterton, Mrs. Ditto Carter, Mr. T. Ditto, Surgeon Carter, Mrs. Ditto 6 Crofts, Mr. T. Newbury Church, Mrs, Thatcham Corker, Mr. M. Ditto Chalk, Mr. John Ditto Carter, Mr. Ditto Collier, Mr. J. Abingdon Copeland, Mr. Sen. Ditto Copeland, Mr. E. Ditto Copeland, Mr. Joseph, Ditto Curtis, Mr. Goring Coles, Mr. John, Banbury Crighton, Mr. A. North Shields Douglas, Rev. A. Reading Dryland, Rev. W. Speen Dyer, Miss, Speen Deane, Mr. Ditto Deane, Mr. T. Newbury Daniel, Mrs. Wantage [Tyne Davison, Mr. H. Newcastle-on- Elliott, Rev. R. Devizes Evans, Mr. B. Abingdon Frost, Rev. R. Hunger ford Fuller, Mr. B. Newbury Flint, Mr. Ditto French, P. W. Esq. Reading Ford, Mr. Ditto Ford, Mrs. J. Ditto Frankum, Mr. Ditto Fairbrotlier, Mr. Abingdon Flower, Mr. Wycombe [Tyne Ferguson, Mr. T. Newcastle-on- Graham, Fuller, Esq. Newbury Granger, Mr. Ditto Green, Mrs. Newbury Graham, Mr. W. Speen Gale, Mr. Ditto Greathead, Mr. Reading Goddard, Mr. Thatcham Gardner, Thos. Esq. Banbury Gardner, Miss Charlotte, Ditto Gardiner, Mr. Abingdon Harris, Rev. W. Wallingford Howes, Rev. J. Goring Hoggard, Mr. Reading Hanson, Miss, Ditto Heathcock, Mr. Ditto, Surgeon Havell, Mr. Ditto Horsnell, Mr. Ditto Higgs, Mr. Newbury Hibel, Mr. Greenham Hawkins, Mr. Weston Hunt, Mr. Thatcham Holford, Mr. J. Abingdon Holford, Mr. T. Ditto Holloway, Mr. R. Ditto Hester, Mr. Ditto, Surgeon Heam, Mr. J. North Shields Johnson, Rev. Mr. Speen Jacques, Mr. Ditto Julian, Miss, Newbury Jackson, Mr. G. Abingdon Key worth, Rev. T. Wantage Kershaw, Rev. J. Abingdon Keates, Miss, Ditto Kent, Mr. J. Ditto Keens, Mr. W. Newbury King, Mr. J. South Stoke Knighton, Mr. Reading Legg, Rev. Mr. Reading Langford, Rev. Mr. London Lanfear, — Esq. Hungerford Lye, Mr. Richard, Ditto 7 Lewis, Mr. Newbury Lamdin, Mr. Sen. Ditto Lee, Mrs. Wallingford Lee, Miss, Ditto Laurie, Rev. G. Reading Morrison, Rev. John, D.D. Maberly, Miss, Reading Millet, Mr. Weston Morris, Mr. Newbury Merrewetlier, Mrs. Ditto Mayo, Mr. J. Ditto Marlind, Mr. Gloucestershire Marshall, J. Esq. Wallingford Moody, Mr. Hungerford Millegew, Mr. Hungerford Morden, Mrs. Thatcham Nicholson, Rev. Mr. Abingdon Nias, Mr. Newbury Norris, Mr. Newbury Newton, Mr. T. Pangbourne Owen, Rev. G. D. Maidenhead Oram, Rev. W. Benson Ord, Rev. J. Newcastle-on-Tyne Pinnell, Rev. A. Mortimer Prust, Stephen, Esq. Bristol Pidgeon, Mr. Sen. Reading Powell, Mr. Ditto Poulton, Mr. C. Ditto Purdue, Mr. J. Newbury Purdue, Mr. Hungerford Panter, Mr. T. South Stoke Pittman, Mr. J. Goring Peisley, Mr. Abingdon Ring, Thomas, Esq. Reading Rusher, Mr. J. Ditto Rugman, Mrs. Ditto. Robinson, Miss, Ditto Rutter, Mrs. Henley Rogers, Mrs.Newcastle-on-Tyne Rogers, Mr. W. Ditto Sherman, Rev. J. Reading Stiff, Miss, Ditto Summers, Wm. Esq. London Summers, S. Esq. Ditto Sargent, Mr. Newbury Shaw, Mr. J. Ditto Shaw, Mr. R. Ditto Smith, Mr. Ditto Sparrowell, Mr. Speen Strange, W. Esq. Abingdon Strange, Mr. J. Ditto Smith, Mr. John, ditto Smith, Mr. G. Wallingford Terry, Rev. Mr. Princes Risboro’ Tyso, Rev. J. Wallingford Toomer, Mr. Newbury Trumplett, Mr. Ditto Tomkins, Dr. Abingdon Tomkins, J. Esq. Ditto Tomkins, Miss, Ditto Tomkins, W. Esq. Ditto Trendell, Mr. J. Reading Taylor, Mr. Banbury. Thompson, Mr. M. Newcastle- on-Tyne Vaizey, John, Esq. Thatcham Yaizey. G. D. H. Esq. Halsted, Essex Yaizey, Miss, Ditto Yines, Mr. J. Brimpton Wilkins, Rev. W. Abingdon Wills, Rev. Mr. Basingstoke? 3 Welsh, Rev. T. Newbury Woolley, Rev. W. Pangbourne Watts, Mr. Thatcham, Surgeon Weedon, J. Esq. Reading Wayland, W. Esq. Ditto Watson, Mrs. Ditto Winter, Mrs. Speen Weedon, Mr. Newbury Walter, Mr. Ditto Wood, G. J. Esq. Upway, Dorset Wardle, Mr. W. North Shields Wait, Mr. Abingdon Williams, Mr. London I Walker, Mr. J. S. LECTURE I The Creation of Man. Gen. v. 1 , 2, informs us that “ In the day that God created man/’ (in which term are included both Adam and Eve) " male and female created he them 3 and blessed them, and called their name Adam, the day when they were created.” My text is Adam : the name given by their Almighty Creator, to our first parents, more usually appropriated in the Scriptures to the first man. This term Adam likewise signifies earth 3 it was therefore a very suitable name for man, who was “ formed of the dust of the ground.” There are, it is true, learned men who derive this name from a Hebrew word of a different signification, and who tell us that the first man was therefore called Adam, because he was created in the image of God 3 the phraseology however of Gen. ii. 7, seems decisive in favour of the interpretation we have adopted. But it is not particularly with the derivation of the word we have to do on the present occasion, the text being chosen with a view in a few plain discourses, to consider certain peculiarly important and interesting dispen¬ sations of the Almighty with the first man, and 10 /• with ourselves considered in him. Such is my design. How far success may crown the attempt rightly to discuss the subjects which lie before us, I know not, but certain I am, that the de¬ sign itself will be approved by all who are com¬ petent judges of such matters, and who know how desirable it is that Christian instruction should be afforded on a scale sufficiently extensive to embrace whatever it has pleased the most wise and blessed God to reveal. Moreover it is to be hoped, that none of us need to be informed, although, possibly, some may require to be reminded, that wilful igno¬ rance of God’s ways to man (as implying a want of due regard for himself) is a sin. Hence we read Psalm xxviii. 5.—“Because they regard not the works of the Lord, nor the operation of his hands, he shall destroy them, and not build them up.’f On the other hand, to acquaint ourselves with God and his dispensations, is represented in the Holy Scriptures as commendable, thus Psa. cxi. C Z. “ The works of the Lord are great, sought out of all them that have pleasure therein.” Those persons there¬ fore, and they are oft to be met with, are clearly in the wrong, who would have ministers pass over no inconsiderable portion of revealed truth, and dwell almost entirety on subjects which, however important, were never intended to supplant others, still less to be made to encourage mental indolence, or feelings, possibly, of a still more objectionable character. In a word, our duty it is, and the rather if we love and fear God, reverentially to endeavour t Job xxxiv. 27. Isa. v. 12. 11 to acquaint ourselves with him, and with the whole of his ways ; in the devout study of which, it is not less my delight than my duty to assist you, by en¬ deavouring to unfold, as far as my ability and means permit, the wonderful ways of God recorded in the sacred volume. God help us, therefore, that with suitable affections and intentions, and with all lowliness of mind, we may address ourselves to the important objects, to which, from the text, your attention will be directed. And, as will hereafter be evinced, we must all be aware that there are special reasons why we should consider with deep¬ est interest, God’s dispensations towards our first parents. Our first subject is the creation of man. On this, considered in respect of not a few of its bearings, solemn theme, we read, Gen, i. 6 26. "And God,” after he had prepared a delightful habitation for his intended creature, said, “ Let us make man.” It is true it is to the work of redemp¬ tion we are to look for a full disclosure of the doc¬ trine of the Trinity and the perfections of God, yet, as in the creation of the world, so especially in the creation of man, it pleased him to give an intima¬ tion of that doctrine sufficiently intelligible to be understood by those, at least, who have together with the Holy Scriptures in their possession a ready mind to submit to the dictates of inspired and eternal truth. Do not these expressions, “ Let us make man in our image, after our likeness,” contain an intimation 1<2 I /V of the doctrine of the Trinity, or that there is a plurality of persons in the divine essence ? This interpretation is strengthened by the fact, that they who disapprove of it, are unableeither to supply us with a better, or satisfactorily to account for God’s appropriating plural words to himself, which he often does.* With reference to thepas- *The Hebrew word, o’n?N (Aleiw or Eloiw) usually rendered God, is plural. On this point the learned Parkhurst, page 19 of his Hebrew Lexicon, observes—“ Let those who have any doubt whether Aleim (or Eloim) when meaning the true God, is plural or not, consult the follow¬ ing passages, where they will find it joined with adjec¬ tives, pronouns, and verbs plural.