and I did eat. The woman gave to me of the tree, and I did eat. This exactly accords with our present nature; and clothes the narrative with the highest verisimilitude. Probably no child of Adam was ever convicted of a fault, who did not lay a part, at least, of the blame on another. IV. The Sentence of condemnation next presents itself. This naturally divides itself into three parts. 1. The sentence, pronounced on the Serpent. This requires a two fold consideration. First: Of the sentence, pronounced on the Instrument. This is contained in the literal expression of the following passage, Gen. iii. 14, 15. Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field: upon thy belly thou shalt go, and dust shalt thou eat, all the days of thy life. And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed: It shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. In these declarations are contained the following things. 1. A general sentence of humiliation. 2. These particular and peculiar circumstances of humiliation; that the serpent should henceforth creep upon the ground; and that he should eat dust. 3. A prediction of perpetual enmity between the serpent and his offspring, and the woman and her offspring: 4. A prediction of the effects of that enmity; that the Serpent and his seed should bruise, or wound the heel of Man; and that Man should bruise, or wound, the head of the Serpent. Of these predictions the daily experience of mankind affords a striking fulfilment. The humbled, and grovelling, state of the serpent is daily evident: a state exceedingly humbled and grovelling, if his former situation was in fact superior to that of other animals; especially if, as has been supposed by multitudes, he was a Saraph, a fiery, flying serpent; and more subtle than any other animal. The enmity between man and the serpent is a singular and striking fact, for which no account has ever been given; nor, it is presumed, can any be given, beside what is found in this narration. The sight of a serpent has always filled man with resentment, and terror. This cannot arise from the apprehension of danger merely; because the effect is produced as really, and as greatly, by such serpents, as are known to be perfectly harmless, as by those, which are most noxious. All persons are instinctively, and eagerly, prompted to destroy them; and usually accomplish the destruction by bruising, or crushing, their heads. It cannot proceed from their ugliness of form or color. The form is beautiful; and the colours are often splendid, and attractive. Far uglier animals are regarded with very different, and much less unfriendly emotions. At At the same time, the serpent appears plainly to entertain the same enmity to Mankind. the sight of man he usually flies, as if conscious of an enemy. If, at any time, he exercises a bolder spirit, or finds his retreat cut off, he attacks the heel of his enemy, and often wounds him danger ously, and sometimes fatally. This enmity has existed from the beginning; and has always existed in the same manner, and produced the same effects. Secondly: Of the sentence pronounced on the Agent. That the Evil Spirit, mentioned in the preceding lecture, was really concerned in the temptation, no person, who admits the Revelation of the Scriptures, has, so far as I know, at all doubted.* There can be as little doubt, that the sentence, pronounced on the serpent, primarily respected him, who used the serpent, as an instrument of his malice and deceit, and who, from this transaction, was called the Old Serpent, i. e. the first serpent, known to mankind. This was the standing opinion of the Jewish church; and is evidenced abundantly by the writers of that nation. Christ has, to every Christian, decided this point beyond a question. He is a liar, and the father of it. That is, the first liar, and the introducer of lying into the Universe. He was a murderer from the beginning: i. e. he committed The sentence, pronounced on the Serpent, is addressed to the Serpent by the judge. The being really addressed, therefore, was supposed by Moses to be one who could understand the threatenings, which it contained; or, in other words, to be intelligent, and not a mere brute. But no other intel. ligent being is known to mankind, who could deserve this name, beside him, to whom the subsequent books of the Bible have applied it. other could have originated the temptation: no other have merited the punishment. It must be admitted, therefore, that the Bible, if it has not spoken truth, has yet preserved exact consistency. In the whole account, which it has given, the prediction has been completely fulfilled. No the first murder in the beginning of the world; the murder of the first parents of Mankind, and of. their posterity, by means of them, The sentence, therefore, respects the serpent, according to its real meaning, secondarily, as the instrument, and Satan, primarily, as the Agent. Of the accomplishment of this part of the sentence