would be less a man for being a glorified man; it would be a diminution to the dignity of man, and he would be the worse for going to heaven; because there, his liberty ceaseth, a liberty to good or evil. What an unimaginable thing is that, that it should be a depression, a diminution, to a man, to glorify him! that that should be a maim of his nature! But if the glory of heaven do not diminish a man, or be a maim to him, because it takes away the possibility of sinning in the heavenly state; then, the efficacy of grace, in the present state, is no diminution, nor blemish, nor maim to the nature of man now neither. Again,

6. We may further learn, hence, what cause we have to apprehend and dread the destructive designs of the devil. For what do we apprehend that he is less an enemy to God, or less an enemy to man, now, than he was at first? Do you think the devil is grown kinder, more good natured, less intent upon the destruction of souls, and less malicious against heaven? It is a most intolerable, most inexcusable thing, that we who pretend to believe the Revelation of God about these things, and do hereby know the devil to have been a "murderer from the beginning," and may collect, that he is still going about, that he may destroy and devour as a roaring lion; say, the Lord have mercy upon us, that notwithstanding we pretend to know and believe all this, we should live so secure as we do, without any thought of any such thing. And,

I

7. It may give us to understand the madness of self-confi dence, that we should be so little afraid of sin; that we should be so little afraid of temptation; that we should be so apt to trust our own strength: and when that perfect state wherein Adam was made in paradise, was not enough to secure him, that we should live such independent lives, so seldom look up, that we have not the sense of that petition more deeply wrought into our souls, "that we may not be led into temptation.' Divers other things there are that might be hinted, but I shall only add this, for the present,

8. We may further learn, that there is no need that there should be any new invented account of the first apostasy of man, so as therein to depart from the plainness and simplicity of the letter of that history, which God hath given us of it; there is no need of any such thing. The matter, as Scripture represents it, and as we have (though less perfectly) represented it from Scripture, as it lies, is rational and congruous enough; and such as we need not be ashamed to own and avow to the world. There are those that are so over-officious

in these matters, as to trouble the world with their fine notions and accounts thereof, altogether alien from the letter of the history, that so they may (as is pretended) make things look a little more plausibly than the letter of history doth represent them; when indeed, if the matter be searched into, the design seems to be, not to make them look plausible, but ridiculous: and their business is not to expound Scripture, but to expose it, and the whole of our religion. But I shall say no more to them now neither.

LECTURE XXIII.*

So far we have gone in our course of treating, in some order, of the several heads of religion, as to enter upon this doctrine of the apostasy, which we proposed to consider and speak to from this text, Sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and therein to treat of these three general heads,

I. Of the fall of the first man.

II. Of the fallen state of man. And,

III. Of the consecution of the latter of these upon the for

mer.

And for the First of these generals, the Fall of the First Man, we proposed, therein, to consider and speak to these four more special heads: 1. the sin by which he fell; 2. the way how he fell into, and by this sin; 3. the death that did ensue; and, 4. the dueness of that death upon this sin and we have spoken to the two first of these.

3. We come now to the third, the death that did ensue as to this first man. And here the inquiry may be, whether that the death contained in the commination or threatening, be principally meant, or the death that is in other terms expressed in the consequent sentence? The first of these, you read Gen. 2. 17. and the latter you read, Gen. 3. from the 17. to the 19.

Preached March 10, 1694.

ver. I say, whether the death expressed in the commination-"In the day that thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die:" or that which is in other words expressed (not by the word death) in the sentence, "dust thou art and unto dust thou shalt return," be the same, yea or no; it is plain, that there is a real difference betwixt the commination (formally considered) that contains the one, and the sentence that expresses the other.

By the former, the commination or threatening, is established (as far as the comminatory sanction could go) that law, or covenant of works, which was to concern all mankind. By the latter, to wit, the sentence, there was a particular application of this law, now transgressed, unto this particular case of trans gressing Adam; as that is the proper business of a sentence, to apply the law according to which it must be understood to pass to the particular case of offenders, when they come to be judged by that law.

But it is here more distinctly to be considered, whether that the sentence do not carry with it some moderation as to the evil or penalty contained in the threatening of commination: in reference whereto, these particulars are worthy your consideration.

