LIBRARY 
 
 OK TMK 
 
 l»RI.\CETO]%, X.J. 
 
 IxtNATIOX OF 
 
 I SAM I 1:K ACi N K\V, 
 
 ..1 y II ! 1. \ I'K 1. H H I \. HA. 
 
 J.rtter 5 *C^ ^^ / 
 
 <^.aA..^^^^* 
 
 BX' 9422 .C3 1827 
 
 Campbell, Alexander, 1788- 
 
 1866. 
 The Christian-preacher 
 
 sec 
 
THE 
 
 CHRISTIAN PREACHEM; 
 
 INTENDED 
 
 TO DETECT ERROR, 
 
 AND TO 
 
 EXHIBIT JIJVD BEFEJ^D TRUTH, 
 
 ON THE 
 
 Difficult and disputed doctrines, connected with 
 the controversy 
 
 BETWEEW 
 
 ARMINIANISM AND CALVINISM; 
 
 AND IN WHrCH 
 
 The Two Systems 
 
 ARE 
 RECTIFIED AND RECONCILED 
 
 BY 
 ALEXANDER CAMrBELL, 
 
 POPLARTOWN, WORCESTER COUNTY, MD, 
 
 COPY RIGHT SECURED ACCORDING TO LAW. 
 
 PRINTED BY A. M. SCHEE, 
 DOVER, DEL. 
 
 1827—8. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 The centre of Calvinism is the absolute Sovereignty 
 of God; and that of Arminianism the love of the Creator 
 to all mankind. These principles appear equally sus- 
 tained by the authority of the Bible. That God rules 
 in the armies of heaven, and worketh all things after the 
 counsel of his own will; and that he loves the world, and 
 is not willing that any should perish, appear to be doc- 
 trines, equally Scriptural and therefore, equally entitled 
 to belief. Convinced of this, and fully believing, that the 
 testimony of the Spirit of truth,- must be always consis- 
 tent with itself, the writer of these sheets, has been in- 
 duced to pursue the enquiry, whether these propo- 
 sitions are not the different pillars of the same temple 
 and therefore, perfectly, and demonstrably, reconcile- 
 able with each other. The residt of this enquiry 
 is given in the following discourses. None of them 
 were ever delivered in the pulpit as they are here exhi- 
 bited; and with one or two exceptions, nothing resem- 
 bling them. A thorough discussion of these subjects, 
 naturally requiring a chain of speculations too abstract 
 for the edification of the generality of hearers, these 
 same principles, when preached, have appeared in less 
 argumentative, but in more popular and practical forms. 
 The remarks appended to some of these sermons, may 
 to many, and especially, to those unacquainted with the 
 facts from which they arose, appear to be unduly severe. 
 If it be so however, the writer, after a calm retrospec- 
 tion of several months, with all the circumstances of 
 the case before him, is still in an error. The attack, 
 which they aie intended to repel, was personal^ and 
 consisted in odious abuse^ and the most u^qiiaUfn^d 
 fakchood, and was made, not on the res^^onsibility of an 
 i.idi.i.JuaU but was supported by the authority of the 
 whole conference of Philadelphia. 
 
 It was also circulated in the most public manner, and 
 with an evident intention as far as |.>ossible to prostiate 
 the relinriou? influence of an iuf^ividi'al. located in the 
 heart of a comm'inity, where the a-.i«hority of Hi'-. Con- 
 fereuce could obtain an extensive credence, for any 
 
IV 
 
 thing which they might choose to publish. No evi- 
 dence has as yet appeared to prove, that any thing un- 
 triie^ or mistaken^ has been introduced into the remarks. 
 If such circumstances did not require, that the sword 
 of truth, should be wielded for the full execution of its 
 piercing and cutting powers, it is difficvdt to say when 
 there could be such a demand. After having repelled 
 the foe, and defended the citadel, the writer wishes to 
 obey the command, Love your enemies. He never 
 wished them any thing worse^ than that they should be 
 better men. And his sincere prayer now, is, that the 
 Ignorance and depravity so manifest in the movers and 
 the conductors of that attack, may be healed by divine 
 grace, and forgiven by divine mercy. 
 
 Almost from the commencement of this work the 
 Editor has resided at a distance from the press. Some- 
 times he could give the proof sheet a slight inspection, 
 and at other times none. Typographical errors are 
 more numerous than could be wished. It is however 
 hoped, that by the assistance of the errata, the meaning 
 will in no case be mistaken. 
 
 At some future time the subjects of this volume may 
 be pursued further. 
 
 That the time may soon come, when the watchmen on 
 Zion's walls, shall see eye to eye; the truth as it is in 
 Jesus shine over the whole earth like the sun; and all 
 flesh see the salvation of God, is the sincere prayer of 
 
 THE AUTHOR. 
 
CONTENTS, 
 
 Sermon, Pa<^e. 
 
 I. Calvinis7n and Arminianism rectified and 
 reconciled j 
 
 I. Thess. V. 21 — Prove all things; hold fast that 
 which is good. 
 
 II. Comiyig to Christ 33_ 
 John V. 40 — Ye will not come unto me that ye 
 
 might have life. 
 
 III. Why men do not come to Christ 49. 
 John V. 40 — Ye will not come unto me that ye 
 
 might have life. 
 
 IV. The cause and the design of God's giving his Son 73, 
 John III, 16 — For God so loved the world, that he 
 
 gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever be- 
 lieveth on him^ might not perish, but have e- 
 verlasting life. 
 
 V. The government of God 97. 
 Ps. XCVil, 1 — The Lord reigneth; let the earth 
 
 rejoice; let the multitude of the isles be glad 
 thereof. 
 
 VI. The fall of man 121. 
 Gen. Ill, 6. — And when the woman saw that the 
 
 tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to 
 the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one 
 wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, 
 and gave also unto her husband with her, and he 
 did eat. 
 
 VII. The same subject continued 153. 
 
 VIII. The best possible system 169. 
 Isaiah XLVI, 10 — My counsel shall stand, and I 
 
 will do all my pleasure. 
 Ps. V. 4 — For thou art not a God, that hath plea- 
 sure in wickedness; neither can evil dwell with thee. 
 
 IX. The same subject continued 193. 
 
 X. Bible Election 233. 
 I. Pet. I, 1, 2 — Peter an apostle of Jesus Christ to 
 
 strangers, scattered throughout Pontiis, Galatia, 
 Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, ELECT accor- 
 ding to the foreknowledge of God the Father, 
 through sanctification of the Spirit unto obedi- 
 ence, and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ. 
 
VI 
 
 XI. The efficacy of prayer in the conversion of the 
 loorld 257. 
 
 Matt. VI, 10 — Thy kingdom come. Thy will be 
 done in earth as it is in heaven. 
 
 XII. Preaching as the oracles of God 265. 
 I. Pet. IV, 11 — If any man speak, let him speak 
 
 as the oracles of God, 
 
 £>The copies of the Christian Preacher now on hand, 
 will be immediately bound in boards and placed for sale 
 in the hands of E. Littell, Esq. No. 88 Chesnut-street, 
 Philadelphia. Any wishing to obtain the work will 
 hereafter apply to him. 
 
RECTIFIED ^JSTD EECOjyciLED. 
 
 Prove all things; holdfast that 'which is good-— I Thess. V. 21, 
 
 Man is endowed with reason and formed for immor- 
 tality. And as the proper application of the one, pre- 
 pares for the enjoyment of the other; the Benificent Cre- 
 ator, ever mindful of our best and most enduring inte 
 rests, exhorts us, in the text, to the legitimate exercise 
 of our rational powers. God has not made us in vain, 
 nor for less than admirable ends. Man may not inno- 
 cently bury his rationality under a bushel or in the 
 earth; lie down on the couch of indolence, permit himself 
 to be cast forth upon the stream of pt)pular opinion, and 
 to be borne heedlessly along by the current: but is en- 
 joined, in the authoritative language of the text, to prove 
 all things, — to search for good and to hold it fa-^t. 
 
 'f he "all things" which it is the design of this discourse 
 to prove, are the two great systems of theology — Calvi- 
 nism and Armlnianism — and the good to be sought and 
 held fast, a more reasonable and scriptural system. Iq 
 this order the subjects lie before us — 
 
 I. The Calvinian and Arminian systems, are to be 
 proved. In the days of the Apostles and their immedi- 
 ate followers, the Saviour's humble and unlettered dis- 
 ciples, believing the Gospel to be the gift of God, impli- 
 citly adopted its principles and its precepts as true and 
 reasonable, without any curious or scrupulous enquiries 
 about the systematical agreement of its doctrines. If 
 one of these primitive fathers discoursed on one class 
 of texts, he would appear Arminian, and, if on another, 
 Calvinistic, and thus to modern systema<izers, his 
 preaching would have exhibited all the apparent contra- 
 dictions, imagined by some to be found in the literul in- 
 terpretation of the ^icriptures, whence it was taken. 
 But soon heretics arose — subtle minded men, who em- 
 ployed all their ingenuity to undermine and prostrate 
 the truth; and who having adopted systems formed ac- 
 
cording to the preconceptions of philosophy, ^'falsely so 
 called,'^ would balance their flimsy fibncs upon the let- 
 ter of a single texf; and wrest and torture every scrip- 
 ture, which their narrow-minded theology could not 
 reach. Then it became necessary for the advocates of 
 truth to study system, to war against the enemy with 
 bis own weapons, and upon his own ground; to oppose 
 reason to reason and phih>sophy to philosophy. No- 
 thing special appears, with regard to the two leading 
 systems, that now divide the christian church, until the 
 fifth century, when Polagius arose and taught, that the 
 doctrine of the original depravity of human nature and 
 the necessity of divine grace to enlighten the understan- 
 ding, and purify the heart, vvas prejudicial to the pro- 
 gress of holiness and virtue and tended to lull mankind 
 into a mischievous and fatal security. This earth 
 born fire kindled in the self righteousness of presump- 
 tuous man, finding every unrenewed heart a magazine 
 and all its corruptions powder, so soon as proposed, shot 
 forth with all the rapidity of the electric blaze and threa- 
 tened fearful desolation to the whole heritage of fxod. 
 The alarm aroused the energies of Augii|tine, pastor at* 
 the church at Hippo in Africa, who |)ouied upon the 
 world such torrents of reasoning and eloquence as sooa 
 extinguished the spreading conflagration. Augustine 
 was probably the first that reduced the doctrines now 
 called Calvinistic into a system. A monk by the name 
 of Cassian with several others, endeavoured to blend to- 
 gether the doctrines of Augustine and Pelagius, and 
 formed a system called Semij)elagianism, the leading fea- 
 tures of wliich nearly resembled the doctrines afterwards 
 adopted by James Arminius. Soon after this, the cloud 
 of popery began to deepen its shades and hung for a 
 succession of ages over the church; and during this long 
 lapse of super«titous night, these doctrines were variously 
 agitated, until Luther^ in the sixteenth century, commen- 
 ced the Heformation, and distinctly taught the'doctrines of 
 Augustine. Aud by Calvin, hi.^ distingushed contempo- 
 rary, these doctrines were more fully explained and sys- 
 tematized. Tiie sura of the belief of these great 6ienj 
 
on the subject of Election, may be comprised iri the fol- 
 lowing woids'-Before the foundation of the world, God 
 chose a certain number of the fallen race of Adam'io c^ 
 terual glory, wjthout any foresight of faith, good works 
 or any other conditions, performed hy the Creature: and 
 the rest of mankind, he was pleased to pass by and or- 
 dain to dishonor and wrath for their sins, and to the praise 
 of his vindictive justice. 
 
 In the year 1591, James Arminius, who had been educa 
 ted in the Calvinian tenets^ and then professor of divinity 
 in the university of Leyden, becoming dissatisfied with 
 the rigid doctrines of Calvin, dissented by teaching 
 "That God from all eternity determined to btsto^v sal 
 vation on those who he foresaw would persevere unto 
 the end, and to inflict everlasting punishment on those 
 who should continue in their unbelief and resist the di» 
 vine succours; so that election was conditional, and rep- 
 robation, in like manner, the result of foreseen infidelity 
 and persevering wickedness."^ 
 
 Such are the primary articles of the Calvinistic and 
 Arminian creeds; and, as tJiese give rise to most of the 
 minor differences, their other peculiar tenets need not 
 be introduced into this discourse. 
 
 Let us compare these leading doctrines, and see wherein 
 they agree and wherein they differ, i'hey are alike in 
 supposing, that the Bible teaches, that God chose some 
 and passed by and did not choose others; and as t!ie Ar- 
 minian admits God's eternal foreknowledge, and main- 
 tains, that from eternity, he determined to ^ayejnst the 
 number which he foresaw as believing, and to punish 
 jMsi the number which he foresaw as persisting in unbe- 
 lief; according to his creed the number saved and the num- 
 ber lost are just as certain, as can be upon Calvinistic 
 principles. Thus far Calvin, and Arminius agier: hoth 
 admit the eternity of the divine foreknowledge, and the 
 eternity of the divine choice. Now. wherein cb) they 
 differ?— In this; Calvin supposes that God '^foresees fu- 
 ture events, only in consequence of his decree, that they 
 
 *Sie Buck's Tlieoiogic*! Diction^iTjr and Mosbeim's Ecclesiastlol History. 
 
shall happen,'' f and Armiuius, that God from eternity 
 determined some future events as a consequence of his 
 foreknowledge of the choosings of his moral creatures 
 not determined at all, and, consequently, while Calvin 
 held, that God determined all things, Arrainius belie- 
 ved, that the choice of his moral creatures, was Uft un- 
 determined. But. not to pursue minor differences, the 
 first dividing point is, Calvin places the determinations 
 of God, before his foreknowledge, and Arrainius, his 
 foreknowledge before his determinations, and, though 
 this app3Ars a difference, occasioned by the splitting of 
 a hair, yet it has filled the camp of the Lord's host with 
 the shout of war and the religious Heavens with black- 
 ness and tempest. 
 
 Both systems have scriptural truths, scriptural contra- 
 dictions, and philosophical ditHcuUies. Calvinism gives 
 a rational and scriptural display of Jehovah's absolute 
 supremacy, wisdom, and power; but by a bold, anti- 
 scriptural philosophy, it makes the decree of God, which 
 elects some men to salvation, the only medium, through 
 which the heavenly mercy moves, and rears the decree 
 of reprobation, as a dark mountain to intercept the sun- 
 shine of love and to cast the cold and deep shades of 
 night and winter over the non-elect world. And it ap- 
 pears inconsistent with such passages of scripture as 
 represent God as willing to act otherwise, if the conduct 
 of mefi had been different; as when Christ declares bis 
 willingness to gather the children of Jerusalem together 
 as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, if 
 they would have been gathered.^- Now if the divine pre- 
 destination i« understood to be the cause of their choice, 
 then the thing supposed — their willingnpss to be ga- 
 thered — was an absolute impossibility — .just as much 
 so, as to reverse the decision of Jehovah's immuta- 
 ble wisdom: and if the Calvini'^t say, that predestination 
 had no influence in dictating the choice; yet if their de- 
 strnrtion associated with this choice, was eternally de- 
 creed, still a question naturally arises, would a different 
 
 tCalvIn's Institutes book III, chapter KXIII. sec. 6. •Matt. XXII, 37^ 
 
choice have altered GotVs eternal decision in rej>;ard to 
 their future state? if you say it would not, thcTn you 
 literally contradict the languas;e of the text uldcli de- 
 clares, ^'l would" hut <'yp would not," and if you say it 
 would, you then surrender the philosophical position of 
 Calvin, that God's predestination is the cause of his fore- 
 knowledge. And the same reasoning applies to all that 
 class of texts to which this belonsis. Swh are the diffi- 
 culties to which the grand principle of Calvin, that God 
 foreknows because he first predestinates, naturally and 
 unavoidably leads. And the most plausible solution 
 found among its ablest and most ingenious advocates, is, 
 that "it is an incomprehensible subject, the facts are to be 
 believed but not to be explained — a subject on which it is 
 presumptuous to reason, because it is an attempt to be 
 wise above what is written." With my reason hewilde- 
 red, and ray Bible contradicted, 1 go to the Arniinian 
 for relief — he points me to a system, which indeed ap- 
 pears to exhibit the mercy and £;oodness, and even the 
 justice of God in a grand and affecting manner; but one 
 which presents his empire as a "mighty maze" and, 
 at least in part "without a plan" — one which, by ma- 
 king all Jehovah's decisions, in his moral universe, rest 
 on the character and conduct, which he foresees his sub- 
 jects will choose, exalts the capricious free will of the 
 Creature above thrones and principalities and powers 
 and ''all that is called God,^^ or, that at best, supposes tlie 
 Almighty placed on his throne like the vane upon the 
 bouse top, liable to be turned to an}' point, which th« 
 uncertain choice of his moral subjects may chance to in- 
 fluence — He exhibits to me as an alteruj^tive for Calvi- 
 nism, a system which affirms that God fn»m eternity- 
 predestined or elected some men to everlastins; life on the 
 previous knowledge of their faith and holiness— hp- 
 cause he saw them ''covformed to fhp imai^cofhis Son^ 
 and *'holy and laithout blame before him in lore,'" whilst 
 the Bible declares, that God pretlestifiated men not be- 
 cause he foresaw tl em already ^'covformed to the iwa^p of 
 his Son/^ but 'Ho be conformed to the ima^s^e of his Son^,-' 
 and that he chose raen before the foundation of the world, 
 
 •Rom, vin, 29. • ' 
 
6 
 
 not because he foresaw thera previously ^%oly and mth- 
 out blame before him in love,^^ but that tliey "'should be ho- 
 ly and ivithout blame before him in love,''^ buch are tlie 
 philosophical difficulties aud scriptural contradictions of 
 this alternate scheine. Aud if 1 press upon its a<lvocat6 
 the objections, that it divests God of his wisdom and 
 makes him the slave of his creature's choosings, he will 
 follow the rigid Calvinist and inform me, that the sub- 
 jects, relating to the divifie foreknowledge and determi- 
 nations are awful mysteries, which he professes not to 
 explain. And if I ask him what those srciptures mean 
 that si) literally contradict his sy«;tem? his answer a- 
 mounts to this ^» They meafi just the contray to the let- 
 ter of tlie sacred text. — In the Bible there are many 
 things hard to be understood." 'I'lie notorious fact is, 
 vou mav reason on either svstem to the entire satis- 
 faction of its ad\rocates^ until you come to the defective 
 and unreasonable parts, and then they will warn you to 
 stand at a distance, they will throw around it a mist of 
 mystery, and inform you that the ground is too sacred 
 to be trodden by the feet of uuhallowed reason. Now 
 is this exibitin:!; a system of divine truth, *<fair as the 
 moon, clear as the sun and terrible as an army with ban- 
 ners?" When men, to accommodate their favorite systems, 
 make mysteries where Go»l has intended there should be 
 none, they create a thousand infidels for every mystery. 
 These two great systems may be viewed as two state- 
 ly structures, bnilt with stones dug out of the quarry of 
 heaven, and eacli fitted by the divine hand for a parti- 
 cular place in the temple of God, but in putting together 
 these precious and lieaven-w rought materials, the buil- 
 ders not comprehending the complitatedness of the 
 whole fa!)ric, frequently take a stone fitted by infinite 
 wisdom for the rear, and ])lace it in the front — a stone 
 finislied for the corner, antl lay it in the centre, and one 
 designed for the fonndation, and elevate it to the top of 
 the rorner, and when you point then to an unclosed 
 joint or a part deformed by a mislaid stone, they fill up 
 the vacuum wjth tiie untempered mortar of iiuman in- 
 vention, spread over it the varnish of mystery aud sup- 
 
 ♦Eph. 1.4. 
 
pose, that contrary to all the appearances addressed to 
 the human eye, there are still existing, a fitness and a 
 beauty in some incomprehensihle maunei", which they 
 can not understand. Calviiusni is an edifice, with itH 
 rear and its ends, wrought with a workmanship, thai; 
 needeth not to he ashamed; hut with some untiltini; 
 stones and an unsightly portico in front, that present a 
 forhiddins; aspect to the transient multitude. On the 
 contrary, the Arminian system, is like an edifice with a 
 well garnished and imposing front, and all its defects 
 and deformities, thrown into the rear, entirely out of 
 sight of mere superficial ohservers; but the man who en 
 ters and surveys all the apartments in the light of reason 
 and revelation, will find, that it has at least as many 
 difficulties and as great deformities as Calvinism, If 
 Calvinism stands in stuhhorn contradiction to some plain 
 and positive declarations of the Great God, Arminian- 
 isni is no less guilty of the same offence. If Calvinism 
 by the decree of reprobation, fails to exhibit the impar- 
 tial infinitude of God's love, Arminianisn by proclaim 
 ing a moral universe without a plan, and a Supreme Cre- 
 ator, governed on his throne by the caprice of his erring 
 creatures — a caprice as blind as chance and yet as irre- 
 vocable as fate — equally fails to display the indepen- 
 dence of him who made all things for himself and the 
 fulness of the wisdom of the only wise God. If Cal- 
 vinism makes God a tjjranP^ Arminiauism makes him 
 a slave. In short, in the manner in which these systems 
 are usually preached and explained, whilst they both 
 exhibit much precious and saving truth, they are e- 
 ver deficient in unfolding certain parts of the perfec- 
 tions of the Most High in those beauteous proportions 
 and in all that unsullied glory and transcendant gran- 
 deur inwhich they are displ »yed in the Bihle; and some 
 parts of each defy all the ingenuity of man to reconcile 
 them with others of the same scheme and with any thing 
 less than a forced interpretation of many texts of sacred 
 writ. Weighed in the balance, all must admit, much 
 in both is found wanting. Let us now — 
 
 *I have somewheie seeu a remark to that amount made by Mr. John 
 Wesley, 
 
8 
 
 II. Proceed, in qoest of the good proposed to be 
 sought — a more reasonable and scriptural system. The 
 aduiissiuri of the two Ibllowing propositions: 
 
 J. The co--eterni*ij of the divine foreknowledge y and 
 divine determinntions^ and, 
 
 U. That God has adopted the best possible moral sys- 
 tem^ will redeem Christianity from all her Armiuian and 
 Calviiiian difldculties. 
 