-—Gen. i. 26; iii- 22. xi. 7; xx. 13; xxi. 53; xxxv. 7.—Deut. iv. 7; v. 23, or 26.—Josh. xx. 19.—1 Sam. iv. 8.—2 Sam. vii. 23. —Psa. lviii. 12.—Isa. vi. 8.—Jer. x. 10 ; ‘xxiii. 36.—See also Prov. ix. 10; xxx. 3.—Psa. cxlix. 2.^-Eccles. v. 7, xii. 1.—Job. v. 1.—Isa. vi. 3 ; and liv. 5.-—Hos. xi. 12 ; or xii. 1.—Mai. i. 6.—Dan. vii. 18; xxii. 25.”—The reader will not, perhaps, be displeased, if to the above we add a quotation from the famous Witsius, who observes—“ It cannot certainly be without design, that the Scripture, when speaking of man’s Creator, so often uses the plural number :—as Isa. liv. 5.—thy husbands, thy makers.—Psa. cxlix. 2—Let Israel rejoice in his makers. Nay, requires man to attend to this, and engrave it on his mind—Eccles. xii. 1—Remember thy Creators. It is criminal when man neglects it ; and says not Job, xxxv. 10—Where is God my makers. Which phrases, unless referred to a Trinity or persons, might appear to be dangerous. Especially when we consider that the oracles of truth were first com¬ mitted to a people remarkably prone to idolatary.— See also Gen. iii. 22, and xi. 7. 13 sages where such terms occur, and many others of various kinds, the doctrine of the Trinity may be called f the key of knowledge,’ for like certain other revealed truths, it is necessary to be admitted in order to understand the Holy Scriptures. For this reason, they who deny it, take away ‘ the key of knowledge.’ They take away too, as far as they can, the foundation of a sinner’s hope. For the doctrine of the Trinity as including the Deity of Christ and the personality of the Holy Spirit, is the most important doctrine of Christianity—it is the foundation of revealed religion, it is the key¬ stone of the arch of truth—in a word—rightly un¬ derstood, it is f an anchor to the soul both sure and stedfast,’ which will prevent it from being dashed against any rock of essential error. To answer, however, to these commendatory representations, the doctrine of the Trinity must be admitted, not merely in the abstract, nor from faith in human creeds—nor discerned merely in the light of reason, acting candidly on revelation: but it must be spiritually apprehended, and as it were experienced by being taken in connection with the works each of the Divine persons perform in the economy of redemption 5 and by our being taught by the Holy Spirit to understand these works in a Scriptural and saving way. As if when man was to be created the persons of the sacred Trinity had held a solemn consulta¬ tion, it is here said—‘ Let us make man 3 ’ and it is only respecting the creation of man that this re- B 14 markable form of speech is adopted, implying, it has been said, ‘that man was the most excellent creature of all this visible world, and the master¬ piece of God’s workmanship.’ How elegantly does the Psalmist speak of man—of man both as created and as redeemed. ‘Thou hast made him a little’ —only a little, ‘ lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour.’ Man forms the connecting link between the angelic and the material world. ‘ Man,’ says Doctor Bates, ‘ is the abridgment of the universe, allied to the angels in his soul, and to material things in his body, and capable of the happiness of both. By his internal faculties enjoying the felicity of the intellectual, and by his external powers tasting the pleasures of the sensitive world.’ Representations these of man calculated to inspire him—not with a carnal, but a becoming—with a holy and salutary self- respect. Besides the excellence of man, in his animal and intellectual natures and moral constitution, are there any other probable reasons why his cre¬ ation was accompanied with this mark of distinc¬ tion, ‘ Let us make man ?’ To say the least, whether other reasons were intended or not, this mark of distinction is calculated to suggest various things respecting man, to which it very emphatically ap¬ plies. In many of its bearings and consequences, the creation of man was a much more important event than that of angels: for ere time began, a covenant of grace was entered into between the persons of the sacred Trinity, for the redemption of man. It was in the nature of man that the Son 01 of God was to make his appearance upon earth, and here (0 wonderful sight! O most welcome visitant! more welcome than is the abating tem¬ pest and the first peep of day to the mariner) here to live, to suffer, and to die. It was in the hearts of chosen sinners, that the Spirit of the Lord was to become the author of a new creation. And to such as should be the subjects of it, angels were to be- come ministering spirits. Man was to be the prin- * eipal means of making known and glorifying God. And finally, it was by sinners from among man¬ kind that God, so wonderful are his councils, intended to people the mansions of glory, and more than fill up the vacancies occasioned by the apos- tacy of the angels who kept not their first estate. Now, if these things be considered, you will not wonder, that an indication of peculiar deliberation should have been connected with an event of such unutterable importance, an event pregnant with consequences of such solemnity and magnitude. For should it be said these remarks apply rather to the redemption than to the creation of man ; ad¬ mitting that j—we answer, man could not have been redeemed had he not been created 5 and all the consequences involved in man’s creation were present to the divine mind when it was said— c Let us make man.’ What is true of the preacher himself, is, he sup¬ poses, likewise applicable to most of his hearers;— 16 when he was born no pealing bells were rung- no thundering cannons were fired$ and, except within the walls of the humble habitation where he first drew the vital air, there were no rejoicings at his birth. But had he been born to titles or estates, then, as indicative of his being a person of conse¬ quence, his birth would have been attended by many a mark of distinction. So God to signify that the creation of man was an event of unutterable moment, put this mark of distinction upon it—‘ Let us make man.’ And here let me remind you, that the birth of every human being, because account¬ able and immortal, is an event of moment beyond the utmost stretch of thought at present to con¬ ceive, although it is an event which is usually pas¬ sed over as a trifling, every-day occurrence. But if you will be persuaded to consider that every son and daughter of Adam will live for ever—live for ever in bliss or woe—in happiness or in misery unspeakable in degree, as well as eternal in dura¬ tion, you will be convinced, that all the most magni¬ ficent events which history records, or even the creation of worlds innumerable, are trifles beyond expression when compared with the birth of only one such immortal being. Oh, to be such a being, and born in sin, how serious, and how affecting! Moreover, concerning the creation of man, we read Gen. ii. 7, ‘ And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground.’ Thus, with respect to his body, Adam was formed of the dust of the ground, as the apostle says, when shewing the pre-eminence 37 of Christ, the second Adam, over the first, as it respects that final state of glory to which he ex¬ alts his redeemed, f The first man is of the earth,— earthy.’ A representation this, which ought to in¬ spire the heart of a redeemed sinner with joy and gratitude, inasmuch as it assures him that by the merit and power of the second Adam, f who was made a quickening spirit, and is the Lord from heaven’—he shall ere long have a body superior to that which Adam possessed by creation. 