(1.) That the terms, wherein the one and the other are to be delivered, are not the same; for the terms of the commination, by which the law or covenant of works, that was to concern all mankind is established, as by a solemn sanction, goes in these express terms: "In case thou eatest, thou shalt (as we read it) surely die" thou shalt die the death, or, dying, thou shalt die. But the sentence hath not the word "death" in it; but it speaks of sundry miseries that should attend this life, and that should end, at length, in the dissolution of the compound, and especially, of the earthly part: "Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return." Having worn out a sad life amidst many sorrows here on earth, thou shalt go to the dust at last, as thou art dust. And,

(2.) It is to be considered, that these different terms are not apt, fully, to express the same thing: for whereas, it is said in the commination, "In the day thou eatest thereof, thou shalt die the death," these are expressions very fitly accommodated to signify death in the utmost extent, in all the latitude of it, "thou shalt die the death :" all the fulness of death seems to be comprised therein without limitation. But in the sentence, when the great day comes to pass judgment upon the delinquents, (the law being now violated and broken,) you have not, in his application to either of the human offenders, any so terrible expressions as this, only they are doomed to manifest sor

rows and miseries: and it is told to Adam, (in whom the woman must be comprehended as being taken out of the man) that "dust they are, and unto dust they shall return;" therefore, there seems to be much less in the sentence than in the commination. And,

(3.) It is to be considered, that between these two, the gospel did intervene; that is, between the commination and the sentence: the commination was given with the law to man yet innocent: when he was now fallen and had transgressed, then cometh the sentence; but it so comes as that the gospel steps in between, being tacitly insinuated in reference to them, in what was directly said to the serpent; that which was a curse to him, was a blessing to them: "I will put enmity between seed and seed, between thy seed and the woman's seed; and that seed shall break thy head, though thou shalt bruise his heel." And this, the grace of God might, for ought we know, apply and bring home to the case of Adam, as it was applied to all the more special seed of the woman, that should come to be united with him who was most eminently the woman's seed. And therefore, it might very well be, that though all the fulness and horrors of death, taken in its utmost latitude and comprehension, were included in the commination, there might, in pronouncing the sentence upon Adam, be as great a mitigation, as the variation of the terms doth import.

But our inquiry here, must be concerning the death contained in the commination, where we have the term of" death," double death, or dying the death, most expressly made use of. And it is by that, that the dying of this death is to be measured; to wit, by the commination, as it did concern Adam, and it must concern Adam's posterity. And admit, that there was a real mitigation upon the intervening of the gospel, and the exercise of the grace of God, applying it in Adam's case, yet we are still to consider the death that was contained in the commination, as due to Adam; due, to wit, in a former instance, before there could be a mitigation in a latter, in a following instance: for supposing there were then so quick and speedy a remission in so great part, yet, the penalty remitted must be due, before it could be remitted. It must be a debt, before it could be a remitted debt. And so concerning the death that was due, which offending Adam and his posterity became subject and liable to; I say, concerning that, it is, we have to inquire, as this dueness is measured by the commination; though indeed, we are not yet, according to the series and order of discourse, to consider this death in the extensiveness of it to Adam's posterity; for that comes in, under the next general

head, the fallen state of man; whereas, we have only now to consider the fall of the first man, and what did concern the case of Adam himself. And so, our inquiry is, What death it was that was threatened to him, upon the supposition that he should transgress? And of this matter, I shall give you an account in several particulars.

[1] Most plain it is, that corporeal death was included in the meaning of the commination; for that he did actually incur. You read, in the short history that we have of him, that death, at length, finished his course. He lived so long, and he died. And it could not be, that he should incur that which was not due. And if it were due, it must be so upon the commination; as the dueness of any such punishment, upon any delinquent, is first measured by the law; the sentence is to proceed according to law; that is, so far as not to go beyond it: it is possible there may be mitigations, but the extent of the law cannot be exceeded. That is therefore plain, that corporeal death was included. And,

[2.] It is very evident too, that much more was included than corporeal death: for Adam did actually suffer more (as is manifest) than mere corporeal death; as the labours, and hardships, and sorrows of life, and whatsoever else besides, about which we shall further inquire anon. And,

[3.] That more beyond corporeal death could not mean annihilation, or an extinction of his being. For,

First. We do not find that either he, or any one else, was ever annihilated, or that any creature ever was. No such thing appears that either he, or any man, or any thing, was actually reduced to nothing. Nor again,

Secondly. Could death be a proper expression of annihilation : for annihilation is not adequately opposite to life. There is no adequate opposition between life and annihilation if there were, then life and non-annihilation, or continuing such a thing in being, must be equivalent terms, if the other be adequately opposite terms. But it is plain, they are not so; because it is manifest, there are many things in being, and which are somewhat, and yet do not live. Therefore, to suppose that annihilation should be the thing meant by death, here, as is threatened to Adam, and so to offending man in him, is a dream without a pretence or ground, neither to be found, or any shadows of it, in Scripture; nor at all agreeing to the reason of the thing.

To reduce a thing to nothing, is no apt kind of punishment. There is no other thing, indeed, but a reasonable creature, that is capable of punishment, properly so called. But the reduc