4

a suffering, so far as it respects us, designed by infinite wisdom, for our good; and which it is our duty not to despise, but to sustain with Christian fortitude and resignation. It may not only be designed for our good, but also for the good of others. This should make us willing to suffer, if the will of God be such, for the good of man.

The apostles considered their sufferings as filling up the measure of the sufferings of Christ; and inasmuch as they were so, for aught we can know to the contrary, there was the same merit in them.And hence, we are assured, they will meet with the same reward: "If so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together. For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us." (Rom. viii. 17, 18.) All suffering, therefore, must be considered in one of these two points of light; i. e. either as the immediate and unavoidable consequences of sin, or else designed by infinite wisdom for a future good. And it is furthermore very possible that much of the sufferings of human nature ought to be considered in both these points of light. Viewed in either light, and having a just sense of the same, the mind becomes reconcil. ed, not to the suffering itself, but to the hand of God who inflicts it.

We

Thus, instead of debasing man infinitely below the brutes, which is done by considering him by nature wholly destitute of every thing that is good, we consider him still, notwithstanding all his imperfections, the most noble creature of this lower creation. consider him as still possessing the image of God in which he was created; and that man is as much made in the image of God now, as he was in the first place for if this be not the case, why is this given as a reason that "whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of

God made he man." (Gen. ix. 6.) This was spoken to Noah, after the deluge; and notwithstanding the supposed total depravity which man had experienced, yet this reason is urged why he should not shed the blood of his fellow man. Man, being made subject to vanity, is liable to err; yet, notwithstanding all this, man is still made in the image of God.

Whatever we may suppose, that man lost in Adam as it respects his nature, we are fully warranted in saying, that it was restored in Noah, when "God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply and replenish the earth."(Gen. ix. 1.); the same blessing which he pronounced upon Adam, whom he created in his own image. See chap. i. 25, 27.

We have no account that God ever cursed man in consequence of his first transgression, as has been often supposed; and even the ground, which was cursed for his sake, we have a most precious promisc that it should be cursed no more; for "the Lord said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; although the imagination of man's heart should be evil from his youth." (Gen. viii. 21.) Our translators have rendered the Hebrew ki, by FOR, in order, I suppose, to favour the doctrine of total depravity; but I have the authority of Dr. Taylor and Dr. Clarke, both, in rendering it though or although.* If this

"The Hebrew particle ki, which we render for, in this place, signifieth ALTHOUGH, as several learned men have well observed, and our translators themselves have so rendered it in the following texts. Exod. xiii. 17. [ki] although that was near. Josh. xvii. 18. [ki] tho' they have iron chariots, and [ki] tho' they be strong. 2 Sam. xxiii. 5. although my house be not so, &c. (See also Prov. vi. 35. Jer. iv. 30. Hab. iii. 17. Zech. ix. 2.) And so it should have been rendered here. I will not curse the ground any more for man's sake; although the imagination of man's heart should be evil from his youth. That is, although he should fall into the last

(i. e. the above) were necessarily the state of man, it would be as good a 'reason why man should become extinct, as it was why that wicked race should be destroyed. But the text under consideration neither affirms nor implies any such thing; but only that man is liable to become thus evil, and although that should be the case again, he has promised not to destroy the world again by water. The next trial will be by fire; and although some may suffer great loss, yet they themselves shall be saved, so as by fire. 1 Cor. iii. 15.

According, therefore, to the premises here laid down the truth and propriety of which will still more fully appear as we proceed, children, while in a state of innocence, in which state they must be considered till they are capable of understanding the law of God, instead of being taught that they are children of the wicked one, that God is their enemy, and that he is very angry with them, and with every body else, for a sin committed by their first parents, long before they were born, should be taught that they are in every sense of the word the children of God; that they are heirs of his kingdom, together with his Son Jesus Christ, who came into the world to teach them the knowledge of this glorious truth, and who, while he was on earth, suffered much for them, and on account of the truth which he came to teach; that Christ loved the world of mankind, and especially children, being considered in a state of innocence; and that they should, in consequence of these great privileges, endeavour to live as he lived; he being the

degree of corruption; meaning that he would use other methods of reformation for the future."

From his youth. "This I conceive," says the Dr. in a note, "is a phrase, signifying the greatness and long duration of a thing.' As proof of this, he quotes, Psal. lxxxviii. 15. Isa. xlvii. 12, 15. Jer. iii. 24; which see. Taylor on Original Sin, part 2, pp. 123, 124.

great pattern and example of the Christian life. On this ground the best morality can be taught, and the best reason can be given for it. If a person's being born an heir to a crown is a good reason why he should be educated with a particular reference to his filling that important station, the reason will hold good here in a superlative sense. If a person's being absolutely destined to live in a certain country is a good reason why he should have a knowledge of that country, of its laws and government, of its manners and customs, it is on this ground we plead the necessity of every one's becoming acquainted with God, and with Jesus Christ, whom he hath sent, whom to know is eternal life. Now would a person be so likely to attend to these things, if he thought there were but a bare possibility, after all, of his obtaining this object; but that the probability was against him? No! But, on the contrary, just in proportion to his doubts and fears, he would be likely to slack in his vigilance.

If his preparation were to be considered the means, and the only means, by which he was to obtain this object, there would be, I must confess, some more encouragement; but he is told that this will depend after all entirely upon the will of another, who has already determined his destination, and who, at the same time, was governed wholly from motives within himself, which have no real connexion with any thing which the creature can do.

From these, and many other considerations which might be mentioned, I am firmly persuaded that the doctrine for which I am contending is the most conducive to good morality, even if that were our only object, of any that ever was advanced. It is often objected that this doctrine ought not to be preached, even if it be true. Without taking up any time to expose the futility of this objection, (for what can men preach better than the truth?) I will only add

in this place, that the strongest reason I can give why it should be preached-is, because it is true. Ifit were not true, notwithstanding the temporary good it might produce, yet, the very circumstance of its not being true, would be a good reason why it should not be preached. All admit that the doctrine would be good, O yes, nothing could be better, if it were only true; without ever considering that the very circumstance of its being good, is one great evidence of its truth. If it were acknowledged not to be good, it would be one great evidence in my mind that it is not true.

Now how does this statement stand when applied to a doctrine diametrically opposite to the one here contended for? In acknowledging this good, they (i. e. those who advocate a different doctrine) acknowledge the one in which they believe, and which stands opposed to this, not good. Why then do they believe it true? If the doctrine be not good, can the author of it be good? and if the author be not good, can that author be LOVE? O forgive me, my religious opponents, I can assure you that I am seeking your best good, while I thus expose both you and your doctrine.

But it is time I had brought this lecture to a close. We find then the present state of man to stand thus: he is made subject to vanity, agreeably to his original constitution; he comes into the world perfectly innocent, in which state he is a fit subject for the kingdom of heaven; he is morally inclined to good, but nevertheless prone to evil; thus he stands in need of all possible instruction, of which he is capable of making a wise improvement. But for the want of proper instruction in the first place, or by neglecting to improve by it in the second, he is liable to pierce himself through with many sorrows. Lest, however, those evils should be productive of events incompatible with infinite wisdom and benevolence