 1. The co-eternity of the divine foreknowledge and 
 the divine determination. Fhey are equally eternal ac- 
 cording to the scriptures — "Known unto God are all 
 Jiig works from the beginnin:; of the world''*— -Here we 
 have his eternal foreknwledge. Again. '*As he bath cho- 
 sen us before the foundation of the world-'f — Here we 
 have his eternal determination or choice. So that, the 
 scriptures do not teach us, that God from all eternity 
 determined to save men, because he first foresaw their 
 faith and good works, as Arminius believed, nor yet, 
 that from all eternity, he foresaw their salvation, because 
 he had first determined to save them, as Calvin taught. 
 And this truth is demonstrable from reason as well as 
 revelation. If from eternity Q:iH\ foreknew all things, 
 then it follows by logical consequence, that from eter- 
 nity he determined all things. Suppose the sutferings 
 of Christ to be the thing foreknown. If he foreknew 
 these sufli-rings. then according to our ideas of I'ela- 
 tions, he previously, had determined to send his Son 
 into the world and,* that he slKmUl be invested with hu- 
 manity; or how could he. have foreseen him circumstan 
 ced or qualified to suffer? He had detf^rmined to create 
 such men as tiie Jews, the High Priest. Pontius Pilate, 
 and the Soldiers; or how could he have foreseen acru- 
 sers. judges and executionf»rs by whom his sufferings 
 would be inflicted? Anil moreover, he had also deter- 
 mined to accept his sufferings in lieu of the puni'.hment 
 due to guilty men; or it would seem difficult to reconcile 
 the permission of the^e suilvrings with the wisdom an.d 
 clemency of a wise and merciful father— And, above all, 
 the foreknowledge of the event, proved its determina- 
 tion certain: !>erause these sufferings were the voluntary 
 act of the Beinir who foreknew thenv 
 
 •Acts XV, 18. tEph. ^' ^- 
 
9 
 
 And again, if from eternity Grod determined all thinais, 
 from eternity, he also foreknew them. For if the suf- 
 ferings of the Saviour be the event determined, then ac- 
 cording to human apprehension, he foresaw, that Christ 
 would come into the world and be invested with human- 
 ity; or otherwise lie would have determined his suffer- 
 ings without knowing, that he would certainly be cir- 
 cumstanced or qualified to suffer. He likewise fore- 
 knew, that there would be such men as the Jews, the 
 High Priest, Pontius Pilate, and the Soldiers, and, at 
 that particular time, they would be disposed to accuse, 
 condemn, and crucify him; or otLerwise he would have 
 determined his sufferings without knowing that there 
 would be instruments disposed and qualified to be aclors 
 in the mournful tragedy. He also foreknew, that his 
 sufferings would be a sacrifice proper to be su'^stituted 
 for the punishment of sinful men; or the determination, 
 that he must suffer, would have been an impeachment 
 of his wdsdora and goodness. And last «»f all. he fore- 
 knew them as possible; or he would not have determi- 
 ned them as certain. So that if we imagine the parts 
 of Grud's universal plan, to have l^-en formed progres- 
 sively in his mind, according to the succession of huniau 
 operations, we find, that agreeably to our conceptions, his 
 foreknowledge and his determinations, must have ac- 
 companied each other and have been interwoven togeth- 
 er from beginning to end in the whole series of events; 
 and therefore, must have been eternally coexistent; and 
 if eternally coexistent, there can be no such relation be- 
 tween them as cause and effect or as antecedent and con- 
 sequent. And as we cannot conceive the one to exist, 
 at least in any succession of acts, without the other, 
 there must be a necessary relation t)etween tlieiii; but as 
 it has been proved that there can be between them no 
 such relation as cause and effect, or antecedent and con- 
 seauent, the relation between them must be that of 
 agreement and coincidence only, because connected with 
 the subject now under consideration, ng other is possible. 
 
10 
 
 And again, althous;h wheu actually contemplating the 
 operations of the divine mind, the narrowness of ouv 
 understandings, forbi(]s us to view them in any i)ther man- 
 ner, than as consecutive acts, just as we would separate- 
 ly and in succession, the parts of a vast and complica- 
 ted engine; yet, wiien we have done contemplating these 
 acts consecutively, we ouglit to conceive them all per- 
 formed at once, by one simple operation of the divine 
 intellect, just as we would imagine the whole plan of a 
 vast and complicated machine, to he formed by some 
 master mind, without any reasoning, by a simple intui- 
 tive eftort.* Now, if at once by a simple prescience, 
 without beginning or succession, God from eternity 
 knew all things, if at once by a similar determination, 
 be decreed all things, and if his determinations and his 
 foreknowledge, as lias been proved, are coeval and co- 
 eternal, then, in our a^iprehension, there can be no other 
 relation betw eeu them but that of agreement and coinci- 
 dence. And then by reason, as well as by revelation, 
 '^ve arc conducted to the conclusion, that Armiiiius was 
 mistaken, wheu he taught, that Grod from eternity de- 
 termined to save, or to punish according to belief or infi- 
 delity previously foreseen; and Calvin, when he sup- 
 posed, that God foresaw the salvation of the elect and 
 the perdition of the reprobate, only because, he had 
 previously determined their respective destinies. 
 
 Now, if God's eternal determinations are not the 
 causes nor even the antecedents of his foreknowledge, 
 and, if the relation between his prescience and his pur- 
 pose, be only that of agreement and coincidence, then 
 be may have created, and may now govern the universe 
 according to an eternal and determinate plan, and yet, 
 his determinations in thi*^ ])lan, not be the cause of any 
 of the sinful choosiiigs of his creatures. It may how- 
 ever he imagined, that this view of the subject, places 
 the voliti(ms of creatures beyond the control of the King 
 of the universe, as much as the Arminian theory, and, 
 if not quite so inconsistent with any plan; yet presents 
 
 ^See note A. 
 
11 
 
 us only a plan of coin.cidence with the free agency of 
 the creature, which is surrendering at once the truth 
 that ought to lie at the foundation of every tlieological 
 theory, '^liat the Heavens do rule''*— ^^The Lord 
 reigneth"t and ^-doeth according to his will in the ar- 
 mies of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth. "J 
 But this objection will appear entirely imaginary if it 
 may be true, that this coincidence be such that the 
 choosings of the creatures, make a part of this plan. 
 And, that it may be true, will appear from a sciiptural 
 survey of God's moral system. 
 
 I'o constitute a moral agent, four things are requisite 
 —first, a law by which "to be regulated. But to be 
 moved onwards in the path prescribed by this law with 
 out any personal choice, or to be torn from it by some 
 extraneous power, would involve no more morality or 
 immorality, than the revolutions, or the aberrations of 
 a planet, or the orderly or disorderly movenicnts of a 
 mill; and hence, secondly, to constitute a moral being — 
 since morality implies accountability —he must be en- 
 dued with a natural liberty, that in the language of our 
 Confession of Faith, '^is neither forced nor by any abso- 
 lute necessity of nature determined to gnocl or evil."|| 
 And, thirdly, since moral agency involves the idea of 
 actiyity in reference to good or evil, the threatened pe- 
 nalties of transgression and the promised rewards of o- 
 bedieuce, must be addressed to him as motives to intlu- 
 ence him to act in conformity to the law suited to his 
 nature and given for his guide. But as these motives 
 would be entirely ineffectual, if met by no correspon- 
 ding principle in the breast of the beius; to whom they 
 are a(Mres«*ed; it is, fourthly, necessary, that in every 
 accountable being, there should be a moral sense — a 
 principle producine; as a consequence of obedience the 
 feeling of approbation, and as a consequence of i\i<o- 
 bedience the sting of remorse, to give power to law and 
 efficiency to motives. Hence we bee, that natural liber- 
 
 * Dan. IV, 26. jPs. XCVI, 10. |Dan. IV, 35. 
 iJConfession of Failh, chap. IX, sec. 1. 
 
12 
 
 ty constitutes an essontial part in a moral system, and, 
 constH]ac?itly, any system in whicli there is no natural 
 liberty, cannot be a moral system* But a system in 
 which there is no plan, is but a system of confusion — of 
 mishaps anvl contradictions — and if so, any moral sys- 
 tem under an all knowing, wise, powerful, and good 
 God, mu^t be one in which there are both natural liber- 
 ty and a defiidte and well ordered plan. It must there- 
 fore l)e possible for na-ural liberty to exist in a well or- 
 dered plan. And as natural liberty consists in choosing 
 and acting acccnding to choice, it is possible that choo- 
 sing and acting according to choice should i.xist in a 
 system all the events of which happen according to order 
 and ceriainty. Hoth must be true, because the ^5crip- 
 turps declare, that God ^^worketh all things after the 
 counsel of his own will*'* and yet they permit no man 
 to say, "'l am tempted of God/'*t But to aid our con- 
 ceptions; suppose all the different orders of moral beings 
 througiiout the whole empire of God, as so many bran- 
 ches of one tree — a tree that spreads its boughs to the 
 most distant worlds and rears its top to the summit of 
 creation; and say, every limb is free to choose and act; 
 and in agref^ment with this choice and conduct, is its in- 
 terminable destiny. Now imagine^ that G«kI before he 
 formed this tree knew how every branch would use or 
 abuse that natural liberty, which has just been shown 
 to be essential to a moral being — how many and what 
 ones would choose death and wither for amputation and 
 Imrnins;, and how many and what ones would choose 
 lile and bloom for glory and immortality; and how he, 
 as the most wise and powerful husbandman, must treat 
 each limb and leaf in correspondence vvith the choice 
 which he views as certain if he should determine to 
 raise this tree into existence. Here the whole tree, 
 with all its branches and their choosings, and his own 
 righteous treatment of every shoot, would be contempla- 
 te<l in his plan. Also imagine, that after mature deli- 
 beration, he determines to rear this tree, and thus to 
 
 •Eph, I, 11. tJames 1, 13. 
 
13 
 
 adopt this p!an. And last of all, contemplate God's 
 survey of ibe moral universe, reprei-entcM! in (his Uce, 
 before we suppose it adopted— his foreknowledge of 
 the choice of every branch, his permissicm of the natu- 
 ral liberty of thatch<»ice, and every other deteimirialiou 
 in the whole plan, as coexistent, and coetenia!; ani!, as 
 one simple intuitive act; and you have iny view s of the 
 liberty and the plan of God's mcual empire— how *'the 
 Lord rei8;neth," and '•doeth his will in tlie armies of 
 heaven and among (he inhabitants of the earth,'' and 
 yet, leaves men and angels free.. Now this illustraticm, 
 if properly apprehended, brinj2;s all the free acts of the 
 creature within the ran2;e <»f God's government; so far 
 as it is possible for such acts to be the sidyects of govern- 
 ment beyond the agents that produce them. Thny Imve 
 been viewed as contemplated in his plan; and as depen- 
 dant on his sovereign will for the agents and the natu- 
 ral liberty from which they derived their existence. It 
 was his Supreme determination, all consequences wise- 
 ly considered, to permit their occurence. And if with 
 the whole system before him — all its tendencies and 
 events surveyed— the choosings of every agent and his 
 own coincidental determinations — wHh power to reject 
 if he wisely thought it best, it was his pleasure to adopt 
 it as he saw it was, and as he foresaw it would be. to 
 say. that this is not working all things after the counsel 
 ofhis own will, is to suppose, that it cannot be the 
 counsel of his will, that his creatures sbnuhl in any case 
 enjoy the liberty of choice; and as this lil>erty is essen- 
 tial to a moral system, it is to suppose fliat I)< ity can 
 not reign consistently with the existence t)f amoral sys- 
 tem. And this is deemed sufficient to obviate any ob- 
 jection, that may be urged agaii.st the tlieory exhibited 
 in this discourse, as militating, in whole or in part, a- 
 gainst any scriptural disjday of God's sovereignty. 
 
 rhus in perfect cnnsistefjcy with the absolute supre- 
 macy of Jehovah, we see how it may be true of all the 
 guilty sons and daughters of Adam, as of I'^rael of old, 
 they destroy themselves. But we may again be met by 
 
1^ 
 
 an objector, who will probablv say, ^^True your des- 
 criptivHi of the moral system illustrates the manner in 
 which God may have predestinated all things and yet 
 man he free; hut, if man's making this fatal choice and 
 incurrhig the vvoful destiny, make, as you teach, a part 
 of this plan, how can it he true, that be has no pleasure 
 in the death of the wicked? And if from eternity he 
 foresaw, tiiat a certain number of his creatures won hi 
 choo«i« tji« road to death, and if at the same time he de- 
 creed to them the natural liberty of making this choice 
 — thus permitting tiieir destruction to make part of his 
 plan, how can he desirt*, that all men should be saved? 
 And how could he weep over unbelieving Jerusalem, 
 if he permitted their sin and destruction to make a part 
 of his purpose? And since it makes a part of his plan 
 to let some men be lost, how does he wisely and sincere- 
 ly offer the fxospel to all men?'' rhough these are objec- 
 tions frequently, and loudly urged by Arminians against 
 Calvinists, yet they may. in a little different shape, be 
 just as forcibly urj;ed againsj; themselves. For if from 
 eternity God i^(»reknew all things, as Arminius supposes 
 — bcf»)re he made man, what man would certainly do — 
 wlio among his falh^n generations would neglect his 
 calls; and, on his foresight of their disobedience, deter- 
 mined from all eternity to sink them to the deeps of 
 yynv; it mny be plausibly objected, that God must de- 
 light in the misery of the wicked; or, in full view of 
 tlif^ir dis(»bedience and death, he would never hav» 
 made them any part of the divine workmanship. How 
 can it be true, that God wdl have all men to be saved, 
 since on the foresight of their iniquity he determined to 
 destruction a part of the human kind before they were 
 b(-rn? And since he knows, that some men will not obey 
 the Gospel; autl as a consequence ot this foreseen disobe- 
 dience, he had determined,before he gave them existence 
 to punish th«*m forever; how can he sin« erely, and wisely, 
 offer the Gospel to all men? And in short, if from eter- 
 nal ;^ges he foresaw, thnt if he did create some men, they 
 would die impenitent, and be lost, why, unless he hadi 
 
15 
 
 pleasure in their sins or in their miseries, did he £;ive 
 them being? These are ultScuUies that the Aiiniiiiau 
 ought to lemove from his own system, before he |)ro- 
 iiouuces Calvinism cruel. 'They are consecjnences, that 
 apparently cling to both systems. The piiocipal dif- 
 ference IS, that in Calvinism, tliey appear in front; bu^ 
 in Arminianism in the rear, throvi'n out of the sii;;ht of 
 mere passers by and superficial observers; but glaringly 
 visible to the eye that surveys the whole scheme, and 
 follows out its consecpjences. 'The Arminian, standing 
 at the front of Calvin's temple, surveyin2; the doctrine 
 of reprobation, hung over the door, exclaims "horrible! 
 horrible!'' — whilst rhe Calvinisf, admitting its apparent- 
 ly frowning and forbidding features; but believing its 
 existence scriptural and its origin divine, responds '*mys- 
 tery! mystery!". But if you take the Arminian by the 
 band and conduct him to the rear of his own temple, and 
 ask him how much softer are the features of his own 
 doctrine, which supposes, tliat God from all eiernity de- 
 termined to doom unborn millions to eternal chains and 
 eternal burnings; for the sins of which he foresaw they 
 would certainly be guilty, if he gave them beiiig? — and 
 how much milder does it appear in the Almighty, to 
 create them, determining to damn them for their sins 
 foreseen, as a certain consequence of their creation, as 
 his creed supposes:^ or to create them, determining to 
 damn them for their sins permissively decieed. as the 
 Calvioist believes? He will answer, '^that though this 
 appears to be the consequence of his doctrine; yet he 
 disavows it; and, that the subject of tiie divine presci- 
 ence is surrounded with mystery"— That is, in other 
 words, it appears logically to be so; but in some mv^^^'- 
 rious manner^ which he cannot explain, it cavinot be so! 
 And thus, whilst the Calvinist admits the doctrine of re- 
 probation to appear awfully severe; but beciu'^e he re- 
 ceives it as the truth ofCiod, supposes that in s(»me mys- 
 terious manner it must be like its author, mild and mer- 
 ciful;— The Arminian acknowledges, that almost the 
 
 *See note B, 
 
16 
 
 same kind of reprobation appears to arise out of his doc- 
 trine; but because it seems harsh and contrary to his views 
 of the mercy of God, he imai];i!ies, that in some mysterious 
 manner it only appears to be^ but cannot be really true; 
 ;ind thus each places the mystery where it seems best 
 in his own eyes. IMiese are (iiiliculties, which candid 
 and intelli2;ent men, honestly attached to both theories, 
 must see and must feel: for it is .generally found, that a 
 man of mind and reflection sufficient to examine and 
 compare b )th systems, is an Arojinian or a Calvinist 
 not because he sees no difficulties in the scheme which 
 he chooses; but because, he imagines fewer in that than 
 in the other. Such, ot both systems, as have eyes to 
 see and hearts to feel these difficMilties just urged, are 
 respectfully invited to the consideration of our 
 
 2. Proposition; ''that God has adopted one of the best 
 possible moral systems.^^^' We may safely admit, that 
 an infitiite number of plans, equally 2;ood with the one 
 which Jehovah has actually chosen, is possible; but to 
 say, that from the mighty range of possibilities, a better 
 might have l)een selected, is to reflect at once on all his 
 natural and moral perfections. He had a knowledge 
 of all p(>ssibilities; and infinite wisdom, so as, out of all 
 Hiese possibilities, to make the very best selection, and 
 to construct them into the very best possible plan; infi- 
 nite goodness to influence him to its adoption; and infi- 
 nite power to secure its execniion. And though, in this 
 plan of moral being, and mural government, some evil 
 be fimnd; yet this does not prove, that this is not the 
 best possible created system. With God, we are in- 
 deed inlormed, all things are possible; but these, "all 
 things," must be understood of things not inconsistent 
 with the combined infinity of mH his peifections; because 
 in the same book, we are taught, that God cannot deny 
 himself. And if so, it maybe inconsistent with his per- 
 fections, to create another being as absolutely perfect as 
 himself: and judging from the Iripse of men, and of the 
 angels who kept not their first estate, it appears altoge- 
 
 *Spe noi-e C. 
 
17 
 
 ther probable, that any moral being not absolutely perfect 
 if in particular circumstances left lo himself, is liable to 
 fall into moral evil. The morning stars that encircled 
 the Maker's throne, and he who led their hosts, forfeit- 
 ed their first abo\le, and were cast down fmm the hea- 
 vens and consigned to the blackness of darkness forever. 
 And if no one moral creature is in himself exempt from 
 such a liability, surely, it is not to be expected, that a 
 system, which may embrace the inhabitants of millions 
 of distant worlds, should be any more exempt from the 
 same liability. So that, without making a system of 
 moral agents, as absolutely perfect as himself—without 
 communicating to every agent in the system, the immen- 
 sity of his power, wisdom, goodness and imnnitability 
 — which would be nothing less than to create another 
 God — an absurdity even in idea — it may have been im- 
 possible for the all wise and omnipotent Jehovah, to 
 construct a system in which there would be less evil, 
 than in the one which he has chosen. As soon as he 
 had given creation the last touch of his plastic hand, he 
 pronounced his benediction ou the new-born existence, 
 and proclaimed all "very good.'^ In the original, the 
 phrase "very good," is the intensity of the superlative, 
 "the best.'' And if "the best," it must not only have 
 been the most perfect, as it then was, before sin had 
 made its intrusions into the fair garden of God; but also, 
 ^Hhe besf^ guarded against its entrance and its desola- 
 tions. 
 
