There is in man, as man, – as the creature of God, – a "moral sense," as it is called; a faculty of perception of moral quality in whatever comes into the field of view. This, of course, was his before the fall; indeed, without it, a fall would not have been possible. He would have been a mere beast, for which it is impossible to be im-moral, just because it is unmoral, with no capacity of moral perception or reflection at all. Such a being could not fall. " Man that is in honor, and understandeth not," – here spoken clearly; not of rational, but of moral discernment, – "is like the beasts that perish " (Ps. 49:20). That is the character of the beast, then. Had man gained by the fall a moral sense, it would have been really, in the phrase of a modern infidel, a "fall upward;" it would have brought him into a higher condition than that in which he was created.

When God said of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, " Thou shalt not eat of it ; for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die," this was surely not to be understood by Adam as a mere consequence which would follow a certain course, a mere appeal to self-love, and no more ! Had it been so, and he had merely understood it as an alternative proposed to him, he might have chosen the alternative, however fatal, yet without sin. But in this case "thou shalt not "could not have been said:the prohibition would have sunk into mere advice. Sin could not then have been, nor possible fall. The innocence in which man "stood,-as made "upright" (Eccl. 7:29),-was not the immaturity of a babe which we call such. To confound the reality of innocence in upright Adam with the shadow of it only in the fallen creature would be to accuse the Creator and make the record of the fall an unintelligible mystery.

What, then, does the knowledge of good and evil, as acquired in the fall, imply ? For it is of this that the very name of the prohibited tree speaks; it is this that the serpent proposes, "Ye shall be as God,* knowing good and evil;" and if is this that the divine word after the fall assures us had resulted:"the man is become as one of Us, knowing good and evil."*"Elohim,"which may be, indeed, "God" or "gods," but the latter would be surely as yet too unmasked evil to be in the devil's mouth. The former is confirmed by the words " as one of Us " afterward*. What, then, is this knowledge? It is, as all the inspired Word is, put before us to understand, and it will be a gain to us to understand it.

When the prohibition was first given, it is plain it was in a scene where God had pronounced every thing, without exception, which He had created, "very good." Evil there was not any where then to be perceived. The faculty of perception did not, of course, create the object to be perceived. Evil there yet was none. I do not mean that angels had not fallen. The whole history assures one that they had. But that did not necessarily introduce it into the world. This was, with all in it, very good; and as such was committed into the hands of man its head. Upon his obedience the condition of all within this realm of his depended. Save through him, evil could not enter; for the presence of the devil in the serpent was not an entrance in the sense in which I speak of it. Man himself alone could really bring it in.

It may be asked, however, Did not the prohibition itself suppose (and so imply the knowledge of) evil as possible, at least? To us, alas! it does; and here, indeed, is the great difficulty for us:how can we put ourselves back into that lost estate of innocence, so as to form any right conception of it at all? Prohibition to us, alas! awakens at once the thought of possible disobedience, and in the fallen nature the lust of it. But Adam had no lust; and no conception as yet of possible disobedience. This need not imply any mental or moral feebleness, but as to the latter (taking all into account), the very opposite.

To know good and evil means simply to discern the difference between these two; but for this to be, the two must be together within the field of vision. It was just the perfection of Adam's world that in it there was none, and in himself none. He could abide in good, and enjoy it, without thought of its opposite; a state for us difficult of conception, no doubt, but not impossible to conceive. Gratitude he could have and feel, without thought of ingratitude; believe, praise, love, and adore he could, without realizing even the possibility of the opposite of these, and with a moral nature which could yet recognize them immediately they were presented.

The history of the fall confirms this. The serpent's first approach is by a question, which under the form of a question of fact, suggests a moral one:" Yea, [is it so] that God hath said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?" But to entertain a moral question as to God is fatal. Implicit confidence in God is gone, and evil is already there known in the soul of her who entertains the question. The woman's answer already shows the consequence of this. " Of the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat; but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, and ye shall not touch it, lest ye die." Here, in her mind the prohibited tree had displaced the tree of life, the prohibition, increased to harshness in the manner of it, is weakened in the certainty of its attending penalty. God's love and truth are obscured in her doubting soul; and the devil can say, "Surely ye shall not die; for God doth know that in the day ye eat of it your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as God, knowing good and evil."

Here it should be plain that faith in God, receiving all at His hand, prohibition and all, as good alike, would have foiled the enemy, and remained master of the field. By faith, from the first, and of necessity, man stood. All dispensations are, in this, alike. The evil that gained entrance into the world began as unbelief in the woman's soul, and this having speedily ripened into the positive transgression, conscience awoke,-the inward eyes were opened:they knew evil in contrast with good,- knew it in themselves, and their actions show plainly that they did so:"they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig-leaves together and made themselves aprons."

The evil that had come in was in themselves alone, for of moral evil man alone is capable. And thus the moral perception in man is become a judgment of good and evil in himself, and of himself in view of it:and this is conscience. There is always in it a reference to one's self.* *As may be seen in such conscience of sin sages as Hebrews 10:2, where " no more conscience of sins'.' means no more apprehension of them as standing against us; and 10:22 similarly, "sprinkled from an evil conscience," one that brings us in guilty. So Acts 24:16-" a conscience void of offense."* It is always, as it were, testifying to our nakedness. It is the inheritance of fallen Adam's children, to whom innocence is no longer possible :a watch set upon us by God as under His just suspicion. It is the knowledge of good:and evil as found in one who has obtained it by disobedience.

Yet how the grace of God to man shines out already here! " The man is become as one of Us, to know good and evil." How significant in its connection with that eternal purpose which was even then, when these words were spoken, beginning to be declared! A return to innocence was indeed '"impossible, but holiness might yet be, if divine love willed. And thus out of the ruin of the first a new-creation yet more glorious was indeed to spring. ( To be continued.)