i to Rome. & Serpents were had in the greatest Honour, and had Sacrifices made to them in the Worship of Bacchus, and a Snake was portray'd round the Tripos of Sibylla Erythraa. The Story of Ophioneus among the Heathens was taken from the Devil's afluming the Form or Body of a Serpent in his tempting of Eve, and the Hereticks call'd Ophite worshipp'd a Serpent and to name no more inftances, Serpents have commonly had Religious Worship paid them both by Ancient and Modern Heathens. And if the Devil has been fo generally worshipp'd in the Form of a Serpent fince the Fall, it can feem no incredible thing, that he should by a Serpent deceive Eve. He feems to have prided himself in this manner of Worfhip, to infult and trample upon fall'n Mankind, by caufing himself to be adored under that very Form, by which he first wrought our Ruin; to which purpofe Clemens Alexandrinus obferves, that in the Feafts of Bacchus, they were wont to cry out Evav meaning, as he fuppofes, Eve. Lucretius makes Evan a Denomination of Bacchus. The Serpent was indeed the common Symbol and myftick Reprefentation of the Heathen Deities. We know, that the Babylonians worshipp'd a Dragon, from the Apocrypha; and that they had the Images of Serpents in the Temple of Belus, from P Diodorus Siculus. q Dragons are defcrib'd to be of a beautiful fhining Colour; and * Philo fpeaking of the Serpent that beguiled Eve calls it a Dragon. It is probable therefore, that she ות 8 Clem. Alex. Admonit. ad Gentes. Max. Tyr. Differt. xxxviii. Apud Eufeb. Conftant. Orat. c. xviii. i Orig. contr. Celf. I. yi. & Spenceri pot. ad loc. k Tertull. Præfcript. 37. 1 Jof, Acoft., 1.v. c. 5, 12, 13. Martin. Hift. Sin. l. i. & iv. Bofman of the Coast of Guinea, Lett. xix. Admonit. ad Gent. Juftin. Mart. Apol. ad Antonin. Pium. Lucan. 1. ix. ? L. ii. c. 4. Vos quoque, qui cunctis innoxia Numina Terris ! De Agricult. " Lib. was was tempted by one of this kind of Serpents, efpecially fince the Dragon is styled, that old Serpent, called the Devil and Satan, Rev. xii. 9. However, it can' be no impoffible thing, that Eve fhould be deceiv'd once by a Creature, by which her Pofterity has been deceiv'd, even to the Worship of it in fo many Ages and Countries fince. The Speech of a Serpent could be no frightful thing to Eve, who knew not what Fear was before her Fall; and if it be thought abfurd (tho' it was fo foon after her own Creation) that fhe fhould not know but that other Creatures might have the use of Speech as well as Man: Yet why might not fhe attribute his Faculty of Speech to the Vertue of that Fruit, which he might be fuppofed to have tafted, " and from his own Experience to recommend to her. So far is it from any Inconfiftency or Improbability, that Eve fhould be beguil'd by a Serpent; and when fhe was once deceiv'd, it will not be deny'd but that Adam might be enticed by her. 2. The Sin committed by our first Parents was in eating the forbidden Fruit, and they both eating of it, fell thereby from their Primitive State of Happiness. The time when our first Parents finn'd is uncertain and therefore there is no ground for the Objection, which fome have fram'd by crowding a long Series of things into the Bufinefs of one Day. Many Circumstances are omitted in the Scriptures concerning the state of our first Parents in Paradife, and relating to their Fall. For no more is mention'd than was needful to Mofes's Design, which was to give a very brief Account of the most remarkable things that had paft from the Creation to his own Times. It appears that our firft Parents were no Strangers to the Prefence and Voice of God, and there is no reason to doubt but that they were fully inftructed in the Terms propos'd to them, with the Reasonableness of God's Commandments, how much depended upon their Obedience, what Danger they were in, and how eafily they might Q 4 escape efcape it, and become enstated in everlasting Innocence and Happiness. God had determin'd to make trial of them by propofing an easy instance of their Obedience, and by forbidding them the ufe but of one Tree in Paradife: It was but a fmall Restraint, and they had Ability enough to have overcome the greatest Temptation; and Life and Death were fet before them, as the Reward or Punishment of their Obedience or Difobedience. Upon eating the forbidden Fruit, they muft furely. die; but if they had but refrain'd from it, another Tree was provided, the eating of which fhould as certainly have made them Immortal, as this made them fubject to Death: For then without ever undergoing Death, they fhould have been tranflated to a Itate of more perfect Blifs and Happiness. It cannot be deny'd, but that it was very fitting and reasonable, that God fhould lay fome Restraint upon our first Parents, whereby he might be