1 Cor. xv. 42—54. Was Adam formed of the dust of the ground ? this should humble proud sinners. For it is a humbling consideration, that, as to our mortal frame, we can boast of no higher origin than our common parent. The beggar and the monarch are made of the same mean materials—of the same dust as creeping things, and beasts of the earth, for of it they were created as well as man. Gen. i. 24. Let not beings then, who, in an essential part of their nature, have one common original with the meanest reptile, pride themselves on the ground of their origin 5 nor let us forget, that whatever be our family, our personal comeliness, or strength, or stature, our pedigree can be as infallibly ascer¬ tained, as it can be soon told—we are of the dust, of the same dust as the most despicable of creatures. Again, let me remind you we are sinners, and dying creatures, and therefore the consideration of our common origin, should remind us of our 'common grave— f dust thou art, and to dust shalt b 3 18 thou return/ is language which at least ought to make each careless sinner thoughtful, and induce him to ask himself—where, when my body is in the grave, will my soul be if I continue Christless and prayerless, as I am at present ? knowing, as we must needs do, that the whole of us cannot die,—that our souls will be living, while weeping relatives are con¬ ducting our bodies to the grave—living while the words you have so often heard are pronounced, f dust to dust, ashes to ashes, earth to earth.’ Attend to the next sentence in the solemn ritual, f in sure and certain hope of a blessed resurrection to eternal life.’ Dying in our present state, over the graves of how many of us might the confidence of future happiness here expressed be consistently uttered ? A question this, as serious as the grave, and which should in¬ duce us all, most anxiously, and without farther de¬ lay, to enquire into the present state of our spiritual concerns, remembering what is written, e Blessed are the dead, that die in the Lord/ remembering like¬ wise, that they only are blessed. Once more :—was man formed out of the dust of the ground ? Who then can sufficiently admire the skill of the archi¬ tect ? What wondrous power and wisdom are here displayed! First, out of nothing, to create the ma¬ terial. Then, of such material, and of clay of the same lump, to form such an almost infinite variety of vessels. And last, but not least, of the same dust to form such a vessel to honour as man. For what a little world of wonders is the human body, in which such divine intelligence in inventing the plan. 19 and such matchless skill and power in its execution are expressed, as might well make the Psalmist, with devout admiration exclaim, am fearfully and wonderfully made.’ Wonderfully indeed ! This must appear to all who pay the least attention to the subject, for many excellencies of the human frame lie within the com¬ prehension of the weakest capacities, and are per¬ petually exposed to the observation of all. We need not the help of the anatomist to learn how admir¬ ably adapted the members of our body are to per¬ form the offices, for which they were created. As the eyes for seeing—the eye-lids for their preserva¬ tion—the skull for the defence of the brain—the ear for hearing—the tongue for speaking—the wind-pipe or trachea for the formation of sound, and intromission of air—the vertebrse of the neck for bending, and otherwise moving the head. What a wonderful chain of joints is the spine, or back bone. A great philosopher observes, that, * con¬ trary to all chains made by art, it unites as is required, firmness with flexibility—it is firm to support the erect position of the body—flexible, to allow of the bending of the trunk in all degrees of curvature.’ No man can consider either his hands or his feet without being struck with their admirable fitness for their respective offices. The muscles with their tendons, the sinews and the joints, are the instru¬ ments of motion, and, it is most interesting to con¬ sider, with what ease and perfection they perform 20 this important service. So perfectly, that by a simple act of our will, all kinds of motion are per¬ formed. It is wonderful with what ease we can stand or balance ourselves, seeing that our feet, the pedestals of this moving statue, are but small: with what facility we rise up, or lie down, walk, run, leap, move backwards or forwards, and all these and many more movements, so far as any consciousness of ours is concerned, are performed by simply willing or choosing that they shall be performed 5 no interposition of any other agency of our own being required in any of these diversi¬ fied positions : a fact this, the more to be noticed, because common sense would suggest that even the least alteration in the position of our bodies, requires a corresponding alteration in the instru¬ ments by which it is produced : a corresponding movement in the organs of motion as truly me¬ chanical, as it is truly wonderful. On the subject of muscular motion, the learned Archdeacon Paley, in his admirable work called “ Natural Theology,” has the following observations, which will illustrate much better than any thing I can state, the remark just made respecting changes of bodily position, as calling into action a corresponding and admir¬ able movement in the organs of motion 5 his re¬ marks are these : The ejaculations can never be too often repeated. How many things must go right for us to be an hour at ease! How many more to be vigorous and active ! Yet vigour and activity are, in a vast plurality of instances, pre- 21 served in human bodies, notwithstahding that they depend upon so great a number of instruments of motion; and, notwithstanding that the defect or disorder sometimes of a very small instrument— of a single pair, for instance, out of the four hundred and forty-six muscles which are employed, may be attended with grievous inconveniency.” There is piety and good sense in the following observations taken out of the Religious Philosopher, “With much compassion,” says this writer, “as well as astonishment at the goodness of our loving Creator, have I considered the sad state of a cer¬ tain gentleman, who, as to the rest, was in pretty good health, but only wanted the use of those two little muscles that serve to lift up the eyelids and so had almost lost his sight 5 being forced, as long as that defect lasted, to push up his eyelids every moment with his own hands ! In general we may remark3 how little those who enjoy the perfect use of their organs know the comprehensiveness of the blessing, the variety of the obligation. They per¬ ceive a result, but they think little of the multitude of concurrences and rectitudes which go to form it.” It should here be observed, respecting the eye¬ lids, that the defect above mentioned, in what may be called the hinges of these inimitable shutters, is an affliction of very rare occurrence: and when, in addition to this, we consider how perfectly and successfully they perform their important office, the eyelids may be selected as a peculiarly appro¬ priate exemplification of the subject under con- 22 sideration, viz.:—the adaption of the members of the body in general, and of the organs of motion in particular, to perform their several offices. As a further proof of this, the member which the apostle James, for evident reasons, calls f an unruly mem¬ ber,’ must by no means be passed over in silence. On this point the reader is referred to article A, in the appendix. 2.—In the human frame, we see an admirable union of strength and beauty, united with a due regard to convenience and comeliness in respect of bulk. These are qualities of the human body not undeserving of notice. Indeed, there is nothing un¬ worthy attention, in which may be discerned the overruling providence of God. To me, it appears a wise and merciful arrangement of the Divine Being, that the ordinary strength of man is what it is, and neither more or less: that the strength of the hand, for example, should be so considerable, and yet be possessed without offence to comeliness or convenience, either as to size or shape, is surely not undeserving the brief notice here bestowed upon it: nor as it has pleased God, in respect of their beauty , to give us bodies suitable to the rank we occupy in the scale of being, should we fail to recognize his hand in it. For, although it is unquestionable that the body has suffered by the fall in respect of beauty, similarly with the soul by the same cause; yet, as to creation in general, sin has left to man’s bodily frame much that bespeaks the dignity and beauty )f his original state. For mark his erect 23 posture, which seems like the star on the breast of nobility, or like the diadem which oft oppresses the brow it adorns, to point out man as the lord of this lower world : mark his countenance and his eye, both beaming with that intelligence and immortality which his speech scarcely less distinctly than his mental powers proclaims. In short, the human head covered as it is with a covering wove in na¬ ture’s inimitable loom, may, I think, be fitly com¬ pared to the ornamental finish of the stately co¬ lumns which support the dome of some ancient pile, whose exact and elegant proportions would but inadequately represent the still more elegant symmetry of the human frame ; in which, moreover, that it might be perfect through the comeliness which God has put upon it, we see the most agreeable variety, both in respect of countenance, complexion, shape, and size. What then must have been its beauty when first created ? Was it not like Zion, “ the perfection of beauty,” so di¬ vinely perfect, that it would not have been an un¬ suitable residence even for an angel ? 