exposed to eternal death by his sin, none have ground to hope for eternal life through the merits of Christ; and, consequently, that Christ died in vain, seeing he did not free mankind from natural death. And if mankind were not by their apostacy disqualified for eternal life, or the enjoyment of God, they were not spiritually dead; and if they were not spiritually dead, Christ did not purchase spiritual life for them. But these absurdities are too gross to be admitted by any thinking person. Therefore it follows that by Adam's sin in eating the forbidden fruit, all mankind lost their original rectitude, became alienated from God, and were every moment exposed to both natural and eternal death and misery. Which brings me,

III. TO SHOW THE REASONABLENESS OF OUR BEING PUNISHED FOR ADAM'S SIN, OR VINDICATE THR JUSTICE OF GOD THEREIN.

That we may have a clear view of this matter, it is necessary to consider, that God entered into a covenant with Adam, as head and representative of all mankind, in which he promised life to him and his posterity, if he did not eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, and threatened to inflict death upon both him and them, if he did eat of the forbidden fruit; as we may see in Genesis 2:17, where the Lord says to Adam, " But of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." This covenant is indeed represented in very brief and general terms, as is common in the Mosaic history. It is not said that Adam should be confirmed in life and perfect rectitude if he did not eat of the forbidden fruit: nor is it said Adam was considered as the representative of his posterity in this transaction. Yet it is evident that both these are implied in this short account of the covenant.

1st. A promise of life was implied in the covenant, upon condition of Adam's obedience: for God's threatening death upon this condition, supposes that it was only upon this condition, viz. eating the forbidden fruit, that death was to be feared. Otherwise God must be looked upon as dealing -insincerely with Adam, when he threatens him with death in case of disobedience, if his perfect obedience would not have preserved him from it, and have entitled him to life. The threatening of death was a motive to obedience, but it could not be a motive of obedience, if there was not an expectation of some good to be attained, or evil to be avoided by obeying: and it would certainly be unworthy of God to raise Adam's expectation of a benefit, which he should never partake of, even though he perfectly complied with the condition upon which he expected it. Death was threatened to Adam only in case of disobedience; therefore it certainly implies that it would not have been inflicted, if he had not disobeyed. Death was by the covenant made the wages of sin; and it is inconsistent with the justice and goodness of God to suffer the righteous to receive the wages of the wicked. Hence it appears that there was a conditional promise of life contained or implied in the threatening of death.

2ndly. It appears that Adam represented his posterity in this covenant transaction; though the Mosaic account of this matter does not expressly mention them, or say that they were concerned in the covenant. It is too manifest to be denied that Adam's posterity do partake of the bitter fruits of his apostacy. We see that sin and death with all its terrors has invaded the whole human race. We see that all the calamities of life, and even death, reign over those who have not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression. But if Adam's posterity had not been included in the covenant. made with him, the curse annexed to that covenant could not in justice be inflicted upon them. The miseries which are inflicted upon infants, although innocent creatures, must be the effects of Adam's sin; for death and all that is included in that dreadful word, is the wages of sin; and it is far from God that the righteous should be as the wicked. If Adam did not represent his posterity, so that they sinned in him, how can the Judge of all the earth be said to do right, in inflicting the penalty which was threatened to him, upon them who are not guilty of actual sin. The sentence passed upon Adam af

ter his fall, is executed upon his posterity, as fully as upon himself. Therefore we must charge God with injustice, or acknowledge that they are guilty or have sinned in proportion to the punishment inflicted upon them. And if they are guilty, or have become sinners, sin and guilt must have descended from Adam to them merely by natural generation, or we must have fallen in him as our legal representative. It cannot be the former, otherwise we derive death and the corruption of our natures from our immediate parents, and we no more died in Adam than in them. Nay, it would follow that more sinful and guilty the parents were, the more sinful the children would be; and the more sanctified the parents, the more holy would be the children. Nay, farther, I cannot see but it would follow that the parents had through the grace of God, got the victory over their sins, and were justified through the righteousness of Christ; but their children would come into the world with as little propensity to sin, and with as supreme a love to God as Adam had when he was first created. But sad experience teaches us that the children, as well of the godly as ungodly, come into the world with strong propensities to sin, and aversion to God and godliness. Hence it appears that the effects of Adam's apostacy is not conveyed to us merely by natural generation. Therefore it follows that Adam, by the appointment of God, was our legal representative in that covenant transaction.

Now, if it appears upon examination, that it was most likely to promote the interest of mankind, for Adam to repesent his posterity, than for each one of them to stand or fall according to their own conduct, then God will be free from all injustice in punishing Adam's posterity, according to his demerit.

