Imágenes de páginas

the sins of parents : But hath God any need of such methods to add to parents' aMictions ? Are there not ways enough that he might increase their trouble, without destroying the lives of such multitudes of those that are perfectly innocent, and have in no respect any sin belonging to them; on whom death comes at an age, when not only the subjects are not capable of any reflection or making any improvement of it, either in the suffering or expectation of it; but also at an age, when parents and friends, who alone can make a good improvement, and whom Dr. Taylor supposes alone to be puriished by it, suffer least by being bereaved of them ; though the infants themselves sometimes suffer to great extremity?

3. To suppose, as Dr. Taylor does, that death is brought on mankind in consequence of Adam's sin, not at all as a calamnity, but only as a favor and benefit, is contrary to the doctrine of the gospel, which teaches that when Christ, as the second Adam, comes to remove and destroy that death which came by the first Adam, he finds it not as a friend, but an enemy. I Cor. xv. 22. “ For as in Adam all die, so in Christ shall all be made alive ;" with verses 25 and 26. “ For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed, is death."

Dr. Taylor urges that the afflictions which mankind are subjected to, and particularly their common mortality, are represented in scripture as the chastisements of our heavenly Father; and therefore are designed for our spiritual good, and consequently are not of the nature of punishments. So in p. 68, 69, 38, 39, S.

Though I think the thing asserted far from being true, viz. that the scripture represents the afflictions of mankind in general, and particularly their common mortality, as the chastisements of an heavenly father, yet it is needless to stand to dispute that matter ; for if it be so, it will be no argument that the afflictions and death of mankind are not evidences of their sinfulness. Those would be strange chastisements from the hand of a wise and good Father, which are wholly for nothing; especially such severe chastisements as to break the child's bones, when at the same time the Father does not

suppose any guilt, fault or offence in any respect belonging to the child; but it is chastised in this terrible manner, only for fear that it will be faulty hereafter. I say, these would be a strange sort of chastisements ; yea, though he should be able to make it up to the child afterwards. Dr. Taylor tells of representations made by the whole current of scripture : I am certain it is not agreeable to the current of scripture, to represent divine, fatherly chastisements after this manner. It is true, that the scripture supposes such chastenings to be the fruit of God's goodness ; yet at the same time it evermore represents them as being for the sin of the subject, and as evidences of the divine displeasure for ils sinfulness. Thus the apostle in 1 Cor. xi. 30....32, speaks of God's chastening his people by mortal sickness, for their good, that they might not be condemned with the world, and yet signifies that it was for their sin ; for this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep : That is, for the profaneness and sinful disorder before mentioned. So Elihu, Job xxxiii. 16, &c. speaks of the same chastening by sickness, as for men's good, to withdrew man from his sinful purpose, and to hide pride from man, and keep back his soul from the pit ; that therefore God chastens man with pain on his bed, and the multitude of his bones with strong pain. Bụt these chastenings are for his sins, as appears by what follows, verse 28, where it is observed, that when God by this means has brought men to repent, and hum. bly confess their sins, he delivers them. Again, the same Elihu, speaking of the unfailing love of God to the righteous, even when he chastens them, and they are bound in fetters, and holden in cords of affliction, chap. xxxvi. 7, &c, yet speaks of these chastenings as being for their sins, yerse 9, 6 Then he sheweth them their work, and their transgressions, that they have exceeded.” So David, Psalm xxx. speaks of God's chastening by sore afflictions, as being for his good, and issuiag joyfully ; and yet being the fruit of God's anger for his sing yerse 5.

“ God's anger endureth but for a moment,” &c, Compare Psalm cxix. 67, 71, 75. God's fatherly chastise ments are spoken of as being for sin. 2 Sam. vii. 14, 15, I will be his Father, and he shall be my Son. If he coma


mit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men, but my mercy shall not deo part away from him.” So the prophet Jeremiah speaks of the great affliction that God's people of the young generation suffered in the time of the captivity, as being for their good. Lam. iii. 25, &c. But yet these chastisements are spoken of as being for their sín, see especially verses 39, 40. So Christ says, Rev. iii. 19.

“ As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten." But the words following shew that these chastenings from love, are for sin that should be repented of: « Be zealous, therefore, and repent.” And though Christ tells us, they are blessed that are persecuted for righteousness' sake, and have reason to rejoice and be exceeding glad ; yet even the persecutions of God's people, as ordered in divine Providence, are spoken of as divine chastenings for sin, like the jast corrections of a Father, when the children deserve them, Heb. xii. The apostle, there speaking to the Christians concerning the persecutions which they suffered, calls their sufferings by the name of divine rebukes, which implies testifying against a fault ; and that they may not be discouraged, puts them in mind, that whom the Lord loves he chastens; and scourgeth eve' ery son that he receiveth. It is also very plain, that the persecutions of God's people, as they are from the disposing hand of God, are chastisements for sin, from 1 Pet. iv. 17, 18, compared with Prov. xi. 31. See also Psalm Ixix. 4....9.