3.—And especially should we consider, that, as the works of God in general, so the human frame in particular abounds with the clearest indications of its being not the work of chance, but of design and contrivance—the work of an infinitely intelligent and Almighty Creator! And this is true, not only of the bodies of Adam and Eve, but of our own, in every part of which, except a man have the disease of atheism, it is impossible not to discover contri- 24 vance and design; nay, effects produced by ways, causes, and combinations so wonderful, as to evince, as we said, infinite skill and power. Is it, for ex¬ ample, we might ask, the work of chance or design, that the human skull, whose office is to defend that vital organ, the brain, is (to resist violence) ever hard and convex, and yet lined with a soft mem¬ brane to fit it for its contents ? Is there no benevo¬ lent care nor design cognizable in the eyebrows, or in the hair, planted with such inimitable skill along their ridges ? Have the ribs their strength and cur¬ vature, and are they placed where they are by chance ? Is it by chance that the nails are placed at the extremities of the toes and fingers P or that the bones should possess the quality of knitting together again so firmly, that when broken and pro¬ perly set, they become as strong as ever ? And surely, that the laws of nature, in respect of the human frame, should operate with such regularity, ought to be regarded as a singular proof of a super¬ intending providence. For on what other principle can we rationally account for the several members of the body being constantly and universally fixed in the same place, and that the very place where they ought to be ? Nor can I see, except on the same principle, as Mr. Addison remarks, how we can account for the fact, that the number of males and females should be so nicely adjusted, that the number of males appears to be ju6t sufficiently larger to make up the diminution to which they are liable by war and other causes. And here it may 25 be enquired, whether the distinction in the sexes does not evince that the body is, as really as the soul, the workmanship of God. Such reflections as these I must leave you to pursue, judging you would be better pleased, were we further to illus¬ trate the point before us by a few more quotations from Paley’s Evidences; for which, see appendix, article B.—And to bring our remarks on the crea¬ tion of the corporeal part of Adam to a close, I hasten to remind you, 4thly.—That whatever in respect of beauty or otherwise, might have been the perfection of the body in its primitive state, it was a perfection the more wonderful; because, had it not been for sin, it would have continued for ever. What an admirable frame then was Adam’s ! as immortal as his soul— a piece of divine mechanism which, but for sin, would never have needed any other repairs than what food and sleep would have efficiently and per¬ petually afforded : with these remedies it would have bid defiance to disease, decay, deformity, and death. Adam’s body was therefore especially a wonderful structure! And yet, it is reasonable to suppose, it was formed by a word in the twinkling of an eye; and formed too, out of nothing but dust. Even as the apostle speaks, when referring to the re¬ building and glorifying of the bodies of the just at the last day, by the same Divine Architect, the eter¬ nal Word, “ without whom, was not any thing made that was made.” But what saith the Apostle? “ We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed—*fin c 26 a moment—in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump.” Well might it be said of Jesus, “ his name shall be called Wonderful.” For what amazing power—power that will fill many, and that, in dif¬ ferent senses, with amazement, is implied in what the Apostle on the same subject, the resurrection of believers, says in another place: “ the Saviour shall change our vile bodies, and fashion them like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things to himself.” O glorious power ! glorious in its nature ! glorious in its application! With what sweet surprise, will it fill the souls of millions ! With what unwonted terror will it pierce the hearts of millions more, especially such as shall die in that most dreadful sin of denying the Deity of our most adorable Sa¬ viour, who is proved to be a divine person, whether viewed in the glass of Adam’s creation, (for Adam was created by his power,) or in the creation in general, (for “ the world was made by him,”) or in the mirror of the resurtection at the last day, (“ for the dead shall hear his voice and live.”) We there¬ fore ascribe to the Saviour merely the honour which is his due, when we address him in the w’ords so familiar to us, and which might be very appro¬ priately applied to the Son of God, considered as the builder of Adam’s wondrous frame: “Hail! great Immanuel—all divine. In thee thy Father’s glories shine.” Having thus considered the material part of man and the creation of the material part of Adam, we shall now, secondly, consider the creation and no.ture of his sonl. Its infusion into Adam’s lifeless body is thus described, Gen. ii. 7. “And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul.” In Hebrew, the word is plural, the breath of lives; possibly because, as one remarks *' the soul of man enabled him to exercise the func¬ tions of all sorts of life, both of plants, of animals, and of men it is called the breath of lives, not so much, we suppose, because man began to breathe as soon as he began to live, or because his life im¬ mediately discovered itself by the breath of his nostrils, as on account of the important offices which respiration or breathing performs in the economy of human as well as of animal existence, a subject on which, without professing fully to explain, we shall nevertheless venture a remark. We premise, by observing then, what I presume we all know; that the blood is a vital stream, for, on its perpetual and healthy circulation through the body, natural life depends; and therefore as Solomon (Eccles. xii. 6) says, when “ the pitcher is broken at the fountain, or the wheel broken at the cistern,” a man dies; he speaks of the circulation of the blood, and the failing of certain vessels essential to its circulation. By “ the pitcher,” it is thought Solomon means the artery or ventricle already mentioned, by which the blood is conveyed to the lungs; and by “the wheel,” the other ventricle called Arteria Aorta, by 28 which the blood, received from the lungs, is sent out into all parts of the system. But you say, what has the circulation of the blood to do with our breathing P Much—for every breath we draw performs two important offices in respect of the blood. 1. It fits it to nourish the body. To this subject we have already alluded, and shall therefore, here, only briefly remark, that it seems to be now satisfactorily proved, that the air we breathe is a mixture of certain gases, by inhaling of which, the blood, conveyed to the lungs for that purpose, undergoes a change, by which it is pre¬ pared to nourish the body. On this subject, the learned Paley observes: “ A necessity exists, that the air be introduced into a near communication with the blood. The lungs are constructed for this purpose. They consist of blood-vessels and air-ves¬ sels, lying close together; and, wherever there is a branch of the trachea or wind-pipe, there is a branch of tbe vein and artery, and the air vessel is always in the middle between the blood-vessels. The in¬ ternal surface of these vessels, upon which the application of the air to the blood depends, would, if collected, and expanded, be in a man, equal to a superficies of fifteen feet square.” 