made known to him. The second is, a seeming inducement must be presented, by way of temptation, to break those terms or law, so that a field of action may be presented, wherein the voluntary choice of the free intelligent agent may prove to himself and others, that he is able to distinguish between good and evil by choosing the one or the other, which is the test of fealty God requires. Hence it will follow, that if Satan had not been permitted to tempt Eve, and through Eve to tempt Adam, that they would never have been, in the direct sense, probationers, unless some other way had been permitted to try them. Adam and Eve being perfectly holy, could have no disposition to violate God's law given them; accordingly, they never would have violated it, which, as it regards them, is equivalent to there being no law at all: because, we may not suppose a knowledge of this law could raise in their minds a desire to break it. Such a thought would make God the tempter, by giving them a law. St. James says, Let no man say when he is tempted, 1 am tempted of God; for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man-either directly or remotely to sin.

From which I conclude, that the circumstance of God's giving a law to our first parents, was not, in the remotest sense accessory to the breach of that law, of which they were finally guilty. Was it necessary, then, that there must be a devil before man could be tempted or tried, or commence his probationary state? I answer, by no means; for if the angels who kept not their first estate, were tempted or tried without a devil, Dd*

(for we cannot suppose the existence of any till those angels fell) then it might have been the same with Adam. Some other mode, as I have before remarked, would certainly have tried him; because I dare not suppose any latent tendency, couched in the qualification of the law, which was given him to seduce him to a breach of it. Neither dare I say there must be a devil called for, to help forward the trial of man, in order to qualify him a probationer; but there being a devil, he was permitted to be their trier or tempter. But if there had been no such fallen evil being, a mode of trial in some other manner must have ensued, or man could never have manifested a voluntary choice of either good or evil; and consequently a probationary state could never have called into action that glorious power, viz. rational free agency

From which it is evident, that the trial of no intel-. ligent being can commence until such time as is presented, after some sort or manner, a seeming inducement to break over the prohibition.

If, then, the above position is true, it will follow, that our first parents were not on trial till the moment they were tempted ; neither are infants on trial till such time as they arrive to know good from evil, and are tempted to do that which they know is wrong; and, for the same reasons, neither can the nations who shall be born during that thousand years, in which Satan shall be taken away, both in identity and influence, be considered as probationers, till the time arrives when he shall be loosed a little season to tempt them, when their trial shall properly commence, and not before.

We are bound to believe every infant which has been born into life, recieved that blessing through Jesus Christ. Had it not been for him, there could never have existed an infant child; because, when our first parents had sinned, they on that account, and in that fact, fell from the image and favour of God, and became thereby exposed to instant damnation, which the very nature of justice required should be executed without any mixture of mercy or delay. But the reason why they were not cut off in that moment, was, because the second person in the adorable Trinity, styled in the Scriptures the WORD, had, from the foundation of the world, determined that if man should sin in the hour of his trial, He would instantly espouse man's cause, as a Redeemer, and, in the fulness of time, would assume his very nature, such as Adam was before he fell, and come into the world to be the victim of relentless yet holy justice, and thereby rescue the ruined couple, and with them seminally the whole race. On his account, therefore, their natural lives were spared, execution was stayed from eternal death of body and soul; for the very moment the crime of disobedience was consummated, justice knew where to point its vengeful arrows. For this very reason, it is written in the book of God, that Christ is a Lamb, slain from the foundation of the world. Rev. 13, 8.

The salvation, therefore, of the natural lives of our first parents, by the prospective sacrifice of Jesus Christ, was also the true and radical cause of the natural life of every infant that is born into the world.

When Satan tempted the woman to sin, it is evident

he intended to lay his blasting hand of ruin to eternity upon the very principles which were to usher into being the whole human family, by destroying the only two in whom was deposited the sacred fire of procreative life.

But from that contemplated dungeon of oblivion and nonentity into which the progeny of man was plunged, in the loins of Adam, the blessed Saviour redeemed us, and opened wide the gate of life in his pierced side, through which the millions of our race have rushed into being. We conclude, therefore, the position of Christ's being the radical cause of the natural life of all infants a truth, which none but an infidel would wish to contradict. If, then, he, by the sacrifice of himself, has become the author of natural life to all infants; and being the pure fountain of life itself, cannot, therefore, produce an unholy work. He was also the author of the being of the two first, who are said to come pure from his hand. So all his works are pure and holy.

I have made the foregoing remarks to establish the doctrine, that infants are pure and holy through Jesus Christ, though descended of fallen parents-which circumstance does not invalidate the idea of the relative, positive, and passive holiness of a child; because direct unholiness is constituted by the direct and voluntary act of an informed free agent against light, which is not the case of an infant; for sin is the transgression of a known law, either expressed or written on the heart. It is, therefore, said by Him who cannot err, that of such is the kingdom of heaven. Mark 10, 13, 14, 16.

If children, then, at the present time are born into life, under such favourable circumstances, as to be beloved in a very tender sense by the Son of God, and are by him, and through him, pronounced fit subjects for the kingdom of heaven, even now when the world is full of sin and sinners-even now, when they are conceived in sin and brought forth in iniquity, though not absolutely their own, but Adam's, and their parents; how much more, then, shall they be holy in the Millennium, when it cannot be said they are fallen or conceived in sin, and brought forth in iniquity, judge ye.

But a question now arises, will those children who are born of holy parents in the Millennium, need to be converted and regenerated, as children now absolutely need when they come to know good from evil, or arrive at the line of accountability? for although infants are not sinners, yet they are fallen.

I shall answer it by referring to the case of Adam, and shall say, if he had not fallen by his own act of sin, and had continued holy as he was created, and had in pursuance of the holy injunction, multiplied his species, can we suppose his offspring would have been otherwise than holy, and consequently stood in no need of a change of heart? Then it will follow, that if all the saints who are living at the time of the first resurrection, do then experience a divine change, which shall be equivalent to the state in which Adam stood in his innocency, when he had access to the tree of life ; then their offspring shall be also holy, and shall need no change of heart to fit them for heavenly enjoyments,