The curse falls upon those who are "carnally minded," or "who walk after the flesh;" but there is no curse upon those who mortify the flesh, nor are they in any respect chargeable with sin because they have to contend with the powers of darkness,' with "the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience." I Cor. iii. 18, "Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you: if any man defile the temple of God, him will God destroy; for the temple of God is holy; which temple ye are." To be holy, is to be without sin; and yet is not the above language addressed to men like Paul, in whose flesh there dwelt no good thing? So that n sin is imputed to them because they had to war against the law of their members, if, by the power of God's Spirit working in them, they obtained the victory over their natural lusts. The same Apostle says, 2 Cor. x. 3, "Though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh; for the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty, through God, to the pulling down of strong holds, casting down imaginations," &c. and Gal. ii, 19," For I, through the law, am dead to the law, that I might live unto God. I am crucified with Christ; nevertheless I live yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me." While he was thus crucified with Christ, was he reputed a sinner because he still had to wage war with his carnal affections? That he was a sinner we do not deny, because doubtless he daily transgressed God's spiritual law in thought, word, and deed; but not because that, from his natural constitution derived from Adam, bis "inward man," delighting in the law of God, was forced to war against sin-James i. 12, it is said, "Blessed is the man that endureth temptation; for when he is tried he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him. Let no man say, when he is tempted, I am tempted of God; for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man ; but every man is tempted when he is drawn away of his own lust and enticed." Here, in express terms, a man is not only not accounted a sinner, but is pronounced blessed, when, being "drawn away of his own lusts and enticed," he yet endures or resists the temptation*.-1 Peter i. 6, "Wherein ye greatly rejoice, though now for a season, if need be, ye are in heaviness through manifold temptations, that the trial of your faith, being

*It may be supposed by some, that the expression "drawn away of his lusts, &c." implies that the person spoken of had yielded to the temptation. I cannot see how the language, taken in connection with the preceding context, will bear this interpretation. But the argument is equally good in which ever way we understand the expression. All that is necessary for the conclusion which we have deduced is, that the man is blessed who resists temptation, and that temptation proceeds from our lusts; and this is the undeniable statement of this passage.

much more precious than of gold, which perisheth, though it be tried with fire, might be found unto praise, and honour, and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ." Here, and in other passages, temptation, when resisted, is not only not reckoned sin, but is the means of obtaining great blessedness.- 1 John iii. 9, "Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him, and he cannot sin, because he is born of God;" and ver. 18, "he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not*." Now this language is spoken of those who have still the law in their members; and who therefore have no sin because that law is there, if they walk not according to it.

In conclusion, I know not of one passage of Scripture which charges guilt upon God's regenerate people for having to contend with their sinful desires, unless they be overcome by them. So that I hold it undeniable, that those who maintain that Christ had to war with the devil, the world, and the flesh, do not on that account impute sin to him; but, on the other hand, they magnify his holiness by shewing, that he continued perfectly pure and sinless while struggling against the mighty influence of the powers of darkness.

Let us now resume our inquiry into the human nature of Christ. The first promise given of a Saviour, was that which is recorded Genesis iii. 15, where it said, that the Seed of the woman should bruise the head of the serpent. When this promise was given, it is undeniable that the woman was fallen and mortal. The same promise was renewed to Abraham, a fallen mortal man, that in his Seed all the families of the earth should be blessed. The genealogy is then traced down through a race of fallen men to David, to whom the promise was again renewed, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, Christ should come. The genealogy is still continued through a line of fallen men to Joseph, the reputed father of our Lord, under whose guardianship he was brought up; and to Mary, a fallen mortal woman, of whom, he was "made," according as it is said Gal. iv. 4. Did he sin, therefore, because he was the true seed of sinful mortal men? No surely. He was the child of the Holy Ghost from his conception, and had neither original nor actual sin; yet he was as truly the seed of fallen men as he was the Son of God. What else can such an expression mean, that "he was made of the seed of David according to the flesh," than that he truly inherited his nature? When Eve was taken from the

That is, he does not live in the practice of sin, but resists it; for the same Apostle says, 1 John i. 8, "If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us."

side of Adam in paradise, did she not truly partake of his unfallen nature? Where, then, is the ground for supposing that when the Son of God was "made of a woman," he did not as truly inherit her nature? That a great change, yea, a complete revolution, took place in the nature of man by the Fall, who can deny? Now, where is there one solitary passage in Scripture to shew that our Lord took up the nature which Adam had before that change took place? The establishment of such an opinion would, I am persuaded, prove the complete subversion of the Gospel plan of salvation, and open the flood-gates of heresy to deluge the church, as it did in former times. It was, I doubt not, to prove the flesh of Christ free from our natural propensities that the Roman-Catholic Church speaks of His mother as an unfallen woman, and as of one who inherited in her own nature peculiar holiness and blessedness.

That we may understand better the necessary consequences which arise from considering Christ as having come in the unfallen nature of Adam, let us now consider what that nature was We know that until Adam sinned he was not subject to death; for " by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin" (Rom. v. 12). It is manifest that he could no more die by a violent than by a natural death, for "death is the wages of sin.' His body was as truly indestructible as the risen body of our Lord; so that, even if we could suppose it possible that he had been nailed to a cross, he would not have died, but, like the three children of Israel in the midst of the fiery furnace, would have remained perfectly unhurt. His body being, then, in its nature immortal, no one, I think, will deny that it was as little susceptible of injury from external violence, as that of our Lord after his resurrection. Yet we see, that, though the print of the nails remained in the risen body of Christ, and the wound in his side, into which he commanded Thomas to thrust his hand, and which undoubtedly would have caused death to a mortal body, did no injury to one in its own nature immortal.