we have no knowledge, but by the Gospel; nor could any other knowledge Its acbe rationally expected. complishment is a part of the government of God, carried on by means wholly extraordinary, and to be known only by Revelation. In the Gospel a full and complete acomplishment of it is unfolded. There an entire humiliation appears to be the lot of this evil being. All his designs are there defeated, and his kingdom is irremediably destroyed, by one, who, in a sense applicable to no other being, was the Seed of the Woman. At the same time, this Seed was bruised, or wounded, by this adversary; bruised in the heel; in his inferior part; his corruptible body. The exactness, and the pleteness, of the fulfilment of the sentence as here exhibited, canI do not not be questioned. mean to assume the story as a revealed one, and thus to beg the question in debate; but to consider it as one most wonderful exemplification of scriptural consistency, and one which may, therefore, be confidently advanc. ed, as exhibiting strong support, to the truth of the original account of the apostasy. com 2. The sentence pronounced on the Woman. This chiefly consists of the two following parts: First: The distress which she was to experience in child bearing. Secondly: Her submission to her husband. With regard to the first of these facts there can be no `doubt: viz. that woman is distinguished from all inferior creatures by peculiar distresses in bearing her offspring. Fears, sickness, pains, and death, in a manner and degree, wholly peculiar, are the lot of Woman in this respect; and this I take to be the tenor of the sentence. Not, that she was to be distressed merely; but to be peculiarly dis*ressed. This has been the standing fact; as was observed by Aristotle in his book on animals, near 3,000 years ago, and as had been every where observed long before. Of the subjection of Woman to Man there is equal certainty, and an equal uniformity. Among savage nations, this subjection is remarkable. Women, in such nations, have been degraded to the state of mere animals, and employed as mere instruments of drudgery, or sensual pleasure. In some such nations this degradation has been so great, that women have laid violent hands on themselves,and become the instruments of death to their female children. In others, and some of them considerably enlightened, to bear female children has been viewed as highly disgraceful; and to such a degree, as to tempt the mother, who has borne several such children, to lay violent hands on some of them. When we consider how great a part of the human race have always been savages; and how great among these people has been female humilia tion, subjection, and distress; neither the reality, nor the extent, of this part of the curse can be denied, or doubted. It is no small glory to the Gospel, and no small part of its beneficent influence on mankind, that it has so extensively and effectually raised the condition of the female sex, and so greatly meliorated the lot of one half of the race of Adam: proving here, as elsewhere, a direct remedy for the evils of the apostasy. 3. The sentence pronounced on the Man. This may be considered as it respected First: The Earth in general; First: The earth was cursed with sterility. Before, it had brought forth all good things, and those very good, spontaneously. Now it yielded nothing for food, or for clothing, but in answer to the unremitted calls of labor. Again: Its products were greatly depreciated in their kind, and their value. Where fruits of life and beauty grew before, thorns and thistles now became the spontaneous productions. Poisonous and pernicious vegetables now took the place of fragrance, health, and pleasure: being either created anew for a ruined world; or, what is perhaps more probable, being multiplied greatly in a soil, now congenial to their growth, and refusing a nobler vegetation. Secondly: Man was doomed, 1. To labor always, and severely, in such a world. In the sweat of his brow, only, was he to eat bread. 2. He was to be the constant subject of affliction and sorrow throughout his life. In sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life. 3. He was condemned to eat the herb of the field. This was a mighty change from that life-giving food, allotted to him in his primitive state. 