II.

"Man’s original righteousness was lost by the first sin. Though he was made righteous, he was not made immutable. He was free to stand or fall. And he soon fell, and lost at once both the favor and image of God. This fully appears,

1. From the account which Moses gives of our first parents, where we read,

(l.)’The eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked;’ (Genesis 3) that is, they were conscious of guilt, and touched with a pungent sense of their folly and wickedness. They began to find their nakedness irksome to them, and to reflect on it with sinful emotions of soul.

(2.)Immediately they were indisposed for communion with God, and struck with such a dread of him as could not consist with true love. (Verse 8.)

(3.)When questioned by God, how do they prevaricate, instead of confessing their Sin and humbly imploring forgiveness! which proves, not only their having sinned, but their being as yet wholly impenitent.

(4.)The judgment passed upon them was a proof of their being guilty in the sight of God. Thus was man’s original righteousness lost; thus did he fall both from the favor and image of God." (Pages 14, 15.)

"This appears, 2. From the guilt which inseparably attends every transgression of the divine law. I say, every transgression; because every sin virtually contains all sin; for ’whosoever keepeth the whole law, and offendeth in one point, he is guilty of all.’ Every single offense is a virtual breach of all the commands of God. There is in every particular sin, the principle of all sin; namely, the contempt of that sovereign authority which is equally stamped upon every command. When, therefore, our first parents ate the forbidden fruit, they not only violated a particular precept, but the entire law of God. They could not sin in one instance, without virtually transgressing the whole law of their creation; which being once done, their title to God’s favor and their original righteousness were both lost." (Page 16.)

"This appears, 3. From the comprehensive nature and aggravating circumstances of the first transgression. For it implied,

(1.)Unbelief: Man did not dare to break the divine command till he was brought to question the truth of the divine threatening.

(2.)Irreverence of God: Reverence is a mixture of love and fear; and had they continued in their first love and filial fear, they could not have broken through the sole command of God.

(3.)Ingratitude: For what a return did they hereby make to their Creator for all his benefits!

(4.)Pride and ambition; affecting to be ’as gods, knowing good and evil.’

(5.)Sensuality: The woman looked upon the fruit with an irregular appetite. Here the conflict between reason and sense began. To talk of such a conflict in man before he fell is to represent him as in a degree sinful and guilty even while innocent. For conflict implies opposition; and an opposition of appetite to reason is nothing else than a repugnance to the law of God. But of this our first parents were no way guilty, till their innocence was impaired; till they were led by the temptation of the devil to desire the forbidden fruit.

(6.)Robbery: For the fruit was none of theirs. They had no manner of right to it. Therefore their taking it was a flat robbery of God; which cannot be less criminal than robbing our fellow creatures. So comprehensive was the nature, so aggravated be circumstances, of man’s first transgression." (Pages 17, 18.)