 And if this moral system, all things wisely consider- 
 ed, be the best, God's choice was not between a moral 
 system in which there would be no evil, and one like 
 the present, in which there is some evil; but between 
 one like the present in which there is ^^on)e evil, and o- 
 thers in which there would be more evil. To create a 
 system in which there would be no liability to evil, may 
 be just as impossible, as to create a free and immutable 
 creature— or, as that there should be a creature God, 
 and a Creator God. And hence, God's choosing a uni- 
 yerse in which there is some moral evil, is not because 
 
18 
 
 he prefers evil to ,e;o()d; but because he prefers a lea« 
 evil to a greater; and because he preferred the present 
 system with all its evils, to the non-existence of any 
 system; just as a man might prefer a house, not so su- 
 perbly finished as Nebuchadnrazar's palace, to the en- 
 tire want of a place of residence. 
 
 'I'he very idea of natural liberty conveys the possibi- 
 lity of acting in more ways than one; and such the 
 fact in the case of men and angels demonstrates — they 
 were free to obey, and for a time they did obey — they 
 were free to fall, and they eventually did fall. The 
 idea of mutability, is a liability to change: men and an- 
 gels did change, and were therefore created mutable; and 
 thus they are proved by the mournful history of sin to 
 have been Iwih free and mutable. Now, as natural li- 
 berty and mutability, imply, t!iat the being or beings oa 
 whom they are delegated, whilst in an unconfirmed state, 
 may change from better to worse, as well as from good 
 to better, it is a contradiction in idea to sup|)ose a free, 
 mutable, unconfirmed beina; or system of beings, so per- 
 fect, th^t it maij not change f(n^ the worse. And if so, 
 the total exclusion of all evil, fi rever, from the moral 
 universe, on any plan, consistent with the combined 
 perfections of Deity, may be just as unavoidable on the 
 part of the Creator, as some degree of im[)erfection ia 
 every created being. If therefore, God suffers evil into 
 his plan, because, with the existence of the best one pos- 
 sible, it cannot be avoided, its existence as a part of his 
 plan, is no more a proof that he delights in sin, or that 
 sin is right or useiul, than the existence of natural im- 
 perfection in the creature, is a proof, that he delights ia 
 natural imperfection, or that it is good and useful. If 
 every species of vines is more or less liable to produce 
 sapless limbs, and a Inisbandmau should choose the 
 kind, liable to |)rodnce the fewest possible, his choice 
 would be so ftr from proving his delight in fruitless 
 branches, that it W(»ul(l demonstrate the contrary — that 
 th^y were the objects of his aversion; yet that he would 
 suffer their existence, rather than cultivate no vine. So 
 
19 
 
 God's choosing the system which has the least possible 
 moral evil, proves, that such evil is not his delight, hut 
 his aversion; yet, that he will suffer its existence rather 
 than there should he no system. Again, I have chosen 
 a watch, though I foresaw, that it would need repairing 
 more than once a year, and that sonittimes 1 would he 
 compelled to throw away some pf its wheels, wrought 
 with the most exquisite workmanship, and composed of 
 the most precious materials. Now, 1 chose this watch, 
 not because I delight in its imperfections, the costs and 
 trouble of its repairs, and the loss of some of its wheels 
 —on the contrary, I dislike the expence and trouble of 
 repairs and am grieved at the loss of any of its parts; 
 hut I chose it because I could obtain no better; and ra- 
 ther than loose the use of the watch entirely, I submit 
 to the expence and trouble of repairs, and to the grief 
 of throwing away the faulty parts; although 1 prize 
 their materials and their workmanship. Even so, God 
 has chosen the present system, not because he delighted 
 in the evils which he foresaw as its ceitain concomi- 
 tants: — on the contrary he hates sin, and is grieved 
 when he casts out any of his rebellious creatures to de- 
 struction;— yet rather than there should be no moral 
 universe, he suffers the existence of sin; and rather 
 than permit sin to destroy the whole system, he submits 
 to the grief of chastising transgressors, although he 
 loves the impress they bear of his own workmanship, 
 and the grandeur of those immortal powers that resem- 
 ble the image of himself. 
 
 I'hus, though the Great God excludes blind chance, 
 as well as 5/mrf fate, from his universe, and moves on 
 his vast affairs according to a most wise plan; and whilst 
 he suffers sin and misery to fall within the range of 
 that plan; yet we may see how it is still true, and lite- 
 rally true, that he loves even Lis erring creatures: has 
 no pleasure in the death of the wicked: is not willing, 
 that any should perish, but that all should come to re- 
 pentance: will have all men to be saved: and how the 
 Saviour hi the most unqualified sense, would have gathc 
 
so 
 
 cred the children of Jerusalem together as a hen gath- 
 ereth her chickens under her wings. 
 
 Perhaps some will grant, that this view of the sub- 
 ject gives a plausible and perhaps a true explanation 
 of these texts; but they will say "If this be true, you mu^t 
 yield your doctrine, that God chooses men, not because 
 of their faith, or good works, or any other thing in the 
 creature, as conditions or causes moving him thereunto; 
 and that men are made willing in the day of God's pow- 
 er:*— if this all be true, it cannot be, that Christ was 
 "willing to gather the children of Jerusalem, or he would 
 have exerted his power to make them willing.'^ i3ut 
 if the willingness produced in the day of God s power, 
 mean the willingness of a new creature; and the wil- 
 lingness alluded to, in Christ's complaint of the inhabi- 
 tants of Jerusalem, the willingness of sinners not rege- 
 nerated, but so convicted by the common operations of 
 the Spirit, as to feel tlie absolute necessity of a Saviour 
 and as to ensure regeneration; and if, while we hold 
 the faith and good works here specified, not to be the 
 causes, but the effect of regeneration, or of what is the 
 same thing, of God/ s choice', and, that neither these, nor 
 any other qualities in the creature, influence his cboo- 
 sirigs, so as to destroy the certainty, or give condition- 
 alily to his present plan: we also hold, that there is an 
 eternal coincidence between the manner in which the 
 sinner, before regeneration, treats the common opera- 
 tions of that Spirit, who convinces the world of sin, of 
 righteousness, and of judgment, and God's purpose to 
 regenerate the soul; and, that, though it was uncondi- 
 tionally Christ's purpose not to regenerate these Jews — 
 the things that belonged to their peace, being forever hid 
 from their eyes;t yet that had they been vvilling in the 
 sense above described, this willingness, as the free act 
 of the creature, God woul<l have foreknown coeternally 
 with the determination of his plan; and it would have 
 been made a part of that plan; and, as there is an eter- 
 nal agreement between his foreknowledge of the free acts 
 
 •Ps. ex. 3, tLuke XIX. 40,, 
 
at 
 
 of creatures and bis determinations, in agreement with 
 their willingness, it would have been his unconditional 
 plan to regenerate them; and thus to make tliem a m il- 
 ling people in the day of l»is power— f/^^w where is the 
 discrepance between God's absolute and unconditional 
 purpose, and his unqualified willingness to save these 
 unrelenting sinners? And if this be a correct exhi[)itiou 
 of the subject; then, though from eternity the unwilling- 
 ness of these Jews was unconditionally decreed; yet if 
 instead of this, their willingness from all eternity had 
 been certain and it was their choice and thertfore, their 
 sin that it was not so, their willingness would, from eter- 
 nity, have beers just as unronditionally decreed; for the re- 
 lation between the evil choosings of God's creatures and 
 his decree is not that of cause and eflect or antecedent 
 and consequent; but that of coincidence. And hence 
 we may say, that if any wicked choice of the creature 
 were different, without an^ conditionality, God's decree 
 in relation to that choice would be different. 
 
 As all these immediately preceding remarks tend to 
 illustrate and demonstrate God's love to all men, and 
 his desire that all should be saved; nothing more need 
 be said, to vindicate his sincerity in the universal of- 
 fer of the Gospel. But it is asked, how can he wisely 
 offer it to all, if he know that some will not accept? 
 
 The Gospel offer contains a command. And if so, 
 why may he not as wisely command men to obey the 
 Gospel, although he knows, that his commands will be 
 ineffectual; as command Adam not to eat the fruit of the 
 forbidden tree, and, Pharoah to let his people go, when 
 he knew, they would render no obedience to his 
 mandates? Also as the moral governor of the Universe; 
 it is wise to offer the Gospel to men who, he knows, 
 will not receive it with an obedient faith; because, in 
 thus displaying his love, his mercy, and his goo<'ness 
 he addresses the strongest motives to produce obedience, 
 and motives, which frequently, when not obeyed to a 
 saving extent, nevertheless lay restraints on the wick- 
 ed, and nroduce a salutary effect upon human society. 
 
And it is also wise, that in the day of judgment, in the 
 sight of the universe, every mouUi may be stopt and all 
 the world become guilty before God. We hasten to aa 
 a|)j)liratioii: — 
 
 Jf tlie positions, vindicated under the second head of 
 this discourse, be true the Calviiiist is enabled to retain 
 all his truths, and expliin all his p'Tuliar difficulties. 
 J f God's foreknowledge of the sinful cho'»sings of his 
 creaturos, does not arise otit of his decrees? and if the 
 relation between his foreknowledge of these choosings, 
 and his determinations in relation to them, be only that 
 of agreement or coincidence; we have seen, that in 
 perfect consistency with the belief of God's eternal and 
 unchangeable determinations, it maybe true, that he has 
 no pleasure in the death of the wicked — that Christ, 
 in the most litprcd sense was willing to have gathered 
 the unbelieving children of .lerusalem together as a hen 
 gathereth her chi':kens under her wings, if they would 
 have been gathered— and that so it is true in every other 
 case, that if any more would come to Christ, than will 
 come, his eternal decree, always coeval and coincident 
 with his eternal foieknowledge, would have been to 
 save tliem; and that if the sinner is not elected it is entirely 
 his own fault — like the Jews he would not. Thus the 
 Calvinist, whilst he holds the wisdom and supremacy 
 of his God, directing all things, from the movements of an 
 iidinity of worlds, to the number of every hair, and the 
 fall of every sparrow; with all the latitude of an Armi- 
 iii^n; can assure sinners, and prove to them from the 
 arguments of reason, and the authority of the iJible, 
 that if any more would come to the Haviour, his uncon- 
 ditional decree would have been, their salvjition; and, 
 that by their sins they have literally compelled God, 
 eitiier to cast down his wisdom from his throne, and 
 leave the w^orld lawless, or to pass upon them the de- 
 ore** of re[)roh;ition. 
 
 Also if ail the parts of God's universal plan were per- 
 formed l»y one simple intuitive glance of the ininite 
 mind, without beginning or succession; the cause of dis^ 
 
S3 
 
 pute, between the Sublapsarian and the Biipralapsari- 
 an disappears and they are left reconciled. 
 
 Again, these views may serve to lighten the shades, 
 that misapprehension frequently hangs around the third 
 chapter of our Confession of Faith. 
 
 ''God from all eternity did by tlip most wise and ho- 
 ly counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably m*- 
 dain whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby mither 
 is God the author of sin; nor is violence offered to the 
 will of the creatures; nor is the liberty or contingency 
 of second causes taken away but rather established.^^ 
 
 In this discourse, it has been shown, that Gnd made 
 the volitions of his creatures, a part of the plan wliich 
 he ordained; and that these volitions coincide with the 
 other parts of his plan, and the other parts of his plan 
 with these volitions: and also that as God does all, that 
 can be done consistently with that natural lil)erty, which 
 is essential to a moral creature, to prevent sin, he cannot 
 be its author. 
 
 "II. Although God knows whatsoever may or can 
 come to pa'is, upon all supposed conditions; yet hath he 
 not decreed any thing because he foresaw it as future^ 
 ar as that which woidd come to pass, upon such condi- 
 tions.^' 
 
 The doctrine that God foreknows and decrees all e- 
 vents, coevally and without beginning or succession, re- 
 moves from his plan every idea of conditionality. 
 
 "111. By the decree of God, for the manifestation of 
 his glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto 
 everlasting life, and others foreordained to everlasting 
 death.'' 
 
 These men and angels foreordained to everlasting death, 
 were doomed to their endless condemnation for their 
 sins — for the abuse of that natural liberty essential to 
 moral beings — an abuse, which a" holy God decreed 
 to suffer, as a part of his plan; not because he had plea- 
 sure in sin or in the death of the wicked; but because, 
 consistently with the nature of a moral system, wluch 
 
24? 
 
 always implies, in beings not confirmed by moral means, 
 a naUiral liberty of doiiis; wrong as well as right — as a 
 moral Governor be could not prevent it. Men and an- 
 2;els would shi^ in spite of every moral means of preven- 
 tion — as a moral Governor he could use no other bot 
 moral means, and hence not by a mere arbitrary, Init by 
 a most wise, just, and merciful sovereignty, in pursuance 
 of the best possible plan, and in the righteous execution 
 of the law, ^'-The soul that sinneth it shall die," he fore- 
 ordained these men and angels to everlasting death — 
 relactantly, iusi as a man would cast away some of the 
 wheels of a v/atch, valuable and prized for their mate- 
 rials and workmanship, because as parts of the watch 
 they become disorderly and injurious. 
 
 '*1V. These angels and men^ thus predestinated and 
 foreordained, are particularly and unchangeably design- 
 ed; and their number is so certain and definite, that it 
 can not be either increased or diminished.''' 
 
 God from eternity foresaw the "certain number,'^ 
 which by any moral means, would not be prevented 
 from destruction; and coevally and coincidentally with 
 with this foreknowledge of their sins, he decreed their 
 destruction. And if their number be so certain, that it 
 can not be diminished; it is because, by moral means no 
 more can be induced to change their course. If a grea- 
 ter number could be influenced to choose to act different- 
 ly, their choice would have been eternally, and uncon- 
 ditionally foreknown; and, in agreement with this, it, 
 together with all its consequences, would have been co- 
 eternally and uncondititmally decreed. Ho, that, if 
 their number is certain, their sins make it such. 80 
 much for the certainty of the number of the reprobate; 
 of the others it is unnecessary here to speak. 
 
 "V. Those of mankind that are predestinated unto 
 life, God, before the foundation of the world wan ^aid^ 
 according to his eternal and immutable jpurposp^ and the 
 secret c<nmsel and good pleasure of his will^ hath chosen 
 in Christ unto everlasting glory, out of his mere free 
 grace and love^ without any foresight of faith or good 
 works ^ or perseverence in either of them^ or any other 
 
25 
 
 thivg in the creature; as conditions, or causes moving 
 him thereunto^ and all to the praise of his glorious 
 
 grace. ''^ 
 
 Foresight of faith or good works, to influence God's 
 choice, there could be none; for until his eternally de- 
 termined election is accomplished in the work of the Spi- 
 rit, who changes the heart; there is no justifying faith or 
 works scripturally good. In this change from death 
 unto life, men unholy before, are chosen that they 
 '^should be holy."^ Nor was he moved to this by any 
 other thing foreseen in the creature, as a condition or a 
 cause. As the mighty Sovereign of the universe, he 
 presf ribes his own laws for the bestowmeot of his owa 
 mercies. And whilst loving the workmanship of his 
 own hands, he will have all men to be saved; still he 
 will save none, but upon his own terms; and his terms are, 
 to give the special influences of the Holy Spirit to regene- 
 rate all such as so regard his common operations, as to be 
 thoroughly convinced of sin, of righteousness, and of 
 judgment — as to feel, that they must receive aid from on 
 high, or perish— as to perseveringly determine, that they 
 will seek the Lord until they find him. For *Ho this maa 
 will I look," says Gud, "even to him that is poor, and 
 of a contrite spirit, and trembleth at my word/'f 1^ is 
 because he will have mercy on whom he will have mer- 
 cy; and not from any goodness in their unholy endea- 
 vours, that he saves them in this way. 
 
 '*VI. .Gis God hath appointed the elect unto glory, so 
 hath he. by the eternal and most fref piirposp ofhlsu-illy 
 foreordained all the means thereunto. Wherrfore, 
 they who are elected, being fallen in Mam, are reiee- 
 medhy Christ, are effectually called'' Iregenerated^ 
 "unto faith in Christ by his Spirit worhng in due sea- 
 son; are justified, adopted^ sanctified and kf^pt by his 
 jpower through faith unto Salvation,^' this part needs 
 no comment. All christians admit, that ti.ey who arc 
 saved, are saved through Christ by the sauclifying in- 
 fluence of his Spirit." 
 
 • •Eph. I. 4. flss, LXVI. 2. 
 
 4} 
 
^6 
 
 ^'^'^Qithev are any other redeemed by Christy effectu- 
 ally called, justified^ adojited^ sanctified^ and saved, but 
 the elect only. 
 
 VII. The r^st of mankind, God was j^^^ctsed, accor- 
 ding to the unsearchable counsel of his own will, where- 
 by he extendeth or withholdeth niercy as he pleaseth, for 
 the glory of his Sovereign j^f^u^pr over his creatures, to 
 pass by and ordain them to dishonor and wrath for their 
 sins, to the praise of his glorious justice.^' 
 
 God from eternity foresaw, that a certain number of 
 the human fa-uily, would not be influenced by any mor- 
 al means to seek his grace, so as to become new crea- 
 turpft io Christ Jesus. Coeternally with this foreknow- 
 ledi^p; in adopting a plan, in whicli, as the only wise 
 God. he w(»uhl not he deceived, for their impenitence, 
 he left them out of the nund^er, which he determined to 
 save by the redemj)tion that is in Christ Jesus. Just 
 as it sometimes is tlie reluctant pleasure of a kind and 
 nierrifnl father, out of a re^^ard for the reputation and 
 the interest of his family; and for the wise and just exer- 
 cise of that authority with which, as a parent, he is in- 
 vested, and by which he has a natural ri^^ht, to extend 
 or withhold his property as he pleases, in his will, to 
 pass by, and thus to ordain to dishonor and want, a 
 disobedient and proflii^atc son; so, in eternal agreement 
 with their purpose, foreseen to resist his Spirit, and ne- 
 glect his grace, it was his pleasure, "according to the 
 unsearchable counsel of his own will, whereby he ex- 
 tendeth or withholdeth mercy as he pleaseth, for the 
 glory of his 8overei2:n power over his creatures, '^ to de- 
 termine, that Christ's blood, should never redeem them 
 from the condemnation due their iniquities; and thus 
 ^Ho ordain them to dishonor and wrath for their sins, to 
 the praise of his glmious justice," and in this sense, 
 Christ is said to lay down his life for his sheep only:^- 
 and though, this now is his jdan, not to be chan2;cd by any 
 conditionality; yet, as there is an eternal coincidence be- 
 tween the free actions of his creatures foreseen, and his 
 
 •John X, 15. 
 
S7 
 
 determinations coeternal with this foreknowledge; if their 
 choice were different, (and that it is not, is their crime) 
 it would have been foreseen as different; the eternal de- 
 terminations of God would have coincided with it as 
 such; and God's unconditional plan then would have 
 been, that these men should be redeemed by Christ. It is 
 their own sins, foreknown indeed, but uninfluenced by 
 that foreknowledge; and decreed indeed, but so as to be 
 uncaused by any decree — it is their own sins, that have 
 separated them from the saving efficacy of the Saviour's 
 blood. But as the Lamb of God ''taketh away the sins 
 of the world,''^ his sufferings were sufficient to satisfy 
 the demands of justice for all; and as God loved the 
 world, and will have all men to be saved; his desire is 
 that all should be redeemed by his death; and thus it is 
 literally true, that Christ, in every sense consisreot w ith 
 a wisdom, which can never be deceived, and a plaa 
 which can never be broken, ^'by the grace of God, tas- 
 ted death for every nianf^ and if none resisted the holy 
 Spirit, all would have been redeemed by Christ, effectu- 
 ally called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved. 
 And, that their neglect of God's gifts, and their resis- 
 tance of the common operations of his Spirit, are the oc- 
 casion of their reprobation, is the true sense of our Con- 
 fession of Faith, we may learn from the answer in our 
 larger catechism, which declares; *'All the elect, and 
 they only, are effectually called;" [regenerated;] *»al- 
 though others may be, and often are, outwardly called 
 by the ministry of the word, and have s(>rae common 
 operations of the Spirit; who for their wilful neglect and 
 contempt of the grace offered to them, being jtistly left 
 in their unbelief, do never truly come to Jes^us Christ."| 
 Again, if these positions are true, they enable the 
 Arminian, whilst he preaches his grand and Scrij)tMral 
 doctrine, that grace is free to all, also to escape from 
 the necessities ofa system, which drives him to acontra- 
 dictim of such texts as teach, that God pred<^stinates 
 men to be "covformed to the image of his Son^^'X and that 
 
 *John I. 29, fLarge Catechism, ques. 68. |Rom. VIII, 29, ~ 
 
S8 
 
 be chooses them before the foundation of the world, 
 that they •*shouhl be holy and without blame before him 
 in love."* If these principles be true, whilst he main- 
 tains his favourite theme; ^'JVo man is eternallif lost be- 
 cause he has been borne to hell by fin eternal decree,^^ 
 he may consistently proclaim an all wise, supreme, and 
 Sovereign God; who after an eternal, unchangeable, 
 and stupendous plan, well ordered in all things and 
 sure, doth his will iu the armies of heaven and among 
 the inhabitants of the earth; and wiio worketh all things 
 after the counsel of his own will. If these things be 
 true, we have a system of Christianity that rests not 
 on a single text as on a pivot; but one, which touches 
 the Bible as a foundation at every side, end, and corner. 
 And, that they are true, is just as reasouable, as that 
 God should be at once wise and merciful. What are 
 the Calvinian texts, but expressions of his immutable 
 wisdom?— and what the Arminian, but the declarations 
 of his loving kindness and tender mercy? — If these prin- 
 ciples be carried out into their consequences, as has been 
 proved, they explain the cardinal difficulties of Biblical 
 theology; and whilst they lay the axe at the root oF phi- 
 losophical Calvinism and [)hilosophical Arminianism, 
 they secure us that Bible Calvinism, which gives a God 
 ^^declaring the end from the beginning,"! ^"^^ whose sys- 
 em reaches to the movement of every thought, and the 
 wandering of every atom, in the fullest hurmony with a 
 Bible Arminianism, which extends his benevolence 
 as wide as the circumference of creation; they will 
 dissipate many of the my>iteries that hang around the tem- 
 ple of Christiariity, disgrace its form, and darken its glo- 
 ry; and present us a reasonable system, and whatisbesf. 
 of all, one,which accords with the'letter of the Bihle, and 
 which reconciles, without wresting the Scriptures; and 
 last of all, if the words of truth and soberness, they will 
 harmonize and tranqnilize the church of God; heal the 
 div.sions, that rend the body of the Saviour; bind the 
 people of God together iu the bonds of love^ and pre- 
 
 •Eph. I, 4. jlsa. XLVI, 10. 
 