4. He was sentenced according to the express language of the law, under which he was originally placed, to die, and return to the dust, from which he was taken. Of the real, and original, existence of every part of this sentence all human experience has been an unvarying proof. The labor, to which Man was doomed; the sorrow, extending through life; the debased and ineffectual food; the death; and the return to the dust; have been the uniform lot of all men. It is to be remembered, that these have been the lot, appointed by God, and accomplished according to his decree, whether we suppose the decree to have been audibly pronounced, as Moses declares,or not. An uniform course of things is clearly an execution of a determination of God. This course of things, therefore, being an exact fulfilment of the decree, here recorded by Moses, stands as a strong and affecting proof of the veracity of the record; and gives a reason, which cannot be answered, for believing the history under consideration. Death and sorrow are not the natural, and original, parts of a Divine creation, or government. They are not such in the eye of reason, nor of religion. On the contrary, they are plainly things most opposite to the whole nature of such a government; and cannot rationally be supposed to have VOL. IV. New Serice. taken place, but in consequence of some disturbance of original rectitude, and harmony, on the part of the creature. A perfect Judge cannot originally inflict death, or sorrow, but as a punishment; and he cannot punish any thing, but transgression. A disturbance of the order of God's kingdom by Man, of the nature of transgression or sin, must, therefore, have given birth to death and sorrow: and such is the account of the historian. By these interesting facts thinking men, of all nations, have been so greatly affected, as readily to accord with the substance of this melancholy history. The religions, laws, writings, and conversation, of men have been wholly built on the apostasy of Man. Religion has attempted to expiate sin; laws to bridle it; writings have been chiefly employed in describing its effects; and the conversation of all men in ascribing it to all. Nor have mankind merely acknowledged themselves to have apostatized; but they have also considered themselves as the heirs of such apostasy. Either tradition, or common sense, or both, have established this opinion among many nations. The following testimonies, among many others, may be adduced in support of these assertions; and may be properly prefaced by observing, what I have already shewn, that the ancients generally adopted the belief, that the original state of Man was a state of innocence and virtue, as well as of happiness. 1. Plato, in his Timaus Locrus, says; "The cause of sin is from our first parents rather than from ourselves: so that we never 2 relinquish those actions, which lead us to follow those primitive blemishes of our first parents." 2. In his book de Legibus, he says; "Inborn corruption is self love," or selfishness. 3. In his Gorgias, p. 493, he says; "I have heard from the wise men, that we are now dead; and that the body is but our sepulchre." 4. Plato also says our present knowledge is vuxтegivи 'nμgα. 5. Socrates says; "Human nature is corrupted, and has κακον εμφυτον evil imfilanted. "Men are all enveloped in native blindness. Virtue is not teachable, nor acouirable by nature, or art; but the product, or effect of inspiration, or communication from God; and all true knowledge comes by communication from God." 6. Pythagoras declared, that sin was a moral death. 7. Grotius asserts, that ancient philosophers generally acknowledged, that it was connatural to Man to sin. 8., The Brahmins hold, and have ever held, the doctrine of original sin; and that man is a fallen creature. Maur. Antiq. Hind. 9. The Asiatic nations, throughout all antiquity, held the same doctrine. 10. The ancient poet, Prudentius, describes a sacrifice, performed by the priests of Cybele, called Taurobolium, and a sacrifice of Regeneration, as were several others. Cybele was worshipped throughout a great part of western Asia, throughout Greece, and Italy. This sacrifice is also called the Bapfism of blood; and was supposed to renew the worshippers, and cleanse them from their original defilement. 11. The Brahmins hold, also, and have from the remotest an tiquity held, that the earth is changed from is original perfection, is grossly contaminated, and dreadfully defiled. So far do they carry this opinion, that some of them raise themselves, in one way and another, from the ground, and live in this situation that they may not touch so defiled an object. 12. The subtilty of the serpent has been remarked by many writers of different nations. Pliny, Plutarch, and various others, may be mentioned as instances. Among ourselves "as cunning, as subtle, as a serpent," is proverbial. 13. The worship of serpents has been extended through the whole heathen world. The Hindoos, Persians, Babylonians, Egyptians, Chinese, people of Guinea, Greeks, Romans, and other Italians, Samogitians, Lithuanians, and many other nations, are known to have worshipped serpents. Several particulars, relative to this worship, deserve to be mentioned. Apollo Python, or Pythius was one of the Greek Gods. Maximus Tyrius, a Platonic philosopher of the Alexandrian school, Justin Martyr, and Julius Firmicus, declare a serpent to have been the common symbol of the Deity among the ancient heathen. Joseph Acosta, Martin, and Bosman, declare the serpent to be the common Deity of the modern heathen. A snake was pourtrayed around the tripos of the Sybilla Erythræa |