Now that portion of the passage in the psalm, which was contrary to his purpose, Satan craftily passed over, "to keep thee, in all thy ways." Here lies the whole force of this Scripture, that this guardianship of angels is promised to us "in all our ways" or "in our lawful calling" only. Christ in all divine wisdom sets before Satan this as the true meaning of the sacred text, when he replies to his face in this precept, "Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God." By this Christ signifies that the "way" of man is not in the air, but that was the "way" of the flying fowls; but that the "way" of man was the steps which led from the roof of the temple to the ground; and which were made for the end that there might be a descent from the top of the temple to the bottom, easy and without peril. When therefore we are in our lawful calling and duty, whether that duty be commanded of God or of men, which latter have a right to prescribe the duty of our calling, while we are thus "in our ways," then we may assuredly believe the guardianship of angels will not fail us. The above example therefore will furnish a very useful rule to be observed in our disputations with these fanatical tools of Satan. For those who are not on their guard are often deceived when crafty men transfer their arguments, after their own manner, from connected to unconnected portions of the Scripture; or adopt dishonest connections or divisions of the sacred text; but adduce not passages in their integral state as they stand in the Word. Now this is the very method adopted in the present case by my adversary, when he argues as above from these two detached portions, "That law is not made for a righteous man," and "Where there is no law, there is no transgression." He who is not on the watch-tower of wisdom and caution here is entangled before he is aware of it, and drawn into the horrible conclusion, that there was no real sin in eating the first apple; because, as our crafty opponents would argue, there was no law; and, as they further argue, which is indeed true in itself, because "where there is no law there is no transgression." And I am by no means certain that some even in our day have not been deceived by this very argument of the devil. For they so speak of original sin as to make it not a sin itself, but a punishment of sin only. Hence Erasmus, discussing this point with his famous eloquence, observes, "Original sin is a punishment, inflicted on our first parents, which we their posterity are compelled to bear for another's fault, without any desert of our own. Just as the son of an harlot is forced to endure the infamy, not by his own fault but by that of his mother. For what sin could any man commit who had as yet no existence?" These sentiments flatter human reason, but they are full of impiety and blasphemy.