divine wisdom, and must prove to every candid mind the truth of the history which records it. The history speaks of Adam as being created a full-grown man, but it carefully distinguishes between his bodily and intellectual powers; the latter the facts show to have been infantine. He had no other means of acquiring ideas than through the channels common to mankind-sensation and reflection. He was not created with an intuitive knowledge of things, though this is precisely the state in which a forger would have pictured him. A mere inventor would have clothed his hero with such powers of intellect, that the record of a law so simple must serve as a key to the history, and prevent even the most illiterate from reading it as other than a work of imagination. Not so Moses. He was concerned only to write the truth; he represents Adam, as one might reasonably expect him to appear, deficient in that knowledge which can be acquired only by time, and reflection, and experience.

In this his infancy, what sort of commandinent do objectors say ought to have been given? One detailing some positive moral duties. As yet there were none in the world towards whom they could be discharged; they could not, then, form a proper test of Adam's obedience. In such re

lations as existed towards God, and such as might be supposed to require of him a gentle use of his dominion over the animals, the sinless purity of his nature* sufficiently disposed him to fulfil them; besides, one may fairly doubt whether he would have understood the complex relations which moral duties involve; we do ourselves become acquainted with them only after long training, and some, even then, with difficulty. Justice requires the commandment to be known and understood before disobedience can be visited with punishment; and as no one existed to whom he might discharge the duties of father, master, friend, or neighbour, so any commandment ordering them would expose the whole narrative to suspicion, and not subserve to the manifestation of the divine wisdom. On the other hand, as Adam's principal employment must have been connected with his bodily wants, his knowledge of the varieties of food and their agreeableness to his taste, the marks which distinguished the

*

It might be enough to say, that as we are now inquiring into the truth of the Mosaic record, we should receive his testimony as to the sinless purity of Adam's nature in the day of his creation, inasmuch as, under any other supposition, the narrative would be incongruous and absurd. But lest any should contentiously demand proof, I would observe, that the mere fact of perfect obedience being required of him to a commandment implies the sinless purity of his nature; for otherwise he could not keep it, nor could he, with justice, be punished for disobedience.

different fruits and determined the preference to one or more above the rest; on these his knowledge must have more rapidly advanced than on other subjects. This is no more than is agreeable to the nature of things. Men are best acquainted with what most occupies their attention, and, indeed, it seems a part of our natural constitution to know nothing well unless by severe and almost individual attention.

Now, let us apply this law to the commandment, "in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." Does it seem unworthy the divine wisdom to test Adam's obedience in a matter in which his most improved knowledge enabled him to decide, with a full understanding of the nature of the commandment? How natural is the reason for which Eve tasted the fruit-it was pleasant to the eyes. She had, by experience, ascertained, that the relish of the fruit was determined by the beauty of its colour; perhaps, to make the test more perfect, it was the most enticing fruit to the eye in the garden. She is herself represented as understanding perfectly the extent of the permission given to her; she shows, too, that she knew the penalty. Her conduct accords with the circumstances, and the reasons by which she was governed are such only

as would be mentioned by an historian solicitous to relate the truth, but which would never occur to the fabricator of a story.

Considering, then, the commandment simply in reference to the state of Adam's intellectual knowledge, it was the most suitable which, as far as we are capable of judging, could have been proposed. If it admitted of no complex relations of duty, it was, for that reason, the simpler, and prevented any possibility of mistaking it. His daily experience served to impress it more clearly on his mind; and as his mind had yet much to learn, and might not be sufficient for a test requiring any great exercise of its powers, so this test merely imposed a restraint on the eye that the appetite might not be tempted to transgress. It is in accordance with the entire narrative; it offers the most convincing internal evidence of its truth. Its suitableness to Adam's circumstances demonstrates its wisdom; the true characteristic of wisdom being, not in proposing subjects for our consideration, or laws for our obedience, so abstruse as to demand great skill and talent to put us in possession of their meaning, but in proposing them in such manner, that, while they are within reach of the lowest capacity, they do not derogate from the dignity

of him who proposes them. In all these this first commandment is perfect, and, taken in connexion with the other facts recorded of the fall, seems to me clearly demonstrative of the truth of the history.

But this is not its only perfection. It cannot be objected to as deficient in holiness. It does not denounce those matters which a law more improved and better suited to our circumstances accounts criminal; but it placed a limit to Adam's desires, and marked the overstepping that limit as sin. This it is which distinguishes between holiness and sin-nay, but for it, there could be no knowledge at all of either sin or holiness. Holiness is perfect obedience to the will of God, and disobedience of that will is sin. transgression of the law," and as, St. Paul says, where there is no law there is no sin, for then there can be no transgression of it, so, also, where there is no law there can be no holiness, for there is no rule whereby to define it. The history relates that Adam was created in the image of God's moral purity, and then proceeds to record the rule which he ordained to show that

"Sin is the

purity, and to manifest his abhorrence of any departure from it. There is an intimate and inartificial connexion between the different parts of