It must be granted that the creature is bound by the law of nature, or by the reason and fitness of things, to perfect and perpetual obedience to the Creator. The condition upon which Adam and his posterity were to be established in life and happiness, was simple and easy-it was only to abstain from one particular tree in the garden where he had such a variety of whatever could contribute either to his support or delight. It is true, Adam could not violate the precept without violating the whole moral law, the sum of which is, to love God supremely, and our neighbor as ourselves. While Adam continued to do this, he could not possibly break this positive precept― while love to God and man reigned in his heart, he could feel no disposition to do that which would dishonor God, and bring everlasting ruin upon all his posterity. Yet it was doubtless great condescension and goodness in God, to make man's life, and his confirmation therein, to depend upon so simple and easy a condition, as the abstinence from the fruit of the tree was.

And if we consider the case as it respected his posterity, it will appear to be every way their interest to have their safety put upon this issue. For it must be granted, unless we deny all natural as well as revealed religion, that if Adam's posterity had not been included in that covenant, they would have been under the strictest obligations to render perfect and perpetual obedience to the whole law, and so would have been in perpetual danger of transgressing it in some instance or other; so that their state would never have been safe: though they should have kept the whole law perfectly for millions of ages, still they would have been liable to the wrath of God upon the least failure. Was it not then much better for mankind, that their confirmation in life and happiness should depend upon obedience to one easy command, than that it should depend upon their keeping the whole law? And was it not better for them to have it depend upon the obedience of one man, who was able and willing, and had stronger excitements to obedience than any other of the human race could have had, than that each individual of them should be left to act for himself, and so be always liable to lose the favor of God upon the violation of any part of the law of God, and so be always uncertain of their future happiness? For if Adam represented his pos terity in the covenant of works, he was under stronger ties to obey and obtain the blessings of obedience than any of his posterity could have been, if

each one had been to stand or fall according to his own conduct. Adam had all the excitements that could arise from the desire of his own happiness and fear of misery, that any of his offspring could have had. But besides this, he had all the excitements that could arise from paternal affection; the eternal weal or wo of his whole progeny depending upon his conduct. But if each one had stood for himself, his falling a victim to divine justice would have been no loss to any but himself, and so he would have been destitute of one powerful motive to obedience which Adam had. Therefore it was evidently more likely that all Adam's posterity would have been everlastingly happy by his representing them in that covenant transaction, than that any one of them should have been happy if each one had stood for himself. But supposing that each one had for himself persevered in obedience for ever, yet they would have been less happy than if they had been, by Adam's obedience, confirmed in that happy state. The stinging reflection that they were always liable to forfeit and lose their happiness, through the manifold temptations to which they would for ever have been exposed, must have greatly lessened their comforts and delights even in Paradise.

It may be farther observed that the good promised in this covenant was greater than the evil threatened. The obedience which God demanded of Adam was no more than what he justly owed; and the punishment annexed to his disobedience was no more than he was justly liable to for the least violation of the law. If God had not entered into such a covenant with man, he could not have had the least claim to eternal life, even if he had not only observed this one precept, but had also perfectly kept the whole law. For though an innocent creature might reasonably expect a happy life, so long as it pleased the Creator to continue him in existence, yet God could not be under any obligations to his creature, unless he bind himself by compact or cov◄ enant. As God could not owe us our being before we had it, neither can we, by any thing that we can do, bring God under any obligation to continue us in being. If we be righteous, what give we him? or what receiveth he at our hands? When we have done all, we are but unprofitable servants. Hence then we see that the penalty annexed to the covenant made with Adam, and in him with all his posterity, was no more than, according to the strictest rules of justice, was due for the least violation of the law. Therefore it must have been just with God to have demanded perfect and perpetual obedience, not only from Adam, but also from all his posterity; and to have punished them for ever for their disobedience, though he had not promised them eternal life upon their obedience; but only a happy life during his pleasure and their obedience. The promise of eternal life is therefore of mere grace, and what Adam nor any of his posterity could have had any just claim to, if God had not made such a covenant with man. If God had not made such a covenant with Adam, but left every one to stand for himself, there is no reason to think that any one of his offspring would have attained to eternal life; seeing Adam had as great abilities and stronger excitements to keep it than any of his posterity could have had, yet he fell. But by his fall, he fell under no greater condemnation than the just demerit of his crime, had there been no covenant made with him. But the covenant secured to him infinitely more than his due upon condition of his obedience. How then can we complain of the inequality of that dispensation of God in which there is such a manifestation of his condescending grace and goodness, as deserves our particular admiration and praise? Upon the whole then it appears that some terms of confirmation in our original state of happiness were necessary for us, and that the terrors proposed in the covenant, wherein Adam represented his posterity, were the most suitable, and the most likely to promote our interest; and without doubt, if we had then existed, we should have chosen that Adam should have represented us, and stood or fallen for us.

SERMON LV.

BY DAVID H. RIDDLE,

PASTOR OF THE THIRD PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, PITTSBURGH.

HUMAN DEPRAVITY.

