with the fulness of the Godhead, in whom we "beheld the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth;"* yet as he appeared in human nature, he partook in this particular also of the circumstances of the human lot. "He was despised and rejected of men, a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief." He was tried by the subtlety of the tempter in the commencement of his ministry, and by the "contradiction of sinners against himself," during its entire continuance.§ He endured a sorrow and "heaviness even unto death,"|| a mental agony which wrung drops of blood from his agitated frame, and burst forth in the thrice repeated supplication, "Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me." And all this, as it proved, so it must have greatly enhanced the magnanimity of that resignation which, though groaning under sufferings thus severe, immediately added, "nevertheless, not my will, but thine be done." Still further, when hanging on the cross, the mysterious sufferings of his soul were manifested by the exclamation, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me !"** before we perceive their glorious termination in that triumph of filial confidence and love with which at his last breath he cried, "Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit,"†† and thus closed his sufferings and his life. Thus was the author and finisher of our faith, "tempted in all points like as we are, yet without sin ;" and for the joy that was set before him, (undoubtedly) the joy of "bringing many sons unto glory,"§§ "endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God." Thus is the assertion of the inspired apostle proved and exemplified, "that whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth; and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth."|||| Nor is it true of mankind only, that probation is essential to his establishment in virtue. It appears that the highest orders of angelic beings have passed through their trial, which was so proportioned to their moral and intellectual powers, that however great the multitudes who sustained that trial with unshaken virtue and unsullied glory, yet many of the most exalted fell * John i. 14. tt Luke, xxiii. 46. § Heb. xii. 3. **Matt. xxvii. 46. + Matt. iv. + Isa. liii. 3. Heb. xii. 2, 6. into unpardonable guilt, and incurred irremediable misery. "The angels who kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, God hath reserved in everlasting chains, under darkness, unto the last day."* It appears, then, that every moral and accountable agent undergoes trial, that he who endureth this to the end is saved; that he who sinketh under it, and incurs the guilt of disobedience to the divine law, is subject to degradation and misery. And thus the instance of the trial and fall of our first parents, is only one example of the application of this general law, from the operation of which no finite being seems to be exempt. With this conviction impressed upon our minds, we shall contemplate the particulars of this great event with more reverence, and acquiesce with more promptitude and more humility in such views of it, as reason may trace, or Scripture may disclose. The particular species of trial, even to abstain from a forbidden fruit, may appear, on a superficial glance, too unimportant to form the subject of a divine command, and the transgression too trivial to be followed by such a punishment as death. But let it be considered, that the only possible objects of trial must relate to our conduct towards our God, our fellow-creatures, or ourselves; requiring towards those several objects, piety, benevolence, and self-government. Now of these three objects of trial, that requiring benevolence towards our fellowcreatures, in this particular case appears almost necessarily excluded. For, as the first pair were circumstanced in Paradise, there was scarcely a possibility of rivalship or jealousy, of oppo- sition or discord, and as there also existed no possible division of property, a command forbidding the breach of these rules which suppose such a division, would have been evidently inapplicable. Thus also with respect to God; many commands, which to men in after ages differently circumstanced afforded a trial of piety, because strong temptation existed to induce their breach, could here have scarcely any place. On their duty to God, our first parents had indeed been most fully instructed. In order that they should be taught this primary principle of religion, it * Jude 6. had been evidently necessary, that they should be clearly and sensibly convinced who it was, who had been the author and giver of that existence which they had so recently received, and from whose all-perfect operation, and all-beneficent gift, the thousand blessings that surrounded them had been immediately derived. In order to impress this conviction, we see the sacred history intimates, that Adam did not find himself, on his first creation, instantly placed in Paradise. But that after he had been created, and possibly after being permitted to remain some length of time in a different and less desirable situation, he was removed by the direct hand of his God, and placed in this blissful scene. For it is said, "the Lord God took the man whom he had formed, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it."