in scripture*. 2. Supposing it to be found he must prove by the same infallible authority, that eternal death, is declared to be synonymous with eternal punishment. 3. As upon the hypothesis in question, persons who are to be everlastingly punished in a future state, must be everlastingly alive to undergo that punishment, how is it that they can be said to be everlastingly dead and everlastingly alive at one and the same time? And what authority is there in scripture for such a monstrous supposition? 4. Is eternal life spoken of in the sacred writings except in connexion with, and as the privilege of God's people? 5. If, with a view to extricate himself from the dilemma, he shall be pleased to allege, that everlasting existence and everlasting life are two distinct things, he is respectfully asked, what foundation there is in scripture, common sense, or the ordinary use of language, for such a distinction? 6. If constrained by the irresistible force of truth, he shall admit that life, and existence

The celebrated critic and commentator, Dr. Macknight, in his notes on Rom. vi. 23, after having decided with considerable force of words, at least, "that the death which is the wages of sin must be eternal," is compelled to make the following rather curious admission, "It is observable that although in scripture the expression eternal life is often to be met with, we nowhere find eternal joined with death." Why truly it would be wonderful if we should. Were such an expression, or even such an idea, to be found in the writings of the inspired penmen, it would be better to infidels than a score of their ordinary arguments, for, (I speak reverently,) it would convict the Holy Ghost of having uttered arrant nonsense. Eternal life, as every person whose mind has not been vitiated and sophisticated by school divinity knows, is life that cannot end or cannot be lost, and, therefore, as eternal death, if it has any meaning at all, must signify the loss of eternal life, it is like every other contradiction in terms entirely out of the question. Curiously enough, in his comment on the same verse, the learned Dr. without any authority, as appears by his own admission, says, "For the wages, which sin gives to its slaves is eternal death." I thought that the Dr. would at least have been consistent with himself, in his commentary on Rom. v. 21, but on turning to it, I discovered, to my great surprise, the following paraphrase, “that as sin, both original and actual, hath tyrannised over mankind by introducing and continuing death in the world, with its train of sorrows and miseries," &c.

are synonymous terms, he is asked, how it is that if God bestowed eternal life upon Adam, our progenitor could lose it-or if he did not lose it, what it is we are indebted for to the Lord Jesus, for, according to this latter alternative, we derive eternal life from Adam, not from Jesus, 7. If eternal death, that is eternal punishment was incurred by Adam, and his natural posterity, it is asked, upon what principle, consistently with the veracity of the Supreme Being, Adam and his posterity can escape that punishment? As soon as the foregoing obligations and queries shall have been satisfactorily discharged and answered, but not till then, I will frankly admit, that the objection to my statement, of death always in scripture signifying the loss of life, derived from the alleged fact, of eternal death signifying eternal punishment, does not deserve the appellation of a cavil. Since I am treating of this subject, I would just remark further, by the way, that the phrase spiritual death stands in the same predicament with eternal death, having no existence that I have yet been able to discover, except in the writings and reasonings of divines.-But of this hereafter.

In the second place. Another objection, to the ordinary doctrine, of Adam having died spiritually and eternally in consequence of his first transgression, is thus stated. The death which Adam actually incurred by the fall must have been exactly commensurate, or of the same extent, with the death previously threatened. It is impossible for any person to dispute this plain and self-evident proposition, without being prepared to maintain the monstrous anomaly in judicial procedure, that a different and a severer punishment may, by the sentence of a court, be inflicted than the laws have previously sanctioned and denounced, and

without bringing a stain upon the veracity of God. If, therefore, spiritual and eternal death was the result of Adam's disobedience, it was so, because spiritual and eternal death was the import of the menace or threatening previously held out to him. That threat, however, cannot have implied so much for the following reasons.