2. Besides its salutary influence upon the blood, which accounts for our breath being called “the breath of life;” there is yet another beneficial effect of breathing in connection with the circulation of the blood, w hich has been noticed by men of science ; 29 for while they admit that the contraction and ex¬ pansion of the heart is the great principle in the cir¬ culation of the blood, yet they say its circulation through the lungs is rendered easier by breathing. In remarks on Eccl. xii. 6, Parkhurst in his Hebrew Lexicon, page 107, on this particular, quotes the observation of the learned Haller, which are these : —In every inspiration of the lungs, the bronchia or branches of the wind-pipe are every way in¬ creased, both in length and diameter ; at the same time the pulmonary blood-vessels, which are wrap¬ ped up together with the bronchia in a covering of the cellular substance, are likewise with them ex¬ tended in length, and spread out from smaller into larger angles, by which means the circulation is rendered easier through them. While this is per¬ forming, the vescular substance, or flesh of the lungs themselves filled out with air, increases those spaces through which the capillary blood-vessels of the lungs make their progress; whereby the pressure of the vesicles upon each other, and upon those vessels adjacent is lessened : thus, therefore, the blood will flow with greater ease and celerity into and through the smaller and larger vessels of the lungs : on the other hand, the effects of expiration are a corn- pressure of the blood-vessels in the lungs—a re¬ duction of the bronchia or branches of the wind¬ pipe into more acute angles—a pressure of the recticular small vessels by the weight and contact of the adjacent larger vessels ; by which means part of the blood—hesitating in the capillary arteries, c 3 30 is urged forward through the veins to the left side of the heart; while at the same time, that part of the blood is resisted, which flows in by the artery from the right ventricle. In this manner, a fresh necessity follows for repeating the respiration, be¬ cause the collapsed vessels of the lungs resist the blood repeatedly expelled from the right ventricle of the heart.” Mr. Parkhurst adds—“ But on the near approach of death, respiration becomes more and more difficult; the distensive power of the lungs diminishes; and the blood being impeded in its passage through them, concretes or becomes grumous; till after the last expiration, “ the wheel is broken at the pit,” the lungs become incapable of another inspiration, and so can receive no more blood from the right ventricle of the heart, and con¬ sequently, the circulation ceases, and the man dies.’ Breath, you will perceive, from these hints, was, in certain very important respects, to man the breath of life, even when in a state of perfection. As it pleased God to form Adam, he could no more have lived without breathing than without eating. But let us now, at length enquire, what is the nature of the soul P For it has been, and still is believed and as¬ serted by “ men of corrupt minds,” whose atheistical sentiments are worse and more to be dreaded than “the pestilence that walketh in darkness,” that the soul of man is rather a material than a spiritual be¬ ing ; that, (as the Sadduces said,) it is not immortal, nor intended to live for ever: in short, that it can no more live without the body, than the body can live without it: in other words, that what people (childish weakness,) call an immaterial and immortal spirit, is nothing but instinct existing in that most remarkable animal, man, in a superior degree to what it does in other animals! It follows of course, according to this principle, that there is no future state of retri¬ bution ; for how can he be rewarded or punished whose entire existence terminates at death ? But * for the desire that this might be the case—but for man’s aversion to God and desire never to come in contact with him—but for the contrariety of his moral character to the divine perfections and re¬ vealed will, dislike of being answerable to God for his actions, and dread of a day of final reckoning and retribution : but for these affections, I say, which are natural to man, the spirituality and immortality of the soul had never been disputed, much less de¬ nied by those to whom "are committed the oracles of God.” In general, it may be said, as the Apostle informs us respecting idolatry, viz.: that as it origi¬ nated in men’s " not liking to retain God in their knowledge,” so may atheism in its diversified forms be traced to man’s mind being alienated from God through the darkness and wickedness which are in him. Nor is it surprising, that he who loves, in so many respects, to live like a beast, should desire to die like a beast; or in other words—that an atheist in practice, should be an atheist in creed. 1 . As for the doctrine which maintains that the soul of man is a being in its qualities as distinct from and superior to the body in which it resides. 32 as the inhabitant to the house in which he dwells B —and that it is in its immortality like the word of God " which liveth and abideth for ever.” This doctrine we think, derives support in no small de¬ gree, by comparing it with the doctrine by which it is sought to be supplanted. He who denies the immortality of the soul and the accountability of man does not, it is true, literally reduce him to a level with the brute ■, but his sentiment clearly involves this affirmation, viz. ; that the superiority man possesses over the rest of the animate creation, is merely of the same nature as the superiority that one animal possesses over another—or, as we said, that man is only a superior animal, terminating his existence at death, as all irrational animals do -—and if so, what is he else but a superior animal ? Does not such a view of man carry absurdity on its very front ? Does it at all comport with those re¬ markable indications of superiority over other creatures, especially that of speech, which we meet with in man’s corporeal nature? Is it countenanced by the consideration of the distinguished character Of man’s intellectual endowments ? Agrees it with that constant bias of the human mind in all ages, and in nearly all countries, to some kind of re¬ ligion ?—Or to that constant clinging to life, as the mariner to a piece of the wreck—and aspiration after some higher state and degree of happiness than he already possesses, which we constantly find In man ?—Or with the facts, that (like the idea of a Supreme Being,) the notion of a future state of 33 existence gains such a ready admission into the minds of men—that those who take most pains to become firm believers in their own creed—that 1 mean, which denies a future state—but ill succeed? The state of the mind, in respect of vigour in death, is opposed to the atheistical idea, that body and soul die together. For if so, how is it they do not invariably grow weak together ? ' How is that the powers of the soul are often in a state of surprising energy and operation, when only a few grains in the hour-glass of life remain ? With these facts and qualities of human beings, the sentiment we are combating, is so perfectly at variance, that it appears superlatively absurd 5 and the fact of men’s believing, or pretending to believe it, absurd as it is, without any thing like proof, evidences that what is above hinted, respecting man’s moral cha¬ racter as the cause of scepticism, is no libel. On the other hand, the generally received doctrine, (would that its importance were as generally felt) which represents man as a-kin both to angels and to the inferior creatures in this lower world; and that his soul is imperishable, is in harmony with all these representations: and therefore bids the fairer to be true. 2 . And this will likewise appear by comparing these opposite sentiments in respect of their moral tendency. Here we have no difficult task to per¬ form. Most people are aware, that in every class of society, improvement is needed in relative duties —in the duties man owes to his God, his neighbour. 