with one man, then there was no man could break it or keep it but that one man ; but the former is true, Gen. 2. 16, 17. besides what is proved before.

The doctrine is this, that none of Adam's sons could or can be justified by any personal act of theirs; for their personal obedience or disobedience was never required as the conditions of life or death, upon which the judicable sentence of life or death eternal should be passed. But to clear God in this point of imputation, I answer, that the disobedience of Adam is the proper act of their nature, though not the proper act of their person, and so not imputed to their nature, for their flesh has eaten, but imputed to their persons, and that justly, being the proper act of their flesh. So if Adam had obeyed, his obedience had been the proper act of their nature, and had been imputed to their persons, and that justly. Dogs may bark at the moon, but this will remain truth. My doctrine is this, that Adam was crowned with all the glory that was due to man, and so must have had all the honour from his family, or all mankind, as he that should be honoured with the glory.

First, Of their health, peace, liberty, lordship

over the creatures.

Secondly, With the glory of their righteousness, holiness, acceptation, life spiritual, temporal, and eternal. Now as the apostle saith in respect of Melchizedeck, consider how great this man was, to whom the whole world must have brought their glory too. We have hitherto considered the glory of the man; let us now consider the glory of the woman, for she is the glory of the man; and though

she had not the glory that her own personal obedience or disobedience should make her righteous or unrighteous in a judicable sentence, I mean to be justified or condemned in as to eternal death, yea she must have had power over her head so far as to bring him uuder condemnation. But how is the mystery?

First, I observe she was in the transgression, 1 Tim. 2. 14. but the offence is Adam's, Rom. 5, Secondly, She was in the trangression, that is, she had a hand in it, and the first hand too. Now if we observe the apostle to Timothy, 1 Tim. 2. 12. he will not suffer a woman to teach, nor usurp authority over the man.

First, Because the man was first formed.

Secondly, Because the man was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, was in the transgression. I observe, that her being deceived was the cause of her transgression, or going out of bounds; but Adam was not deceived, therefore knew what he did, for deceit is in opposition to true knowledge; so that Adam did eat with knowledge, both of what he did eat it for, and for what would come of it; but Eve was deceived in both. Now, why Adam did eat, shall be handled by and by; but I observe that Eve is part of Adam's body, though not part of his person; Eve transgresses, the body of Adam has transgressed also, but it was his person that was the substituted head of all mankind, so except he personally sins his posterity cannot be sinners; and I cannot see but if Eve had been a part of his person, as she was part of his body, but her disobedience must have been imputed to all her posterity as well as unto Adam. Enough has been said before; but

to clear it more. Was Christ's obedience imputed to us, and our disobedience imputed to him in › one covenant or two? If but one covenant, we need not wonder at this, being Adam was a figure of him that was to come, Rom. 5. 14. Now let us enquire into this mystery, to what end Adam eat, being he was not deceived? Some may say he was not deceived by the serpent, but was deceived by his wife. I answer, had he been deceived by his wife, that was deceived by the serpent, it had been all one; for he had been deceived by the serpent, though more remotely; Eve by the serpent, and he by the serpent through Eve, which had been all one; but he was not deceived, saith the apostle, therefore he must have eat to the intentment of the covenant itself; for had he eaten to any other end but to draw his wife and all his posterity with him, he must have been doceived. Now if he was not deceived then he eat in the full intentment of the covenant but he was not deceived, Egro, if he eat in full intentment of the covenant, he eat to draw all men after him. Let us look to the antitype Christ, John 12. 32, And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto (or after) me. Why not as though he had said, the first man did well to disobey; to draw all men after him and I, why may not I obey, to draw all men after me? For if the kingdom of the devil consisted in the one, the kingdom of God in the other. But why should Adam be so ambitious to draw all men after him? the antitype may yet serve, John 17. 24. Father, I will that they also whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory which thou hast given me. So if Christ had not drawn all men after him, that they might be with

him, they could never have seen the glory of his constituted body, nor the glory of his substituted headship. So Adam had he not personally eaten, he might have died for the transgression of his body, but could not have made all men see the glory of his substituted headship; but he personally eating, has drawn all men after him, 1 Cor. 15. 21, 22. Rom. 5. 12. This glory the devil labours to obscure (2 Cor. 4. 4. Rom. 5. 12. to the end) but both their glories will be manifest at the last day, for eternal life is but the glory of the one, and eternal death the glory of the other. So both these substituted heads was laid in the laps of their constituted bodies, which as Dalilah betrayed them both ; so that how great soever Adam's glory was, it was in the power of Eve to deface. Let me illustrate this of Adam and Christ with a figure, for they run parallel. I chose Sampson, who was a Nazarite, Dalilah pressed him hard, or earnestly, to tell her wherein is great strength lieth; he tells her, that if they take to bind him with scycn green withs that were never dried he should be as another man, Jud, 16. 7. the Hebrew has it, I should be as one, signifing, that as long as he kept his Nazarite's vow, he was more than one, that is, had the strength of more than one; but this I observe, that he tells her just as many green withs as he had locks, and just as many new cords as he had locks; and he had just as many locks as powers of the soul, which is reason, understanding, knowledge, judgment, memory, will and power to express itself. Now could the devil have provided Adam's Dalilah or Christ with any reflect act for their personal sins, they might have been bound, I mean the powers of their human

souls had been imperfect, for it is guilt that weakens. the soul. Or,

Secondly, Or could the cords made or twisted, or contracted by others, have bound them, I mean had the imputation of the transgression of their Dalilah made any imperfection in their souls, they had been unfit to have acted as public heads; for how could Adam sin in a proper sense if the powers of his soul had not been perfect? Besides, he was not deceived, but sin must properly be a free choice of the free-will. One argument I offer, if Adam was not deceived, then all the powers of his soul must be perfect, but the former is true. Ergo.

Thirdly, The weaving or binding of his locks with the web could not bind him or disable him, I mean that though the perfection of every power was required in the obedience of Adam and Christ, these powers remain in their perfection. In Christ's obedience there was the perfection of every power, so there must have been in Adam, not only in his obedienee, but in his disobedience. For my part, I cannot see how his disobedience could be dis obedience properly, without the perfection of his powers, nor can I see how all his powers could be corrupted, and his will free; nor can I see how any of his powers could be impotent till he had eaten, Some tell us that God created the will of men and angels free, but did not uphold the goodness of the will.

First, Query, What was that goodness of the will? Was it some created power in Adam to uphold his will good, or incline his will to good? if so, then he must have lost that before his will was free to

1