JOHN 3:6. That which is born of the flesh is flesh.-Rom. 3:23. For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God.

Human Depravity is at the foundation of the whole system of Christianity. Besides being plainly and repeatedly asserted, it is involved in every other peculiar doctrine of Revelation.

It is the ruin which the divine mission of Jesus Christ was designed to restore. It is the disease which the blood of the Son of God, and the divine influences of the Holy Ghost, are designed to remedy. Correct views of this subject give harmony and symmetry to the whole Revelation of God, while errors or superficial sentiments on this radical point introduce a corresponding looseness and superficiality into the whole system of religious belief.

The doctrine of the Holy Scriptures on this melancholy subject is definite and explicit. Their testimony concerning human depravity is, that it is natural, universal, and total. "BY NATURE ALL MANKIND are TOTALLY DEPRAVED. Let us explore this melancholy but profitable theme.

I. Human depravity is NATURAL, or original. The disease is seated in our very nature. By this we do not assert that it was always so. No: "God made man upright." Originally he was formed "in the image of God," only "a little lower than the angels." Man once, for a short season, stood erect-lord of the creation-the earthly image of his Creator-reflecting his glory, and enjoying his constant presence. The tabernacle of God was once with men. But "the gold became dim, the most fine gold was changed.” "By one man sin entered into the world." This sin defaced the image of God, deprived man of his presence, and introduced a fearful and fatal moral disorder, into the system and into the race. "IN ADAM ALL DIE." The fountain was corrupted-the head was diseased-the representative of the whole race became polluted. Adam in his act of transgression, not only sinned personally and fell personally, but acting as the federal head and representative of his posterity, he involved them also in the consequences of his transgression. This is the plain doctrine of the Scriptures, on which the standards of our church* are founded. 66 By one man's offence death reigned by one.” "By the offence of one, judgment came upon all men to condemnation."†

*The covenant being made with Adam, not only for himself but for his posterity, all mankind descending from him by ordinary generation, sinned in him and fell with him in his first transgression."-Quest. 16, Shorter Catechism.

+ Much philosophy and curious speculation has been expended on the why and

By natural or original depravity, we mean to express, that all men since the transgression of Adam, and as a consequence of that transgression, are born without holiness, alienated from God, and possessing a nature so prone to evil, that until renovated, it will produce only evil actions. This we say is the natural state of man. Involved in the guilt of our first parent, from our connection witth him as our representative, we are thereby liable to death-partakers of their corruption, in our nature we are utterly indisposed of ourselves to holiness, and possessing the active principles of opposition to God, from our first moral being, we are incapable of relishing his service or enjoying his presence. This is natural depravity. This is the humiliating fact, expressly revealed in the Sacred Volume and confirmed by universal experience.

66

1. (a) This fact is clearly revealed in the Old Testament Scriptures. Two conclusive passages will suffice for the Old Testament evidence, although many more equally conclusive might be cited. Behold," says the Psalmist in the penitential Psalm, “Behold I was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me." Could any selection of words more definitely and unequivocally testify to the fact of original depravity? Can any philosophy, except that which is falsely so called, pervert this passage to mean any thing else? Again, the Psalmist testifies of human nature, as a fact undeniably certain, "We go astray from the womb speaking lies." If plain, unvarnished Scripture testimony, capable of no misconstruction, is admitted to be conclusive, this ought to satisfy any man what is God's verdict on this subject.

(b) The New Testament is equally conclusive. We were BY NATURE the children of wrath, even as others." This is the acknowledgment of Paul in behalf of himself and his Christian brethren. Naturally, Christians and all others are "the children of wrath”possess the depravity which exposes to wrath. Our Savior testifies explicitly-"That which is born of the flesh, is flesh," or corruption. "The carnal mind is enmity against God." Unchanged human nature is enmity to God, and surely this is depravity.

2. This fact, that depravity is natural or original, is moreover testified by observation. "Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean?" is a common-sense principle, as well as a Scriptural interrogatory. "The tree is known by its fruit." Now just so far back as human observation can extend, it confirms the Scripture doctrine. The very first actings of a child, that partake at all of a moral character, are consistent with the fact and the philosophy of Scripture, and are inconsistent with, and utterly inexplicable upon, any other principles. Waywardness, obstinacy, and perverseness, mark the earliest buddings of its moral nature. The bitter tears of parental anguish give sorrowful demonstration that "foolishness is bound up in the heart of a child." And in the loveliest and most attractive exhibitions of infantile sweetness, flowers almost like Eden's, the most partial eye

the how of this doctrine-the rectitude or the expediency of this constitution of things. The Scriptures plainly and broadly reveal the fact. The apostacy of one was the ruin of all. The sin of Adam involved his whole posterity. "The guilt of Adam's first sin;" that is, liability to punishment on account of it, is imputed to all his posterity, and forms a fearful part of what we mean by original sin,