Εικόνες σελίδας
PDF
Ηλεκτρ. έκδοση

against the church, for their faithfulness to the truth, Rev. xii. 17. chap. xiii. 7. these wars are unlawful; and all the blood shed therein, is a breach of this Commandment.

(2.) It is no violation of this Commandment, to take away the life of offenders, guilty of capital crimes, by the hand of the civil magistrate; for this is elsewhere commanded, and magistrates are appointed for that end, Deut. xvii. 8,-10.

(3.) It is no breach of this Commandment, when a person kills another without design, or the least degree of premeditated malice. Nevertheless, the utmost caution ought to be used, that persons might not lose their lives through the carelessness and inadvertency of others.

(4.) In some instances, a person may kill another in his own defence, without being guilty of the breach of this Commandment. But this is to be considered with certain limitations; as,

[1.] If there be only a design, or conspiracy against our lives, but no immediate attempt made, to take them away; we are to defend ourselves, by endeavouring to put him that designed the execrable fact, out of a capacity of hurting us, by having recourse to the protection of the law; whereby he may be restrained from doing it, or we secured. This was the method which Paul took, when the Jews had bound themselves with an oath, to slay him; he informed the chief captain of this conspiracy, and had recourse to the law for his safety, Acts xxiii. 21.

[2.] If there be a present attempt made against our lives, we should rather chuse to disarm, or fly from the enemy, than take away his life; but if this cannot be done, so that we must either lose our own lives, or take away his, we do not incur the least guilt, or break this Commandment, if we take away his life, to preserve our own, especially if we were not first in the quarrel; nor give occasion to it by any injurious or unlawful practices.

Here it may be enquired, whether it be lawful for two persons to fight a duel, upon a set challenge, or provocation given? In answer to which, let it be considered,

1st, That, when a war, between two armies, may be issued, and the shedding of much blood prevented hereby, it is not unlawful, provided it be by mutual consent, and with the approbation of those on both sides, who have a right of making war and peace; and if the matter in controversy may be thus decided, without tempting providence. We have a remarkable instance of this, in the duel fought between David and Goliah, in 1 Sam. xvii. Nevertheless,

2dly, It is unlawful for two persons, each seeming too prodigal of his life, to challenge, accept of, and, pursuant thereunto, to endeavour to put an end to each others life, merely to

gratify their own passion, or pride. This, though falsely called honour, will, in reality, render them vile in the eyes of God, and notoriously guilty of the breach of this Commandment.

Here we may consider the wicked practice of those who have obliged poor wretches, who were under their command, to murder one another for their diversion. This Joab and Abner did, when they said, Let the young men arise and play before us; and every one thrust his sword in his fellows side, 2 Sam. ii. 14,-16. There is also an unlawful diversion, which, though not altogether so barbarous and cruel, is, in some respects, a breach of this Commandment, viz. when persons fight with, and wound one another, without design of killing, merely to get a little money, while entertaining a number of unthinking persons with their folly; in which case they that fight, and they that look on, are equally guilty, Prov. xxvi. 18, 19. Thus concerning the sin of killing another; we shall now account for two or three difficulties that occur in scripture, relating to the actions of some good men, who seem to have been guilty of the breach of this Commandment; but were not really so.

1st, It is enquired, whether Elijah was chargeable with the breach of it in destroying Baal's prophets, which we read of in 1 Kings xviii. 40. wherein it is said, that he ordered that none of them should escape; and he brought them down to the brook Kishon, and slew them there.

In answer to which, it may be observed, that it was not a small inoffensive error that these phophets of Baal were punished for; but apostasy from God. And that the persons who were thus punished, deserve it, will appear, if we consider,

[1.] That, they were the advisers and ring-leaders of all Israel's idolatry, and the abettors and principal occasion of that violent persecution, which then raged against the Lord's prophets, and true worshippers.

[2.] Had they only been false prophets, and not persecutors, they were according to the law of God to be put to death, Deut. xiii. 6,-9.

[3.] This was done after a solemn appeal to God, and an answer from heaven, by fire, which determined, not only who was the true God, but who were his prophets, and consequently whether Elijah deserved death, as an impostor, or Baal's prophets.

[4.] Ahab himself was present, and all his ministers of state, who had a right to execute justice on false prophets; and, it is highly probable, that they consented to, and many of them had an immediate hand in their death, which might be occasioned by a sudden conviction in their consciences, proceeding from the miracle which they had just before observed, or

from the universal cry of the people against them; so that the thing was plainly of the Lord, to whom Elijah brought a great deal of honour, and was far from being chargeable with the breach of this Commandment.

2dly, It is farther enquired, whether Abraham's offering Isaac was a breach of this Commandment? This is proposed as a difficulty by those who do not pay that deference to divine revelation, as they ought, nor consider, that God cannot command any thing which is contrary to his perfections; nor do his people sin in obeying any command that is given by him. However, that this matter may be set in a just light, let it be considered,

[1.] That God, who is the sovereign Lord of life, may take it away, when, and by whom he pleases. Therefore Isaac had no more reason to complain of any wrong or injury done him, by God, in ordering his father to sacrifice him, than any one else has, who dies by his immediate hand, in the common course of providence.

[2.] Abraham could not be said to do this with the temper and disposition of a murderer, which such have, who are guilty of the breach of this Commandment, who kill persons in a passion, or out of envy or malice, being void of all natural affection or brotherly love; but he acted plainly in obedience to God's command. His hand was lifted up against one whom he loved equally to, or, it may be, more than his own life, and, doubtless, he would rather have been, had God so ordered it, the sacrifice, than the offerer.

