SECT. III. Of the different DISPENSATIONS of revealed religion. § 1. The defection of our first parents. § 2, 3. What would have been the confequence of Adam's continued obedience? § 4, 5. What the fate of his fallen pofterity without a Saviour? § 6. General preparatory remarks on all the divine difpenfations. § 7. The Adamic difpenfation of grace. § 8. The Noahic. § 9. The Abrahamic covenant, or promife. § 10. St. Paul's comment on it. § 11-19. Obfervations on this covenant, and the apostle's reasoning on it. § 20. The Mofaic covenant, or law. § 21. Explained by Jeremiah and Paul. § 22-28. Obfervations thereon. $29-33. The diftinguishing character of the gospel covenant compared with the foregoing. $ 1. WHE THEN Adam and Eve tranfgreffed the pofitive command, which was not to eat of a particular fruit in the garden of Eden, the death threatened, or the execution of the penal fanction, followed. But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day thou eateft thereof thou shalt furely die. A fpiritual death immediately seized the foul; or that which may be most emphatically called the life of a perfect creature, forfook it as the necessary and not merely the threatened effect of the tranfgreffion. And unto Adam he faid,-In the fweat of thy face fhalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of E 4 it it waft thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust thou fhalt return." Thou art no longer to expect my fovereign interpofition to prevent that mortality, "to which, by the common laws of the universe, "thy frame tends." By one man fin entered into the world, and death by fin; and fo death passed upon all.+ § 2. Obferving that among men there awaits every conditional engagement a permanent confequence on either fide, many have been led to ask, "What would have been the confequence of "Adam's continued obedience?" But fuch a question evidently overlooks the nature of the subject. For it might as well be asked, What would have been another plan of creation and providence, if the prefent had not been adopted? And this would further lead us to the fruitless enquiry, In how many different ways was it poffible for GOD to make a universe? Every thing in the plan actually followed proceeds on the fuppofition of Adam's apoftacy; therefore, to fuppofe his conftant obedience, is not merely to fuppofe an alteration in a single part of the divine scheme, but to fubftitute another fyftem. § 3. To give, however, a more direct reply to queftions of this nature, I remark: 1. That Adam's continuance in perfection muft have been owing to fuch continued acts of God, as Adam had no true ground of claim to in equity. For though he was not impelled to fin, he was not fufficient of himself, without GoD's immediate and gratuitous * Gen. iii. 17, 19. + Rom. v. 12. gratuitous affiftance, to preferve his happy ftate one moment; which pofition will, in the course of this Effay, be more profeffedly difcuffed and confirmed. Therefore, 2. If God ever meant to fhew to a moral fyftem that there was in him towards it perfect equity and fovereign mercy, the fuppofition of Adam and his pofterity continuing perfect, muft have been an impoffibility. So that, in fact, the question returns to this, Are the attributes of equity and mercy towards the human race to be manifefted, or are they not? If they are, a continuance in a state of perfection was not poffible. § 4. Nearly akin to the preceding queftion is the following: "What must have been the confe"quence, refpecting fallen Adam's pofterity in this "world, on fuppofition that no Saviour had been "provided? Muft we not admit the multiplica"tion of the fpecies, and the enjoyment of the "neceffaries of fubfiflence, for a time, before they "fhould be fixed in a ftate of punishment? In that "cafe, what they enjoyed could not be the effect of "mediatorial grace, but their due in equity, other"wife the demerit of the first offence must have "been annihilation; and thus the human fyf"tem must have been deftroyed as foon as it ex ifted, and utterly removed out of the universe." -But this question, as well as the other, feems to overlook the nature of the fubject; and takes for granted an impoffibility, that the fuppofed confequence may take place, without fuppofing another world. world. Whereas the truth is, that fince the prefent plan of things, in all its parts, proceeds on the fuppofition of a Saviour provided, to fuppofe this removed is to fuppofe another univerfe. And what kind of contrivance muft that be, which admits of moral evil to invade the system, but excludes all falvation? Such a world does not appear to be worthy of the goodness of GoD, or confiftent with his wifdom. With reverence I would obferve: $5. 1. To fuffer men to live in a state of fin and rebellion, from age to age, for the fake of propagating their species, and without any provision of redeeming grace, is not confiftent with divine goodnefs. How can it be confiftent with infinite goodnefs to give being to fo many millions of intelligent creatures without fecuring the happiness of one of them? Not one of all the ftupendous fyftem, on the fuppofition, is happy; and only justice in all its awful feverities is difplayed. Such a conduct, indeed, could not be called unjust, but could it be faid to be marked with goodness? If it be good to manifeft goodness, and eminently fo to manifeft mercy, fuch a fyftem as the objection fuppofes, which excludes goodness and mercy, could not take place. Nor, 2. Could it be confiftent with divine wisdom to place our reprefentative in circumstances that made his fall certain, without any provifion of recovering grace. Suppofe our progenitor to reprefent his innumerable offspring, to be placed in perfect equilibrium with refpect to the event of his probation, and and that his abuse of his liberty was perfectly forefeen from the beginning; I would then ask, How can we reconcile the certain fall of the whole system, and its inevitable everlasting ruin, with divine wifdom? Rather, would not this be a probable dictate, "Either let not the system exift at all, or let there "be a referve made of falvation out of its ruin." To let juftice alone reign, without mercy, is not good; and to fuffer all men to perifh through want of previous contrivance, on prevision of apoftacy, is not wife; and therefore fuch a state as the objection fuppofes was impoffible. If there were no fecond Adam, the Lord from heaven, it would not have been worthy of either the goodness or wisdom of God to appoint a first Adam, who should fall as the representative of his pofterity; nor confiftent with the difplay of his equity and mercy that he should fo interpofe as to make him continue in the ftate in which he was firft placed. As far, therefore, as the providence and government of God are concerned in the prefent ftate of things, we may fafely fay, "Whatever is, is RIGHT." §6. Seeing, then, that in the prefent plan alone does there appear any room left for an admixture of equity and mercy, we may fee how well adapted it is, above every other fuppofed plan, for the full exercife of moral government. But that we may the better comprehend this admixture, proportion and order, in the various, wonderful steps of the divine government through the different difpenfations of time, it may be proper to remark, 1. That |