While it is expressly intimated in Scripture that sin was the cause of death, it is scarcely less evident that all sorrow and pain and infirmity had their origin from the same source. Before the Fall, I believe that Adam could neither have experienced hunger, nor thirst, nor weariness, nor grief, nor pain of any kind crucifixion itself, if it had been possible, would, I believe, have occasioned him no suffering. If this is a correct view of the nature of the unfallen Adam-and we think it will be difficult to prove that it is not-who does not see, that to say Christ came in such a nature, is to overthrow, from its very foundation the scheme of redemption?

:

But Christ was not only made for fallen man, but was made "under the law." Have these words, "under the law," any

meaning? The Law was not given to man in his unfallen state, but to correct the evils which the Fall introduced. It was given for those who are tempted by their natural inclinations to the commission of every crime. Could it be said that Christ in his glorified state is now under the law, or that the angels are under the law, because they transgress none of its requirements? But truly as well might they be said to be under the law, as Christ while on earth, if he was in the nature of the unfallen Adam. The mere compliance with the outward rite of circumcision in the flesh, if performed on one who required not to mortify the deeds of the body, nor to subjugate the carnal affections, could not constitute him under the law. In that case, it would be a mere empty ceremony, without any signification. What can the righteousness of Christ, and his obedience, mean, if he was under no temptation to transgress the law? Does not righteousness, when applied to the creature, always suppose a perfect adherence to a law, which the creature is naturally inclined to transgress? We do not speak of the righteousness of angels, but of their holiness.

The unbelieving multitude (Matt. xiii. 55) said of our Lord, "Is not this the carpenter's son?" This plainly intimates that, in his external appearance and ordinary deportment, there was nothing that distinguished him from our fallen race. This, indeed, is more strikingly shewn by his friends not believing on him, but laying hold on him, and saying "he is beside himself." But the people say of him (Mark vi. 3), “ Is not this the carpenter?" Was it the condition of an unfallen being to be labouring for his daily bread? Then, again, it is said that he hungered, thirsted, was weary; that his friends ministered to him of their substance; that he was poor, and had not where to lay his head; that he wept, was sorrowful, was meek (that is, had his passions under perfect subjection), and lowly of heart. The following description, which the Apostle Paul gives of his own outward condition, was in many particulars more strikingly true of the Master whom he served: "For I think God hath set forth us the Apostles last, as it were appointed to death; for we are made a spectacle to the world, and to angels, and to men. We are fools for Christ's sake, but ye are wise in Christ; we are weak, but ye are strong; ye are honourable, but we are despised. Even unto this present hour we both hunger, and thirst, and are naked, and are buffeted, and have no certain dwelling-place, and labour, working with our hands; being reviled, we bless; being persecuted, we suffer it; being defamed, we entreat. We are made as the filth of the world, and are the offscouring of all things unto this day." If such could be the conditions of an unfallen man, it will be difficult to shew what those evils are which the Fall introduced.

To evade the force of such reasoning, it is said by some that he endured all these evils, not for his own sake, but for ours. With this we entirely agree. Our difference is not regarding the object or end of his sufferings, but the nature in which they were borne. It was only for the sake of his rebellious creatures that he voluntarily entered into their fallen nature, and not merely suffered for them, but suffered those very sorrows which their rebellion had introduced. We have a striking illustration afforded us of the nature of our Saviour's mission, in a resolution taken many years ago by two young Moravians, to sell themselves for slaves in the West Indies, in order that they might have an opportunity of imparting Christian instruction to the Negroes. "They were willing to have imparted unto them, not the gospel of God only, but their own souls." The more effectually to gain their noble purpose, they would have parted with every thing that was dear to them on earth-their friends, their enjoyments, their liberty-and have shared in all the sorrows and miseries of those in whose spiritual darkness they deeply sympathized. They would have endured the same toils, been driven out to their daily work under the same lash, and, what was more, they would have exposed themselves to the same temptations. Under this latter aspect their resolution seems almost too daring even for the most spiritually minded of our guilty race. To live in the midst of a people who from time immemorial had been sunk in a state of moral degradation little superior to the brutes, and be exposed continually to the danger of witnessing their abominable deeds, and of hearing their filthy conversation, seems almost too much for any mere man, even of the highest Christian attainments, to endure. But if they had endured; and, by watchfulness, and cultivating a close communion with their Heavenly Father, had obtained strength to shut their eyes and ears against the pollution which assailed them, and remained uncontaminated by the general corruption, would they still have been chargeable with guilt for the constant warfare in which they had to engage with their natural lusts? Would we not rather say, that they had attained to a degree of holiness far surpassing that of him who, being placed in similar circumstances, had no such passions to mortify? Now all this, and much more than all this sorrow and temptation, our blessed Lord exposed himself to, according to the representations of Scripture, when he assumed our nature.

Christ having of himself taken upon him our nature, ever willingly underwent its conditions. "He had power to lay down his own life, and had power to take it again."

When seized by

his enemies to be crucified, he shewed that he could by a miracle have instantly removed himself from their grasp, or have destroyed them in a moment. Even after he had permitted