[3.] This was done, as is more than probable, with Isaac's fuil consent. Hence some think, that his faith was no less remarkable herein than that of Abraham. His willingness to be offered, evidently appears, in that Abraham was in his feeble and declining age, and Isaac in his full strength; for it was not a little strength which was sufficient to carry wood enough to answer this occasion, which we read he did, Gen. xxii. 6. Besides, if Isaac had resisted, none was at hand to assist Abraham against him, and, doubtless, he would have strove in this matter as one who desired to be overcome. Therefore we must suppose, that it is so far from being a breach of this Commandment, that it was one of the most remarkable instances of faith in scripture; and God's design in ordering him to do this, was, that it might be a type whereby he would lead him into the glorious mystery of his not spa ring his own Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, and of his willing ness to lay down his life a ransom for his people.

3dly, Some charge Moses with being guilty of the breach of this Commandment, in killing the Egyptian, which we read

1

of in Exód. ii. 11, 12. But, to vindicate him from this charge, let it be considered,

[1.] That the Egyptian, whom he slew, not only smote an Hebrew, as it is in this chapter, but he did it wrongfully, as it is observed in Acts vii. 24. there was no offence given, nor just reason for this injurious treatment, and to oppress or abuse one that is in a miserable condition, as the Hebrews were at that time, is an heinous crime in God's account. Moreover, to smite, in scripture, is often taken, for to slay; so that it is not improbable, that the Egyptian slew the Hebrew; or if he did not, it might be such an injury as deserved death; which would have been inflicted in another manner, had not Israel been denied, at that time, the protection of the law.

[2.] Moses was, at this time, raised up, and called by God, to be a ruler and a judge, to defend the cause of his oppressed people; and in this action he first began to fulfil his commission; though the people refused to own him, and seemed to join with those that designed him evil for it; for which reason their deliverance was put off forty years longer, while he was an exile in the land of Midian, Acts vii. 24, 26. compared with 30. Now to slay a public enemy and oppressor, and, as it is probable, one who had forfeited his life, and that with a commission from God, to act as a ruler and a judge Sover his people, cannot be reckoned a breach of this Commandment. Thus concerning the violation of this Commandment, as including in it the murdering of our neighbour.

2. This Commandment is notoriously broken by those -who lay violent hands on themselves, which we have no in-stance of any good man, in scripture, that was ever suffered to do, but only such who were, like Saul, Ahitophel, Judas, and others, of the most infamous character. This is a sin which is attended with many aggravations; For,

(1.) It is to act as though our lives were at our own dispo"sal; which are to be considered as a talent which we are entrusted with by God, to improve for his glory; and he alone. has a right to dispose thereof at his pleasure.

(2.) This argues, and arises from, the highest discontent and impatience under the hand of God, which is contrary to that temper, which we ought to exercise as Christians, who profess subjection to him.

(3.) It is contrary to nature, and that principle of self-preservation which God has implanted in us; and, indeed, he that does this, not only acts below the reason of a man, but does that which even brutes themselves are not inclined to. (4.) It is a giving place to, and gratifying the Devil, who acts agreeably to his character, as a murderer from the begin VOL. III. 3 Z

ning, when he tempts men to destroy both soul and body at

once.

(5.) It is presumptuous and bold to resolve, that whatever measure of duty God has prescribed for us to fill up in this world, we will serve him no longer. If marshal law punishes deserters with death, is there not a severe punishment due unto those who do, as it were, desert the service of God by self-murder? Nothing is more certain than this, that if duty be enjoined by God, the time in which it is to be performed, is also fixed by him, and not left to our determination.

(6.) It is a rushing hastily into eternity, not considering the consequence thereof, nor the awful tribunal of Christ, before which they must immediately appear, and give an account of this, as well as other sinful actions of life.

(7.) It is done with such a frame of spirit, that a person cannot, by faith, commit his soul into the hands of Jesus Christ; for that requires a better temper of mind than any one can be supposed to have, who murders himself.

Here it may be enquired, since, as was before observed, no good man was ever guilty of this crime, whether Samson did not break this Commandment in pulling down the house upon his own head, as well as the Philistines?

To this it may be answered,

[1.] That Samson's life, at this time, was a burden to himself, useless to his brethren, a scorn to the open enemy, and an occasion of their ascribing their deliverance to their idol; and probably, it would have been soon taken away by them; which circumstances, though they would not, in themselves, have been sufficient to justify this action; yet they might justify his desire, that God would put an end, to his life, and release him out of this miserable world; especially if this would redound more to his glory than any thing he could do for the future, or had done in the former part of his life,

[2.] It plainly appears, that God, in answer to his prayer, not only gave him leave to take away his own life, together with the lives of his enemies, but he wrought a miracle to enable him to do it; and therefore it was a justifiable action, and no breach of this Commandment, Judges xvi. 28,―30.

3. We shall now consider the heinous aggravation of this sin, of taking away the life of another unjustly, and the terrible judgments that such have ground to expect, who are guilty hereof.

(1.) According to the divine law, this sin is to be punished with death, by the hand of the civil magistrate, Deut. xix. 11, 12. Thus Joab, who had deserved to die for murders formerly committed, was slain, by David's order, by his son Solomon, though he sought protection by taking hold of the

« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »