Chapter VII: Sixth Day (4)

As all animals are to live in media where the heat varies, it was necessary either to form them in such a way, that their functions should not be affected by varieties in temperature, or that they should be enabled to keep up the heat of their bodies at a regular point. Animals have been endowed with the latter power, and can accordingly maintain their heat, whether exposed to a high or low degree of temperature, with some exception as to the degree in the lower orders of animals, in some of which the temperature varies with that of the medium in which they are placed. This is the case with the Frog.--This animal, when placed in warm water, has the temperature of its body raised several degrees, and, on the other hand, may be reduced to the freezing point, without producing death. The heat of the human body, however, is little changed, whether it be exposed to intense cold, or much above the heat of boiling water. In the experiments made in heated rooms by Dr. Fordyce, and Sir Charles Blagden, these gentlemen remained several minutes in the heat of 260 degrees, nearly 50 degrees more than boiling water. At this heat a beefsteak and eggs were cooked near the stove, and yet the heated air produced no bad effect upon their bodies: it raised the temperature of their bodies only a few degrees.--The lungs are the chief agents by which heat is introduced into animal bodies. By their means, the blood is exposed to the air, and consumes its oxygenous part, which contains the principle of heat in a combined state. This, during circulation, is evolved by the minute blood vessels, so as to become sensible on every part of the body: and it is an important fact, that the quantity of oxygen consumed is greater in cold than warm weather; by this wise provision, in proportion as the heat is more quickly carried off by the coldness of the surrounding medium, the animal receives an increased internal supply. Many experiments have been instituted to ascertain the quantity of oxygen consumed in a given time by ordinary respiration, and, according to the best calculations, it appears that the consumption amounts to about 33½ ounces troy weight, in 24 hours; and it has been computed by philosophers, that the quantity of heat, which the oxygen consumes and will supply to the body, is nearly equal to that given out by a common candle.[199] I have thus attempted to give a short view of the different structures and functions of the body, and have briefly pointed out some of their varieties in the different classes of animals.

This corporeal system, which by its uniform and harmonious action contributes so essentially and largely to our terrestrial enjoyment, exhibits an astonishing display of the infinite wisdom, almighty power, and boundless goodness of its glorious Creator. Galen, an ancient Pagan physician, on contemplating the different parts of the human body, and the disposition of them, fell on his knees in humble adoration of the wisdom with which the whole is contrived; and was excited to challenge any one, after a hundred years’ study, to tell how the least fiber or particle could have been more commodiously placed, either for use or beauty. His seventeen books on the subject are like so many hymns of praise to the almighty and all-wise God, the Creator. Lactantius calls his writings on the body of man, a marvellous comment on his creation, and Galen himself managed the subject as a full demonstration of a Deity which every man carries about with him.

But what is still more deserving of our attention is the _soul_ of man: for if the external structure be so admirable a piece of mechanism, what shall we say of the immaterial and intellectual spirit resident in it? This noble, constituent, essential part of man, is yet a more astonishing production of infinite skill and power. Elihu says, “The Spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life. There is a spirit in man, and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding.” God, by his creating energy, called all things out of nothing, but there was neither order, light, nor motion, till the Divine Spirit moved on the lifeless chaos; so the same all-wise and powerful Architect formed of clay the wonderful fabric of man’s body, which remained without life and action, till the Holy Spirit infused a vital spirit into him, thereby enduing him with sense, motion, understanding, will, and active powers. This soul, therefore, became a living principle of intelligence, consciousness, and activity, in man.

The great Creator said, “Let us make man in _our image_, after _our likeness_.” Now, as the Divine Being is infinite, he is neither limited by parts, nor definable by passions: therefore he can have no _corporeal image_ after which he formed the body of man. The _image_ and _likeness_ in which he was created must necessarily be intellectual: his soul must have been formed after the nature and perfections of God. The Creator was now producing a spirit, formed after himself. He is the fountain whence it issued; hence the stream must resemble the spring which produced it.

The most perfect description of God, given to us in the Scripture, is that by our Saviour:--“God is a Spirit.” It has been observed by expositors, that this assertion is no where else to be found in the sacred Writings. That passage, “Now the Lord is that Spirit,” sounds something like it, but in meaning is different. The word _God_ here is not to be understood personally, either for the Father, or the Son, or the Holy Ghost, alone, but essentially for the Divine Nature, which each of these glorious Persons possesses. The Divine Nature is _spirit_. This shows, that, according to the popular and common use of the word, he is a Being entirely separated from matter or body, in all its properties and affections; that he is a pure mind, and possessed of the most excellent powers and perfections, which belong to spiritual beings.

It is difficult, for persons of a low understanding, who are unaccustomed to abstract reflections, and who have imbibed their knowledge by means of the external senses, employed on material objects, to raise their minds to the contemplation of the existence of immaterial, invisible beings. But that there really are such, and particularly that God is such, admits of the clearest proof, and will not be called in question by any who on rational grounds acknowledge his existence. It is usually granted, that it is much more easy to say what a spirit is not, than to define what it is. It is not in the power of the wisest and most knowing of men, to declare its nature. Nay, who can explain what the consistence of any piece of matter is, which we every day see and touch!

But as, notwithstanding our ignorance of the essence of material objects, we are not only sure of their existence, but also know many of their properties; so in like manner, though we are ignorant of the nature of spirits, yet from their manifest operations and effects, we are both convinced that such beings exist, and have some notion of several of their faculties and powers.

The powers and capacities that we observe in all the operations and works of God, are utterly inconsistent with the properties we discern in matter. In the works of creation we perceive evident proofs of thought, intention, contrivance, and design; which powers, we are sure, having no affinity with solidity, figure, and a capacity of being moved by the impulse of another, cannot arise from the composition or mixture of any of the known properties of matter. Not only the existence, but many of the perfections of God, may be discerned in various parts of the universe.

In short, we can say nothing higher of God, than that he is a Spirit. This notion leads us to conceive of him as a most perfect Being, and to reject concerning him whatever would argue any imperfection. It leads us to believe him to be perfectly immaterial, free from all the imperfections of matter, and from all the infirmities of corporeal creatures. But though _spirit_ signifies a being of higher rank than body or matter, yet the word is too low to express the essence of God, any otherwise than analogically, or metaphorically. He is infinitely more excellent than the highest created spirits, being eternal, and immutable. But some may inquire, if God be such a Spirit, how is it that in Scripture we read of his having bodily members, and natural affections, like men; such as head, eyes, ears, mouth, hands, and feet; and the affections, or passions, of anger, grief, love, joy, &c? these are ascribed to him, or rather assumed by him. I answer; this is done in condescension to our narrow capacities; for if God should speak to us of himself, as he is in himself, our understandings could not comprehend him. As the inconceivable glories of the world to come, are explained to us by the honors and pleasures of this life; so the nature of God, by a gracious condescension to our weakness, is signified to us by a likeness to our own. By human members being ascribed to God, are implied the moral excellencies of his spiritual nature, or rather his operations, which are more sensible to us than his invisible nature. His eyes are emblems of his knowledge, wisdom, omniscience, and providence. His face indicates his favor, and sometimes is expressive of his displeasure, because both these appear in the countenance of a man. His mouth is the symbol of the revelation of his will. His hand, or arm, is indicative of the less or greater exercises of his power.--Such a _Spirit_ is the Creator of man, whom he made in his _image_ or _likeness_.

Whoever reflects with attention on the human soul, may easily perceive it to be of a nature entirely different from the body. Being immaterial, it is not compounded of material principles, nor consists of innumerable parts which may be separated from each other; neither is it capable of solidity, figure, extension, and other properties of matter; but is a simple, uncompounded substance, though possessed of various and distinct powers; and therefore is neither visible nor divisible, nor has it any dimensions or shape.

The soul has a power of _thought_, with which mere matter can never be endued. If it pass through all the changes, and assume all the shapes of which it is capable, thought will never be the result. It may be differently modified, framed, and disposed, but cannot think. “I find in me something that _thinks_,” says a celebrated author, “which neither earth, water, air, fire, nor any mixture of them, can possibly do. Something which sees, hears, smells, tastes, and feels, all which are so many modes of thinking.” Thought is the privilege of immaterial beings.[200]

This inward principle is capable not only of thinking, but of love, desire, hope, joy; hatred, fear, sorrow, anger, and a whole train of inward emotions, which are commonly called _passions_ or _affections_. A something apprehended to be good in itself, or calculated to be beneficial to us, is the object of love. If that good be absent, it excites desire: if there be a probability of obtaining it, that produces hope; and the possession of the desired object yields delight and joy. Evil, whether real, or imaginary only, is the object of dislike and aversion. If there be any probability of this evil coming in contact with us, it causes fear; and if it unavoidably come upon us, it produces sorrow or anger. These passions or affections seem to be the only spring of action in the soul.

The soul has received from God a principle of motion, whereby it governs at pleasure every part of the body, and directs its operations: only with this exception, that all the vital motions, which are absolutely necessary for the continuance of animal life, are involuntarily going on, whether we advert to them or not; which is a marvellous instance of the wisdom and goodness of God. With the exception of these, I direct the motion of my whole body. By a single act of my will, I put my head, eyes, hands, or any part into motion: although the manner of doing this I do not comprehend. Every one feels that he has an inherent power to move this or that part of his body or not, and to give it a direction this way or the contrary, just as he pleases. I can, as I choose, open or shut my eyes, speak or be silent, rise up or sit down, stretch out my hand or draw it in, and use any of my limbs according to my pleasure, as well as my whole body. Matter may be moved, but it can never move itself.