29 
 
 pare them for that millenial effort, which will pour the 
 light of heaven into every mind; and the love of God 
 into every heart; and that will fill the earth with the 
 knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea.— 
 Amen. 
 
 A 
 
 The mode of speaking very much in use among divines on this sub- 
 ject, is that there is in the operations of the Suprenrie mind, no order o/" 
 ti7ne; but the order of reason. With regard to there being no order of 
 time, or perhaps more accurately, no order of duration, the idea weil com- 
 ports with the absolute perfection of that Infinite Being, •who is "the same, 
 yesterday, to-day and forever " But why speak of tie order (J" reason, and 
 of the operations of the divine intellect, just as if Deity wt re like ourselves, 
 under the necessity of reasoning; and just as if in the contemplation and 
 adoption of his moral system, there were consecutive operatior.s? Does not 
 this idea make God too much like the creature? Is it not the perfection of 
 knowledge to know all things and of wisdom to plan all things, without any 
 succession in reason, any more than in duration? Is it not more consir.-^ent 
 wirh the idea of infinite perfection, in knowledge and wisdom, to suppose, 
 that God knows and determines not without reason (that is, not without that 
 which is analagousto the result of our reasoning;) but without the beginning 
 or the succession of reasoning; just as it is to suppose, that he knows and 
 determines without any beginning or succession in duration? But we are told, 
 that we can not conceive, how there can be knowledge, and determinations 
 without beginning or succession in reason. Granted. So neither can we con- 
 ceive, how there can be knowledge, and determinations, wi':hou*- a beginning 
 or succession in duration. In each we are equally overwhelmed in the divine 
 infinity. Why then deny the one, and admit the other? They stand or fall 
 together. We can not conceive, how there can be succession in reason, with- 
 out a corresponding succession in duration. Let any man contemplate God, 
 as viewing all possibilities, selecting and combining these possibilities, and de- 
 termining them into a certain system, as he would say '-according to the or- 
 der of reason," and see if he can separate from them, the idea of an antece- 
 dent and consequent duiation, apporcioiifd to each. You may suppose, the 
 succession of reason ten thousand times more rapid than the lightening, that 
 glances in the twinklirg of an eye, frona one end of htaven to the o^her; 
 but still you do not separate from it the idea of aconesjjonding<^urcession in 
 duration. The analogv between the creature and the Creator is /^mmledge, 
 not the acquiretnent of hyiom^Udge God knows by an eternal inc.iition; man 
 by a process of ratiocination. To speak of ^he order or succession of rea» 
 son without reasoning, is to me incoinprehensible. Manemploy.s his reason, 
 xng powers to lead him to knowledge (I mean that knowledge which is not 
 intuitive) just as he employs his locomotive organs to arrive at a desired 
 place. In forming an idea of his transit, we must conceive in the order of 
 locality and duration, that his first step was/romthe place of departure, and 
 his last to a^t. place oif his arrival; but as God is Omnipresent, no such ideas 
 
30 
 
 either of locality or duration, ought for a moment to be entertained of him. 
 He performs no such operation; he takes no such order; with him it is un. 
 necessary; he already is present in every place. So if, as is admitted, God 
 knows all things by an eternal intuition— if all causes and effects and ante- 
 cedents and consequents, are alike the subjects of his immense survey— he 
 performs no reasoning process: he takes no order of reason; with him it is 
 superfluous; by his infinite intuition, wirhout reasoning, he occupies every 
 point of knowledge, to which reason could conduct, just as by his Omnipre- 
 sence, without locomotion, he occupies every point of space to which loco- 
 m<^tion could lead. 
 
 In this order of reason, supposed to exist in the divine mind, originate 
 the Anninian and Cilviniau differences. The high Calvinist, or Supralap- 
 sarian, supposes the order of reason in the divine mind to be this — God de- 
 termined to glorify himself; this he foresaw could be done by the glorifica- 
 tion of some creatures and the destrucuon of others; he therefore determin- 
 ed, that some creatures should be destroyed; and others glorified: he fore- 
 saw, that he would i>e the most glorified by saving from destruction some 
 fallen beings; and by leaving others to perish in their sins; he therefore de- 
 termined to save some and let others perish; but there could none perish or 
 be saved without falling in^o sin; he therefore decreed to suffer them to fall 
 into sin: and as none could fall into sin or abide in obedience without exis- 
 tence, he determined to make such creatures as would fall into sin or remain 
 in obedience Thus according to the Supralapsarian, that which is last in 
 the order of reason, was first in the order of execution. The inoderate Cal- 
 vinist, or the Sublapsarian supposes the order of reason to be, that God de- 
 termined to glorify himself by creating intelligent beings; he then foresaw^ 
 that some, by abuse of liberty, would fall into sin; he then decreed to save 
 some men and leave others, together with the angels who kept not their 
 first estate, to perish in their sins, and so on, just the reverse of the Supra- 
 lapsarian. 
 
 Arminian writers, so far as I have con'-ulted them, exhibit no very clear 
 statements on this su',)ject: yet as Arminius supposed, that God determined 
 tie salvation of some men. on a foresight of their faith, and determined to 
 damn others on account of their foreseen unbelief, his philosophy appears 
 to follow that of the Sublapsarian in this supposed order of reason; but todeny, 
 that the sin of men or angels, made any part of God's plan. Arminian s 
 •appear generally to suppose, that if this were the case, God would be the 
 Author of sin Their order of reason would probably be this: God deter- 
 niined to make man; then he foresaw, but did not decree, even permissive - 
 Iv, his fall; on the foresight of his full he determined to send Christ to save 
 all; but foreseeing all wruldnot believe he determined lastly to save all who 
 he foresaw would believe; but to damn all that he foresaw would not.— - 
 Some Arminians perceiving, that to create man foreseeing that he would 
 certainly fall, is tantamount to permissively decreeing his fall, have denied 
 God's f:^reknowledge of his creatun's sins! r See note B.) Thus all these 
 different systems of phd>)Sophy which give the sectarian tinge to liiblical ex- 
 posi'ion, find their fortifications in this supposed onler (if reason. Now if it 
 be found that no such order exists in the divine niina, the strong hold of 
 contention is demolished. 
 
 B 
 
 If tV.ls conseqtience be logical — and that it h not, is yet to be 
 proved - Anniniaiiism after wresting :ind torturing, that class of texts, 
 "whi^^h teach tiiat (lod "vvorketh all things after the counsel of his 
 own will," falls short of its avowed object — extending the love of 
 
Si 
 
 God to all the human race. It only appears to do this, for to create 
 man knowing, that he would certainly sin and be lost, is just about 
 the same as to decree his sin and destruction. 
 
 In this age of invention, a salvo from these pressing consequences, 
 which as strongly, as the most severe C alvinism appear to exhibit God 
 as the author of sin, is imagined to be found in supposing, that the 
 Supreme Being chooses not to foreknow all things, and in many ca- 
 ses prefers ignorance to kn >wledge. 1 deny, that creating a free and 
 intelligent being, knowing that he will certainly sin, constitutes the 
 Creator the author of the creature's sin, any more, than knowing 
 from the analogy of nature, that every child, born into the world, if 
 preserved to years of accountability, will sin, constitutes the parent 
 the author of the sins committed by his child. But admitting it did; 
 this imaginary doctrine affords no relief. — Suppose some supernatural 
 agent from the invisible world, should appear, and with the breath 
 of inspiration, endow me with power to create'any kind of moral be- 
 ing I might choose; and also impart to me the attribute of prescience; 
 so that, if 1 chose, I migh*, before creating him, foreknow all the e- 
 vents that would certainly attend his whole existence; and 1 would 
 determine to create the being; but would resolve not to know his char- 
 acter, his conduct or his end; and imagine thatas soon as he obtained 
 existence, he should snatch a sword, enter a church, murder the whole 
 congregation, and be apprehended, condemned, and gibbetted; and 
 that some wretched widow, whom his bloody hand had bereaved, 
 should come to me and remonstrate — Saying, "Sir, why did you 
 create such a cruel, murderous, and unfortunate being?" — and I 
 should answer — *'But 1 did not know what the events of his existence 
 would be," and she would ask, Sir, might you not have known if 
 you would?" — and if so; for not knowing, when you might, what 
 w^ould be the consequence of his creation; are you not chargeable with 
 folly; and what is woise — a recklessness of the lives of your fellow men 
 and the welfare of your own workmanship?'* Now, how could 1 
 deny the charge? Would 1 be less reprehensible, because 1 did not 
 know, when 1 might have known, and wnen my ignorance was a 
 matter of design? So that, if creating this bloody agent, knowing 
 what he would do, constitutes me the author of his sins, then design- 
 cdl}-- not knowing, when I might have known, makes me equally the 
 author of his crimes. And in the same manner, if creating moral be- 
 ings — men and Angels — knowing that they would certainly ein, 
 involves the Great God in the authorship of their iniquity; the black- 
 ness of the picture is rather deepened than otherwise, by supposing 
 him when creating them, wilfully ignorant of the sins of which they 
 afterwards would be guilty. 
 
 Nor does this hypothesis render man any more accountable for his 
 sins; for, if the thing formed should say to him that formed it, *'Thou 
 formedst me at first indeed very good — but liable to mutation from 
 good to evil; Author, of my mutable nature, why didst thou make me 
 thus!*' And the Creator should say, by way of excuse, "Iknew not 
 
3S 
 
 the consequences of these liabilities, or my goodness v/ould never 
 have permitted me to have made thee thus;" then the thing formed 
 might reply; *'But, my Maker, do not blame me for thy ignorance, 
 and least of all, for thy wilful ignorance; it was thy will to be ignorant 
 and who hath resisted thy will? Why dost thou yet find fault? Why 
 didst thou determine, ignorantly to form me thus?" It therefore re- 
 moves no ditficuky; and is an outrage on all reasonable ideas of infi- 
 nite wisdom; because wisdom, according to our habits of thinking, 
 can no more exist without knowledge, than a house without the ma- 
 terials of which it is composed — knowledge furnishes the materials on 
 which wisdom operates. And worst of all, it contradicts the Bible. 
 In this divine Book we are taught that God foretells the particular 
 sins of particular men before they are in being — as the sins of the 
 Egyptians, in oppressing the Israelites; and the deeds of the accu- 
 sers, betrayer, and crucifiers of our Lord. It is literally opposed to 
 the text which declares "•Known unto God are all his xoorksfrom the 
 foundation of the world.*^ — Acts xv, 18. In short, it is a doctrine 
 hard to be believed, and good for nothing if it should find credence — 
 It is without the support of^a single text in the Bible; and it has been shown 
 to remove no difficulty. As these remarks are all made, on the supposition 
 that the distinction, between the attribute and the act of foreknowledge, 
 discovered by the fanciful teachers of this whimsical doctrine, is true; and 
 on that supposition, prove the hypothesis unscriptural and useless, any exa- 
 mination of that super-refined discovery is superfluous. 
 
 c 
 
 Some perhaps will consider this doctrine, as limiting the Creators 
 power. But if you sav he might have made a more perfect system — one 
 not only sinless as it fell from his hand; but that would remain so 
 for ever — and, that he yet chose the present with all its foreseen sins and 
 miseries, you elevate his power at the expence of his goodness. We do not 
 set bounds to his power. He may have power, which from a regard to his 
 other perfections he will never exercise. He may have power to deny him- 
 self; but the exercise of that power is forbidden by his truth. So also he 
 may have power to create a more perfect system; but the exercise of that 
 power may be forbidden by his other perfections. 
 
 This view of the subject is not advocating the opinion of The Great Mo- 
 ral Poet that "Whatever is, is right," but proving that in the best possible 
 system, there may be, unavoidably on the part of the Creator, some things, 
 wrong. 
 
 A, M. SCHEE, PKlNTERv 
 
THE CHRISTIAN PREACHER. 
 
 Vol. I. JUr.Y, 18^7. No. 2. 
 
 COMlJ>rG TO CHRIST. 
 
 Ye will not come unto me, that ye might have life — JohnV, 40. 
 
 The image of (rod in the soul, lost by the fall, is the 
 spiritual life of which man is now naturally destitute. 
 The recovery of this is the object contemplated in the 
 text. It made no part of our original constitution; but 
 was produced by the indwelling of the Holy Ghost, and 
 directed all the human powers to the service, and the 
 glory of the Creator. But when offended by transgres- 
 sion^ this sacred inhabitant departed from his terrestial 
 tenement^ all these powers became deranged from their 
 proper order, and perverted from their proper ends; 
 and thus, not because man by his fall lost any of his 
 constitutional powers, or propensities; but because of 
 their derangement and perversion, his whole head is said 
 to be sick, and his whole heart faint. Consequently, 
 the restoration of this image, is not the implanting of 
 any new faculty or passion, but is such a work, effected 
 by the Holy Spirit, as recovers the soul from its de- 
 rangement and perversion, a-nd places every original 
 principle of the man in its proper subordination and di- 
 rects it to its proper object. 
 
 The text supposes life not given, that men may come; 
 but their coming required to obtain life. The topics pro- 
 posed for consideration, are the act of coming to Christy 
 and the reason why men do not come. Each of them 
 will furnish matter for a separate discourse. 
 
 I. The act of coming to Christ. Imagine a fine ship, 
 well manned and equipped, and under the direction of 
 one, who is at once a wise and good commander, and 
 an experienced and skilful navigator — one who would 
 employ the best means to mainrain the most harmonious \ 
 discipline among the crew, and who could traverse the 
 Ocean with the most perfect safety. Such was man ia 
 
34 
 
 K(ien, M'hen liis sniil wns consecrated by the inbabita- 
 tiou of the Hol^' Ghost, whose divine infiuence govern- 
 ed his powers and guided his way. Imagine tlie crew 
 to mutiny and (heir captain, righteously, to desert them 
 for their rtbellion, and to U'ave them to all the disorders 
 of their faction and to the wild mercy of the winds and 
 the waves, without a compass and without a guide; un- 
 til the ship is dashed anO injured, and the crew wearied 
 and wounded by the distractions of mutiny, and wea- 
 kened by hunger and disease, and all very far gone 
 from the right course; and just ready to be thrown and 
 lost on rocks and quicksands. Such is fallen man, 
 his native powers not lost, but weakened and impaired 
 by perver.'^iou and abuse; himself far estranged from 
 the right way, and exposed to the shipwreck of reme- 
 diless ruin. And suppose the commander, moved by 
 the spirit of compassion and forgiveness, and embarked 
 in the ark of mercy, should linger around and elevate 
 his trumpet, long and loud, now, to warn them of their 
 danger, and again, to address them in the tones of ex= 
 postulation and entreaty, to permit him again on board, 
 and again, to submit to Ids guidance, that he might rec- 
 tify their disorders and effect their escape from the wide 
 yawn of near approaching destruction. Such is the 
 Saviour in the calls of his providence, his word, and his 
 Spirit, to apostate man. His language, is "to you, O 
 men, I call and my voice is to the sons of men/' Now 
 imagine that convinced of the truth of the warning, that 
 proclaims their danger, and alarmed at the view of its 
 near approach — out of no love for iheir commander or 
 for order or virtue — but entirely from a love of life and 
 a sense ot" danger, they should prostrate themselves be- 
 fore him, and implore his return, and his government, 
 and guiclaiice, to rescue them from death. Such is the 
 act of the sinner, when convicted of his sins, and fear- 
 ing his danger, he comes to Christ, that he may have 
 life. He trembles, he weeps, and he prays, not because 
 the Saviour, against whom his sins have been commit- 
 ted, appears to him altogether lovely, or his law holy, 
 
35 
 
 just, and e;oo(l, or his yoke easy, and his huiden light; 
 but he trembles, liecause he believes that ^^indignation 
 and wrath, tribulation and anguish," are proclaimed a- 
 gainst every soul of man that doeth evil; lie weeps, be- 
 cause 'Hhe pains of hell" have <^gat hold on him;" and 
 Jie prays, because he would be saved from devouring 
 flames^ and escape from everlasting burnings. 
 
 And finally, suppose the commander, at the selfish 
 and undeserving entreaties of the guilty crew, should 
 re-enter the distracted sliip, restore all to peace and or- 
 der, and by an influence more than human, win the 
 hearts of the formerly rebellious, and change their ha- 
 tred against himself and each other into love, and regain 
 their course and conduct them to their desired shore. 
 So at the prayer of the convicted and awakened sinner 
 — though it is not a prayer which rises to the standard 
 of the divine law — not the prayer of a faith which 
 works by love and purifies the heart — though it .arise 
 from a mere conviction, that without aid from on high, 
 to repent and believe aright, he must perisli forever; the 
 Saviour according to his eternal purpose in the merciful 
 dispensation of the Gospel; by the operations of the 
 Holy Spirit, creates a new heart and renews a right spirit 
 and thus, brings all the native powers and propensities 
 of the man, into a willing subjection to the love of God, 
 and guides him in the way that leads to glory and im= 
 mortality. Thus a sinner comes to Christ, when con- 
 victed €>f sin, by the outward means of grace, and the 
 common operations of the Spirit, and alarmed at his 
 danger, he importunately and perseveringly desires^ 
 and prays God, to enable hiniy by worlcingin him both to 
 will and to do of his good jAeasure, to escape from the 
 wrath to come. 
 
 But as many suppose, that men never come to Christ, 
 until spiritual'life is given, the doctrine just asserted and 
 illustrated demands the confirmation of the following ar- 
 guments: 
 
 The text intimates, that obtaining life is a certain 
 consequence of coming to Christ, and undoubtedly the 
 
36 
 
 Saviour elsewhere proclaims, that ^^him that comcth 
 UDto me I will in no wise cast out.''* 
 
 The outward means of grace, and the commoQ ope- 
 rations of the Spirit, undeniably produce on the minds 
 of thousands, who were become new creatures in Christ 
 Jesus, convictions of sin and fears of punishment. Now 
 if God has constituted no connexion between that de- 
 sire to be saved, which often results from the convic- 
 tions and the fears naturally produced by these means 
 and operations on the minds of the unregenerate, 
 then so far as obtaining spiritual life and eternal sal- 
 vation is concerned, they must be perfectly nugato 
 ry, nay worse; because, by awful forebodings, they 
 frequently enkindle in men's minds, the fires of future 
 woe, without being at all suited to effect their escape. 
 
 So that except designed as the mere ministers of time, 
 to throw restraints on men, and thus to subserve the in- 
 terests of the present world, they not only appear useless 
 but mcmZess; because, ihx^^disciylinary, becomes then a 
 vindicatory world, and from a theatre of preparation 
 for a future state, it is changed into a place of retribu- 
 tion for crimes. But unless adapted to promote the de- 
 sign of redemption by bringing sinful men near their 
 God, why employed by infinite wisdom? Shall the mea- 
 nest insect not live in vain, and showers not fall useless 
 on barren deserts, unadorned by the meanest shrubs, 
 and shall God's word return to him void, and his Spirit 
 operate without a purpose? 
 
 Again, the Scriptures continually describe God's dea- 
 lings with men in this world as disciplinary, and as conn* 
 terjiarts of his system of salvation — Are the inhabitants 
 of the old world overwhelmed Uy a flood, and the cities 
 of Sodom and Gomorrah consumed in lire? It is for an 
 ensample for them that after should live ungodly.f Are 
 God's judgments abroad in the earth? It is, that the in- 
 habitants of the world may learn righteousness? f^aj Is 
 the earth filled with the goodness of the Lord? It is, 
 
 •John VI. 37. t2 Pet. II. 6. a. Isaiah XXVI. 9. 
 
