1. _Man had an Eden and lost it._

I take the Fall to be a historical fact. To all who accept the

authority of Scripture, no words are needed beyond the simple statement

before us, but we may just gather up the signs that there are on the

wide field of the world's history, and in the narrower experience of

individuals, that such a fall has been.

Look at the condition of the world: its degradation, its savagery-all

its pining myriads, all its untold millions who sit in darkness and the

shadow of death. Will any man try to bring before him the actual state

of the heathen world, and, retaining his belief in a God, profess that

these men are what God meant men to be? It seems to me that the present

condition of the world is not congruous with the idea that men are in

their primitive state, and if this is what God meant men for, then I

see not how the dark clouds which rest on His wisdom and His love are

to be lifted off.

Then, again--if the world has not a Fall in its history, then we must

take the lowest condition as the one from which all have come; and is

that idea capable of defence? Do we see anywhere signs of an upward

process going on now? Have we any experience of a tribe raising itself?

Can you catch anywhere a race in the act of struggling up, outside of

the pale of Christianity? Is not the history of all a history of

decadence, except only where the Gospel has come in to reverse the

process?

But passing from this: What mean the experiences of the

individual-these longings; this hard toil; these sorrows?

How comes it that man alone on earth, manifestly meant to be leader,

lord, etc., seems but cursed with a higher nature that he may know

greater sorrows, and raised above the beasts in capacity that he may

sink below them in woe, this capacity only leading to a more exquisite

susceptibility, to a more various as well as more poignant misery?

Whence come the contrarieties and discordance in his nature?

It seems to me that all this is best explained as the Bible explains it

by saying: (1) Sin has done it; (2) Sin is not part of God's original

design, but man has fallen; (3) Sin had a personal beginning. There

have been men who were pure, able to stand but free to fall.

It seems to me that that explanation is more in harmony with the facts

of the case, finds more response in the unsophisticated instinct of

man, than any other. It seems to me that, though it leaves many dark

and sorrowful mysteries all unsolved, yet that it alleviates the

blackest of them, and flings some rays of hope on them all. It seems to

me that it relieves the character and administration of God from the

darkest dishonour; that it delivers man's position and destiny from the

most hopeless despair; that though it leaves the mystery of the origin

of evil, it brings out into clearest relief the central truths that

evil is evil, and sin and sorrow are not God's will; that it vindicates

as something better than fond imaginings the vague aspirations of the

soul for a fair and holy state; that it establishes, as nothing else

will, at once the love of God and the dignity of man; that it leaves

open the possibility of the final overthrow of that Sin which it treats

as an intrusion and stigmatises as a fall; that it therefore braces for

more vigorous, hopeful conflict against it, and that while but for it

the answer to the despairing question, Hast Thou made all men in vain?

must be either the wailing echo 'In vain,' or the denial that He has

made them at all, there is hope and there is power, and there is

brightness thrown on the character of God and on the fate of man, by

the old belief that God made man upright, and that man made himself a

sinner.

Expositions of Holy Scripture: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers · 第 54 / 329 题