The soul is free in its operations; it possesses this property, which is capable of being exerted with regard to all its faculties, as well as all the motions of the body. It is a power of self-determination, which, though not affecting all our thoughts and imaginations, yet extends to our words and actions in general, with but few exceptions. I am certain, that I am free to speak or not to speak, to act or not to act, to do this or to do the contrary, as I am of my own existence. I have not only what is termed a _liberty of contradiction_, but what is termed a _liberty of contrariety_, a power to act one way, or the contrary: to deny this would be to contradict the uniform experience of all human kind. The soul is not necessitated to judge or act by any bodily impulse. Let things appear as they may to the senses, the soul can suspend its judgment, till it has examined and considered them more thoroughly. Let the appetites and inclinations of the body strongly urge their own gratification, the soul can refuse their solicitations, and maturely weigh what the consequences would be. Let all the allurements of sensible objects, the assurance of sensual enjoyments, or the influence of custom and example, try to corrupt the integrity of the soul, and lead it astray from the paths of peace and purity; unless it consent, the attempts will prove ineffectual. We can reason, discourse, study, contrive, choose, and refuse with discretion; begin a work, and cease again at pleasure. We can reflect on what we have done, and either rejoice and delight in it, or be ashamed and grieved for it. We distinguish truth from error, moral good and evil; we fear punishment on having committed evil, and hope for reward on having done well. And, through the grace of God assisting us, we have a power to embrace and resolve to do good, as well as evil. We are free to choose whom we will serve, and, if we determine in favor of the better part, to continue therein.

_Conscience_ is not a faculty of the soul distinct from the understanding, memory, will, and affections, but that power by which we are conscious of our own state, reflect on our actions, and pronounce them either good or evil. This supposes, that we are acquainted with the law of God, either natural or written, which is the rule of our duty. The name is derived from the Latin word _conscientia_, into which the Greek word συνειδησις is exactly translated. Both these words for conscience, signify, that the mind is possessed of a consciousness of the actions and thoughts of the man, and passes a judgment on them, according to some rule. The Jews have no proper word in their language for conscience, and therefore use the term _heart_; which is also used in the New Testament. Conscience is the journal or diary of the actions of man. Its office is, 1. To call, urge, and excite us to duty. 2. To testify and bear witness either for or against us, according as we perform or neglect our duty. 3. Either to excuse or acquit, or accuse and condemn us, on the evidence it gives of the moral nature and quality of our actions: if they be conformable to the Divine rule, as to matter and manner, it acquits us; if they be contrary to it, conscience accuses, condemns, and passes sentence upon us. 4. And if its sentence be true and just, conformable to rule, it is ratified by God the Supreme Judge, whose deputy and vicegerent it is in the breast of every man.

Though the soul is not under the imperious influence of the body, yet for many ages it has been allowed by sensible men, that “there is nothing in the understanding which is not first perceived by some of the senses.” The imagination is the place where the images of things are first engendered, and from which they are transferred to the understanding. And therefore those who want any sense, cannot have the least knowledge or idea of the objects peculiar to that sense: as they who never had sight, have not the least conception of light or colors. But there is a great difference between our senses, considered as the avenues of knowledge. Some of them have a narrow sphere of action: others a more extensive one. By _feeling_ we discern only those objects which touch some part of our body; and consequently this sense extends only to a small number of objects. Our senses of _taste_ and _smell_ extend to fewer still. But, on the other hand, our nobler sense of _hearing_ has a wide sphere of action: especially in the case of loud sounds, as thunder, the roaring of the sea, or the discharge of cannon: the last of which sounds has been frequently heard at the distance of near a hundred miles. Yet the space to which the hearing itself extends is small, compared to that through which the _sight_ extends. This sense takes in at one view, not only the most unbounded prospects on earth, but also the moon, and the other planets, the sun, yea, the fixed stars, though at such an immeasurable distance.

But still none of our senses can reach beyond the bounds of this visible world. They supply us with such knowledge of the material world, as answers all the purposes of life. But as this was the design for which they were given, beyond this they cannot go. They furnish us with no information at all, concerning the _invisible world_. But the wise and gracious Governor of the worlds, both visible and invisible, has prepared a remedy for this defect. He has favored us with a _revelation_, concerning himself, his existence, perfections, and will; and another world, its nature, certainty, and duration: and this revelation is contained in the Scriptures. And he has appointed _faith_ to supply the defect of sense; to take us up where sense sets us down, and help us over the great gulf. Its office begins where that of sense ends. Sense is the evidence of things that are seen; of the visible, the material world, and the several parts of it. Faith, on the other hand, is the “evidence of things not seen,” of the invisible world: of all these invisible things, which are revealed in the Oracles of God.[201] Though eternal things come not within the reach of sense, yet, by faith, they are as present to the mind, in their reality, excellence, and continuance, as if they were seen with the eye of the body. The testimony of the God of truth, is the foundation and reason of this faith; for what he says must be true, because he cannot lie: this is a principle concerning which all agree who own his existence.