obey'd, and his Sovereignty acknowledg'd: And as no Law could be more easily obferv'd than this, fo it was moft proper for the place in which they were, and for their manner of Life and state of Innocence. The common Rules and Laws of Morality could then scarce have any place, but it was requifite that this or fome fuch other inftance of Obedience, fhould be impofed. Theft, and Murther, and Adultery, and other Sins against moral Duties, were then either impoffible to be committed, or fo unnatural, that it can hardly be imagined, how any of them fhould be committed, when there were yet but two Perfons in the World, in a state of perfect Innocence: and therefore in moral Duties there could be no Trial of the Obedience of our first Parents; befides, these were fo well known to them, that there could be no need of any Command concerning them. But God gives them a Command in a Thing of an indifferent Nature, that so he might have à plainer Proof of their Obedience, in a thing have * which which was both indifferent of it felf, and fo easy to them, that nothing but a careless and perverfe Neglect could betray them into Difobedience. To fuppofe Good and Evil to be in the Nature of Things only, and not in the Commandments and Prohibitions of God, is in effect, a renouncing of God's Authority; but this Tree was the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil: For it made them fenfible of the Divine Authority upon which moral Good and Evil formally depend, tho' materially they be in the Nature of things: Whatever God is pleas'd to command or forbid, however indifferent it be in it self, is for that very Reafon, fo far as it is commanded or forbidden by him, as truly Good or Evil, as if it were abfolutely and morally fo, being enacted by the same Divine Authority, whereby all moral Precepts become obligatory as Laws to us: For all moral Truths, or Precepts, or Rules of Life, however certain and necessary in themselves, yet receive the Obligation of Laws from the Divine Authority, this being the most certain Truth in Morality, and in Order of Nature antecedent to all others, that God is to be obey'd in all that he commands or forbids. But the Divine Authority was folely and purely concern'd in this Commandment, which had no Foundation in the Nature of Things, but depended merely upon the Will and Pleasure of God, and by the Tranfgreffion of this Law, it became notorious to our first Parents and their unhappy Pofterity, that both Good and Evil, whatever they may be in Speculation and abstracted Notions, yet as they concern us in the Practice of our Lives, are to be refolv'd ultimately into the Divine Authority; God is our Law-giver, and nothing can be a Law to us but by His enacting, and what he enacts must be a Law to us; and of the fame neceffary indifpenfable Obligation, fo far as he is pleas'd to enjoin it, whether it be a moral Precept, or only an indifferent thing in its own Nature. It feems then that "God God was pleas'd to manifeft his Sovereign Authority in this Commandment, and to fhew that it is abfolute and independent upon moral Good or Evil; and that tho' his infinite Holinefs and Goodnefs would not permit him to command any thing contrary to moral Duties, nor fuffer him not to command moral Good, and forbid moral Evil; yet his Authority is arbitrary over us, extending as far beyond all the Duties of Morality as he pleafes, which indeed are only Truths and Precepts, but not Duties to us but by Vertue of his Authority. This Commandment therefore was given in Affertion of God's Authority, whom it is always and in every thing good to obey, and evil to difobey, as our first Parents found by fad Experience. Maimonides obferves, that they had the Knowledge of Truth and Falfhood before, but Good and Evil became known to them by their Fall, whereby they understood the Value of that Good which they had loft, and were made fenfible of the Mifery of that Condition, into which they had brought themfelves: They perceiv'd how good it was to obey God, and how evil to be difobedient to Him in any thing whatfo f ever. Mr. Mede has obferv'd that their Sin was Sacrilege. God had referv'd that Tree as holy to himself, in token of his Dominion aud Sovereignty, and ap pointed it to fuch ufes as he had defign'd it for: and therefore it was a Sacrilegious Prophanation to eat of it; it was a Theft or Robbery, no less than the Robbing of God, as the Prophet ftyles Sacrilege, and an Invafion of his Right. And the Lord God faid, Behold the Man is become as one of us to know Good and Evil, Gen. iii. 22. which Words are generally fuppofed to have been spoken by a fevere Sarcasm, or with an upbraiding Anger and Indignation; but they feem to admit of an easier Maim. More Nevoch, Pt i. c. 2. Lib. i. Difc. xxvii. Senfe, |