that the doctrine of imputation is contrary to the fundamental principles of the Divine government. Neither righteousness nor wickedness can be transferred from one individual to another.

Adam was the first sinner, and the first mortal. Christ was the only perfect man, and the first to rise from the dead. "As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive."

Some persons may be alarmed at the admission, that there is such an element in the Bible as the floating opinions of the age. It may be thought that it is calculated to undermine the authority of the Scriptures, and to lead to the adoption of such rationalistic opinions as to amount, at last, to the rejection of revelation altogether. The course of things in Germany may be cited as an example of a people gradually conducted by the fatal declension of skepticism to total unbelief.

it

What is to hinder the course of things in this country,

may be asked, from taking the same direction, and ending in the same result? I answer, that the only thing that can save this country is the adoption of this very distinction which is made in this discourse. It is wholly impossible to resist the course of rationalism. Rationalism, in its true sense, is the only thing which can save the Bible.

Christianity is now compelled to meet a state of things entirely new. Three hundred years ago, there was a traditionary and superstitious faith in the Bible. It was, moreover, fastened upon the convictions of the people by civil enactment. To call any part of the traditionary opinions concerning it in question, was a civil offence.

The first rationalistic question which was started after the revival of learning and science in the sixteenth cen

The as

tury, was one which arose from the discoveries of astronomy. In the Bible, the common opinion is taken for granted, that the sun actually rises and sets. tronomical discoveries of that age, especially of Galileo, left it no longer doubtful that this was an optical illusion. The sun, in fact, neither rises nor sets; but the earth turns upon its axis, and makes it appear that the sun, moon, and stars pass round the earth once in twenty-four hours.

The theologians of that age, who had the civil power under their control, considered the honor and credit of revelation to be involved in maintaining the truth of the old opinion, because it is taken for granted in the Bible. Not only so, they prosecuted Galileo before the Inquisition for heresy, and for bringing the Bible into contempt by maintaining that the earth revolves upon its axis. This of course was based upon the supposition, that the rising and setting of the sun was a doctrine of the Bible. The Scriptures do in fact speak of the rising and setting of the sun, in such a manner as to lead us to infer that their writers entertained the same astronomical opinions which were held by the rest of the world. But nothing could be more short-sighted in the defenders of the Bible, than to make it responsible for the truth of the astronomical doctrine, that the sun rises and sets. The investigations of science have established the fact, that the heavenly bodies do not revolve round the earth. Were the Bible made responsible for the opposite opinion, its authority would be lost. Its credit is maintained solely by the admission, that there is such an element in it as the floating opinions of the age, which were alluded to and assumed as true by the sacred writers. But this admission being made, the authority of the Bible stands as firmly as ever.

In the first chapter of Genesis, the world is related to have been created in six days. Heaven is spoken of as a solid partition between the waters which belong to the seas, and that aerial ocean which was supposed to exist in the skies, and from which the rain was poured forth. Science has since discovered that the earth was untold ages in assuming its present form, and while it invalidates the literal interpretation of the six days' creation, it establishes the much more important declaration of the sacred writings, that the work of creation was gradual, and that the progenitors of the human race were created immediately by the hand of God.

We are compelled, therefore, to place some parts of the account of the creation among the traditionary opinions which the Bible records, but for whose literal truth it is not responsible. There is no other way for those who are most zealous for the honor of Divine revelation.

The same is true with regard to the demonology of the New Testament. Some diseases were then supposed to be occasioned by the possession of devils. Christ is said even to have cast out devils. But the phenomena recorded are all those which have been presented in every age of the world by the natural disease of lunacy. Science has dispelled the superstition that any disease is occasioned by the indwelling of devils. Yet Christ used phraseology which implied their real existHe did not attempt to correct the common opinion in relation to the agency of wicked spirits. He left that to be corrected by the progress of scientific investigation. And we have every reason to believe that he judged rightly. Christianity had enough to do in correcting the false ideas which then prevailed on subjects strictly religious. Any attempt to set men right on mat

ence.

ters of physical science would have created such an opposition to the Gospel, as to have put a stop to its propagation at the very commencement. Christ often speaks of a personal devil. But when we analyze his language, we do not find any positive assertion of his existence. So, those who have no belief in his personal existence, at the present day, still continue to speak of the Devil as the personification of evil, just as if they believed in his personal existence. Christ, on a certain occasion, when speaking of the future spread and influence of his religion, said, “I saw Satan fall as lightning from heaven.” This, of course, is a figurative expression for the downfall of the kingdom of evil.

Into the same category must fall, as it seems to me, the language of the New Testament, and of the Bible generally, as to the introduction of sin into the world. It is referred to as a tradition, or a floating opinion of the age. The conception that the Devil had any agency in the temptation of our first parents, or mankind in general, is one which evidently grew up without any authority from the Scriptures.

Nothing is said of Satan, or the Devil, or any evil spirit, in the account of the temptation and fall of man, nor in any part of the writings of Moses. And in the first place in which he is mentioned, it is in the same way in which the word is now used by those who have no belief in his existence. In Chronicles it is said, "And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel." In the Second Book of Samuel, the same transaction is spoken of in the following terms: "And again the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them, saying, Go, number Israel and Judah." It does not appear that any thing

more was meant by this, than there was in the New Testament, by John, in speaking of the betrayal of Jesus by Judas Iscariot," the Devil having put it into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, to betray him." The only devil needed in this case seems to have been the evil passions of covetousness and revenge.

But it may be said, that such doctrines as these will destroy the authority of the Bible. I answer, that such doctrines as these will save the authority of the Bible.

It has been thought by some, that the best way to preserve the authority of the Bible is, to lay down dogmatically the plenary verbal inspiration of the Scriptures, and then brand as heretics and denounce as infidels all who call it in question. The next step is to draw up a set of articles of faith, and incorporate them into a system of church government, and excommunicate and silence all those who do not assent to them. But as light increases, this can have no other effect than to drive away the honest and the well-informed, and to embrace only the timid and the ignorant, till, by demanding too much for the Bible, the Church will procure its rejection altogether. The cause of the Bible is weakened when its advocates are seen to fight against facts, or to give explanations of them which are wholly unsatisfactory. The truth can do no injury to any honest cause.

Rationalism must run its course, and the sooner the better. The thing most to be lamented is, that it did not begin earlier. With better principles of Biblical exposition, such a man as Edwards would have been of immense advantage to the Church and to the world. As it was, his whole life was spent in striving to reconcile with reason and justice doctrines which are plainly contradictory to both, merely because, finding them in the Bible