The soul has a vast intellectual capacity; for the knowledge of God, nature, providence, the original and present state of man, the visible world, sublime speculations, and useful discoveries, come within its comprehension. It can reason, infer, reflect, and carry on a chain of thoughts, with perspicuity and close connection, concerning things. Its powers take in objects of all dimensions; yet they are not situated as bodies in a material place, where the greater occupy more space than the less: for the thought of a mile, or ten thousand miles, does no more fill or stretch the soul, than that of a foot, an inch, or a mathematical point. And whereas all matter has its parts, and those extended, one without another, into length, breadth, and thickness, and so is measurable by inches, yards, or solid measures; there is nothing of measurable extension in any thing belonging to the soul, neither length, breadth, nor thickness; nor is it possible to form an idea of a foot of thought, a yard of reason, a pound of wisdom, or a quart of virtue.[202] The soul is capable of abstract notions, mathematical and metaphysical conceptions. Its powers are so great, that we can explore nature, span the surface of the earth, dive into its capacious seas, and there discover the numerous inhabitants of the watery world. We can travel to the sun, continue our journey through our own spherical system, from planet to planet, tell their dimensions, measure their distances, and accompany them through their various revolutions. We can pass the boundaries of our own, and enter into other systems; and from thence, into eternity itself: ascending from region to region, from world to world, from the creature till we reach the abode of the great Creator, who is the first cause of all things; and then, with ravished eyes, gaze on that glorious Luminary of the moral world, till we are amazed, delighted, and overpowered, with the splendor of his infinite perfections.

The soul is _immortal_ in its duration: it once began to be, but will never cease to exist. When the whole of time is elapsed, it will live in the vigorous exercise of its active powers, and its existence run parallel with eternity. The death of the soul cannot be effected by the operation of second causes; and God, who is the first cause, will never annihilate it. The Sadducees denied the immateriality and immortality of the soul, saying, that, except God, there was no spirit: they were much like the Epicureans among the Gentile philosophers. In refutation of this Sadducean notion, our Saviour referred them to the five Books of Moses, which they acknowledged as of Divine authority, where God says, “I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.” Abraham had been dead upwards of 300 years when these words were spoken to Moses. Now, says our Saviour, “God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.” Though the bodies of these renowned patriarchs had been long dead, and ceased to exist among mortals, their souls were still living, not only in a future state, but with God. He also warned his disciples of the opposition they would meet with, in the faithful discharge of their religious and ministerial duties, from the prejudice, rage, and fury of men; but urged them to take courage, and not suffer themselves to be intimidated, so as to neglect in any degree the execution of the important commission he had given them, saying, “Fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul.” Hence the soul is a principle distinct from the body, actually survives it, and can subsist without it, not only retaining its vital existence, but its consciousness, reflection, and activity. The following lines of Addison are strongly and beautifully descriptive of the immortality of the soul:

“The soul, secure in her existence, smiles
At dissolution, and defies its power.
The stars shall fade away, the sun himself
Grow dim with age, and nature sink in years;
But thou shalt flourish in immortal youth--
Unhurt, amidst the war of elements,
The wreck of matter, and the crash of worlds.”

In a word, since the soul is not material, it can have no parts; if it have no parts, then it cannot be separated; if it cannot be separated, then it cannot be dissolved; if it cannot be dissolved, then it is incorruptible; and if it be incorruptible, then it is immortal.

Thus it is evident, from all the perceptions of the soul, that it is not compounded like the body. Those powers and affections, such as thought and reason, judgment and liberty, love and hatred, joy and sorrow, can never be the properties or effects of matter, in any possible variation or modification of its parts. Nor can matter ever produce those noble and just sentiments, those sublime and generous affections, to which the soul sometimes rises in its contemplations of God, the phenomena of the universe, and the operation of Providence which sustains and governs all things. All this can never be produced by matter, which is altogether inactive of itself; and when motion is impressed on it, the only change produced is in the situation and contexture of its parts. Surely all attempts to account for these things, by any laws of nature known in the corporeal world, are absolutely ridiculous.

How strange is it then, that such a spiritual being should be united so closely to flesh and blood, imprisoned in a tenement of clay, and use the body as the instrument of active operations.--Several philosophers, among whom is Socrates, have called the body της ψυχης οικητηριον, _the habitation of the soul_; yea, φυλακη και ταφος, her moveable _prison_, and living _sepulchre_. These two essential parts of man, which God, at his creation, united so closely together, that both make but one person, is a great mystery; considering the different natures that adhere, soul and body, matter and spirit. All this is unintelligible to the human intellect, however improved and capacious. The disputers of this world will find themselves completely perplexed, in attempting to explain by what ties a spirit is united to a piece of clay; and what holds it confined to its habitation. The adhesion of the material particles in the human body, the flame of animal life kindled and burning clear and strong within us, and the union of spirit and matter, so that the one is the tenement of the other, and the instrument of its operations, are, as to their manner, mysterious, and attended with difficulties that would perplex and confound the most penetrating and sagacious mind.

