ry along with it its own Confutation, he has done what amounts exactly to the fame with fuch a Declaration. He does not speak himself, but his Writings fpeak for him, and call aloud to Us, "though I cannot affure You that God "created the World and Man, that Man was happy in it while innocent, and became mife"rable by Sinning, yet be ye perfwaded to act "as if all these Things were fo." So great must be the Defect of Authority in an Apologue for inforcing Doctrines, where Credit is to be given at once to the Doctrines, and to the Facts from whence they are deduced.

THOUGH We are all agreed that certain Doctrines of moral Use were defigned to be inculcated by this Account, yet we do not agree with Regard to all the particular Doctrines that are contained in it. Those who follow the literal Senfe affert, from the History itself, that Man forfeited his Title to Happiness by a fingle Act of Sin, and that He loft the divine Favour by the very first Violation of God's Commands. But this Allegorift fays, that Man became wretched and miferable not till he was become a wilful and habitual Sinner. a If this was the Opinion defigned to be inculcated by it, allowing it an Allegory, fure Nothing could be worse contrived for the Purpose. The Command given to Man, to abftain from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, was as follows. Of every Tree of the Garden Thou mayeft freely eat ; a Page 137.

But

But of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, Thou shalt not eat of it: For in the Day that thou eateft thereof thou shalt surely die. a Here We see Man is threatned to be punished with Death on the very first Breach of the Command, and accordingly We find in the Third Chapter that he was no fooner drawn into Difobedience, than God came down to execute the Punishment he had denounced. Man is not queftioned by his Judge whether he had been guilty of a Series of Crimes, but whether he had broken this fingle Command. Haft Thou eaten, fays God, of the Tree, whereof I commanded Thee, that thou shouldft not eat? And upon his Conviction of this finb gle Crime, he is immediately condemned. Let him tell Us then by what Rules of Interpretation one fingle Act of Difobedience is to be taken, in an Allegory, for a Series; and how habitual Sin is figured in once Eating of a forbidden Fruit. This cannot be thought an unferviceable Remark, because if We admit that Man did not forfeit his Title to Happiness as foon as he became a Sinner, We must alfo allow, that He was of himself able, by future Obedience, to attone for past Crimes; and that he had, as this Author infinuates in the Perfon of fome wife and ancient Reformer, after all his Sins and Depravity, ftill in his own Power the Means of recovering the divine Favour, and of reftoring himfelf to his original Happiness, by deferting that beftial Rule of fenfual Pleasure, which had beguiled

a Gen. 2. 16, 17. b Chap. 3. II.

K

bim

him into a State of Sin and Mifery. a How repugnant fuch an Opinion is to the Foundation of most Christian Virtues, and the whole Scheme of our Redemption, I need not observe.

AGAIN. Thofe, who believe this History to be true, conclude from it, that there was a Tempter, diftinct from the Man and Woman, concerned in the Fall. But this Allegorift fays, that the fubtil Difcourfe of the Serpent, which beguiled Eve, could mean Nothing else but the tempting Suggestions of Luft and fenfual Appetite, of which the Serpent was an Emblem; and that their Expulfion out of Paradife pointed out the natural Effects of Sin and Guilt, in depriving Man of his Happiness, and plunging him into Mifery, Sorrow and Death. Which Account of the Matter, he fays, is no other than what St. James himself gives

the natural Method, by which Men are usually beguiled to debafe the Purity of their Nature: where he says, but every Man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own Luft, and enticed: then, when Luft hath conceived, it bringeth forth Sin: and Sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth Death. b James I. 14, 15. This Paffage is a general Description, of the ordinary Manner and Effects of Temptations and their Conquefts over Us; and it is not written with any particular Regard to the Sin of our First Parents. But if it had, nothing could have been more applicable to the Hiftorical Account of their Fall, and therefore it cannot give the leaft Advantage to a Page 132. b Page 133.

the

the Allegory. For St. James does not exclude an outward Tempter from having a Share in our Seduction, neither does Mofes exclude the Paffions. On the contrary, the Apostle expressly describes the Behaviour of different Men under outward Temptations, and the different Confequences of it. In the 12th Verfe He calls that Man bleed that endureth Temptation: For when he is tried, he fhall receive the Crown of Life, which the Lord hath promifed to them that love him. And then he goes on to expose the Impiety of those who, having failed under the Trial of Temptation, charge God, the Author of their Nature, with their Sin. Let no Man fay when he is tempted, I am tempted of God a &c. telling them in the 14th and 15th Verses as above, that their Sin and Misery is chargeable on their own Folly alone, and their cowardly and base Submiffion to the Suggestions of their own Luft. The Hiftorical View of the Fall is exactly agreeable to this. For it lies in this Order. Firft the outward Temptation is mentioned, this communicates the Fire to the Lufts of Eve within, She weakly yields to her inflamed Defires, fins, and incurs the Penalty of Death. The Allegory therefore, by taking away the outward Tempter, by no Means renders the Description of the first Sin more confiftent with St. James's general Account of Temptation. But it certainly lays the Account itself under a very confiderable Difficulty. In the fixth Verse of the third Chapter there is a

diftinct Picture of the Workings of Eve's irregu lar Paffions. And when the Woman faw that the Tree was good for Food, and that it was pleasant to the Eyes, and a Tree to be defired to make one wife; She took of the Fruit thereof &c. Here is plainly an Indulgence of her rebellious Appetite: The is pleased with the Beauty of the Fruit, her Mind drinks in the Infection, and rafhly believes it poffeffed of every Excellence that is falfely imputed to it; fhe haftens to fatiate her Senfes, and obey her Defires. If then, as Dr. M. would have it, the fubtil Difcourfe of the Serpent alfo means Nothing else but the tempting Suggestions of Luft and fenfual Appetite, then here is a double Account of these tempting Suggestions; they are described both in plain Language, and in an Emblem. This is certainly, to fay the best of it, a very great Deformity in his Apologue. The fame Difficulty is again repeated in his Explanation of the Expulfion out of Paradise. For that, He fays, points out the natural Effects of Sin and Guilt, in depriving Man of his Happiness, and plunging him into Mifery, Sorrow and Death. Now it is certain that these same natural Effects are spoken of alfo in plain Language. God threatneth Adam, that in the Day he finned he fhould furely die. After their Sin, we see Pain immediately taking Poffeffion of their Minds, and the Conscience of Guilt filling them with Shame, Distraction, and Fear of Punishment. And then we behold God himself dooming them to Punishment, and diftinctly foretelling their Mifery,