as it is to them. He testifies that their understanding was darkened and alienated from the life of God, through their ignorance and blindness, notwithstanding all modern boasts of their piety and virtue. He testifies that they had, in general, given themselves over to work all uncleanness with greediness; and from this even their sages and their men of virtue cannot be excepted, as well because the Scriptures include them, and also because of the history of their private lives.

In the same epistle, Paul assures us that the same things are applicable to the former state of those who had received Christianity. Lest it should be supposed that all the virtuous and wise part of the world had received Christianity, and, therefore, were not included in such general censures, he informs us that those who then believed were formerly nothing better than the rest. Chap. ii. 1, 3—“ And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; wherein, in time past, ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience; among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others." Instead of any of them being virtuous and holy, they were all dead in trespasses and sins. How great is the moral depravity of man, when it is called death! Here it is plainly asserted, that this moral death as much incapacitated them from doing the works of God, and living unto him, as natural death incapacitates men from doing the works of the living. How exceedingly offensive is this doctrine to the philosopher, to the Scribe, and to the Pharisee. All men of virtue, of every name and sect, of every age and nation, the learned and the illiterate, all repudiate such representations. They cannot submit to receive even God's testimony, when he declares that all men are dead in trespasses and sins; yet let men take it as they will, this is here asserted, and asserted so fully, and in such a variety of phrase, that it is utterly impossible to explain it away with any colour of plausibility; the ingenuity even of Satan would be baffled in giving a solution to this difficulty, that

could bear the examination of common understanding. All men are represented as being dead in sins, in which they walked according to the course of the world. This teaches us what the course of this world is. It is now, and ever has been, in the lusts of the flesh and of the All men are represented as walking according to the prince of the power of the air. This prince is said to be the spirit that worketh in the children of disobedience, and in the end of the third verse, is expressed in language as harsh and offensive to the men of virtue, as it is possible to choose. Even Christians are said to have been, by nature, the children of wrath, even as others. Could language more plainly assert that all men are not only guilty before God, but that without some way of reconciliation, they must be the objects of punishment! What say you to this, such of you, ye philosophers, as profess to believe the Scriptures? Are men, indeed, dead in sin—are they the children of wrath? Renounce your systems, or renounce your profession of Christianity.

That the Jews are under the same guilt and condemnation, we have seen clearly from our Lord's treatment of the most righteous among them. He not only condemns the Sadducees, a kind of infidels, but with still more marked disapprobation he condemned the Scribes and Pharisees, the most religious people of their nation. It is said that the Jews had a proverb, that if but two men were to be saved, one of them would be a Pharisee and another a Scribe. But we see how very different is the judgment of God from that of men. Though the character of the Pharisees and Scribes was outwardly righteous, it was inwardly alienation to God. May not this teach us that all the pretensions to virtue among men now, notwithstanding the praises of them by their fellow-men, are as void of that principle which can alone render them acceptable to God. But that the highest pretensions to righteousness among the Jews-even among the Jews so highly privileged-were unfounded, we see from the account given of himself by Paul. This man-so long a pattern of moral excellence and of the highest religious attainments, according to the views of men-confesses himself the chief of sinners, as soon as

his eyes were opened to perceive the truth of the gospel. When Paul failed in establishing his own righteousness, no man, to the end of the world, can ever possibly hope to succeed. His failure stands as an everlasting proof that there is no possibility of finding acceptance with God, through our own righteousness. Let us listen to his own account of his former character, and then see in what light he considers this character, when he came to the knowledge of Christ. Phil. iii. 4-" Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more; circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews, as touching the law a Pharisee, concerning zeal, persecuting the church, touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless. But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ." Many of the Jewish false teachers boasted of their righteousness, which they derived from an attentive observance of the rites of the law of Moses, which chiefly referred to the body. Their hopes of eternal life were founded on their high attainments in religion and their relation to Abraham. The Apostle is afraid lest some of the believers might be led astray by their plausible discourses; and, to demonstrate the folly of their pretensions, he exhibits those which he could himself boast, according to the righteousness that was in the law. Though he was ever distinguished as a Jew, and an adherent of the sect of the Pharisees, the strictest in that age; though his zeal exceeded any thing of which we have read ; and though, with respect to the righteousness of the law, he was blameless, yet he now finds no source of hope in all these distinctions. He counts them all but loss. Here, then, we have a man, virtuous and well-educated from his earliest youth (for he was brought up at the feet of Gamaliel), professing the very religion that God himself enjoined by Moses, distinguished even among the Pharisees for religion, and zealous beyond all his countrymen, yet as soon as he is brought to the knowledge of Christ he renounces all hope from the things in which he formerly trusted and gloried. What once was gain is now loss. What, then, is deficient in this cha