Man then was created in the _natural_ image of God, which consisted chiefly in the spiritual nature, amazing powers, and immortality of his soul; like God, it is a _spirit_, immaterial, invisible, active, intelligent, free, and immortal: and partly, in a lower sense, in the privilege of his body, which, in his state of innocence, was, by the promise of his Creator, entitled to a gratuitous immortality. Some make reason or understanding to be the image in which God created man: but, though this may be included, yet, it is not the principal thing intended by the Divine _image_: for if rationality were the image, it could never be lost. Sin, which defaces this beautiful image, does not deprive man of intellect: his nature will for ever continue rational; he can never, I presume, be deprived of his reason so as not to possess it any more. Thought and consciousness are inseparable from the nature of man, and therefore this _image_ of God in which Adam was created, must be something distinct from reason. Indeed reasonable creatures only can be the subjects of it, but reason is not the thing itself. To suppose that mere reason is God’s image in man, is an hypothesis unworthy of a reasonable nature; and with how much confidence soever some assert, the assertion is reproachful to our Maker.

The chief thing intended by the Divine _image_, is moral rectitude; man was created in the _moral image_ of God; but that image in man was only a _likeness_, it did not equal, but resembled its high original--a disparity which necessarily exists between a creature and its Creator. According to any rational opinion we can form of God, we must believe that he is a spiritual Being; which includes the simplicity of his nature, his indivisibility, and his immortality; possessed not only of every natural perfection, but of all moral excellencies. He is not only an intelligent, omnipresent, omniscient, almighty Being, but wise, holy, righteous, and good. Without moral perfections, his character would not be very interesting to us. If he had no radical and constitutional principle in his nature that could move him to regard the temper of our minds, and the complexion of our actions, or cause him to be either pleased or displeased with our behavior, however conducted, we should have no reason to act either from motives of love or fear of him. His natural attributes alone, are very far from finishing his character; in conjunction with these, his moral excellencies complete his glory, exhibit him as the most perfect Agent, and render him in the most exalted sense our Governor. His holiness, justice, goodness, and truth, are called moral attributes, or communicable perfections; because we can trace some resemblance in angels and men; though there is an infinite disproportion between these perfections as they exist in God, and are faintly displayed in the creatures: in him they are infinite, in the creatures finite and limited.

These moral perfections constitute God a proper object of religious adoration, and without which no worship would be due or could be rendered to him. The Divine Nature is the foundation of that worship which we, as rational beings, are under obligations to perform; and the revelation of the will of God, with which he has graciously favored us in the Scripture, is the constant rule of his worship. On believing his existence, and cultivating the knowledge of his attributes, especially those which are so astonishingly displayed and harmonized in the redemption of mankind by Jesus Christ, it very naturally follows, to every reflecting mind, that we owe him ourselves, and are bound by the strongest ties to present to him the most spiritual worship of which our intelligent nature is capable.

The moral image of God, after which man was created, was his greatest excellence. His _understanding_ possessed a large capacity for improvement, equal to an extensive and accurate acquaintance with things both natural and divine, the acquisition of which would facilitate his own happiness, by rendering him more competent to answer the benevolent design which his Creator projected in calling him into existence. This capacity was amply supplied by his Creator; for all divine knowledge is given by revelation; which he must either communicate to man, or he must remain ignorant of him. The capacity is one thing, and its improvement is another; which, as it is not naturally inherent in man, so it must be acquired. The knowledge of the nature, perfections, and will of God, can, in the first instance, only be made known by himself; for there is not a correct notion of him in the whole intellectual and moral world, but what has been received from either Divine revelation, or his own immediate influence. Adam, then, as an intelligent creature, was endued with the knowledge of God, so far as was necessary to enable him to fear, love, and serve him. Without a perception of his existence and perfections, and the knowledge of his will, he could not perform any acts of adoration, reverence, reliance, regard, and delight, toward him. If therefore man, in his primitive state, was obliged to worship his Creator (of which certainly no one can doubt,) it must be granted that he possessed knowledge equal to the nature and extent of his obligations. In his state of innocence, he did not perform a blind devotion, or worship he knew not what. Such ignorance is the consequence of sin; therefore he could not be the unhappy subject of it before he transgressed.

