related to law. The two are correlative, so that where there is no law, there can be no sin. (3.) That the law to which sin is thus related, is not merely the law of reason, or of conscience, or of expediency, but the law of God. (4.) That sin consists essen- tially in the want of conformity on the part of a rational creature, to the nature or law of God. (5.) That it includes o;"ilt and moral pollution.
Sin is a Specific Evil.
Sin is a specific evil. This we know fi-om our own consciousness. None but a sentient being can know what feeling is. We can nei- ther determine a priori what the nature of a sensation is, nor can we convey the idea to any one destitute of the organs of sense. Unless we had felt pain or' pleasure, we should not be able to un- derstand what those words mean. If born blind, we cannot know light. If born deaf, we can have no idea of what hearing is. None but a rational creature can know what is meant by folly. Only creatures with an aestlietic nature can have the perception of beautv or of deformity. In like manner only moral beings can know what sin or holiness is. Knowledge in all these cases is given immediately in the consciousness. It would be in vain to attempt to determine d priori, what pain, pleasure, sight, and hear- ing are ; much less to prove that there are no such sensations ; or that they do not differ from each other and from every other form of our experience. Every man in virtue of his being a moral creature, and because he is a sinner, has therefore in his own consciousness the knowledge of sin. He knows that when he is not what he ought to be, when he does what he ought not to do ; or omits what he ought to do, he is chai-geable with sin. He knows that sin is not simj)ly limitation of his nature ; not merely a sub- jective state of his own mind, having no character in the sight of God ; that it is not only something which is unwise, or derogatory to his own dignity ; or simply inexpedient because hurtful to his own interests, or injurious to the welfare of others. He knows that it has a specific chai'acter of its own, and that it includes both guilt and pollution.
Sin has Relation to Law.
A second truth included in our consciousness of sin is, that it has relation to law. As moral and i-ational beings we are of necessity subject to the law of right. This is included in the consciousness of obligation. The word ought would otherwise have no meaning.
182 PART II. Cii. Vin. — SIN.
To say we ought, is to say we are bound ; that we are under au- thority of some kind. The word law, in relation to moral and religious subjects, is used in two senses. First, it sometimes means a controlling power, as when the Apostle says that he had a law in his members warring against the law of his mind. Secondly, it means, that which binds, a command of one in authority. This is the common sense of the term in the New Testament. As the rule which binds the conscience of men, and prescribes what they are to do and not to do, has been variously revealed in the constitution of our nature, in the Decalogue, in the Mosaic institutions, and in the whole Scriptures, the word is sometimes used in a sense to include all these forms of revelation ; sometimes in reference ex- clusively to one of them, and sometimes exclusively in reference to another. In all cases the general idea is retained. The law is that which binds the conscience.
iSin is Related to the Law of God.
The great question is, What is that law which prescribes to man what he ought to be and to do ? (1.) Some say it is our own reason, or the higher powers of the soul. Those powers have the prerogative to rule. Man is autonomic. He is responsible to him- self. He is bound to subject his life, and especially his lower powers, to his reason and conscience. Regard to his own dignity is the comprehensive obligation under which he lies, and he fulfils all his duties when he lives worthily of himself. To this theory it is obvious to object, (a.) That law is something outside of our- selves and over us ; entirely independent of our will or reason. We can neither make nor alter it. If our reason and conscience are perverted, and determine that to be right which is in its nature wrong, it does not alter the case. The law remains unchanged in its demands and in its authority, (i.) On this theory there could be no sense of guilt. When a man acts against the dictates of his reason, or in a manner derogatory to the dignity of his nature, he may feel ashamed, or degraded, but not guilty. There can be no conviction that lie is amenable to justice, nor any of that fearful looking for of judgment, which the Apostle says is insejmrable from the commission of sin. (2.) Others say the law is to be found in tlie moral order of the universe, or in the eternal fitness of things. These however are mere abstractions. They can imjiose no obli- gation, and inflict no penalty on transgression. This theory again leaves out of view, and entirely unaccounted for, some of the plainest facts of the universal consciousness of men. (3.) Others