If divine chastisements in general are certain evidences that the subjects are not wholly without sin, some way belonging to them, then in a peculiar manner is death so, for these reasons :

1. Because slaying, or delivering to death, is often spoken of as in general a more awful thing than the chastisements that are endured in this life. So Psalm cxviii. 17, 18. “I shall not die, but live, and declare the works of the Lord. The Lord hath chastened me sore, but he hath not given me over unto death." So the Psalmist, in Psalm 1xxxviii. 15, setting forth the extremity of his affliction, represents it by this, that it was next to death. “I am afflicted, and ready to die : While I suffer thy terrors, I am distracted.” So David, 1 Sam. XX. 3. So God's tenderness towards persons under chastisement, is from time to time set forth by that, that he did not proceed so far as to make an end of them by death, as in Psalm lxxviii. 38, 39, Psalm ciii. 9, with

verses 14, 15, Psalm xXx 2, 3, 9, and Job xxxiii. 22, 23, 24. So we have God's people often praying, when under great affliction, that God would not proceed to this, as being the greatest exIremity. Psalm xiii. 3. “Consider, and lear me, O Lord my God: Lighten mine eyes, lest I sleep the sleep of death.” So Job x, 9, Psalm vi. 1...,5, 1xxxvii. 9, 10, 11, and cxliii, 7.,

Especially may death be looked upon as the most extreme of all temporal sufferings, when attended with such.dreadful circumstances, and extreme pains, as those with which Providence sometimes brings it on infants, as on the children that were offered up to Moloch, and some other idols, who were tormented to death in burning brass. Dr. Taylor says, p. 83, 128, s.

“ The Lord of all being can never want time, and place, and power, to .compensate abundantly any sufferings infants now undergo in subserviency to his good providence. But there are no bounds to such a license, in evading evidences from fact. It might as well be said, that there is not and cannot be any such thing as evidence, from events of God's displeasure, which is most contrary to the whole ourrent of scripture, as may appear in part from things which have been observed. This gentleman might as well go further still, and say that God may cast guiltless persons into hellfirc, to remain there in the most unutterable torments for ages of ages, (which bear no greater proportion to eternii, than a quarter of an hour) and if he does so, it is no evidence of God's displeasure, because he can never want time, place, and power, abundantly to compensate their sufferings afterwards. If it be so, it is not to the purpose, as long as the scripture does so abundantly teach us to look on great calamities and sufferings which God brings on men, especially death, as marks of his displeasure for sin, and for sin belonging to them that sufier.

2. Another thing which may well lead us to suppose death, in a peculiar manner, above other temporal sufferings, inunded as a testimony of God's displeasure for sin, is, that

death is a thing attended with that awful appearances that. gloomy and terrible aspect, that naturally suggests to our tninds God's awful displeasure. Which is a thing that Dr. Taylor himself takes particular notice of, page 69, speaking of death, “ Herein," says hé,“ have we before our eyes a striking demonstration that sin is infinitely hateful to God, and the corruption and ruin of our nature. Nothing is more proper than such a sight to give us tlie utmost abhorrence of all iniquitý, &c.” Now if death be no testimony of God's displeasure for sint, no evidence that the subject is looked upon, by him who inflicts it, as any other than perfectly, innocent, free from all manner of imputation of guilt, and treated only as an object of favor, is it not strange, that God should annex to it such affecting appearances of his hatred and anger for sin, more than to other chastisements? Which yet the scripture teaches us are always for sin. These gloomy and striking manifestations of God's hatred of sin attending death, are equivalent to awful frowns of God attending the stroke of his hand. If we should see a wise and just father chastising his child, mixing terrible frowns with severe strokes, we should justly argue, that the father considered his child as having something in him displeasing to him, and that he did not thus treat his child only under a notion of mortifying him, and preventing his being faulty hereafter, and making it up to him afterwards, when he had been perfectly innocent, and without fault, either of action or disposition thereto. We

may well argue from these things, that infants are not looked upon by God as sinless, but that they are by naa ture children of wrath, seeing this terrible evil, comes so heav: ily on mankind in infancy. But besides these things, which are observable concerning the mortality of infants in general, there are some particular cases of the death of infants, which the scripture sets before us, that are attended with circumstances, in a peculiar manner giving evidences of the sinfulness of such, and their just exposedness to divine wrath. As particularly,

The destroying of the infants in Sodom, and the neigh: boring cities; which cities, destroyed in so extraordinary,

« AnteriorContinuar »