Some persons have thought that Adam, in his primeval state, understood the doctrine of a Trinity of Persons or Subsistencies in the Godhead. Though the knowledge of this important doctrine cannot be attained by reasoning on the operations of Divine wisdom, power, and goodness, visibly and conspicuously displayed in the universe; yet, as Adam received by immediate revelation some truths, why may we not suppose that this mystery was not conveyed to him in the same way, that his acts of devotion might comport with the honors due to each of the Sacred Three? The Divine Nature is without multiplicity, it is one; but the Three Subsistencies in that Essence are essential to the Godhead: this arrangement is radical, constitutional, and eternal. Therefore why should not God be worshipped according to his own natural distinction of Persons in his undivided Essence, by man in his primitive state? A Trinity in Unity is the most correct view of God; and, consequently, the worship that accords with it, being the most accurate, must be acceptable to him. The Christian religion has not given existence to this doctrine of the Trinity; for independently of the mediatorial scheme of redemption and salvation by Christ, God was from eternity the same Triune Being, and cannot change. It is not improbable that man, while he retained his pristine state, worshipped the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, in all his acts of religious worship. Lord Bacon, in his Confession of Faith, says,--“I believe that nothing is without beginning but God; no nature, no matter, no spirit, but one only, and the same God. That God, as he is eternally almighty, only wise, only good, in his nature; so he is eternally Father, Son, and Spirit, in Persons.”

We cannot rationally suppose that Adam was a stranger to his _duty_, either in its nature, manner, or extent. If he had not known what duties his Creator required him to perform, it would have been impossible for him to act agreeably to his will. Obedience to any authority necessarily supposes a knowledge of what it enjoins: and, consequently, Adam must have known what he ought to practise, in what manner, and with what views; for, otherwise, he could not be obedient to the will of God in what he did. Hence we must conclude, that he was acquainted with the whole compass of his duty. As his understanding was not blinded by contracted prejudices, so it was free from any natural defect. His mind was furnished with correct views of God, his own dependence upon him, relations and obligations to him, and the way to please and enjoy him.

Adam, in his primitive state, knew wherein his _happiness_ consisted. If he had been ignorant of that happiness to which he was entitled so long as he preserved his integrity, how could he have enjoyed it while in his possession; for a delight in any present good arises from a perception of its nature and value. Neither was he ignorant of the misery, into which an action committed against the will of his Creator would bring him. He certainly knew that sinning against God would inevitably be attended with fatal effects to himself. His unclouded reason could not but discern, that rebellion against the dignity and sovereignty of his Maker would unavoidably expose him to his righteous displeasure.

As the judgment of Adam could not but entirely approve of the supreme Good, in all the perfections of its nature, and revelation of the Divine Mind; so his _will_, with great freedom following its dictates, readily embraced what was right, and exactly harmonized with every requisition. He had a holy disposition, such as comported with the infinite perfection of holiness, so resplendent in the Divine Nature. Some have asserted, that God formed man without any direction in his will either to good or evil. But this imagination is irrational, for it supposes that he was neither holy nor unholy. It is evident from Scripture, that he was created good in an ethical or moral sense, for he was made in the _image_ of God, which chiefly consisted in a conformity to his moral perfections. He resembled these, particularly that of holiness; so that, though in an infinitely lower degree, he was holy as God is holy; without the least taint of sin in his nature, or any inclination to evil, all his powers and faculties being disposed to comply with his utmost requisition.

Adam’s _affections_ were subordinate and obedient to the higher faculties of his soul, and moved without the least tumult or disorder. Being pure and regular, there was no depravity or discord among them. No temptation arose from vanity seated in any of the inferior powers: neither was there a rebellious disposition among the passions directed against his reason. No unlawful love, delight, or aversion had any place in his innocent nature, and therefore the dictates of reason did not meet with any control from corruption in the affections; and, consequently, obedience to his Creator was not rendered difficult by unruliness in the passions. Being thus made after the _likeness_ of God, he had the moral law written on his heart: that hereby he might have a perfect rule of obedience, and be easily apprised of his duty to him. And as he was indispensably obliged to yield obedience to this law, and the consequence of violating it would be endless ruin, God, as a just and gracious Sovereign, gave him ability to keep it. Herein he treated him as a rational creature, and a subject of moral government.

The inferior _appetites_ of Adam were in a state of perfect subjection, and never indulged to the least excess. The animal structure requiring food for its support, there was a great variety provided. But while surrounded with plenty, he was strictly temperate; his appetite was regular, consistent with purity, and in harmony with his devotions. The _senses_ also corresponded to the faculties of the soul, and were inlets to wisdom and enjoyment. Thus, as one observes, all his faculties both of body and mind were subservient to the glory of God, and contributed to his own felicity: a state which we are to regain by Christ.

“Enslav’d to sense, to pleasure prone,
Fond of created good;
Father, our helplessness we own,
And trembling taste our food.

Trembling we taste; for, ah! no more
To thee the creatures lead;
Chang’d, they exert a baneful power,
And poison, while they feed.

Curs’d for the sake of wretched man,
They now engross him whole;
With pleasing force on earth detain!
And sensualize his soul.

Groveling on earth we still must lie,
Till Christ the curse repeal:
Till Christ descending from on high
Infected nature heal.

Come then, our heavenly Adam, come,
Thy healing influence give;
Hallow our food, reverse our doom,
And bid us eat, and live.

Turn the full stream of nature’s tide:
Let all our actions tend
To thee their source; thy love the guide,
Thy glory be the end.

Earth then a scale to heaven shall be,
Sense shall point out the road;
The creatures all shall lead to thee,
And all we taste be God.”