37 
 
 because the goodness of God should lead to repen 
 tance. (b) Are prophets, and wise men and scribes, 
 from age to age sent to plead the cause of God with the 
 disobedient inhabitants of Jerusalem? It is because the 
 Redeemer would gather th^ra as a heu gatbereth her 
 chickeos uuder her wings, (c) 
 
 Now, if there be an established connexion between 
 that desire of escaping from wrath, which these dispen- 
 sations of God, by convictions and alarms often produce 
 on the minds of natural men, and their obtaining that 
 spiritual change by which they are released from con- 
 demnation, and be2;in to live for Heaven, then the sig- 
 nificancy of these representations, are awfully obvious; 
 but if not, their relevancy is obscure and their force and 
 their meaning dwindle. 
 
 And moreover, why in lands unblest by the showers 
 and the sunshine of these common means of Christiani- 
 ty — instead as in christian countries— of fields waiving 
 with Gospel fruits, and the light of the Sun of righteous- 
 ness reflected from mount Zion by a thousantl domes 
 that rest upon her summit, do we see such wide sprea- 
 ding, fruitless and dreary wastes, and the night of death 
 resting on every mountain top, and lengthening and 
 thickening its shades over every valley and every plain, 
 presenting a horrible scenery with scarce a light to relieve 
 the eye, but the fires kindled by superstition to roast her 
 infants and to burn her widows? If there be no connexion 
 [between the importunate, and the persevering seeking 
 prompted by the terrors of God, often thrown over the 
 minds of the impenitent by these ( ommon means accom- 
 panied by the Spirit; why did the apostles in obedience to 
 the mandate of their risen Lord, *Goye into ail the world 
 and preach the gospel to every creature,' at the expense 
 of toil and blood, and at the peril of life itself, traverse 
 the then known three quarters of the globe? And why 
 did the Master give them the imperious commission? 
 And why, in heathen lands, among the worshi!?pers of 
 
 b. Rom. II. 4. c. Matt, XXIII. 37> 
 
38 
 
 the ISiie and the Ganges — among the devotees that sur- 
 round Jug;;arnaut or that bow at the feet of the Grand 
 Lama, do we not witness the outpourings of the Holy 
 Spirit and abundant conversions fr(mi the worship of i- 
 dols to the service of the living God? 
 
 Jt however will probably !)« said, that God indeed 
 more frequently regenerates the souls of such as are 
 made anxious in the use of these means, and with rest- 
 less and continued importunity, call on him for grace, 
 with the same kind of natural desire as that which the 
 lavens cry for food; yet there is no certainty that such 
 seekers shall all ultimately find him. Is this all? Is 
 the anxious sinner to be encouraged by a mere parad- 
 venture? How agrees this with facts? — The Gospel is 
 sent to heathen lands, its nature and its designs are ex- 
 plained to the understanding, and its requirements urged 
 home to the heart; some of the savage hearers are im- 
 pressed, and tears roll from their eyes; they go away 
 and think of these things, and the feelings of guilt 
 strengthen their hold, and the fears of hereafter haunt 
 their daily walks and (heir nightly slumbers. They 
 determine to hear more of this word — the^' become more 
 and more impiirtunate, and they persevere; and all that 
 ])ersevcre find pardon and peace. Most surely then, 
 there must be some certainty between the awakened sa- 
 vage's desire to escape from misery, and his attainment 
 of the end; or why do we not read of forests, vocal with 
 the mourfiiiig of those, who have sotight the Saviour, 
 but cannot find him? And we may add, why are notour 
 chtjrches filled with the waitings, and ilooded with the 
 tears of awakened and anxious sinners, who for scores of 
 years, have importunitely, and jierseveringly. implored 
 God for assistance to become pious: but have received 
 no answer to their entreaties? such a convicted, impor- 
 tunate, aud perseveringly seeking sinner treads not the 
 footst'x)! of God. Such is the wondiM-ful (oincirlencc 
 between the seeking of the unrenewed man and his ob- 
 
 tainiuir mer^v. 
 
 ~ %, 
 
 5jut above all it is certain that God has regarded the 
 
39 
 
 iinpoHunate and pcrj^evering entreaties of unrenewed 
 men, who were so affected by liis providence, or his 
 word, as to desire his interposition. He answered tho 
 prayer of Manasseh, {a) and the Ninivites, {h) and Cor- 
 nelius, (c) andwith light and life, met the inquiries of tho 
 anxious jailor, (d) and also of (he Jews, who on the 
 day of Pentecost, [jricked to the hearts by the preaching 
 of 8t. Peter, solemnly inquired, what shall we do? (e) 
 And if the prayer of ASanasseh and the Ninivites are 
 supposed to have been confined to temporal m.eicie?, 
 which were however undeniably granted, the argument 
 is only strengthened, for much more would tiipy have 
 been answered, ifthoy had been made for spiritual things. 
 On this subject, the testimony of the Saviour is, "'Ask. 
 and it shall be given you; seek and ye shall find; knock 
 and it shall be opened unto you.'' (/) And if it be suppo- 
 sed, that this relates to none, but such as are already re 
 animated with the divine life, the refutation is found in 
 our Lord's own words: ^'Jt^very one that asJceih recei- 
 
 And finally, this doctrine corresponds with the ^C{\ 
 nomy of the Gospel, not only as it relates to man's con- 
 dition; but also to the principles of his nature. Though 
 depraved, he still possesses a conscience; by the means 
 of grace before regeneration, this conscience is ad- 
 dressed on the subjects of guilt and danger; and if these 
 addresses are permitted to have their proper efft ct, it is 
 stung with a sense of guilt and alarmed by the appre- 
 hension of danger. And the whole Gospel epitomised 
 — ^*He that believeth and is baptised shall be saved and 
 he that believeth not shall be damned,''(/i) is addressed 
 to the strongest principle of fallen man: the sjjpreme 
 love of self. And through the power of this principle, 
 wlien aroused by the threatenings of Jehovah, the unre- 
 newed man bends to the cross of the Kedeemer, and 
 calls for mercy, not beiauso he hates God less; but be- 
 cause he hates eternal torments more. And surely, 
 
 a. 2 Chron. XXXIII. 13. b. Jonah III. 10. c Acts X. 4- d. Act". 
 XVI. SO e. Acts II. 37, f. Matt. VII. 7. g. Matt. VII. 8. h. Mark 
 XVI. 16. 
 
40 
 
 surely, it appears at least, as consistent with the Divine 
 character, to bestow mercy on the sinner, when by the 
 means of supreme appointment, he has I)een made to 
 feel his need of mercy: as to obtrude it on him when he 
 Hc£;lects those means, and despises that mercy. 
 
 And the declaration of Christ, that, *'no man can 
 come unto me except the Father who hath sent me draw 
 him," (ft) is no objection to the position here maintain- 
 ed. It is held that the word, providence, and JSpirit of 
 God, by addressing the principles of the natural man. 
 and creatine; the* feelings of guilt and terror, lead the 
 sinner to call for mercy; and it is averred, that these are 
 the drawings of the Father, without which no man can 
 come to Clirist. 
 
 Nor is the case of Lydia. (/>) whose heart the Lord 
 opened, to attend to the tilings spoken by Paul, or 
 that of Paul, (c) himself, who was struck down by a 
 light from Heaven, when so far from seeking mercy, he 
 was breathing out threatening and slaughter against the 
 Christians, and in the pursuit of a high-handed and bloo- 
 dy persecution, any argument against the theory here 
 defended — Granting all that an adversary in this argu- 
 ment could ask — That Lydia, when one of the most 
 thoughtless beings within the range of God's rational 
 creation, by a direct act of the Omnipotent Spirit, was 
 arrested and made a new creature, and that the renova- 
 ting ei;ergy from on high touched 8auFs heart; as soon 
 as the divine voice reached his ears, or the celestial ra- 
 diance his eyes; and that the old man crucified with his 
 aflections and lusts, fell with the persecutor to the 
 ground; and we only admit too actual cases, with the 
 possibility of some others as exceptions to a general 
 law. 
 
 To admit any thirjg more, w^ould be as perfectly gra- 
 tuitous, as to grant, that because the sun once stood still 
 upon Gibeoii, and the moon in the valley of Ajalon, (d) 
 there is no law to guide them in their courses, or to re- 
 gulate their settings or their risings. Deity always acts 
 
 John VI. ?'7. h. Acts >'V1 U. c. Acts IZ. 3. 4, 5. 6. d Josh. X, 15 ■ 
 
41 
 
 in consistency with his own perfections— he cannot de- 
 ny himself. In both the natural and the moral world, 
 it may be agreeable to his perfections, occasionally, to 
 depart from the usual course of his operations; but facts 
 prove, that in agreeableness to his nature, he for the 
 most part, 
 
 •*Acts not by partial, bat by general laws," 
 But there is nothing related of Paul or Lydia, that 
 requires the case eitlier of the one or the other to be 
 classed under the head of exceptions. There is no 
 proof that Saul became a new man, when by a voice 
 and a light from heaven, he was struck to the ground. 
 Here was indeed irresistible evidence addressed to his 
 mind, that in persecuting the saints, he was opposing 
 the King of heaven, and subjecting himself to his ire. 
 As a consequence of this evidence, he may have felt, 
 and acted as a sinner, absolutely dependant on the mer- 
 cy ^f Grod in Christ; and thus have been met with ''the 
 effectual working of his mighty powpr*/' by which the 
 scales fell from his eyes. And as to Lydia, when Paul 
 began to preach, the common operations of the Holy 
 Spirit may have attended his word to her heart, and 
 she may have yielded to the convictions, and the fears 
 produced on her mind by these means; and in the 
 course of the sermon, acted upon them, by coming to 
 Christ as a lost sinner; and thus obtained life; and thus 
 have had her heart opened by the Lord to attend to the 
 things spoken by Paul. 
 
 Nor is there any valid argument in the objection, that 
 such a coming to Christ, is but the act of an unregene- 
 rate, and consequently of a wicked man, whose very 
 thoughts,{a) sacrifices, (6) and prayers,(c) are an abomi- 
 nation to the Lord— of a man who regards iniquity in 
 his heart,(rf) and therefore of one, whose prayer the 
 Lord will not hear. 
 
 These texts here alluded to, probably, describe those, 
 who allowedly live in a course of sin, whose thoughts 
 
 aProv, XV, 26. bProv. xv, 8. cProv. xxviii. 9. dPs. Ixri, 18. 
 
 6 
 
are alltAvctliy wicked, and whose sac riil* es and prayers, 
 are tlieieloie liy[)oci itical. If they prove, tluit God 
 will iii»t Ijear tlie |)rayers of tiie anxious sinner, who 
 <it'sires to be saved fioin the wratli t » come, they also 
 prove, that he will not hend an ear to any prayer, but 
 that of hiiD, who is abswlutely sinless — every other may 
 strictly be said, in ai>;reater or less degree, to regard ini- 
 quity in his heart. ]5ut this whole objection is founded 
 on a mistake — that God legards the prayers of men, 
 ])ecause they are hfdy: but the truth is, he hears no 
 man's supplications, because they are accounted pure in 
 his holy tsfiination; for if judgment be laid to the line, 
 and righteoustiess to tlie pbimmet, in his siglit, no flesh 
 living can be justified. He meets no individual of Ad- 
 am's children, l)ut as a sinner, and on the ground of mercy 
 through a Mediator. The liedeemer's obedience in the 
 sinner's stead, alone, squares with the line of judgment 
 and the plummet of righteousness. And if mercy*be 
 the only ground of transaction between God a!)d man, 
 surely, a sinner's want of a new heart, and his feeling 
 that want, is no disqualification to l)is becoming a sup- 
 pliant party on that ground. The belief that God per- 
 forms this work, when the sinner, seized by the terror 
 of future wrath, desires this change, is opposed, be- 
 cause, his desires and his prayers are said to be an a- 
 bomination to God. Then to give this objection full 
 sweep, we ought to suppose, that he performs this ope- 
 ration, when the sinner is the most indifferent, or the 
 most opposed tosuch a change. Strange! — is his indif- 
 ference, or !iis opposition to salvation, any less an abo- 
 mination to God, than a desire to be saved? 
 
 Also the manner in which this subject has just been 
 exhibited, if carefully surveyed, will be found perfect- 
 ly to accord with that |)assage of our Confession of 
 Faith, which affirms, that in this change, man i«< ^^alto- 
 geiher 2msswe.^\a) Our representation of the case is, 
 that the sinner must first come to Christ, and then the 
 8|)irit of God effects on his soul that transformation, 
 
 aConfession of Faith chap, x, sec 2. 
 
43 
 
 which produces spiritual life. Now as a man diseasod 
 by a cancer, may he active in goiuii; to a physician, an<S 
 yet be perfectly passive in the operation, wliich removes 
 the disease, so a sinner may be active in i^oin£;to ('hrisu 
 that he may have life, and yet be. '♦altoS^ether passive" 
 in the spiritual change hy which it is produced. 
 
 To some, no doubt, this will appear to give the saved 
 sinner somewhat of whicli to boast. But wliatcan he 
 the ground of his boasting? That he has oheyed the 
 divine law and is therefore saved for his own merit? 
 No, verily — the law requires love to God with all tlie 
 heart, soul, and mind; but the doctrine represents the 
 sinner as desiring to be born again — not because he 
 loves God at all; but because he loves himself and 
 hates eternal misery. Suppose that in heaven, lie 
 should begin an anthem to himself for his salvation; 
 what would be his language? "Praise to me, that out 
 of pure love to myself, and in perfect disobedience to 
 God's holy law, which righteously demands my su- 
 preme affection — praise- praise to me^ that out of mere 
 love to myself, and in a state of absolute hatred to my 
 Maker, Preserver and Redeemer, when convinced hy 
 the means of his mercy, that if I continued my rebel- 
 lions against him, 1 must eventually sink under the 
 wrathful arm of his power; like a warrior, who asks 
 quarters from his enemy, when he sees resistance would 
 eventuate in his own ruin, 1 laid down my weapons 
 from fear and begged the God whom 1 basely hated, to 
 have mercy upon me — praise to myself, that God had 
 mercy upon me a sinner!!" The most that such a sin- 
 ner could say in praise of his own merit, is that his sin- 
 ful desire of mercy, was not so guilty as anotbers s/?7/«/ 
 rejection of mercy. So that, according to this doctrine, 
 the former achieves no merit and deserves no reward; 
 but the latter, by his rejection incurs great guilt and de- 
 serves deep condemnation. 
 
 Nor is there any disagreement between this expla 
 nation of the doctrine of coming to ('hrist^, and ano 
 
4I< 
 
 (her portion of onr Confession of Faith uhicli teaches, 
 that *'God chooses men not from any foresight (if faitii, 
 or good works, or any other thing, foreseen in tlie crea- 
 ture, as a condition or a cause moving him thereto."(rt) 
 It has already heen shown, in this discourse, that the 
 coming of an unregenerate man to Christ, in tiie sense 
 here explained, falls short of the standard of the divine 
 law, and therefore, if compared with it, cannot be a 
 good work, and that the belief upon wiiich the man acts, 
 in this coming — is not the faith demanded by the scrip- 
 tures — is not a faith which works by love; and hence 
 the theory here advocated, supposes that God gives life 
 to the sinner; not on acrount of faith, or good works, 
 previously possessed. And as it is humbly believed to 
 liave been deraonstrated, in a former di-scourse,* that, 
 between God's foreknowledge of the free acts of the 
 creature, and his determinations in regard to those acts, 
 there are no such relations as antecedent and conse- 
 quent, either in the order of duration or of reason; ac- 
 cording to this theory, nothing in the creature could 
 have operated on the mind of Deity as a cause or con- 
 dition, to influence him when in his eternal plan he de- 
 termined to bestow life upon the anxious, seeking sin- 
 ner; for a condition or cause must, both in the order of 
 reason and duration, precede that, of which it is a con- 
 dition or a cause. 
 
 And so far from opposing ^ our doctrine demands a 
 literal interpretation of the scriptures, that giays "He 
 will have mercy on whom he will have mercy.''*(ft) In 
 the usual course of his saving operations, he will have 
 mercy on all those, and those only on w hom he may 
 have mercy, consistently with all his moral perfections 
 — on such as improve the instructions of his Gospel, and 
 the threatenings of his law, and the application of these 
 instructions and threatenings, made by the Holy Ghost 
 in his common optrations, to their consciences — ia a 
 
 aConfession of Faith, chap, iii, ^c. 5. 
 
 *See No. 1, page 8^ and note A. at the end of the sermon. 
 
 bRom. ix, 15. 
 
45 
 
 way perfectly within the iiiiregeneratod powers of the 
 natural man — so as to throw aside the outward immo- 
 ralities or a wicked life — so as to feel the workinejs of a 
 sin-smitten conscience shuddering with the forehodings 
 of a judgment to come — and so as with all the importu- 
 nity of a sinking Peter, to cry out, "Help Lord or 1 
 perish," or of the sightless Bartimeus, "Jesus thou son 
 €f David have mercy on me," 
 
 From this exposition of our text, we are able to recon- 
 cile the scriptures which say, '^It is God, ivhich war- 
 li'eth in you, both to icill and to do of his good flea 
 sure,^^ (a) ''you hath he quickened who were dead ia 
 trespasses and sins/' (b) "Jesus ivhich hath delivered 
 us from the wrath to come/* (c) "a new heart also will 
 Igive you and a new Spirit will I put within you/' (d) 
 with others whose language is, " H'ork out your own 
 salvation f^ [e) ''arise from the dead;^' (/) ''flee from 
 the wrath to come;'' (g) "make you a new heart and a 
 new Spirit." {h) And this apparently discrepant lan- 
 guage, is just as literally reconciled, as the saying "that 
 a farmer raises a crop of corn," is with the proposition 
 that <4n the growth, and the formation of the grain, the 
 farmer is altogether passive, and the production wholly 
 a work of divine power." The farmer indeed supported 
 by God's providence, ploughs the ground and plants 
 the seed; but in the plan of Jehovah this is only an an- 
 tecedent to the production. Then the same unseen, 
 Almighty hand that first formed grass and herbs, conti- 
 nues his creation, and without the farmer's assistance, 
 the blade shoots, the stalk rises, and the corn matures? so 
 the unregenerate sinner, convicted by the law and awed 
 by the terrors of God, unceasingly calls for mercy; but 
 this is only an antecedent to regeneration. Then in the 
 merciful dispensation of grace, the same Spirit, that 
 moved in the night of Chaos, and brooded on the face of 
 the waters, and produced light and order among the 
 
 aPhil. ii, 12. bEph ii, 1 cl. Thes. i, 10 dEzekiel xxxvi, 26. 
 ePhil. ii, 12. f Matt, iii, 7, gEph. v, 14. hEzekiel xriii, 31. 
 
46 
 
 il.U'k JHu] crude maffrink. without any co-operation of 
 Hie siotHM', corrects the disorders nnd dispels the dark- 
 ness of this moral chaos, and creates him a new crea- 
 ture. Thus io the Ianp;iia2;" of common life, an nore- 
 nf^wed man may he just as literally exhorted to make 
 liim a new heart as a farmer to rear a crop. In cither 
 case the man hut performs an anfecedent, which God is 
 pleaded to follow with an oj)erution, exclusively his own. 
 In the popular laii2;uage of the Bi!)le, the man who fol- 
 lows the crmrse, which God has appointed to ohtnin this 
 spiritual chano;e; as literally makes him a new heart; as 
 he rears a harvest, who performs that process, which is 
 usually crowned with the productions of the field; whilst 
 in the strict language of the jjihle, as well as in tiie 
 accurate language of Christian philosophy, it is lite^ 
 rally true, that God gives a new heart, and that God 
 loads the fields with the bounties of the year. 
 
 And if these things I)e so, the minds of anxious sin- 
 iiers ought not to he distracted with theological subtle- 
 ties and paradoxes — such as whether, if they are note- 
 lected, they may not be lost though they feel their need 
 of a Saviour never so deeply, and never so earnestly and 
 inces.*^antly knock at the door of mercy — whether they 
 may pray before they have repented and believed — 
 whether they may not have committed the sin against 
 the Holy Ghost and therefore not obtain life though they 
 should come to Christ — and whether they ought to at- 
 tempt to believe or repent or to make to themselves a 
 new beart lest they presumptuously intrude upon the 
 ]u*ovincc of a jealous God; but they should be taught 
 that it makes a part of God's eternal purpose to elect thfe 
 very sinners that convicted of their iniquities and convin- 
 ced, that if the Redeemer saves not, they are lost, and 
 that acting upon this convi( tion, gives him no rest, but 
 day and night beseech his deliverance from the wrath to 
 comp; that in jiraypr and every other religious exercise 
 in which they engage, they ought immediately to believe 
 and repent — that no sin can condemn the soul that comes 
 to Him whose blood cleanseth from all sin — and that it 
 
47 
 
 is tbf *TS to endpavoiir in depenilence on divine j^race, to 
 believo, rt pent, and ohtain a uew heart; hwi Ciiod's to 
 give cijicacy to these eiwleavonrs; just as it was for the 
 aaiaii with the withered hand to attemjjt to >stiettli it 
 forths hut for Christ to irive succesiy to the attempt. 
 
