for me either to

like or dislike the orange, in reality, until I taste it? Well, I taste of it, and like it. Do you like it? says my friend. Yes, I reply, its flavor is exquisitely agreeable. But that will not do, says my friend; you must not like it because its taste is agreeable, but you must like it because it is an orange. If there be any propriety in what my friend says it is out of my sight. A man is travelling on the sands of Arabia, he finds no water for a number of days; the sun scorches, and he is exceedingly dry; at last, he finds water and drinks to his satisfaction; never did water taste half so agreeably before. To say, that this man loves the water because it is water, and not because of the advantage which he receives from it, betrays a large share of inconsistency. Would not this thirsty traveller have loved the burning sand as well as he did the water, if it had tasted as agreeably, and quenched his thirst as well? The sweet Psalmist of Israel said, “O taste and see that the Lord is good.” And an apostle says, "We love him because he first loved us." What attribute do we ascribe to God, that we do not esteem on account of its advantage to us? Justice would have been no more likely to be attributed to the Almighty than injustice, if it had not first been discovered that justice was of greater advantage to mankind than injustice. And so of power, were it of no more advantage to human society than weakness; the latter would have been as likely to have been esteemed an attribute of God, as the former. If wisdom were of no greater service to man than folly, it would not have beeen adored in the Almighty, any more than folly. If the love were no more happifying to man than hatred, hatred would as soon have been esteemed an attri bute of God, as love.

Undoubtedly the Almighty loves without an influential object, as it would be erroneous to suppose that an infinite being could be operated upon. He loves because his nature is to love. An apostle says, "God is love." The sun does not shine, because our earth influences it; it is the nature of the sun to shine. But all created beings love, because of influential objects; and they always love according to the influence which objects have on their minds and passions. It seems then, says the objector, that our vices are not to be attributed to the devil, but to the influence which objects have on our minds. Surely the reader ought to expect, that after we have denied the existence of a being, we should, likewise deny his power. Perhaps, however, the reader may be surprised, to find that we do not believe in the existence of a being so universally acknowledged among christian people, and which perhaps, has been of as much advantage to some, as the Goddess Dianna was to the craftsmen of Ephesus. But we are willing to give our reasons for not believing with the multitude, in this particular. A created individual being cannot be in more than one place at the same time.

But how many millions of places must this evil angel Ch be in, at once, in order to perform the business which christians have allotted him? In order for us to be lieve in such a being, we must give him the omnipresency of the Almighty, which belongs to none, in our opinion, but our Maker. Again to admit the existence of such a being, would be of no avail, as there is nothing for him to do. There is, says the objector; he tempts men to sin. But does he tempt men contrary to their passions and the influence of their motives? Answer, no. Then the temptation is of no possible consequence. Supposing a man to be exceedingly

one

hungry, and an agreeable meal is set before him,
and he invited to refresh; at that moment, the devil
comes, and tempts him to eat. What effect would the
temptation have on the hungry man? Or supposing,
in room of tempting him to eat, he should tempt him
not to eat, would he be likely to succeed? But what
means the scripture, which speaks of a devil?
who was a liar from the beginning, &c. We answer, we
have no objection to believing, that there is such a
devil as the scripture speaks of. He is called the
old Serpent, and is the same we have described, which
beguiled the woman in the beginning; and it is the
carnal mind which is enmity against God. "I will put
enmity between thee and the woman," said the Lord,
"between her seed and thy seed." An apostle says,
"The flesh lusteth against the spirit, and the spirit
against the flesh, that ye cannot do the things ye
would." And, that this was the first beguiler, we may
learn, from the scripture, before quoted, which saith,
"Lust, when it conceived, brought forth sin; and, sin
when it was finished, brought forth death." An apostle

also says,
"When a man is tempted, he is drawn away
with his own lusts, and enticed. Any person, who is
wholly dictated by a fleshly mind, may justly be called
a devil, as in the case of Judas and Peter. As our
Lord said to the Jews, also, "Ye are of your father
the devil; and the lusts of your father, ye will do.”
But says the objector, do you think our Saviour was
tempted by the powers of the flesh, when it was said
he was tempted by the devil? We ask in our turn, for
what is this particular circumstance introduced? If
we cannot prove, from our own experience, that we
are tempted by some other being than our own fleshly
appetites, would it be any thing more than a specula-

tive belief, to admit another tempter? But says the objector, that does not answer the question. Then let us look at his temptations; when he hungered, he was tempted; by what? and to what? Answer, by hunger, to turn stones into bread. Here was a fleshly appetite. When he had a view of all the kingdoms of the earth, and their worldly glory, he was tempted to avail himself of them. Here was natural ambition, such as gave rise to the victories of an Alexander. When on the pinnacle of the temple, he was tempted to cast himself down, as it was written concerning him, that God would give his angels charge over him, &c. Here was that passion which gives rise to presumption, and wishes to avoid duty. But it is said, the devil taketh him about, thus and so; not literally, however, for there is no mountain in the world that commands a prospect of but a small part of the kingdoms of the world. In a word, the scriptures inform us that he was tempted in all points as we are yet without sin. If, therefore, we know how we are tempted, we know also, how he was tempted. It is a sentiment of mine, that we ought not to argue that for truth, in matters of this nature, which we have no knowledge of, by experience.

Having illustrated the original cause, and the secondary causes of sin, I pass to take notice of its consequences.

In order to have our work plain before us, I observe, sin is the fruits of the flesh, which are opposed to that true light, which lighteth every man who cometh into the world. And St Paul, as before quoted, says they are manifest. See Gal. v. 19, 20, 21. 'Now the works of the flesh are manifest which are these, adultry, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witch

craft, hatred, variance, emulation, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envying, murders, drunkenness, revellings and such like." These are the sins which our fleshly minds are daily producing, and their consequences are witnessed by a miserable world. By these sins, with their associates, mankind are rendered miserable indeed. Social and domestic happiness are frequently destroyed. Cold and cruel jealousy murders the soft and tender passions of love, as Cain slew his brother. A garden, enclosed by the walls of fidelity, decked with the flowers of innocence, watered with the living streams of love, teeming with fruits of richest repast, and adorned with the vine of future prospects, is laid waste in an hour. Jealousy, like a foe bent on plunder flung down the wall, dried up the stream, and, like a devouring worm, gnawed the vine, that it perished; the flowers droop, and the fruits wither away. Nothing remains but some faint vestiges of what is ruined, serving as evidence of the melancholy truth, that sin has found its way to this once happy place.

Idolatry is the sin of worshipping that, which is not, in reality, the true God. The Old Serpent could never long hold the creature in captivity, if he did not allow him a god to worship, and religious duties to amuse him. Man is constituted in such relation to God that to worship, is perfectly natural. Then, in order for the carnal mind to take the lead of the whole man, it must introduce a god to be worshipped, and religious duties, whereby this god may be pleased, and make the creature believe, that this god is the true god, and that those religious duties are of the genuine kind. But this god will surely possess all the vile passions of the old man, Adam, and those religious duties must consist in certain rites which