racter, according to the doctrines either of the philosopher or the divine? He employed his faculties assiduously, and he was not conscious of being misled in his inquiries after truth. No man ever appeared more thoroughly convinced of the truth of his opinions than Paul. His sincerity in his opposition to Christ cannot be questioned. If he was deficient in good works or religious observances and attainments, who will ever come up to the standard? Is such a man, then, to be viewed as a sinner? Is it to be supposed that such a man deserves punishment from God? Is a man of this character a child of wrath? Is he in danger of everlasting perdition? One thing is certain, that a man of such a character now, whether he be a Jew, or Gentile, Christian, or Mahometan, Pagan or infidel-all philosophers and men of candour, liberality and charity, of all denominations, would admit into the first place in paradise. But if he professed the Christian religion, and adhered to any of the orthodox sects, even the most surly sectarian would exalt him among the worthies. I can see nothing he wants that almost any of the popular systems of religion requires, except the profession of Christianity; and before the publication of Christianity they must admit the law of Moses was sufficient. In fact, some divines not only have perceived this, but are found to admit that Saul of Tarsus was a good man, and that had he died before he became a Christian he must have been saved. Indeed, to be consistent, they cannot maintain any thing else; for a better man void of the knowledge of Christ will never be found by them. If they cannot contrive, then, to save Saul while he remained in unbelief, they will in vain struggle to save any other of their virtuous men and sincere worshippers of God. If Paul, a Jew, is lost, all virtuous men, all— even the most zealous cultivators of religion void of the knowledge of the gospel-shall perish. It is not wonderful, then, that they have laboured hard to save persecuting Saul; for their own salvation depends on the success of their efforts. But have they succeeded? No; the confession of Paul himself, upon this very point, will cover them with eternal confusion. Instead of considering himself as a good man, with all his attain

ments and distinctions, he considers himself as a monument of sin and of mercy. Though he was formerly so very religious in his own eyes, and in the estimation of men, yet, in the account he gives of himself afterwards, he confesses that he was 66 a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious." He declares that he was brought to the knowledge of Jesus, not as a reward for his former sincerity in opposition to him, but by mercy. His hope is not in his works or sincerity, but that "it is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Jesus Christ came into the world to save sinners." Notwithstanding his virtue, his morality, his religious attainments, his zeal, his sincerity, he confesses himself to have been the chief of sinners. Nor was this confession a mere hypocritical confession of over-strained humility, as some are willing to suppose it. Were it such, it would be cant and hypocrisy ; which, indeed, may be exemplified among some of the professors of religion, but which is unworthy of a servant of Jesus, who ought to speak as he thinks in his heart. It is the language of truth and soberness. Nor is it hard to discover the reason why Paul considered himself the chief of sinners; though he was not addicted to any of the grosser vices, though he was eminently virtuous and religious, he was above all others full of enmity to the truth of God. Sin is the alienation of the heart from God, or is alienation from God; and whatever discovers most enmity to God is the most sinful. According to this standard, there is not in the human race to be found a greater sinner than the virtuous, the religious, the zealous, the sincere worshipper of God, Saul of Tarsus, when vice, adultery, drunkenness, stealing, and all the vile catalogue of gross sins do not discover so much hatred to God's character as opposition to the truth in which it is revealed. Even the unnatural sins of Sodom and Gomorrah, and all the lascivious excesses of Tyre and Sidon, are not so sinful as the opposition of the gospel. And though this is a bold truth, we are not afraid to declare it; for Jesus has himself testified that it shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah, for Tyre and Sidon in the day of judgment than for those who have heard his gospel and rejected it. Con