« PreviousContinue »
ly a circumstance in his being, and not an image in which he was made. Gen. j. 26. “God said let us make man in our own image, and let him have dominion,” &c. Here man's creation in the image of God, and his having dominion are marked as two distinct circumstances; the one refers to his creation, the other to the design of his creation, or to the circumstances in which he was placed after he was created. Man was created in the image of God, but he did not possess dominion until after he was created; therefore, the image
of God, in which he was created, could not have consisted in his having authority over this lower world, as God's vicegerent, because the image existed before he possessed the authority: he was created in the image, but the authority was given him after he was created. It must appear equally absurd to contend, as some have, that the image of God, in which man was created, consisted exclusively, in the immortality of his soul. There is no evidence, that God's immortality constitutes his image, any more than bis justice, holiness, or any other perfection of his nature. Immortality is one of the divine perfections, and if one of the perfections of God be embraced in the image, which he stamped upon his rational offspring, it is reasonable to suppose that every communicable perfection of the divine nature must be embraced to render the image complete ; wherefore we conclude, that as man was created in the divine image, he received from the plastic hand that formed him, the stamp of every communicable perfection of the divine nature : nor is holiness the least prominent
among these perfections, as God has revealed himself in the Bible. But this view of the subject does not depend upon abstract speculations upon the perfections of God, for it is based on the declarations of his word. Eph. iv. 24. “And that ye put on the new man which, after God, is created in righteousness and true holiness.” By the new man, which we are here exhoited to put on, we understand the true christian character. This the text informs us, is created after God, i. e. after the likeness or image of God, and this is " in righteousness and true holiness." The image of Cud, then, consists in rightcousness and true boliness; and as man was created in this image, he must have been livly; not merely free from unholiness, but
positively holy; for he shone in the divine image, which conists in righteousness and true holiness.
III. We infer man's primitive holiness from the seal of the divine approbation which was set upon him by his Maker. Gen i. 31. “ And God saw every thing that he had made, and behold it was very good.” As this was spoken of all the works of God, its meaning must be, that every thing was very good of its kind; the world was a good world, and the man that was created to people it, was a good man. Now as man was a rational being, a inoral agent, and destined to lead the moral career of this vast world, when God pronounced him good, it must have been with reference to him, such as he was, a moral being; he must, therefore, have been good in a moral sense. This clearly proves that man was not only free from all moral evil, but that he was positively good, or possessed real moral virtue. If, as some now assert, all moral good and moral evil consist in voluntary action, man being neither holy nor unholy until he puts forth his volitions, the text under consideration which asserts that he was very good, cannot be true; for, in such case, it would be as correct to assert that he was very bad, as it would to pronounce him good. It must be perfectly plain, that, to assert that man was very good, because he was free from all mora al evil, would be no more true, than it would be to declare that he was very bad, because he possessed no moral holi
IV. One quotation from the pen of inspiration, shall close the subject of man's primitive holiness. Eccl. vii. 29. “Lo this only have I found, that God hath made man upright, but they have sought out many inventions.” That this text relates to man's moral rectitude, and not to the erect posture of his body appears from two considerations.
1. This is the sense in which the word upright is uniformly employed in the scriptures. Ps. vii. 10. “ My defence is in God, who saveth the upright in heart.” Prov. xi. 9. “ The righteousness of the upright shall deliver him." See also, Ps. xi. 7. xviii. 23, 25.-xix. 13.-xxxvii. 37. Prov. xi. 20.--xii. 6. The above, to which many more references might be added, are sufficient to show that the term upright, is uniformly used to signify moral rectitude.
! 2. In the text under consideration the inspired writer represents his discovery of the fact, that God made man upright; to be the fruit of laboured investigation : which could not be the case if he alluded to the upright posture of his body. It would reflect no great honor on the lintellect of the inspired penman to understand him as saying, that he had numbered a thousand persons, one by one, examining each, to learn that God had created man to stand erect in opposition to the quadruped race. It is clear then, that God made man upright in a moral sense, and if so, he must have been free from moral evil, on one hand, and possessed positive mural virtue, on the other. With these very brief remarks on man's moral character, as he came from the hand of his Creator, we will proceed to notice his exemption from death, while he remained free from moral evil.