34 and himself. It would seem from the aspect of things, as if even our national weal—not to use a stronger term—not only called for, but depended upon a speedy, a radical, and general reform, in these important respects : a reform this, much more closely connected with our national tranquillity, than political reform. For let the duties which we owe to our fellow creatures, and fellow subjects—to the slaves, for instance, in our colonies, and others, continue to be as criminally disregarded as they have been for so many years past—and then, who that is acquainted either with the state of things, or the character of that God who is the moral governor of the universe, dares to anticipate either national peace or prosperity ? But, would it tend to pro¬ mote the reform for which we here plead to teach men that they have nothing to fear in the next world from their actions in this ? And that the creature, whose cause we advocate, that he may have liberty, and have exercised towards him justice and mercy, is only an animal of superior quality ? A sentiment which, as it degrades man, so it would lay him open to all kinds of insult and oppression. Whereas, that view of man, viz. his immortality, which tends to make him both respect himself and be respected by others, likewise tends to make men act both to¬ wards themselves and others in a proper manner. Nor would it be possible for men to behave as they do towards themselves or their fellow creatures, were it duly impressed upon their souls, that this being however sinful, or poor, or ignorant he may be, is. 35 nevertheless, as immortal as an angel. Finally— we consider the influence of the sentiments we are exposing, in respect of national and individual moral manners to stand much upon a par with the effect which a total repeal of the criminal code would produce—to make a man act like a beast in respect of himself, and like a demon in respect of others. If we could suppose that God would permit a nation to exist, formed of persons denying the Holy Scrip¬ tures, the immortality of the soul, and a future state they would presently, acting like the atheists in the first French revolution, and like the giants before the Deluge, fill the nation with anarchy, oppression, and lust, and blood. Such, at all events, is the moral tendency of such sentiments. 3. There are hints above mentioned merely in a general way, which may be thought deserving of greater prominence in this great argument. I would therefore ask, whether the extraordinary intel¬ lectual endowments of man do not deserve consider¬ ation on this momentous question—What is the nature of the soul—and is it immortal ? It would seem as if the soul possessed the capacity of an ever¬ lasting growth in its attributes, providing the animal powers were not subject to decay: because, especi¬ ally in those who have a thirst for mental cultivation, we always find the mind progressively advancing in intellectual attainments, as long as ever the senses and bodily organs are unimpaired. It seems there¬ fore, that if these organs were to remain in perpetual vigour, the soul would be perpetually growing in knowledge. Now does it seem credible, that the be¬ ing in which so wonderful a perfection resides, is only intended to be as it w'ere, like Jonah’s gourd, which “ grew up in a night and perished in a night ?” To suppose this, is contrary to that divine wisdom which so resplendently shines in all God’s works; and in nothing more than this, viz. suiting the ca¬ pacities and qualities of creatures to that end for which they were created. Reasoning therefore, from the wisdom God as thus displayed, it seems high¬ ly improbable, that beings endued with such won¬ derful capacities—so incomparably superior to the most sagacious of animals, are nevertheless destined like them, to live a short—a precarious and toilsome existence—and then by death, to end it for ever. And so we are to think, advise those sages that the souls of our “ mighty dead”—of our Newtons for in¬ stance, w ere notwithstanding their splendid talents, only souls of an ignoble and perishable nature ! Should it be said, there have been but few such men as our great philosopher—I answer; few or many affects not the argument; that all possess not first- rate talent argues nothing against that dignity of man for w'hicli we plead ; but it should remind us of Cod s wisdom in furnishing men with such predi¬ lections and talents as are suitable to the stations of life he designs them to fill. 4. If the soul be not immortal, how are we to account for such facts as the following ? Why, as above remarked, should there be an impression so general and so powerful in favour of the existence I 37 of a future state of happiness and misery ? An im¬ pression so general, that only a few tribes among the rudest savages can be found who have no reli¬ gion. An impression so general, that almost all the heathen, both in ancient and modern times, in one form or other believed the doctrine of a future state. A doctrine so congenial to the mind, that there are but compartively few, even amongst the profane, who can be persuaded that there is no hereafter: a doctrine which it is so difficult to resist, that most of those who pretend to disbelieve it are mere hypocrites for so doing 3 a doctrine oft so powerfully felt in death, and that even by infi¬ dels themselves, that they have been known while the frantic soul was raving round the walls of her clay tenement,” to express themselves to the effect, that they had rather for thousands of years endure the most exquisite bodily torture, than the horrors of conscience which they endured from the contemplation of the past, and the anticipation of the future. On the other hand, (for “ the Christian’s faith can govern death”) many when “the time of their departure was at hand,” have felt so power¬ fully and so rapturously the existence of a future state 3 and that there was “ laid up for them in heaven, a better and a more enduring substance,” that they were ready to die with delight—ready to sink beneath the insupportableness of the glory. Have not these things a voice ? And does not that voice say, not as Philip’s Page—“ Remember thou art mortal”—but remember thon art immortal. D 38 5. Either we must believe in man’s immortality, or we most deny the providence of God. For if the soul of man is not immortal, a future state of re¬ ward and punishment must in course likewise be denied ; how then will it be possible to maintain that the affairs of this world are under the manage¬ ment of an infinitely wise, holy, and benevolent Being ? For in this case it must be supposed, that, the virtuous and the vicious have the same end, viz., annihilation. That, like the vilest and most injurious of our species,—prophets, apostles, martyrs, and myriads of the wisest, the most be¬ nevolent, and the most holy of mankind, have perished. All their sanctifying hopes, and fore¬ tastes of future glory, were only “waking dreams.” Seems this credible ?—What, that there is neither sin nor virtue in the world, God being alike regard¬ less of the righteous and the wicked. And is this blasphemous libel on the Almighty Creator of the universe, and of man, sanctioned by anything known of his character ? Stands it with any just views either of the wisdom, the goodness, the holi¬ ness or the justice of God, that the best of men, after suffering incomparably more than the worst, should be regarded by him in the same light—and have the same end as they ? John the Baptist, the same end as Herod? Paul, the same end as Nero? If so, then in course, what the scriptures say, “ the fool hath said in his heart,” is true, viz., “there is no God!” Certainly facts declare it plainty enough, that chance and not God. rules here, if there is not 39 a hereafter: and a hereafter there is not,, if man is not immortal. 6 . Nay, we are persuaded, that the atheistical tendency of the brutalizing system of the material¬ ist is such, that we shall he able, if he has courage to be consistent, to make him take up a still nearer position to blank atheism,—and believe that chance made the world as well as governs it. For if man is, after all, only a brute of superior sagacity and elegance, (an animal which can talk,) it would be difficult to believe, that the God created the world who can do nothing unworthy of himself. And, as far as we can discover, it would not have been worthy the infinite Jehovah to have created this most wonderful earth, and the other burning worlds around it belonging to the same system, replete with wonders,—merely for the use of a race of animals, all short lived,—and all so far inde¬ pendent of God as to be unaccountable to him for their actions: and therefore under no moral obli¬ gation to fear, love, or serve the author of their existence although it is perfectly obvious they possess all the intellectual capacities necessary to enable them to do so. If men are really beings of so ignoble a nature—and placed here in circum¬ stances so entirely irresponsible—then chance must have made them and their abode : and not God. God, the Creator of these, and of such a world for the service of these, the supposition is a match¬ less absurdity ! Not for a moment to be enter¬ tained respecting God: if even it were his will to 40 continue this world for ever. For peopled, as it is pretended, by a race of animals at once so mean, and so mischievous—the thought of the world’s everlasting duration, is just as unendurable, as that God would have ever created beings of such a quality, and for them so splendid an abode. If therefore man is merely a species of dangerous animal, both himself, and his habitation must have originated in chance. Unless any should prefer to think, that God, in respect of his own glory, has created the world and man in vain. For in vain are they created if the soul is perishable in its being as well as well-being. In this case in vain should we enquire why was this world and man ever cre¬ ated ? And for what purpose has God provided such an inexaustible store for the body, and such an equally inexhaustible store of means for our mental improvement ? All this for a being whose life is but a span ? Incredible !—wherefore all this profusion, this waste ? But let me remind you God is infinitely wise, he does nothing in vain, nothing he does merely because he can do it, and therefore while the profuseness with which he pro¬ vides proclaims his infinite goodness, so methinks it likewise proclaims the dignity, the immortality of man. Say you he is not immortal ? Listen then to yonder sun, and to yon fair orb whose light relieves our darkness. O listen to yon bright worlds which burn around thee and illuminate the temple of God. Listen to whatever is useful, mys¬ terious, wonderful, or at present incomprehensible 41 in God’s works—for all these as David teaches “ declare the glory of the Lord”—proclaim too to man his immortality. Rightly understood and im¬ proved, the works of the Lord, in their immensity, variety, number, utility, and mystery, announce in reason’s ear man’s immortality. Rely upon it this volume of wonders was not composed for the use, or spread open before a being whose existence will terminate with the death, either of the body, or of time. 7 . As man’s immortality and responsibility have a reciprocal and inseparable relation to each other, we will here submit a remark on the latter. Man’s accountableness to God, if true, is a solemn truth, and as it is not a sentiment contrary to reason, he who treats it with levity disgraces him¬ self, whatever his creed may be. And as there are many, alas ! too many, who will neither enter “ the sanctuary of God” nor the temple of truth, (I mean the word of God) we will invite them once more to enter with us into the temple of reason, in order to know what may there be learned respecting the responsibility of man, and to examine whether the sceptic’s own creed warrants his usual confidence, that death will end his being, and that neither here nor hereafter needs he dread being called by God to an account for his actions. Now we maintain that, there is a moral relation¬ ship subsisting between God and man, is a senti¬ ment in harmony with reason. d 3 42 1 . It will not, we presume, be denied, that man possesses all the intellectual capacities neces¬ sary to enable him, as far as the means are fur¬ nished, to know, fear, love, worship, and serve God, who made him, preserves him, and supplies his needs. Is it then unreasonable to think that God requires man to honour and serve, and not to sin against him, and that he will call him to an ac¬ count if he does not obey ? Could God consistent - ly create beings so adapted to be the subjects of a moral government, and unite them together among themselves by such diversified bonds, and then say, it is my will that you should be under no ob ¬ ligation, either to myself, or to each other 3 but be at liberty to do or not do whatsoever you please. Hate him who made you if you please and hate each other, it matters not, for there is no moral relationship subsisting between your Creator and you. Would this be reasonable ? 2 . If it is not reasonable to believe that man is accountable to God for his deeds, how comes it to pass that the great bulk of mankind, have in all ages and countries, espoused the sentiment ? A fact this of a remarkable character, it must be confessed, but its truth will be admitted by all who are ac¬ quainted with the history of nations. Even the heathen mariners in the tempest are said to have “ cried every man to his God. And they said every man to his fellow. Come, and let us cast lots, that we may know for whose cause this evil is upon usW 43 Jonah i. 5— 7 - Felix too trembled before Paul, his prisoner, as he reasoned of righteousness, tern * perance, and judgment to come.” And why trem¬ bled the tyrant—for he neither hated his ways nor repented of his evil deeds. That made him trem¬ ble which made Herod say of Christ “he is John the Baptist, whom I beheaded, he is risen from the dead.” The Chaldean tyrant Belshazzar, the evil son of Evil-merodach trembled too, heathen as he was. For when amidst his impious feast, he saw the writing on the wall—yea and the hand which wrote it too—it is said “ his countenance was chan¬ ged, and his thoughts troubled him, so that the joints of his loins were loosed, and his knees smote one against another.” Dan. v. 5,6. And why trem¬ bled each of these P Conscience—the vicegerent of God in the soul—made them tremble. And they trembled because, that man cannot sin with impu¬ nity, is a sentiment which accords with the judg¬ ment and common sense of mankind. These there¬ fore, as well as revelation, we have with us in main¬ taining the immortality of the soul, and that man is an accountable being. While they who profess the contrary—and oft while they too tremble as much as Felix did—only practice imposition upon themselves when they say, we have judgment on our side. Rather let them think they have their will, their inclination, their hopes, and desires on their side. In a word, it is mere empty boasting, assertion against fact, and oft in opposition to an in¬ ward monitor powerfully remonstrating, to pretend 44 that pure reason, untutored by crafty Jesuits and mercenary priests, is opposed to and unmolested by, what none but fools allow to trouble them, viz. that man must live for ever, and that “ we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ.” 3. Besides there are certain other facts, for such we are bold to call them, which we claim as proofs of our proposition, viz. that man’s responsibility is a sentiment in harmony with reason. We consider it therefore to be strictly reasonable to believe 1.— Tliat God created man. 2.—That he was not created in his present condition. For unbiassed reason will certainly admit, when taught to know, that the Divine Being is holy, just, and good : and consequently would not have created man as he now is, either morally or physically. 3.— That therefore, owing to some cause or other, man has fallen from his primitive state, and has undergone a change for the worse to an unspeakable degree. And 4.—That God has been pleased to express his displeasure at this change, and its effects, in ways which are both innumerable, fearful and obvious. And it is to this point especially, we solicit for a moment the candid attention of the reader. And we ask, has it not been the concurrent belief of the great bulk of mankind in all ages^* that God is wont to be displeased both with individuals, and with nations: and that he is wont to express this displeasure, and the contrary, in ways innumerable. Are there any who are not aware that it has been the custom of mankind in general, to attribute an 45 infinite variety of human ills to the displeasure, and providence of God ? And there are few who need to be reminded of the means, such as sacrifices, and penances, to which it has been customary for all nations to resort, to atone for their sins, or ap¬ pease the wrath of some incensed deity. It is easy to say all this is superstition. Superstitious, no doubt the pagans as well as others were; which however implies that man is a being naturally ad¬ dicted to some kind of religion; or why should he be so easily imposed upon by religious fraud. But their belief that God, oft and variously, expresses his displeasure against the human race, was not superstitious. For in what other way can the shrewdest of us more rationally account for much deserving our attention. For cast your eye through the history of nations, and you may easily fix it on a variety of events, concerning which, if exercised with candour, reason will unite with revelation, and will say, those things did not transpire by chance; but where providences, expressing the dis¬ pleasure of the Deity : for this appears both from the character of the events, and from that of the nations and individuals on whom those judgments were inflicted :—and therefore in reasons ear thev declare, “Verily there is a God who judgeth in the earth.” Indeed both the heavens and the earth—both the rational and the animal worlds teem with sad indi¬ cations of having undergone a dreadful change— and with expressions of God’s displeasure against 46 sin : which seems to have clad the whole creation in mourning. And what are these things but proofs that there is a moral relationship subsisting between God and man—for were there not, if God were not the moral governor of the universe, it is absurd to imagine that he would have thus ex¬ pressed his displeasure against sin. And he who will not acquiesce in this decision is, as already- proved, more atheistical than the heathen—by opposing a sentiment in which the great bulk of mankind have ever been agreed. Finally,—we feel assured from the whole, that our view of man’s character is consonant with reason, viz.: that man is an immortal and accountable being—while he who is opposed to us, espouses a system, which as truly outrages common sense, as it does the word of inspiration. 8. Thus may we reason on this momentous sub¬ ject, the immortality of the soul. We will now, briefly appeal to that blessed book, which says, “ life and incorruptibility are brought to light by the gospel.” For my part, I think the immortality of the soul is a doctrine taught us in the passage under consideration, as well, as has been already remarked, in the expressions, “Let us make man.” For why should man’s creation be thus distin¬ guished from that of other creatures, if like them, it was foreseen, that he should quickly and totally perish ? As to the words on which we are dis¬ coursing, viz.: “And man became a living soul,” it should be remarked, that contrary to what is 47 said of other creatures, whose body and life were created together—man’s body and soul were made distinct—first the body and then the soul. “ It is observable,” says an author, “that man’s body and soul were made distinct, which they were not in other creatures, to shew that his soul is of a diffe¬ rent original from his body 3 being the immediate work of God.” He adds, “the expressions, ‘and man became a living soul,’ denote that man was created with a more excellent life than other crea¬ tures here below.” A more excellent life indeed! For the soul was formed to live through ages of a never ending duration. And, (for man has not sinned away his immortality—well for millions were this the case,) this is the constitution and destination of every soul. This the Bible teaches—teaches in a variety of ways both directly and indirectly—- teaches both by promises and threatenings—both by doctrines and declarations. The Scriptures teach that the soul is a being distinct from the body 3 that it is a spirit 3 that it leaves the body at death 3 ascends to God who gave it 3 and is then, and immediately, either received into the mansions of the blessed, or banished to regions of hopeless, intolerable, and eternal woe. Finally, the Scrip- ur es inform us, that “ God has appointed a day, in the which, he w ill judge the world.” That the bodies of the dead shall be raised 3 the bodies both of the just and the unjust 3 and these “ shall go away into everlasting punishment 3 and those, “ into life eternal.’ That this is the doctrine of 48 the Scriptures, is incontrovertible j and therefore, that the soul of man is spiritual and immortal, is just as certain as it is that the Bible is true. Just as infallibly certain, as it is that the Saviour died upon the cross for sinners. And indeed the poet’s words will well apply to the doctrine of man’s im¬ mortality :— “ Here, on the Cross, ’tis fairest drawn. In precious blood, and crimson lines. “O the sweet wonders,” then, of that cross which at once brings our immortality to light, and shews us by what means it may become our great¬ est blessing. Surely the doctrine of the cross—the much neg¬ lected, but glorious doctrine of the cross, containing the most convincing and impressive evidence, both of man's moral degradation—of the certainty and seriousness of the danger, to which, as a sinner, he is exposed; and of the physical dignity of his nature as an immaterial and immortal being. There is voice from Calvary which proclaims—proclaims in the dignity of the sufferer, and in the quality and design of his sufferings—O man, thou art to exist for ever! But to conclude : how plain and unutter¬ ably important is the account which the Bible gives of the nature of the soul, and its final destination! And, as we ought with the greatest confidence to believe that “ the scriptures cannot be broken,” so should they teach us how wide they are off the mark who say man is but a little superior to the beasts j whereas the Bible affirms, he was created only “ a 49 little lower than the angels.” And now, in bringing this subject, the creation of man, to a close, let me submit to your attention, a remark or two, byway of application, in addition, to others embodied in the preceding pages. And — 1st.—Is the soul of man an immaterial being? and must it exist for ever ? Then care for the soul, and let its safety be our supreme concern. For let none lay ihe flattering unction to his soul, that the Bible may possibly turn out to be false. “ O ! foolish people, and unwise!” The Bible turn out to be fa.se! Verily if this be our hope we are hope¬ less indeed ! For what, ground is there, either for hope or fear, that its enemies will be able to under¬ mine the citadel of truth. They must first silence the garrison of reason—for he who believes what reason teaches, believes too much to disbelieve revelation. For which before our apprehensions are seriously excited, its enemies must become men of a very different character— they must adopt a more religious creed, for, fallen as he is, man is not the being to be generally per¬ suaded that religion may be altogether safely and even advantageously dispensed with; and their efforts must be much more successful amon thy will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth; and none can stay thy hand, or say unto thee what doest thou.” " O man who art thou that repliest against God.” Moreover, the sovereign authority, which God most righteously as well as most certainly exercised in this matter, is denoted, as judicious divines ob¬ serve, by the covenant of works being, as it fre¬ quently is, denominated a law, and the law of works.* Why should this covenant be thus called a law ? Because the conditions w 7 ere sovereignly "commanded by God.” And their being appointed in this way, originated in the infinite disparity of the persons covenanting. * Gal. iii. 10.—Rom. iii. 27, and vi. &c. and vii. 4, and viii. 2—Gal. ii. 19, and iv. 4. 95 2 . The other contracting party in this league was Adam. Adam considered. 1. As perfectly innocent and holy, and conse¬ quently able to perform all that God required of him. God therefore justly demanded of Adam ab¬ solutely perfect obedience, because he was formed with a capacity to render it. And what other kind of obedience would it have been meet for such a being to have rendered to such a Lord. But for any now to seek to be saved by their own works, as if they were perfect, or as if the Scriptures countenanced such a way, is of all errors the most absurd—neither is it the less absurd nor the less dangerous, because it is of all errors the most com¬ mon. Such persons (and all are such who are in a state of nature) need to be requested to bear in mind, that the covenant of works (the form of which, is ,