Sivut kuvina
PDF
ePub

what worthy purpose such a being was introduced among us.

Perhaps I may be accused of discussing points not in question, too much in detail. But, when page after page is employed, and speech after speech expended, in proving and explaining the covenant of works, by shadowy metaphors and abstractions, and by phrases which melt into mist when the ray of truth touches them; I hope I may be excused for treating the same subject, as an article of Christian faith, and endeavouring to exhibit it in the pure light of revelation. Besides, it is my wish, instead of a partisan skirmish, to lead up truth in solid columns, capable of presenting a firm front to any foe, from any quarter. But not to run my credit too close-I proceed to my argument.

If Eve was represented by Adam in the covenant, I ask, what formed the bond of connection between her and him? Was it ordinary generation? That cannot be. Of all that ever descended from Adam, the most extraordinary beyond compare, was this very Eve. Jesus of Nazareth was only half as extraordinary. He was conceived by a mother, and brought forth by a mother; one half the law of human generation was observed in his case; in Eve's case, the whole of that law was unknown. She had neither father nor mother; of consequence, ordinary generation was not the bond which connected Eve with Adam as her covenant head. And, therefore, I conclude, that ordinary generation does not connect any one with Adam as a covenant head; for that which can be dispensed with in one case, may be dispensed with in another, and in another, till the exceptions will not leave a single instance to exemplify the rule.

D

creation of ourselves. In Adam we behold a man cre ated out of the ground-in Eve, a woman created ou of a rib of Adam-in their posterity, thousands created as much by the immediate agency of God, as eithe of the former and, though the event occurs more fre quently, it is not the less unaccountable; yet Adam Eve, and their posterity, all created by God so many human persons, though created in a different manner have their destinies bound together by one covenant But enough.

[ocr errors]

Let us now bring together Eve and Jesus Christ for the purpose of comparison. In how many points do they agree; both derived human nature from Adam both derived human nature from him pure and holy and without a flaw-both derived it from him in an extraordinary manner; but in this they differ, one is under the covenant of works, the other is not. Upon what other difference is this founded? Reader, on this and only this, Eve possessed human nature in human personality,-Jesus had no human personality; his humanity was united to the personality of his divinity. Reader, reflect upon this. Confidence of opinion is more frequently the result of feebleness, than of strength of understanding, and as often the result of pride as of either; but, if I dare at all trust to the impression of evidence on my own mind, I must pronounce this argument conclusive. Adam did not represent human nature, simply as human nature; for then he would have

represented Jesus Christ, whom he did not represent. Neither did he represent human persons as descending from him by ordinary generation; for then he could not have represented Eve, whom yet he did represent. But he represented human nature as existing in human personality; whether that person were formed out of the ground, as himself was formed, or taken out of his side by one process of creative agency; or created according to the ordinary law of nature, by another species of creative agency.

The general conclusion is, that they were human persons, under the formal consideration of their human personality, that Adam represented. So far, I trust, we are on safe ground. The question is not, how did they obtain their human personality, but, do they possess it?

Having brought the discussion thus far, that it appears fixed and determined that they were human persons, deriving their humanity from Adam, in whatever way God should think proper to determine, whether by ordinary generation or otherwise; that they were human persons under the formal consideration of their personality; it is time to inquire, whether all the individuals of Adam's posterity were distinctly contemplated in the covenant. Upon this question, let us endeavour to ascertain as much of the truth as comes within the horizon of our vision.

1. There is no question that the covenant, from its own nature, left the number of its subjects to be determined by the sovereign wisdom of God. The law was the law of human nature, existing in human personality. Had Adam fulfilled the righteousness of that law, it would, according to the nature of the covenant, have been transmissible or imputable to every human

person, be the number more or less, on the final catastrophe of the human drama. And now that he has sinned, his sin is imputed to every human person, and would, from the nature of the covenant, be imputed to each one, were the number a million times more than they are, or ever will be. Sin is the transgression of the law, and its wages is death; and what the law saith, it saith to every one that is under the law. Adam transgressed the law in one point; and James informs us, that he who transgresses in one point is guilty of the whole though obedience must be universal, cursed is he who continueth not in all things written in the book of the law to do them. In a word, the righteousness of the law is a unit, and the transgression of the law a unit, and both are imputed without defalcation, in their integrity and wholeness, to every individual to whom they are imputed at all. Should twenty men tell the same lie, though there is but one lie, there are twenty liars in the world: and should twenty assassins plunge their daggers at the same instant into an honest man's bosom, though there is but one murder, there are twenty murderers, who ought to be hanged.

This doctrine is so obvious, that I do not recollect of ever hearing it contradicted or questioned; and was a good deal astonished that Mr. M'C. should have thought it necessary to prove so much in detail, and in so warm and impassioned a manner, that Adam's guilt is not cut up into shreds, and dealt out in parcels among his posterity; and that Christ's righteousness is not parcelled out among the faithful in the same manner. How could they? That which is less than a whole sin is nothing at all; and that which is less than righteousness, is no righteousness at all.

2. It is not supposable that Adam knew all his pos

terity by name, or could contemplate them individually by name in the covenant transaction. I have already said, that it does not appear, that, at the making of the covenant, he had any idea of any human being but himself. But, when Eve was created, and the blessing of fruitfulness pronounced upon them, he certainly did expect posterity; and certainly was informed, that his standing or falling, should be the standing or falling of himself, his wife, and all his posterity, leaving the number of that posterity to be determined by the sovereign counsels of Jehovah. And knowing, (I presume he knew) that God had his own counsels on the subject, and that those counsels included the whole of the human family, their times, and places, and modes of existence, from the first of them to the last, he considered himself bound for the whole, and for each individual of them. After this is granted, (and can it be denied?) it seems to me a needless refinement, to say, that Adam did not represent every individual of the human race, as an individual; and I cannot see the utility of the refinement. Adam certainly did intend (or else he acted dishonestly in the transaction) to represent all those, whom God determined he should repreLet us, therefore, attend to the view which God must have had in this transaction.

sent.

3. The question now is, Did God, in the making of the covenant, design the precise number, and the particular individuals, who should be represented in that covenant, and affected by it? This is no very abstruse point. But, as God's law is a light to the feet, and a lamp to the path; and as this light, shining with direct rays on the understanding, without the reflections or refractions of human science or human arguments, produces the purest illumination, while it cheers the

« EdellinenJatka »