Secondly, we say that man was not subject to natural death, or dissolution of body, before he sinned, and consequently, would not have died, if he had not sinned. This we maintain on the principle that moral evil is the cause of natural evil; though in this place, we shall not argue of natural evil in general,
but of the death of the body in particular. It is probably, generally known that modern. Universalists deny that the death of the body is an effect of sin, and maintain that Adam was created mortal, and that he, and all our race, would have died if sin had never entered the world.
Mr. Hosea Ballou has expressed his sentiments on this subject too plainly to be misunderstood. He says, "natural evil is unquestionably the necessary result of the physical organization, and constitution of animal nature in the elements of which our bodies are composed and in their combination, in our con stitution, we evidently discover ample provisijns for the production of all manner of disorders to which they are incident, and even of mortality itself
. It has long been the opinion of christian divines, that natural evil owes its origin to what is denominated moral evil, or sin, but we feel fully convinced that the very reverse of the opinion is true.
The ground we shall take, is, that natural evil owes its origin to the original constitution of animal nature, and that moral evil, or sin, owes its origin to natural evil.” Treatise on Atonement, fourth edition, pages 31, 32. This position taken by Universalists, so
far as relates to the death of the body, appears to be essential to their whole theory. If it be allowed that the death of the body is an effect of sin, two consequences must follow fatal to to the modern system of Universalism.
1. If the death of the body be in consequence of sin, it must follow that the consequences of sin are not confined to this world as Universalists assert; for, in such case, it cannot be denied that the separation of the soul from the body must affect it in a future state.
2. As the resurrection of the body depends upon the sovereign will and power of God, and not upon some germinating principle in man's body, it follows, that if sin has caused the death of the body, it has produced an effect which is in its own nature endless; and which would prove an endless evil, were it not counteracted by the power
of God, manifested through Jesus Christ. We will then attempt to prove that man would not have died, if he had not sinned.
I. The first annunciation of man's mortality was in the form of a sentence, inflicted on him for his first disobedience. Gen. jj. 17---19. “ And unto Adam he said, because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree of which I commanded thee, saying, thou shalt not eat of it, ---in the sweat of thy face, shalt thou eat bread, till tbou return unto the ground, for out of it wast thou taken, for dust thou art and unto dust shalt thou return." Let it be noted that God first threatened man with death in case he should disobey, and then, after he had disobeyed, he announced his mortality as the fulfilment of his threatening : “because thou hast eaten,” &c. “ dust thou art and unto dust shalt thou return.' God charges on man his mortality as the consequence of his own disobedience; hence, if man had not sinned he would not have died.
JI. The manner in which God executed the above sentence of death, proves that the death of the body was intended, and, as all must see, that it was in consequence of sin. The sentence of death was executed by expelling the offender from the garden of Eden, and thereby cutting off his access to the tree of life, which stood in the midst of the blooming circle. Gen. iii. 22, 23. “ And the Lord God said, behold the man has become as one of us to know good and evil; and now,
lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever, therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden." It is clear, then, that if man had not sinned, by partaking of the forbidden fruit, he would not have been expelled from the garden, and cut off from the tree of life ; and if he had not been cut off from the tree of life, he would have lived forever, or would not have died; therefore, if man had not sinned he would not have died.
III. The suffering, which is an inseparable accompaniment of death, proves it to be an effect of sin.
With our present views of the divine goodness, we cannot suppose that God would permit a race of sinless beings to suffer.
If it he consistent with the goodness of God to permit sinless beings to suffer, his goodness can give no security against the endless suffering of sinners.
We say then, sin is the cause of all suffering, directly or indirectly, but death is inseparably connected with suffering; therefore sin must be the cause of death, and if man had not sinned he would not have died.
IV. The resurrection of the body is a part of salvation, which is the gift of God through Jesus Christ; and hence, the death of the body which renders such a salvation necessary, must be a part of the evil of sin, and the curse of the law, from which Christ has redeemed us. 2 Tim. j. 10, “Who hath abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the Gospel.” 1 Cor. xv. 12, 13, 20, 21,' “ Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead. But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen. But now is Christ risen from the dead and become the first fruits of them that slept; for since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead." These quotations clearly show that the resurrection of the dead is the result of Christ's death and resurrection, overthrowing thereby the empire of death, and bearing away the spoils of the grave. Indeed, if death is not a part of the penalty of the law, and consequently an effect of sin, we think no good reason can be given why the death of Christ was necessary in order to our redemption. If the law did not inflict death, as its penalty for sin, it would not have been pecessary for Christ to die to