Man was _happy_ in his original state; he not only was free from pain and misery, but enjoyed delight. His pleasure was of a pure nature, not only such as God approved, but derived from a Divine source. If his mind had not been possessed of correct knowledge, his will disposed to obedience, his affections regular and holy, and his appetites and senses subject to a rational control, what pleasure could he have taken in the contemplation of infinite perfections, and in a compliance to the requisitions of the moral law? Happiness necessarily supposes delight, and delight as necessarily supposes a concordance between the disposition of the soul, and the objects from which its pleasure springs. Man was happy while innocent; he therefore enjoyed pleasure, which was pure, arising from positive holiness, and the presence and blessing of God. Surely it is reasonable to conclude, that Adam performed devotional acts with holy reverence and supreme delight. He could not but give the tribute of praise to his beneficent Creator, for his superabundant goodness toward him; being favored with every thing, not only necessary to his sustenance, in the excellent circumstances in which he was placed, but with whatever he could desire for the entertainment and delight of his innocent and heavenly mind. Above all, his grateful soul most certainly adored his Creator, for the glorious and beneficial displays of his wisdom, power, and goodness, and rejoiced in the interest he had in his approbation, protection, and kindness. While he retained his integrity, and enjoyed free access to his Maker, intimate communion with him, and was free from his displeasure, what serenity, satisfaction, and pleasure must fill his soul! He possessed that first and greatest of blessings, mentioned by Horace, _mens sana in corpore sano_, a sound mind in a healthy body.

Notwithstanding the excellent state in which Adam was created, and advantageous circumstances in which he was placed, yet he was liable to fall. By reason of the spiritual and intelligent principle in him, he became a moral agent, and a subject of moral government. He knew his duty, and had the power of determining his own choice and actions. He could choose good, and refuse evil, and be influenced by the hope of reward and the fear of punishment. He had no disposition to sin in his nature: for God could not create him in a sinful state, since that would render him the author of sin. He had full power to stand: but God could not interfere with the freedom of his will; and herein he acted toward him in a way agreeable to his condition of probation. The mutability of his will was essential to him as a rational creature, placed in a state of responsibility for his actions to the great Governor of the world. Dr. Paley says, “Free agency in its very essence contains liability to abuse. Yet, if you deprive man of his free agency, you subvert his nature.” God answers for himself in Milton:--

----“Man had of me
All he could have: I made him just and right,
Sufficient to have stood, though free to fall.”

The sentiments of Faber are very appropriate. “When the Almighty ceased from the work of creation, he pronounced all that he had made to be very good. The new world was as yet free from the inroads of sin, and from the curse of sterility.

---- ‘Nature then
Wanton’d as in her prime, and play’d at will
Her virgin fancies.’

“The whole creation smiled upon man, and the golden age of the poets was realized. Blessed with perfect health, both mental and corporeal, our heaven-born progenitor was equally unconscious of the stings of guilt and the pangs of disease. His understanding was unclouded with the mists of vice, ignorance, and error; his will, though absolutely free, was yet entirely devoted to the service of God; and his affections warm, vigorous, and undivided, were ardently bent upon the great Fountain of existence. Though vested in an earthly body, his soul was as the soul of an angel, pure, just, and upright. He was uncontaminated with the smallest sin, and free from even the slightest taint of pollution. His passions perfectly under the guidance of his reason, yielded a ready and cheerful obedience to the dictates of his conscience; an obedience, not constrained and irksome, but full, unreserved, and attended with sensations of unmixed delight. Such was man when he came forth from the hand of his Creator, the image of God stamped upon his soul and influencing all his actions.”[203]

We may add, the authority and _dominion_ with which God invested Adam. This extended “over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over the earth, and over every living thing that creepeth upon the earth.” God constituted him the ruler, under him, of all the inferior creatures. He probably inducted him into this office when he caused the creatures to pass in review before him. “And the Lord God brought every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air, unto Adam to see what he would call them: and Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.” Man alone, says Smellie, enjoys the power of communicating and expressing his ideas by articulate and artificial language. This inestimable prerogative is a great source of improvement to the human intellect. Without artificial language, though the Author of nature has bestowed on every animal a mode of expressing its wants and desires, its pleasures and pains, what a humiliating figure would the human species exhibit?