1. No such meaning appears on the face of the record itself. I must here enter my solemn and decided protest against all assumptions in this matter. The notion of spiritual and eternal death having been the amount of God's threatening to Adam, if not proved, either from the Mosaic narrative itself, or from some other source of equal and infallible authority, falls at once to the ground. I have already shown, from an examination of the meaning of Genesis ii. 7, that the life conferred on Adam, as he came from the hands of God was life connected with breathing, or such a life as we now possess, and a few verses further down I find Adam threatened eventually with death, or the loss of life; now as there is no other kind of life, besides that originally conferred, treated of in the intermediate verses, I am obliged to conclude, that the death threatened was the loss of the life possessed, unless I can bring myself to suppose, either, on the one hand, that a creature may lose more than it has, or, on the the other, that the Supreme Being is chargeable with deceit, employing terms which denote one thing, when in reality he is speaking of another. Both these suppositions being inadmissible, I cannot help understanding the terms life, and death, in Genesis ii. 7. 17, in their plain, obvious, and literal signification, and relation to each other, the former as denoting an existence such as we now have, and the latter, the loss or forfeiture of it.

Ꭰ

2. The threat in Genesis ii. 17, cannot imply spiritual and eternal death, because Adam, in his creation state, was incapable of understanding it in this sense. The force of my present argument lies in this, that it is inconsistent with every idea of justice to regard those who are unable to apprehend the import of a prohibition as amenable to punishment for violating it. No man, and no legislature, in the exercise of a sound and discreet authority, ever attempted to inflict punishment upon individuals who were ignorant of the demerit of their conduct. From this plain and incontrovertible fact, I am clearly entitled to argué, that unless Adam, in his creation state, was capable of comprehending what was meant by spiritual and eternal death, it is impossible, without violating all our notions of justice, and without casting a most injurious reflection upon the Supreme Being, to suppose spiritual and eternal death to have been the import of the threat in Genesis ii. 17. Here let me put it to any man of common sense and common honesty, believing in the truth of scripture, if with the utmost stretch and license of imagination, he can suppose, that Adam, previous to the fall, was able to apprehend in any measure, or degree, the meaning of terms so complex, sophistical, and metaphysical, as spiritual and eternal death? If any shall be fool-hardy enough, in the face of this appeal to their understandings, and consciences, to answer in the affirmative, grounding their answer, perhaps, on an alleged intimate communion with God, which they are pleased gratuitously to ascribe to Adam, in his state of innocence, I then inquire how they contrive to reconcile this notion of theirs with the Mosaic narrative, and the analogy of scripture? When I turn to Gen. iii. 1-7 I find that Adam had no knowledge

of evil, or sin, previous to the fall, all his acquaintance with it having been derived from the fall itself but as upon the principles, and by the showing of our adversaries, an acquaintance with the nature, magnitude, and demerit of evil is requisite to the understanding of spiritual and eternal death-how was it possible for Adam, in his state of purity and innocence, to speculate concerning that, of which, as the Holy Ghost informs us, he was entirely ignorant? Besides, in what part of scripture is communion with God ascribed to Adam, or even to Old Testament saints? From 2 Corinth. xiii. 14, compared with John xiv. 16, &c. and 1 John i. 3, it appears, that this communion is a privilege confined to New Testament believers, and enjoyed by them, in virtue of their connexion with the Lord Jesus. As it thus appears, that Adam, in his creation state, was ignorant of evil, and incapable, consequently, of understanding the import of spiritual and eternal death, it follows, that spiritual and eternal death was not implied in the menace, Genesis ii. 17, and was not the death which by his disobedience he incurred.

In the third place. My last objection to the notion of spiritual and eternal death being the amount of the punishment with which Adam was menaced, and which he incurred, is exactly the converse of the preceding one, and requires only to be stated in order to carry home conviction to every candid, considerate, and unprejudiced mind. If spiritual and eternal death was threatened to Adam, and incurred by him, for himself and his posterity, then either spiritual and eternal death is executed upon him and them, or the Supreme Being stands convicted of falsehood. As spiritual and eternal death, according to those who espouse the dogma, signifies eternal exclusion from God's presence,