 What encourage nsent Tor anxious sonU! That he who 
 inhabits the hight'st heaven; occupies a th.rone to which 
 %n\ created <!li;nify can climh; is clothed with the myste- 
 rious, the awfnl, and the infinite majesty of the Kins; of 
 kings; ar.d wliose ears are greated with the hnllelnjahs 
 of angelic and cheru!)ic choirs — that He should how the 
 Jjeaveiis to bear the cries of a worm, whose very prr^yer 
 is hut the foiced tiihnte of a selfish and a slavish fear; 
 Ihe very accents of w hich are formed hy an unhallowed 
 tongue, and horee frt^B i is lips by polluted hreath, may 
 well stagger the belief of a trembling sinner. It is loo 
 much for him to ask so inlinke a thing, and too rrnich to 
 expect^ had not the Almighty's own voice poroclaimed 
 ^'The Lord, the Lord God, merciful and grftcinns.^^ 
 
 But has he said, that him that cometh uuto me, Iwill 
 in no wise cast out, and shall he not perform? 
 
 O turn not away from the voice that warns thongli it 
 utters terrible things. On the mount whence roll the 
 thunders of condemnation ami wrath, I see one, like the 
 Sou of man, standing half veiled in clouds; in his hands 
 he holds the li2;htnings that flash to devour; ar.d I bear 
 him say in a still small voice, to which all nature pau- 
 ses to listen^ and w hich angels stoop to hear — a voice 
 that sileuces the thunders: ^'IjOoJc unto me and he ijp. 
 saved, all the ends of the earth.^^ But do y(m respond 
 •*We see him not — vv'ljere sliall we find mm? 
 
 Keep your face fixed* to the mount whence your ear 
 
 *If so soon as the face of the anxious sinner is kept fixed, he is met by Spi- 
 ritual life, this language intimates no delay in regatd to faith and repentance. 
 If a sinner be ignorant, he ought to be instructed; if careless, alarmed; and 
 jf anxious, exhorted to come to Christ immediately, by endeavouring in his 
 strength, to exercise an evangelical repentance and a saving faith. It is 
 then the cry of the sin-smitten sinner becomes the prayer of faith, just as in 
 the miracle of the Saviour, the attem.pt of the luiibercd, became the act of a 
 sound htirxd. If God has joined seeking and finding together, to exhort a 
 sinner to come to Christ im,mei:ately, is to exhort him to repent and Mievr 
 hmnediately. 
 
4S 
 
 caught the alarm, that now a:;Uates your frame, and 
 though now surrounded by dark clouds of the sky, 
 which no unaided mortal eye can penetrate; yet soon 
 shall the day s|)ring from on high gihl the edges of 
 the horizon, the ch)uds break, and tlie sha(h)ws flee a- 
 way, and every star that now garnishes the hidden ca 
 nopy, shall becovne a sun to reveal to your astonished 
 eyes a gracious Saviour — O turn not away — he has not 
 said to the seed of Jacob seek ye my face in vain — 
 Amen. 
 
 The opposition of some excellent brethren is so strong to even the name 
 of the best possible moral system, that they have actually refused to read 
 the part of our first number classed under that head Forthe information of 
 such, it is now stated, that in this work, the best possible moral system is 
 used to denote that system in which there is *'tbe least possible moral evil,''* 
 an idea almost the reverse of the theory usually known by that name— in- 
 asmuch as the latter supposes that the present system is made good, is made 
 the best, by the introduction of moral evil. 
 
 At the following words in note C of our first number some of our rea- 
 ders have taken offence "in the bost possible system there m,ay be, unavoida- 
 bly, on the part of the Creator, *nm£ things wrong." This is it supposed, to say 
 the least, is speaking very disrespectfully of Almighty power. As it is found 
 that this objection is made by almost none, b«t those who have turned to the 
 note but have not read the sermon, the attention of our readers is respectful- 
 ly invited to the pages, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of "The Christian Preacher" 
 No 1. It is intended in the course of this work to treat the subject more 
 fully. 
 
THE CHRISTIAN PREACHER. 
 
 Vol.1. SEP rEMBER, 18^7. No. 4* 
 
 The cause and the design of God^s giving his Sow. 
 
 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, 
 that whosoever believeth in him, should not perish, but have everlas- 
 ting life— John iii, 1 6. 
 
 lledemption is a glorious theme. Originatina; in the 
 bosom of divine love, planned in the depths of infinite 
 >visdoiD, exenited by the hand of omnipoteixe, fulfil- 
 ling the predictions of truth, meetins; the demands of 
 justice, and encircled on its throne with all the lustre of 
 the divine mercy, it appears to call into requisition every 
 infinite perfection, and to concentrate and t(» present in 
 one view, all that is important for man ia this world to 
 know of Deity. 
 
 Viewed by finite minds, God's perfections might 
 seem unharmonious and unausjdcious — omnipotence, 
 tyranny; justice, severity; and mercy, weakness; but 
 now blended together as the diversicoloured rays, and 
 harmonized in the plan of the "great salvation", they 
 constitute the glory of the Supreme Majesty, the light 
 of the upper heaven, the Sun of the moral universe, 
 which not only kindles the blaze of heavenly noon ia 
 the moral midnight of this earth, biit probably rolls the 
 tides of celestial day to illumine and bless the lemotest 
 regions of moral existence. The same host of heaven- 
 ly heralds, that hailed the night of the Saviour's na- 
 nativity with the song of peace on earth and good will 
 to men, may have sung the same anthem to the inhabi- 
 tants of other spheres, and the twelve angelic legions, 
 who stood ready to vindicate the honour of their insul- 
 ted Lord, may have been commissioned to take their 
 flight from world to world, to publish the agonies of the 
 garden and the tragedy of the cross; and to explain to 
 the astonished universe, why nature darkened, paused, 
 and shook. 
 
71 
 
 Hot hn\vo\ rrelr^afino;f!iP tl'OMglit, tliat onr (j.hI and 
 l>is Clnist. are known n\M\ adored hy rjuniberless other 
 l)i'ini:;s tl>roii£;hout the if»trlli«j:;pnt armies of the ujiiverse, 
 who lise hii:;her in the scah' ofexi^tenc^^ tlum ourselves; 
 it is (ins, to cot»tHin(»late Ucity and Redemption main- 
 ly in reterence to onr own vvoild 
 
 Fully convinced (»f this truth, let us examine the two 
 leading ideas comunmicated tons in the letter of the 
 text— - 
 
 T. The cause, and 
 
 11. The design of God's giving his Son. 
 
 1. The cause- -He •*h>ved the world." It is not 
 taught in this text, or in any other part of the Bihle, that 
 Cto<1 loves every human being in the same degree. In- 
 deed as a holy God, who hates sin and loves righteous- 
 ness, this would be impossible. It would be a denial 
 of his perfect nature, to suppose, that he cherished the 
 same degree of affection for Judas as for John, or for 
 Pilate as for Paul, or, that he who changes not and who 
 views things that ore not as though they icere^ should 
 love a man, whom he eternally views as an enemy, 
 never reconciled, as much as one, whom he eternally 
 views as an enemy reconciled. So. that while it is be- 
 lieved, that God in the donation of his Son loved those 
 whom he foresaw as redeemed, sanctified, and saved, 
 more than those whom he foiesaw as crucifying him, and 
 putting him to an open shame^ and retaining against 
 him an eternal enmity; still it is susceptible of moral de- 
 monstration, that He loved the world. 
 
 All the human family stand alike related to hira as an 
 universal parent. All are alike the parts of the divine 
 workmanship, fenrfally and ironderfu/ly made. And 
 though now the bright gold has become dim, still it is 
 g<d(l; although the gem is cast into the mire, still it is a 
 gem; and although the moral workmanship is despoiled, 
 yet the materials are precious. And the Maker's own 
 testimony is. that he has no pleasure in the death of the 
 wicked: and that it h good and acceptable in the eyes of 
 God our Sai*ii)in% that supplications and prayers, inter- 
 cessions and giving of thanks he made for all men. That 
 
7.'> 
 
 the Saviour loved the wicked whom he contemplated a« 
 his on n certain persecutors, murderers, and etiMnally ir- 
 reconrileahle enemies is pathetically proclaimed in his 
 apostrophe to Jerusalem—//* thou kadst known, evpn 
 thou, at least in th^'s thy daij^ the thirties which belong un- 
 tothyjjeacef But now they are hid from thine eyes, if 
 Jerusalem, ,lerusa/em, thou that kiflest the prophets and 
 stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would 
 I have s:athered thy children togther as a hen gatherelh 
 her chickens under her wimcsl 
 
 And not only hy the verbal expres>^ions of his bene- 
 volence and the effusion of his tears; hut more hy the 
 sorrows of Getlisemane, the blood of Caiv:ny. and tlie 
 humiliation of the sepulchrn, he dem^uistrated a love 
 for tlie whole world, stron!j;er than death — fk gave 
 himself a ransom for all. As every word of God is a 
 stone, shaped for some place in Zion's bulwarks, tow- 
 ers, or palaces to support, streni^then, or adorn them, 
 it is indispensable that every l)uilder in God's house, 
 who would not have his works burned as wood, hay, 
 and stubble, and who would be a work raim, that needeth 
 not to be ashamed, should prayerfully and as seeing him 
 who IS invisible, endeavour to appropriate each to its 
 own divinely appointed location. And especially it is 
 indispensable, in regard to words such as ransom^ pro- 
 fitiation, atonement, SLnd redemption, which relate im- 
 mediately to the Redeemer's meditation, and thus be- 
 come pillars upon which the fair edifice of revealed truth 
 rests its foundatious — The word ransom literally signi- 
 fies the price of redemption for captives, whether it be 
 appropriated and accepted so as to become efficient for 
 their liberation or not. He will not regard any ransom. 
 Then a great ransom cannnot deliver them. In these 
 texts a ransom, and a great ransom, is described as not 
 accepted, and therefore, not appropriated to the redemp- 
 tion of the captive. The idea is well illustrated in the 
 description, which Homer gives of the price of libera- 
 ton, brought to Agamemnon by Chryses, the priest of 
 Apollo to redeem his captive daughter. The ransom 
 offered by her father, for her redemption, is represented 
 
76 
 
 by the poet, as infinite in value, and yet it was rejected 
 by the wrathful Agamemnon, This however did not al- 
 ter its value, or its meaning; in the wishes of the parent; 
 in amount it was all sufficient for redemption, and it was 
 consecratedto the purpose by a parent's fondest affections; 
 and in the song of the poet as well after Agammenon's 
 refusal to accept it for the redemption of the captive, as 
 before, it is called tlie infinite ransom. Though a thing 
 may be properly denominated a ransom, whether it be 
 formally appropriated and accepted as the price for the 
 liberation of a captive or not; yet it never properly be- 
 comes such, until set apart tnrthi^ purp(icie, by the wishes 
 of him, who would redeem; or until olTeriMl by bin} in 
 the place of the captive. This is but a plain inference 
 from the texts just cited, as well as from the passage in 
 Homer's Illiad. just alluded to. lu the one text, it is 
 asserted, that a ransom will no^ hprp^arded^ ai»d in the 
 other, that a ^^reat ransom connot deliver^ and the con- 
 ditions of both suppose an actual (jffer; and in the case 
 of Homer's priest of x\pollo, there was an actual tender. 
 Money in the treasury of a nation, is but mere silver 
 and gold; but when offered to an enemy in the place of 
 captured citizens, then it becomes a ransom. Ho also the 
 humiliation and suffering of Jesus Christ, in themselves 
 considered, are but degradation and misery, but when 
 offered in the place of man, they then take the character 
 of a ra«.<?r;m. And if it be supposed that the word ransom 
 implies not only the price of redemption offered in the 
 plate of theca|)tive, but also aj^propriatel l)y the offerer 
 in purpose and in fact, andacce|)ted by the holder of the 
 captive, in so far as to procure some privileges, if not an 
 actual liberation: whilst we would still contend, that all 
 this is not expressed by the term ransom; and from con- 
 viction ( onfifie our view to the ideas of the word just given; 
 yet we freely grant, that Christ in giving himself a ran- 
 som b«*came more to all than is literally comprehended in 
 the term — He became a propitiation /(>r the sins of the 
 whole world. The wt.rd propitiation, simply means, 
 something tiiat propitiates. Offended Deity is so far 
 appeased by the mediatioa of the Saviour, as to scatter 
 
his blessings over the whole face of this terrestrial crea 
 ♦ion — as to cause his sun to shine and his showers to 
 fall upon the just and upon the unjust — as to open all 
 the facilities and treasures of air, earth, and ocean, alike 
 to the pious and the impi!)us, and to the grateful and the 
 thankless — and above all, as not only to be unwilling, 
 that any should perish, but so as to stand in readiness to 
 be eternally reconciled to every one, however wicked 
 and however vile, who will come unto him that he may 
 have life. 
 
 If on accou!»t of man's sins, justice would require, that 
 the heavens over his head should beconte brai^^, and un- 
 der his feet the earth iron, the sea bear frowns and terrors 
 on every wave; the air. f he sound of woe and the pang of 
 torment on every bn atl.; the clouds shower curses, and 
 the sun dart forked lightikings and devouring fires over 
 the world; and above all, that the transgressor should 
 be punished with everlasting flestruction from the pre- 
 sence of God and from the glory of his power — how can 
 justice be maintained, and, yet the heavens spread over 
 him the lofty and azure conoj)y: earth place her soft and 
 verdant carpet under his feet; the ocean roll his surges 
 but to waft him to other shores; the air continue the easy 
 and salubrious element of life, the clouds scatter Hea- 
 ven's blessings, and the sun pour Heaven's glories to 
 enrich and adorn his habitation, and more wonderful 
 than all, God announcing his willingness to save from 
 the justly threatened desolation, proclaim iu the inhabi- 
 tants of tl e world — Look unto me, and be ye saved, all 
 the ends of the earth—how. unless in man's stead, some 
 mediator has interposed, and so far sustained the penal- 
 ties which he incurred by disobedience, as to render of- 
 fended Deity, if not reconciled — yet propitious — ready 
 to be reconciled to the whole family of man? Hpre the 
 scripture always its own best interpreter, whilst it |)ro- 
 nounces sin the abominable thing which God hates, and 
 its wages to be death, casts such a light over the whole 
 face of the moral creation, as reveals the consistency of his 
 ways of clemency to the whole human race, l»y teaching 
 us that Jesus Christ the righteous is the propitiation for 
 
78 
 
 iJiP sivs of the whole world, that he died for all. and. that 
 he hu the grace of God tasted dpothfor every man. 
 
 Placed williin ihe sphere of this iihimiiiatioM, we ran 
 discover how men y and truth may meet too:;ether — fjod 
 be just and yet propitious to all Adam's rebellious chil- 
 dreo. 
 
 It is no objection, that in common langnn£;f, a life Iniil 
 down in th«^ place of another, always implies tiie libe- 
 ration of the one at first subject to deatli, since Christ 
 by his mediation has liberated all matikind from the im- 
 mediate endurance of many of the suilerini^s to which by 
 their apostary they are leii;ally ex[)0sed. and procured for 
 them a day oii2;»'ace; and therefore th^y are liberated in e- 
 very sense in which he died for their liberation. And as 
 his death is not only suffic'ipnt to pr^jcure this day of 
 respite for all; but al.-JOU) satisfy (he demands of jiHtjce 
 for their sins, mercy improves the day, by making ti- 
 vertures of reconciliation, putting it to their choice, wtje- 
 tticr jiistire shall [)la('e the sulfVriuHis of Christ to 
 tiieir account, and thus {)rononnce them n'£/fp/w«^rf and 
 acquitted, or whether tliey wisl stand responsiMe to 
 their own penalties. And the only reason, s;iven \\\ the 
 word of (tvuI, why any perish, is that they will }tot conii^ 
 to Christ, that he mny become their surety. .and that his 
 death may be placed to their accoHiit for justification; 
 attd thus it is ^iterally tru'j, that the world throui:;li him 
 miij;ht — because salvation is left as fairly to their choice 
 j^s any other offer— the world thron2;h him might be 
 saved — Imai^hie, thatawlnde provijjceof a large empire 
 should revolt fiom a powerful king and that by the laws 
 of the realm, all the revolutiornsts for their disloyalty, 
 sh(»uld!)e subject to endure a public execution to-moi row. 
 J»ut the king's s(m interferes and says, '^Father, 1 will a- 
 gree to be exeruted to-morrow in their stead, if you will 
 spare them all ten days, and in the mean time, send he- 
 ralds among them to proclaim, that my death shall be 
 ac(epted by you, instead of th*» death of every one, who 
 within that time, shall return to his allegiance." Sup 
 pose the proposal accepted, and the death is then vicari- 
 ous and the condemned are liberated to the extent of the 
 
79 
 
 stipulition. So in the case of Chmt's propitinVry ran- 
 S(-m tor all mankuid—they are actually liberafed fnini 
 tl»e immediale execution ofrnftr??/ of the curses ilne tofhem 
 for tieir ^lisloyajty (o G'.d, and Chii^st's (.eath nlieietl 
 to l»e iniputeil to tiiern for redemption and reconcilia- 
 tion. 
 
 It is not intimated however, that in tlie plan of the 
 moral system, Christ died in no higher spnse, t!ian this, 
 for ihose. who were eternally viewed as eventually co- 
 ntiiiH; to him. re( eivins; spiritual life, and beiiii; actJially 
 saved through his death; hut this view is 2;iven, as tire 
 most obvious ai.d literal s^nseof such scriptures as rep- 
 resent him, dyins; for all. Fora//thp scriptures describe 
 not his death as an atonement or redemption, but a pro- 
 pitiatiov: throuiqli it Deity is so propitiated, that he of- 
 fers to be rectmciled to o//, and to make the haviour's 
 sufferings a redemption for all. 
 
 Thus we have given the Arrainian, all the latitude of 
 his own interpretation to his own favorite scriptures, as 
 may be seen from the following quotation in Arminius' 
 own language', as given by VVitsius — "Let us add to all 
 these things by way of conclusi( n, the proper and imme- 
 diate effect of the death and passion of Christ. Now, 
 it is not an actual removal of sin, from this or that parti- 
 cular person, nor actual remission of sins, nor justifica- 
 tion, nor the ar tual redemption of this or that person, 
 which none can have without faith and the spirit of 
 Christ; but the reconciliation of God; the impetration of 
 remission, justification, and redemption before God.'**^ 
 
 iSow this amounts to nothing more, than the propitia- 
 tion which we have descri!»ed, with the single exception, 
 that Arminius, very improperly says — "the reconcilia- 
 tion of God,'' For this there is no scriptural warrant — 
 God is never reconciled to the sinner uiitil he believes 
 in Christ. It is however evident from the whole pas- 
 sage that Arminius meant nothing more by '-the recou- 
 ciliaiion of God. '^ than we, by <*the propitiating oFCrod.'' 
 
 These unnumbered bicssiugs, that flow to the wh(de 
 race of man as consequences, from God's iiu-»p<'uk;J>a' 
 
 ♦ExaniirkC Predestine, p. T5. 
 
80 
 
 » 
 gift, at once clpinonstrato his love to the whole world, 
 and also, that his love was the moving cause in giving 
 his Hon. 
 
 According to the order of the text, the 
 
 II topic of consideration, is the design of God in gi- 
 ving Ids Son. It is concisely stated in the text, that 
 whosoever bcJieveth on him shoifid not perish but have 
 everlasting life. However his propitiatory ransom 
 for the sins of the whole wnrld, was contempl-^ted in 
 this (!onation; and however many less ends may have 
 been revcdved in the ()lan: yet st) far at h»ast, ms it relates 
 to this world, the salvation of those viewed as believing, 
 loomed highest in the prospect, and was the grand end 
 in theangnst transaction. 
 
 When Deity formed the great plan of moral govern- 
 ment, as the (Jmniscient he had before him all actual 
 and all possilile beings and events. In the important 
 part which related to the gift of his Son. he foresaw 
 with unerring precision, who of the human family would 
 come to him, and thus obtain power to believe and be- 
 come the sons of God, and w ho would not come. He 
 therefore foreknew, that a portion of mankind notwith- 
 standing the universality of the propitiatory sacrifice, 
 and all other moral means, that his infinite wjsd(>m and 
 benificence, might provide, would nevertheless, eventu- 
 ally choose the road to death and sink to the abodes of 
 endless desolation. Had this been foreknown as the 
 certain choice, and the cert;\in end of all Adam's fallen 
 generations, it would a[)pear unreasonable to conceive, 
 that Infinite wisdom would still have given his Son to 
 endure the sufferings of death and the inhabitation of 
 the tomb, to provide a propitiatory ransom for such a 
 race. What then, but the redemption of those who ac- 
 tually believe could have been the great object of the 
 Redeemer's mission? 
 