Dr. Beattie, in defining the human voice, says, it is air sent out from the lungs, and so agitated, or modified, in its passage through the windpipe and larynx, as to become distinctly audible. The windpipe conveys air into the lungs for the purpose of respiration and speech; the top or upper part of which is called the larynx, consisting of four or five cartilages, that may be expanded or brought together, by the agency of certain muscles which operate all at the same time. In the middle of the larynx there is a small aperture, called the _glottis_, through which the breath and voice are conveyed, but which, when we swallow any thing, is covered by a lid called the _epiglottis_. Authors have determined that the voice is produced by two semi-circular membranes in the middle of the larynx, which form by their separation the aperture that is termed the glottis. The space between them is not wider than one-tenth of an inch; through which the breath transmitted from the lungs must pass with considerable velocity. In its passage it is supposed to give a brisk vibratory motion to the membranous lips of the glottis, and so to form the sound which we call _voice_: in order to the production of which, it, however, seems necessary, that, by an energy of the will, a certain degree of tenseness should be communicated to the larynx, or at least to the two membranes in the middle of it. The voice, thus formed, is strengthened and mellowed by a reverberation from the palate, and other hollow places in the inside of the mouth and nostrils; and as these are better or worse shaped for this reverberation, it is said to be more or less agreeable. The glottis is found to be narrower in women and young persons than in men; hence the voices of the latter are deeper, or more grave, than those of the former. We can at pleasure dilate or contract this aperture, so as to form the tones of the voice to every variety of the musical scale. If we consider the many variations of sound, which the same human voice is capable of uttering, together with the small diameter of the glottis; and reflect that the same diameter must always produce the same tone, and, consequently, that to every change of tone a correspondent change of diameter is necessary: we must be astonished at the mechanism of these parts and the fineness of the fibers, producing effects so minute, various, and uniform. For it admits of proof, that the glottis is capable of at least sixty distinct degrees of contraction and enlargement, by each of which a different note is produced.[204]

Concerning the origin of language, numerous conjectures have been formed. As an instance how far the human mind, unassisted by a Divine revelation, can go, Diodorus Siculus and Vitruvius have asserted, “that men at first lived like beasts in woods and caves, forming only strange and uncouth noises, till their fears caused them to associate together; and that on growing acquainted with each other, they came to correspond about things, first by signs, then to make names for them, and in time, to frame and perfect a language; and that the languages of the world are different, because different companies of men happening thus to come together in different places, would, of course, form different sounds or names of things; hence would arise the variety observable even in ancient languages.” Thus we perceive the necessity of the Scriptures relative even to this subject.

“The Mosaic History,” observes Dr. A. Clarke, “represents man as being immediately capable of conversing with his Maker: of giving names to the various tribes and classes of animals; and of reasoning consecutively, and in perfectly appropriate terms, concerning his own situation, and the relation he stood in to the creatures. As in man’s first attempt at speech, according to this account, there appear no crudeness of conception, no barrenness of ideas, and no inexpressive or unappropriate terms, it is most rational to conclude, that God who made and endued him with corporeal and mental powers, perfectly suited to his state and condition in life, endued him also, not only with the faculty of speech, but with speech or language itself; which latter was as necessary to his comfort, and, indeed, to the perfection and end of his being, as any other power or faculty which his Creator thought proper to bestow upon him.”

Some assert that Adam _gave names_, from an intimate knowledge of the nature and properties of each creature: that this shows the perfection of his knowledge, for the names affixed to the different animals in Scripture always express some prominent feature and essential characteristic of the creatures to which they are applied; and that had he not possessed an intuitive knowledge of the grand and distinguishing properties of those animals, he never could have given them such names. Dr. Leland states, that man was immediately endued with the gift of language, which necessarily supposes that he was furnished with a stock of ideas, a specimen of which he gave in giving names to the inferior animals, which were brought to him for that purpose. Dr. Johnson affirms, that the origin of language must have come by inspiration. But Bishop Warburton conjectures, that God, in this transaction with Adam, taught him language. Here, says he, by a common figure of speech, the historian, instead of directly relating the fact, that God taught man language, represents it, by showing God in the _act_ of doing it, in a particular _mode_ of information; and that the most apposite we can conceive in elementary instruction; namely, the giving of names to substances; things with which Adam was to be conversant, and which therefore had need of being distinguished each by its proper name. And what a familiar image do these words give one of a learner of his rudiments? _And God brought every beast to Adam to_ SEE _what he would call them_. But though it appears that God taught man language, yet we cannot reasonably suppose it any other than what served his present occasions, he being now of himself able to improve and enlarge it, as his future necessities should require. The celebrated Cowper, touching this subject says:--

“One man alone, the father of us all,
Drew not his life from woman; never gaz’d,
With mute unconsciousness of what he saw,
On all around him: learn’d not by degrees,
Nor aw’d articulation to his ear;
But, moulded by his Maker into man
At once, upstood intelligent, survey’d
All creatures, with precision understood
Their purport, uses, properties, assign’d
To each his name significant, and, fill’d
With love, and wisdom, render’d back to Heaven
In praise harmonious the first air he drew.
He was excus’d the penalties of dull
Minority. No tutor charg’d his hand
With the thought-tracing quill, or task’d his mind
With problems.”

However, by the creatures passing before Adam, probably in pairs, and he giving them names as they passed according to the nature and properties of each, one thing evidently appears, namely, he was convinced that none of these animals could be a suitable companion for him; for, among all which he had named, “there was not a help-meet for him:” one suitable and proper as an intimate companion and friend.