* On the same principle of rendering each blessing conferred, more valuable by the contrast of its want, and pointing out distinctly the divine hand from which it came, Eve was not created at the same time with Adam; God previously "brought to him every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air, to see what he would call them ;"t-and then (instructed certainly by his divine benefactor, both in the rudiments of language and the nature of the objects to which he applied it,)" Adam gave names to all cattle, and to every fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam, (says the sacred narrative,) there was not found an help meet for him." . Thus, when the wearisomeness of existing in the midst of a world of solitude, had been sufficiently felt, and the hopelessness of relieving it by the society of any creature then existing, had been experimentally proved, then, and not till then, was the last and most acceptable gift of "an help meet for him,"‡ bestowed on man; and in such a mode, as made him recognize, not only the intimate union which ought ever to subsist between them, but the direct power and agency of the Creator, in forming and conferring this blessing, which surpassed and completed all the rest. It also seems implied by the sacred narrative, that to keep alive this sensible impression of their Creator's perpetual and beneficent agency, his glorious presence frequently visited those Ibid. ii. 21 to 24. * Gen. ii. 15. Ibid. ii. 19, 20. highly favoured creatures, and the voice of their God was a sound familiar to their ears.* Under these circumstances, fresh from their Creator's hand, surrounded by his immediate gifts, frequently witnessing the presence of his glory, and habituated to look to him as the original cause and perpetual preserver of every blessing they enjoyed, it was scarcely to be conceived, that they should withhold the worship due to him, or transfer or divide it with any other. And still less conceivable was it, that they should form the idea of worshipping him under any preposterous similitude, or with any degrading rites; or that they should feel any temptation to profane his holy name. Thus it seems probable, that not a single command of the decalogue, was applicable to the situation of the first parents of mankind. No mode of trial therefore appears so obviously adapted to their situation as that which the sacred history relates was adopted. "Out of the ground the Lord had made to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food, the tree of life, also, in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil." And on placing man in paradise "the Lord God commanded the man, saying, of every tree in the garden thou mayest freely eat, but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou shalt not eat of it; for in the day thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die." This command, given at the moment man was placed in paradise, the only restriction of its enjoyment, and the only condition of its tenure, tried at once his gratitude for the favours, his obedience to the will, and his faith in the promises of his Creator. It also exercised his constant self-government, exhibiting perpetually on one side the tree of life, the sacramental pledge of God's favour, and the symbol of obedience, the continual reward of which it assured him of and conveyed, by invigorating his life, and securing the prolonged enjoyment of all the divine blessings. While, on the other side the prohibited tree, (by abstaining from which he would exercise and understand good, by indulging in which he would perpetrate evil and feel all its punishment,) was a symbol of disobedience, and as it were a sacramental pledge of + Ibid. ii. 9, 16, 17. * Gen. iii. 10. the displeasure of God, and the forfeiture of that life he had conferred, with all the blessings which attended it. If this view of the state of Adam in paradise be correct; if, on being placed in that seat of bliss, he was admitted into a covenant with his God, during his adherence to which, he was permitted on the part of God to partake of the tree of life, as a pledge and a conveyance of the divine favour; if his abstaining from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, was the established symbol and pledge of his adherence to that covenant; and if his eating of the forbidden fruit, was the established symbol of its breach on his part, a deliberate disavowal of the allegiance due to his Creator, and a rejection of the authority of his God, then this transgression assumes an aspect very different from that of a light and venial offence. die." That such was its character, is abundantly proved by the account, which the sacred narrative (however briefly) delivers of the arguments employed by the tempter, and of the motives which prevailed with the unhappy Eve to yield to his suggestions. With an hypocritical affectation of ignorance, he asks, "Yea, hath God said, ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden ?"* Thus with malignant but subtle audacity, he insinuates a doubt of the liberality and beneficence of God, and draws forth her answer; "We may eat of the fruit, of the trees of the garden, but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall touch it, lest ye ye Thus she recalls and avows her clear knowledge and distinct recollection of the divine command, and the awful denunciation of punishment by which it was sanctioned. All plea of ignorance, of surprise, of misconception is removed. She acknowledges the full extent of the divine benefits, recognises the sole condition on which they were enjoyed, and declares her persuasion, that if the truth of God was sure, their forfeiture must be incurred by the breach of that condition. And now, undoubtedly, perceiving the forbidden object had excited her sensual appetite, and that her gratitude to God for the blessings he had given, was overpowered by impatience at the restraint which he had imposed, so that the criminal indul Gen. iii. 1, 7. |