 To suppose, that there ever was a period in infinite 
 duration, in which Deity had no plan, by which he in- 
 tended to create and govern the moral universe; or in 
 w hie h he hud not before him every item of this plan, ap- 
 
81 
 
 pears like suspecting infinite wisdom of infinite folly it 
 
 is folly's own essence to be planless; ai,cl U) imagine this 
 plan to be made, and the events comprehended in it to 
 happen differently, impugns his Omniscience, and is 
 an accusation of ignorance— it is a privilege peculiar to ig- 
 norance to be deceived. The All Wise and the Omnis- 
 i^ient therefore, has a plan, eternal as his existence, and 
 as infallible as his wisdom, and if so, whom he did 
 infallibly, and eternally, /orfZcwoze?, as coming to Christ, 
 he also did, \n\'?i\\\h\\ smd etern-Aly, prpdestinate^ to be 
 covformed to the image of his Son. Moreover whom he 
 did predestinate^ them he also called, and whom he cal- 
 led, them he also justified; and wh^m he justified, them 
 he also glorified. And if after our reasoning, there still 
 should remain a doubt whether this predestination was 
 made in time or eternity, the question is decided by the 
 revelation, that God has chosen believers in Christ, be- 
 fore the joundatwn of the world, that they stiouldbfholy 
 and without blame before him in love. And this choice 
 made in eternity, in purpose, is in time actually fulfil- 
 led, in the sanctification of the Spirit and the bvlief of 
 the truth. If therefore they who believe were predes- 
 tinated from eternity, and chosen before the foundation 
 of the world, to be conformed to the image of God's Son^ 
 and to be holy and without blame before him in love; and 
 as a consequence of this holy transformation, to be. glo- 
 rified; and if the Saviour never would have entered this 
 region of ruin, had he foreseen the dreadful certainty, 
 that none would be saved by his death, the conclusion 
 is irresistable, that in the purpose of the infinite mind, 
 Christ's principal object in descending to the pilgrimage 
 of earth, was to save them whom he foresaw as coming 
 to him, and as certainly to be made, by his choosing 
 them, evangelical believers. 
 
 Again believers only are recognised as actually re- 
 deemed by Christ. His death has indeed propitiated 
 Deity in behalf of all the human kind; and he is ready 
 to make it redemption to every one that comes to the 
 
 It 
 
Saviour; yet as redemption properly signifies a release 
 purchased by a ransou), iu Jehovah's eternal and infal- 
 lible plan, none can he ranked as redeemed, but such as 
 are foreseen acluaily coining to Christ, that they may 
 obtain the spiritual life, by'vvhich they are enabled to 
 exercise a scriptural faitli; because none but such can 
 be released from the penalties incurred by transgression. 
 We indeed read of wicked men who deny the Lord, 
 that BO UGH V them. But to 1)uy is not to redeem. — 
 The original word liere accurately translated bought is 
 Agorazo which literally signifies to purchase articles in 
 the market, and must undoubtedly apply to those bought 
 in the sense, in which it has been already shown, 
 Christ died for the whole worhl It is sometimes me- 
 taphorically used in the sense t^f redeem, and then it is 
 always applied to believers only. For thou wast slain 
 and hast redeemed US to God by thy blood. And so 
 also its co2;nate Kxagorazo, as in the [exi— Christ has 
 redeemed UB/rom the curse of the law; but literally, it 
 can only mean to buy;'\i\i\ in this sense alone, can it be 
 applied to those that are eventually lost. Wicked men 
 bought by Christ's propitiatory ransom, still remain in 
 the hands of viudiratory justice, just as an article paid 
 for, may still remain in the iiands of the seller. But 
 the literal meaning of the Greek word Lutroo properly 
 translated redeem, signifies to release a captive by pay- 
 ing the price oi redem|)tion; and hence its derivatives 
 Lutrosis and Jpolutrosis denote a release from captivi- 
 ty by a price paid, and are rightly translated redemp- 
 tion. According to the sense of Agorazo, buy, an ar- 
 ticle may be purchased and yei remain in the t)ands of 
 the seller; but in the original sense of Lutroo, redeem, a 
 prisoner must not only ht^ purchase dUui'diiusiWy released. 
 13iit the unbelievers who descend to the pit, is never 
 released; and the idea conveyed in a scriptural redemp- 
 ti(»n, is oidy applicable to those released from condem- 
 nation and rum. And henf e the language nf inspiration 
 is, The Lord redeemeth the soul of ids 8KIIVAN FS. 
 YE were not redet^med with corruptible things as sil- 
 ver and gold — but wifli the precious blood of Christ, 
 
83 
 
 Who gave himself for Us, that he might redeem V^from 
 all iyvquity. Even the righteousness of God, which ts by 
 faith of Jesus Christ unto all, and upon all that V»K- 
 LIEVE— being justified freely by his grace through the 
 redemption that is in Christ Jesus. Jesus Christ, who of 
 God is made unto US —redemption. In whom Wl^have 
 redemption through his blood, the forgiwessof sins.^ 
 Ilavirig obtained eternal redemption for US. in tthom 
 W K have redemption through his blood, even the for- 
 giveness ofsins.-\ 1 hus the Greek u orcls Lutroo. Lu- 
 trosis, and dpolutrosis, translated by the English 
 words redeem and redemption, when employed in rela- 
 tion to the death of the Savionr, are throughout the 
 iSievv Testament invariably applied to believers only; 
 and if so, we see, that our Cordession of Faith exhi- 
 bits the true meaning of the Bible, wUdn it declares, 
 that '^JVeither are any other redeemed by Chnst.X 
 
 And the same is true of the Atonement. The pri- 
 mitive meaning of this English word, is to bring to a- 
 greement those that formerly were at variance — to put 
 at one (hose formerly separated by disagreement, as 
 may be seen from the composition of the word at-one- 
 ment. The original meanings of the Greek words 
 Jiatallasso and Katallage of which our atone and atone- 
 ment are translations, are to change, a change. When 
 God and the sinner, make peace, a change is eifected — 
 they that were once at variance, are now become friend^; 
 and this change is very properly denominated a recon- 
 ciliation or an atonement. From the very nature of a 
 reconciliation between parties once at variance, their 
 mutual hostilities must be followed by mutual good 
 will. Now i/ the carnal mi^td is enmity against God, 
 however propitious he may be towards the transgressor 
 and ready to be reconciled to him; yet in the nature of 
 the case, there can be no atonement between them un- 
 til this enmity is slain— until the man renewed in the 
 spirit of his mind, believes th»* Gospel with a faith that 
 works by love. And thus we find, that while the Scrip- 
 
 *Eph. i. 7, |Col. i 14, |Chap. ui. sec, 6. 
 
tures teacb us, that it pleased the Father by him to re- 
 concrle all ihin^^s unto himaelf, whether they be thins;$ 
 in earth, or things in heaven, and whilst they iafoim 
 us, that this plan was in the progress of fulfilment— 
 that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto him- 
 self, not imputins: their trespasses unto them^ they also 
 instruct us, that none, but ^-saints'* and ^'faithful bre- 
 thren",! are actually reconciled, declaring that — ''YOU, 
 that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind 
 by wicked works; yet now hath he reconciled." <*lf 
 when enemies, \VE were reconciled to God by the 
 death of his Son, mucb more being recojiciled, we shall 
 be saved by his life." ^*VVho hath reconciled US to 
 himself by Jesus Christ." ^'And not only so but we 
 also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ by 
 whom WE have now received the atonement." As it 
 was the design of God, that made the sufferings of 
 Christ a propitiatory ransom for ihe sins of the whole 
 world, as was argued in the former part of this discourse,, 
 so also it is his purpose, that makes them redemption 
 and an atonement to them that in coming to Christ re- 
 ceive spiritual life to repent and believe. And here a 
 few extracts from some well written letters on the atone 
 ment, lately published, may be appropriately introdu- 
 ced: "It was the purpose of God, that made the death 
 of his Son an atonement; consequently, if you view 
 his death apart from this purpose, you can see no atone- 
 ment. In the cross of Christ thus contemplated, yon 
 may behold suffering and ignominy; you may behold a 
 display of fortitude and patience, but you can see no a- 
 tonement. To discover this, you must ask why on Cal- 
 vary was exhibited that amazing spectacle? 
 
 "In Strictness of speech, we ouglit to distinguish be- 
 tween the death of Christ and the atonement; just as we 
 distinguish between a cause and irs effect. The death 
 of Christ is one thing, antl the atonement another thing; 
 the former being the cause and the latter the effect. In 
 human language, it is not unusual for the cause and the 
 
 •Sec Romans i. 7. II Cor. i. 1. \Co\. i. 2, 
 
85 
 
 pffect to receive the same denomination. Thus the sen- 
 sation produced and the^rc which produces it, are both, 
 though very diiFerent things, denominated heat. 80 
 also cold signifies the cause of a certain sensation in the 
 human frame, and the sensation itself. 
 
 Here then we see the reason why the death of Christ 
 has been called atonement; it is so denominated, be- 
 cause it produces atonement or reconciliation between 
 God and sinful man; and as it has produced this glori- 
 ous effect in millions of instances; it is justly entitled to 
 this appellation. So it may be called in reference to 
 all who have been, or shall be, atoned for, reconciled to 
 God; but with what propriety, can it be so denominated 
 in reference to individuals who never will be reconciled 
 to an offended God by its influence? In truth the death 
 of Christ is an atonement to no man, before it has been 
 applied, and produced its effect; then, and not till then, 
 is it an atonement to him." 
 
 "VV^e have admitted the merits of Christ's death'' ^^to 
 be infinite and thatif applied," thpy "wunld save millions 
 more than shall ever be saved, but it will not follow, 
 that the atonement was made for those who will never 
 be saved. The earth is large enough to have many 
 millions (jf inhibitants more than have ever lived on it, 
 and probably to sustain millions more than will ever 
 descend from Adam; but on this account, it cannot with 
 any propriety be said, that it was made for human be- 
 ings, who shall never be created. The Sun is large 
 and luminous enough to send his beams to more pla- 
 nets than exist in the solar system and to enlighten and 
 warm their inhabitants; but on account of his greatness 
 and grandeur, it could not be said witli any propriety 
 that he was formed to enlighten and warm inhabitants 
 of planets, that shall never be created."* 
 
 And we not only argue the design of Christ's advent 
 from facts, that in the purpose of God. his death is made 
 redemption and atonement to those only, that believe 
 but from the language of the scriptures which proclaim 
 
 *Janeway*« letters on the Atonement* 
 
86 
 
 that desi2;n: *»VVIio gave himself for iis, that be mii^ht 
 redeem ITS from ali iniquity and purify unto himself a 
 peculiar people, z^^alous of i^ood works.'' "For Christ 
 also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, 
 that he might bring US to irod." '•For him who 
 knew no sin, he hath ma le to be sin for us, that WE 
 might be made the righteousness of God in him." 
 '^^Rut when the fulness of time was come, God sent his 
 8(m — t5iat he might redeem them that are under the law, 
 that VV^E might receive the adoption of sons" "Who 
 died for us, that w hether we wake or sleep WE should 
 live togeUier with him." *^Who his own self bare our 
 sins — that WE being dead to sin, should live unto 
 righteousness." "Christ also loved the CllUKCH, 
 and gave himself for it; that he might sanctify it; and 
 cleanse it wUh the wasldng of water by the word; that 
 he might present it to himself a glorious church not ha- 
 ving spot, nor wrinkle; nor any such thing; but that it 
 should be holy and without blemish." 
 
 'I'hus the purpose of God, in relation to the Saviour's 
 madiation, is definitely stated in the language of inspi* 
 ration, to be the salvation of them that believe, from sin 
 a^id of course from its coi^sequent miseries. 
 
 Then if the process of investigation, pursued in this 
 discourse, exhibit the true sense of itispiration, we are 
 divinely taught, tl»at God loved the whole world, and 
 consequently, desired all men to be saved; yet in design 
 gave his Son to make redentption, and atonement, and 
 to procure salvation for none but those who eventually 
 believe. The former are views peculiarly Arminian, 
 and the latter p<^cnliarly Calvinistic. Hpre the strenu- 
 ous Amdnian and the hightoned Calvirdst rush in on 
 each side from their opposite [)olt's, and declare these 
 views irreconcileable with each other. Our reply is, 
 that a literal course of Biblical exposition, has produ- 
 ced these resiilts, and if you pronounce them irreconci- 
 leable with each other, you openly declare, that the 
 Bible on these to[)ics literally contradicts itself, and you 
 both tacitly acknowled.:;'% that yimr systems can not be 
 defended; but by a ligurativc interpretation of sacred 
 
87 
 
 writ; ami ene of you says, that one set of Scriptures 
 must be converted into figure, and the other a class just 
 the opposite. Bt fore however adopting the advice of ei- 
 ther, let us examine vvhetlier these Scriptures are in- 
 deed literally contradictory. On the one hand we are 
 taught, that God loved the whole world; and on the o- 
 ther, that his design was to send his only bt-gotten 8oa 
 ^o save them only that believe. Wherein is the dis- 
 crepance? God's benevolence is as boundless as his in- 
 finite nature, and therefore he uill have all men to he 
 saved. But with all the means which a gracious God 
 employs, a great portion of men, will not come to Christ, 
 that they might have spiritual life to become scriptural 
 believers; it is inconsistent with his juslice and other 
 perfections to grant them spiritual life and salvation 
 without such coming. In forming his eternal plan of 
 moral government, as the Omniscient he had before him 
 all, tiiat would,, and all that would not come to obtain 
 life, so as to be made true believers. Then as a Wise 
 and Omniscient God, who would not be planless, nor 
 yet form a false plan, he \V(^uld frame a j)arpose, not as 
 extensive as his benevolence, but according to the known 
 certainties of that natural liberty, which is an essential 
 to a moral system — a purpose coincident with the cer- 
 tainty of the number of those who w ould come to Cinist.^^ 
 Had he formed a purpose to send Christ to save those 
 who, he knew ivould not be saved^ he would have exhi- 
 bited the absurdity of choosing his own deception, and 
 then in contradictiou to his own word i^e would have 
 displayed in fact to the universe, that "the purpose of 
 God slialV^ KOr ^'stand, and that he icilP' ^0 1 '^imr- 
 form all Ms pleasure.''' Ho that on the one side, we 
 are taught his infinite good will, and on the (»ther. Ids 
 infinite wisdom; and who but an atheist should pro- 
 nounce these periectinns irreconcileable with each other? 
 Nor is there any discrepance between the views 
 which the Arminian'nnd Calvinistic texts exhil>it in re- 
 lation to the death of Christ. Why might not Deity, in 
 
 *See No. Ill, pp, .5'5, 56, 57, 58, 59; Stc. Also No. I. pp. 11, 13 Ac 
 
88 
 
 his eternal purpose, determiiir^ that Chtist's deatli 
 should at once be SLj^ropitiathn tor the sins of the whole 
 worhl, and also a redemption and an atovement ^in 
 thcni only, thai eventually !>elieve; as ^^eU as decree, 
 that the moon should at once be a reflector to cast her 
 pale rays over the darkness of this world, and also, be 
 an abode of life and happiness to numerous intellec- 
 tual inhabitants, or, that the «un b^' his heat and 
 his light should be the occasion, at once, of both sun- 
 shine and showersP In the nature of the case there is 
 nothing unreasonable in supposing, that the Saviour's 
 death should be aj)pointed for one purpose to all and 
 for anotlier to those who believe. And the Scriptures 
 which teach a propitiation \\\v all and an atojiempnt and 
 redemption for those only who believp^ are crowned with 
 all the evidence of actual facts. Is it not true, that none 
 but believers, are actuMlly redeemed — released from the 
 tyranny of sin and punishjinnit, and actually reconciled 
 to God? And is it not true, that the whole world is un- 
 der a dispensation of God's clen^ency, or why is not 
 every fallen descendant of Adam consigned to the fiery 
 pit as soon as he commits his tirst sin? Without some 
 propitiation to appease offended Deity, this, stern justice 
 would inevitably demand. 
 
 Some Calvinists will probably ask, for what purpose 
 did Christ become a propitiatory ransom for the whole 
 world? Since all will not be saved what necessity for 
 such a ransom? — In the economy of God, the wicked 
 and the righteous must in this world, stand together, 
 like the wheat and the tares. 
 
 The servants were not permitted to gather the tares, 
 lest they should root up the wheat als(»: so, as the wic- 
 ked and the righteous are connected together in all 
 brotherhoods of lite; and as progenitors and posterity; 
 and as many noija wicked are yet to become righteous; 
 the swift ministers of justice, must not immediately de- 
 scend to gather the impenitent for their burnings; lest 
 with the wicked, the righteous also be rooted from the 
 earth, liut the claims of justice are inexorable and de- 
 iutind immediate sati^sfaction; and hence, that God may 
 
89 
 
 gather a church from the ruins of the fall, and snp^ 
 poM the justice of his throne, results the necessity of a 
 Mediator and a propitiation for alL A just Jehovah 
 must be propitiated, that ever^ transgressor be not 
 sunk instantly to hell. 
 
 Besides it is agreeable to Him who delights not in 
 iniquity, that the moral universe should be governed ia 
 the way, best adapted to prevent sin, and promote righ- 
 teousness; and this in moral beings — beings endowed 
 with natural liberty, is effected by presenting to them 
 the strongest possible motives to obedience. JBut what 
 motives so strong, can be presented to such beings, as 
 the proof of God's love given in Christ's becoming for 
 them a propitiation; his willingness, that his sufferings 
 should be an atonement and redemption to all who will 
 come to him; and his desire, that all should come? — 
 Here are, 
 
 ^'Amazing pity, grace unknown. 
 And love beyond degree" — 
 
 These motives having been presented, in the day oC 
 jiul2;ment not only shall all the world become guilty 
 before God, but every mouth shall be stopt and every 
 tongue become speechless; and sullen silence, shall ac- 
 knowledge, that the only reason why all were not sa- 
 ved, is because tijey would not, — The Saviour would 
 have gathered them, but they would mot. 
 
 If the Arminian object, that God's determining 
 Christ's death to be redemption and an atonement for 
 those only whom coeternally with his determination, h© 
 foreknew as coming to the feaviour, would be unjustAn- 
 asmuch as it would be leaving others out ui' the plan of 
 salvation, not for any thing, which they had aciually 
 done, but for something which he foresaw they would 
 do, wc reply, that an objection of precisely the same 
 form, may be urged witlj as much cogenry against his 
 own system. He supposes, that God fn^m eternity, 
 foreknew the particular individuals of the ho man race, 
 that in the neglect of his mercies^ would die in unbelief. 
 
90 
 
 ami, that fur this uiibfiienbieseen, he tVom eternity de- 
 teruiined t«» inflict od theni, everlasting punishment. 
 ^Ovv lare he admits an elernal delerminalion to inflict 
 KKiless niisery, not for sins acluiilly toinmitled, hut for 
 sins foreseen to be conimittc d. If then, our system 
 make Ueity uujust, as he iniai;ines, because it supposes 
 that for their sins foreseen, bui not yet coininitred, in his 
 plan he left them out of the number of tiiose for whom 
 he determined Christ's death to be redemption and an 
 atonement; as much at least does the Arminiati system 
 make him unjust, since it sn[)poses, that for sins fore- 
 seen, hut not yet perpetrated, he determined from eter- 
 nity, to consign the unbelievins; to the deeps of a fiery and 
 an endless desolation. Every sensible Arminian will 
 immediately perceive, that in making this objection, he 
 furnishes a sword which will as readily decapitate him- 
 self, as wound his antagonist. And if in the scriptural 
 idea of a propitiation, wecompreliend all th.it he, with- 
 out any warrant from the Bible, denominates '^an atone- 
 ment or redem[)tion," then we in reality admit, that 
 Christ did as much for the salvation of all men as 
 he supposes- -lit became a proj)itiation fur the sins 
 of the whole world; on the basis this propitiation, 
 his death is offered to be made to all the ground of re- 
 demption and of an attniement; God sincerely desires 
 that all should ccmie, that it thus might be made to tht m, 
 reconciliation and redemption: nothing prevents tneir 
 coming, but an excuseless ^^wtll noty^ and to overcome 
 even this, he employs every means consistent with a 
 moral Governor: but we contend also, that as his pur- 
 poses descend to all the [»articular events of his moral 
 kingdom, he eternally decreed, that the Saviour's 8uf< 
 ferings should procure an actual redemption, and an ac- 
 tual atonement, for all such, as he coeternally foresaw, 
 would, in the scri[)tural sense of the word, come to him; 
 and, that he did notdelermine it to be such for any others, 
 lint it is asked, 'nvhat if others should c(»me?'' As this 
 is a supposition contrary to certainty and fact, it is fair to 
 answer it with another supposition of the same character, 
 AVe suppose, that if this were the case, God w ould have 
 
9t 
 
 foreknown the event; and as there is an ae^reement be- 
 tween his foreknowle(l£;e and his decrees, he would have 
 determined the application of Christ's death as an atone- 
 ment, to be commensurate with this supposed greater 
 number. The Arminian imagines however, that if God's 
 determinations reach every event in the universe, then 
 he becomes the author of sin. Eut if it be true, that his 
 foreknowledge of the choosingsof his moral cieatiim, be 
 coeval with his plan, the inference is illegitimate, be- 
 cause in relation to his prescience his decrees can not 
 l)e caiisaL A cause must always precede the fffcct in the 
 order of duration. J5ut his decrpps are coevat with his 
 jjrpscience; they cannot then fnie be the cause of the di- 
 vine foreknowldge: and if not of that foreknowiedge, 
 not of the things foreknown. The agency that pro- 
 duces events, is the cause of thoj^e events. But the de- 
 termination of an event is one tiiirjg, and the agent that 
 produces it, another; the decree therefore, of winch an e- 
 viiiit is the fulfilment, cannot be the cause of that event. 
 The event therefore, may he produced by an agent en- 
 tirely different from the one who decrees. God's de- 
 crees therefore may be fulfilled by the agency of others 
 as well as by his own, and either his own agency, or 
 this agency of others, and not his decrees, is the cause 
 of the events decreed — God deterniued to create the 
 world; in fulftlment of this determination he created it 
 — himself Sind not his dpcree^ was the cause of the pro- 
 duction; God determined to give up the heathen world 
 to vile affections,'^ to idolatry, and to all the wickedness 
 which he knew they would choose, and thus determi- 
 ned to suffer all these enormous sins — iJiemselvPS how- 
 ever and not God s decree to suffer them, was the cause 
 of these enormities. So, that the coeternity of the divine 
 foreknowledge and of the divine decrees, levels the 
 imaginary mountain at a single stroke; and casts to the 
 winds the old Arminian objection, that the doctrine of 
 predestination destroys man's natural liberty. 
 In this subject we have the goodness and the wisdom of 
 
 *Rom. i. 26. 
 
God equally displayed. In his goodness so strong are his 
 well wishes for the happiness even of the wicked, that 
 he lov«^d the world: in infinite wisdom, he adopted a 
 covenant of meroy. ordered in all thin£;s and sure, and 
 gave his Son to become a propitiation for all, and an a- 
 tonins; and redeeming sacrifice for thena that believe. 
 Let saints adore and obey, and let sinners believe and 
 shed tears of penitence at the love and the humiliation 
 proclaimed by the cross. 
 
 And if these things be so, let no messenger of Jesus, 
 fear, that he is transcending the limits of scriptural or- 
 thodoxy, or any article of the Presbyterian church, 
 when he infcu'ms dying men, however thoughtless, or 
 however wretched, that with the love of benevolence. 
 God loves thetrin and Christ died for tJiPm^ and that if 
 they are not saved it is because they will not. 
 
 UEMAHES, 
 
 VVe beg leave of our re:vders, to introduco a few le- 
 tnarks on some strictures, on our first number, over the 
 signature '•Arminiau'', w hich recently appeared in ihe 
 ^^Rpligious Messengvr of the Philadelphia Conference,'' 
 a Methodist weekly paper, published in Philadelphia. 
 In our remarks we intend no atlack upon the society lo 
 which the writer probably belongs. — We recognise ma- 
 ny among them, both clergy and laity, as friends and 
 christian brethren, svith whom we have held commu- 
 nion, and taken sweet counsel together, and whom, 
 whilst we wish them better reconciled to pure Bible or- 
 thodoxy, we love, and fron) ubiun, we wtuild not wish, 
 our diiiVrence of theological opinions, to alienate our 
 sillections. But our duty to the great JShepherd, some- 
 times requires us to mark a black slieep in whatever 
 fold he may be found. 
 
 We think, the literary, theological, and moral quali- 
 fications of the writer not such as prepare him. either 
 for Biblical ( titirism or thecdogical animadversions As 
 we have neither the name, uor any personal knowledgie 
 
93 
 
 of the author, our c^ecision is made entirely from his 
 Strictures. We exaiiufic first his literary abilities: 
 
 We make no remarks on tyjjogra})hical errors, to 
 which every publisher is exposed; nor are we oflended, 
 because he tells us that ^»he has completely failed in his 
 main design as, 1 think, evrry attempt of the kind must 
 do;'" [Stric. No. l] or because he says **all things else 
 as zV [aie] »'casual;" [Stric No. 4] or because with 
 some considerable degree of bad taste, he makes the 
 Greenlander quake and fear like a man, and at the 
 same time howl like a dog f^tric No, :]. 'I hese are 
 trifles, on account of whicii we would not be disposed 
 to condemn the performance in foio, as destitute of 
 claims to literary tolerance, if not to literary appr<'l>a- 
 tion. But when a man })laces himself before the world 
 in the attitude of a public expounder of divine truth, 
 and as a theol(»giral cesisor, and then, in addition t(j 
 these minor blemishes of composition, proves himself 
 not only utterly ignorant of Ciblical criticisuj; but to be 
 so uncultivated in his vernacular tonguf*, as to write and 
 publish language, which conveys ideas altogether dif- 
 ferent from those irKended to be exhibited, we then 
 think, that the dignity, and hcmor of religion, demand, 
 that such a man, should be at least, informed of his de- 
 ficiencies: 
 
 Id strictures H^o. 4] we are 2;ravely informed by our 
 censor, that, ''trom the f(>undation of the world" does 
 not literally mean from all eternity. Now if he had 
 been so fortunate, as to have turned to his Greek Tes- 
 tament; or if he does not read Greek, as it would rather 
 seem, if he had opened R. Watson's book, which he 
 has several times very unappositely introduced into his 
 strictures, at the beginning of his chapter on the Om- 
 niscience of Deity, he would there have found it rightly 
 translated "'From all eternity;'''' and if this would not 
 have done, if he had gone to Aristotle. [De Coelo Lib. 
 I, Cap, 9] whose authority, as a Greek schidar, is still 
 better, he would have seen the decision confirmed; and 
 the good sense of the theological community would then 
 
91 
 
 probably, not have been offended witb the illiterate bab- 
 bling, that the text does not inean/rom all eternity. 
 
 In strictures No. 3, we meet with a similar instance 
 of ipse dixit exposition. There our censor, very con- 
 fidently, as if well acquainted with the whole matter, 
 declares ^'1 am liappy in having the authority of the 
 Apostle Paul, to bear me out in this view of the subjecl. 
 His words are, God hath from the be^s;inning chosen i/ou 
 to Salvation 'rHiiv)UGIl the sanctification of the Spi- 
 rit and the belief of the tritth:'^ and then with an air of 
 supreme confidence, he draws the conclusion, that the 
 sanctification of the Spirit, and the belief of the truth, 
 are in the text, anterior to the choice of (xod. Had he 
 here consulted the very words of tlie Holy Ghost, he 
 would have found, that the apostle Paul, who is not 
 genernlly suspected of Anninianism, is in this text, pe- 
 culiiirly adverse to the system; that tlie through so con- 
 fid<*ntly dwelt upon, is the Greek en [most strictly and 
 literally in']; and, tiiat consequeiitiy, the Saints here ad- 
 dressed, were chosen, in the sanctification of the Spirit 
 and the belief of the truth. 'J^hus God carries into ef- 
 fiM't his eternally desii^ned clioice, beginning in the sanc- 
 tification of the Spirit, by whicli the moral power to ex- 
 ercise faith is given; and ending in the believing opera- 
 tion of that power. '1 he original language of this text 
 is most decisive against the Arminian notion, that God 
 chooses men to be saints after he sees they are saints. 
 
 But in stricture 4, he proves himself inadequate toihe 
 appropriate application of even English words. VVe are 
 there informed, that the determinations of Heity, are ca- 
 sual In first glancing the e.ve over the sentence it was 
 supposed to be a typographical error, and of course, 
 its place was supplied with causal. 15ut to our sur- 
 ])rise, wefoujid the word repeated, and repeated, some- 
 times very much to the annoyance of li. Watson's good 
 sense. 'I his proved at once, that our confident critic, 
 Jiad never rooted up all the classic soil of Greece and 
 Home, nor yet swr.llowed Johnson's Dictionary whole. 
 In the annals of theological lore we know of no better 
 parallel, than the following auccdotC;, communicated Lv 
 
a gentleman of respectability as a fact: A certain prea- 
 cher chose for his text, the reply of the slothful servant 
 to his Lord; **1 feared, because thou art an austere 
 man," and not thoroughly versed in Dictionary distinc- 
 tions, he read -'thou art an oyster wan.^^ He then pro- 
 ceeded to show, how God resembled an oyster man; he, 
 described the various ways of rakins; oysters; traced 
 the analogy between them and the methods, in which 
 Grod rakes for sinners; and eventually, as might be ex- 
 pected, succeeded in convincing the more intelligent 
 part of his au<lience, that he was better qualified for ra- 
 king ojsters, than for preaching the Gospel. When such 
 men are paraded befoie the public, as teachers of religion 
 and the defenders of theological systems, we have a pic- 
 ture so ludicrous, as warrants us in adopting the language 
 of the poet — 
 
 Sp f datum admissi risum teneatis, amiciP 
 and yet, when viewed in another aspect, it is such as 
 ought to make every lover of Zioo's health and pros- 
 perity mourn. 
 
 We secondly consider his acquaintance with theologi- 
 cal opinions incompetent. W e pass over any particular 
 exposure of the want of that mental training, by which 
 a man is enabled to direct all his words to a point — a 
 want, however, very loudly proclaimed in these stric- 
 tures, by a frequent wandering from the subject at first 
 proposed, and by the unappropriate expressions, and 
 the irrelevant matter often introduced. 
 
 in stricture No. J, he proves the narrowness of his 
 Theological reading when he charges the Christian 
 Preacher, with a misrepresentation, because it is stated 
 that Calvin places the determinations of God before his 
 foreknowledge.-^In proof of this, see the quotation from 
 Calvin's Institutes, at the end of the third page of 
 Christian Preacher No, 1, and also the follow] nic quo- 
 tation from his institutes — Hook 111. Chap. XXill, 
 Sec. 1 — *'The cause of liardening is the sf'cret counsel 
 of God;'^ and if the cause of hardening, then antece- 
 dent to the foreknowledge of hardening; because an c- 
 vent, according to the reasoning of Calvinists, can not 
 be known, as certain, until its certainty is secured. To 
 
96 
 
 this we add the following anthovities of €alvini&tic 
 writers: 
 
 **All the forpknowlfMl£;e of fulnre things, is founded 
 on the decree of God." — Wifsius on Cov. vol. it, p, 9. 
 
 **Frescience follows — j)rede:^tin?ition'' Back's Theo^ 
 Die. under the word JWesciencp, 
 
 **Praescientia Dei seqiiitor ejus decretnni. The pre- 
 science of God follows his decree. — Francis Turrettin 
 Vol. i, p, 331. 
 
 The latter author was one of the successors, that 
 occupied Calvin's chair at G(Micva. It would be 
 well if certain preachers and writers, who are frequent- 
 ly refuting and abusing Calvin, would first, be at the 
 trouble of learning what Calvinism is. It would no 
 doubt save them a great amount of labour. We think the 
 above quotations suflBcient to render palpable the igno- 
 rance of our censor. 
 
 We thirdly consider h]^ regnrd to cand<vnr, and truth 
 as much deficient as eitiu i' his literary or tInMjIogical at- 
 tainments. In stricture No. ;i, tht* Christian Preacher 
 is represented in the most unqurilifu'd manner, as tea- 
 chins;, that Christ did not die Uw ail mankind. I'his 
 statement is not only /h/.s£^, but. if the writer read the 
 i7th page of the No. he prnlV'ssed to review he must 
 have known it to h^ false. It appears like a downwright 
 intentional misrepresentati^m — ^ee Christian Preacher 
 No. i. p. 27, and No. iv. throuirhout. At the end of stric- 
 ture No. i. we are informed, that it will be, as difficult to 
 gain submission to Calvinism in any finm, among ♦he 
 Arminian part of tht* population of Delaware as it 
 ^"would to persuade them, that Judas died for the world 
 instead of Jrsus Christ; or that the Bibalonish captivi- 
 ty was iieforc the flood" — This may all be true. But 
 in this sentence a piece of scandal shows as much of its 
 face as it dare. 
 
 /The vcmarls irtll he concluded in the next number. ) 
 
THE CHRISTIAN PREACHER. 
 
 Vol. 1. OCT OBER, 18^7- No. 5 . 
 
 THE GOVEliJrMEJtTT OF GOD. 
 
 The Lord reigneth; let the earth rejoice; let the multitude of the 
 isles be glad thereof— Ps, xcvii. 1 . 
 
 All nature is silent, yet in distinct and harmonious 
 language, acknowledges the necessity of a supreme go- 
 verning power. When we see the earth moved with 
 convulisious; seas rolling their waves over the abodes 
 of men; and volcanos burying in ruins the cities, scat- 
 tered on the surrounding plains, and, above all, when 
 we see lawless multitudes, raising the voice of anarchy, 
 like the roaring of many waters; and unruly nations, rush- 
 ing like planets hurled headlong from their orbits, thwar- 
 ting each others paths, and dashing each other in pieces — 
 WQfeel that a power Omnipotent, to balance the rocking 
 world, to bound the raging sea, to stay the fury of the bur- 
 ning sepulchres, to allay the whirlwind of clashing anar- 
 chy, and quell the storm of angry nations, is not only re- 
 quisite, but indispensible to the order of the world. With- 
 out the assurance of such a power, what a sad spectacle 
 would creation often present! Such a power the text 
 reveals. In this discourse we shall, 
 
 I. Consider the Government of God; and 
 
 II. Why it should be the cause of joy. 
 1. The Government of God — 
 
 1. He rules in the natural world. He directs the 
 wanderings of every atom, and guides the revohitions of 
 every planet. W ithout his direction, not a sparrow 
 falls to the ground; every hair is numbered; the heaven 
 is the work of his fingers, and he ordained the moon 
 and the stars. 
 
 One part of the work of creation, was the arrange- 
 ment of matter into forms. In creating the world, God 
 made the waters retire, and the dry land appear. He 
 organized matter into herbs, and trees and beasts, and 
 men, A similar translation of matter, and organization 
 
98 
 
 of it into forms, have ever since been in process up to 
 tlie present moment. Vegetable substances are conver- 
 ted into animal bodies, and animal into vegetable. — Ihe 
 corn eaten by the ox, is converted into a part of his bo- 
 dy; he dies; his flesh is dissolved on the field, and is a- 
 gain transmuted into corn. Again the matter that com- 
 poses a man's body at sixfy years of age, is not thft 
 same, that constitutes it at twenty. The original par- 
 ticles have been expelled and new ones introduced. 
 As soon as this flux of matter ceases, the man dies. 
 The process then, that preserves life, is a constant work 
 of creation. 'I'he same is demostrably true of the ve- 
 getable generations. 
 
 In the work of creation, the waters were separated 
 from the waters — the waters above the firmament from 
 those below— and formed into clouds above, and into 
 seas below. This creation of watery forms, we still 
 constantly witness. Water is taken up into the atmos- 
 phere and converted into vapours and clouds, and a- 
 gain, in the form of rains, dews, frosts, or snows, it de- 
 scends and is conveyed by a thousand channels into the 
 Ocean whence it was taken. Thus the deep is made 
 the store house to receive the watery atoms, and to give 
 forth others to undergo the same varied transforma- 
 lions. 
 
 And if we descend to the bowels of the earth, in the 
 mineral kingdom, we find the same evidence of a con- 
 stant creative process — rocks dissolving to dust, and 
 dust changing to rocks. 
 
 Thus the same operations, that in the Bible, are as- 
 cribed to God at first, as a work of creation, have beea 
 moving onwards, through all successive years. And 
 if this process at first required the exercise of Almighty 
 power, why should not the same process still denand 
 the exertion of the same energies? And if so, God rules 
 matter in all the variety of its kingdom, in its minutest 
 particles, lint if in its minute atoms, shall we say, 
 that he does not in its congregated and more magnified 
 fori: ^^? Shall we say, that hp rules tbe particles of ve- 
 getable matter, until he forms a plant, and then lets loose 
 
99 
 
 his grasp?— That he conducts the movements of atoms, 
 until he forms rocks and mountains, beasts and men, 
 clouds and oceans, and then surrenders their magnifi- 
 cence to the wihl vagaries of chance? Shall v^e say, that 
 he conducts atoms, but lets worlds fall from his hand as 
 if too ponderous for his omnipotence? 
 
 But it is thought by some, that to suppose, when De- 
 ity first created matter, he impressed upon it certain 
 laws, by which it produces its mutations, and propa- 
 gates its own forms, without the superintendence of any 
 Sovereign power, presents more exalted notions of his 
 efficiency and his wisdom. In answer to this, it ought 
 to be sufficjent to repeat the argument, that all these 
 transformations of matter, in the first instance, are by 
 the Scriptures, attributed to the immediate ngency of 
 Deity; and if so, atoms at first liad received none of 
 those laws of transformation of wliich philosophers now 
 so frequently speak; because, the divijie interposition 
 described, would then have been unnecessary. And if 
 no such laws existed then^ what evidence of their exis- 
 tence nowP What proof, that these laws which regulate 
 the movements of the universe, are any other, but the 
 varied operations of the same power, revealed as at first, 
 creating the heavens and the earth? If these laws were 
 at all impressed on matter, it must have received this 
 impression, after it had been, first by the direct agency 
 of Deity, organized into forms. But if this exhibit su- 
 blimer views of his character, than to suppose his direct 
 operations to be still continued, then on the same mode 
 of reasoning, to maintain, that these laws were impar- 
 ted to atoms, as soon as they were created, and that by 
 their guidance, matter was first organized into forms, 
 would display ideas of Deity still more sublime; and to 
 imagine, that he laid such laws on empty space, as with- 
 out his attention, would produce atoms, convert them 
 into forms, and impart to them all those powers of trans- 
 formation, whose unremitting operations we constantly 
 witness, would develope ideas the most sublime. And 
 thus, we should prove, that we could support a most 
 sublime philosophy by a total rejection of the account 
 
100 
 
 that God, in the beginning created the heavens and the 
 earth/ This system wliicli snatches the universe from 
 the hand of God's providence, is founded on the hypo- 
 thesis, that the theory harmonizes best with the perfec- 
 tions of the Supreme, which leaves him the most free 
 from care and activity, in the mnnas^eraent ol the world. 
 It considers a plan unworthy of Infinite wisdom, which 
 requires his constant exertion. And thus it would make 
 him the Wisest God who could or who would so form 
 his plan as to enjoy, or perhaps we ou2;ht to say to endure 
 the most indolence. If that system he true, then, Jeho 
 vah after starting the machine of the universe, might fall 
 asleep, or be annihilated, and, yet nature as at present, 
 preserve her course tliroughout eternity. Such would 
 be an Epicurean divinity — a God of ease and indolence 
 — a God contrary to the analogy of nature, which moves 
 onward with an untiring course; and contrary to all the 
 ideas of the great Governor, communicated in the lives 
 of good and useful men, bearing his image, whose years 
 abound with activity; but above all; such a God is op- 
 posed to the God of the Bible, who is dcscril)ed as the 
 Keeper of Israel who slumhers not nor sleeps; as he 
 who upholds all things by the word of his power. He 
 stills the winds, he calms the seas; at his command the 
 wheels of nature pause; and the sun and moon stand 
 still — Therefore God reigns in the natural world. But, 
 2. He rules in the moral world. To entertain just 
 conceptions of God's moral government, we must first 
 learn his perfections, and keep our eyes steadily fixed 
 on his moral character. If we leave this totally^behind, 
 or carry with us only some one attribute, whilst the o- 
 thers are forgotten, the moral universe appears a track- 
 less confusion, a maze of contradi( tion, and perhaps to 
 some minds, even a theatre of injustice and merciless 
 partiality — in which no cause is seen — 
 
 ^^Why unassuming worth, in secret lived, 
 And died neglected: Why the good man's share 
 In lifp was gall and bitterness of soul: 
 Why the lone widow and her orphans piaM 
 
In starving solitude: While Luxuiy 
 
 In palaces, lay straijiing her low thoughts 
 
 'Jo form unreal wants: V\ hy heaven hurn Truth 
 
 And ^ moderation fair, wore the red marks 
 
 Of Superstition's scouige: Why licensed pain, 
 
 '1 hat cruel spoiler, that embosom'd foe, 
 
 Imbittered all our bliss." 
 
 And whatever may be the conceited orthodoxy of thosij 
 whose saint is the infidel philosopher — 
 
 "Slow to no act — who takes no private road, 
 But looks through nature, up to nature's God:" 
 
 The experience of ages, teaches man the hnmiliatin"- 
 truth, that though the heavens declare the glory of God, 
 and the firmament sheweth his handy work; — though 
 reason may climb the ladder of nalure, ufitil inference 
 looks into the heavens, and hears the voice of a power 
 above us; yet, that. He makes darkness his secret iiloce; 
 and the jmvUion round about him are dai'Jc waters and 
 thick clouds of the skies. Keason when sobered by pie- 
 ty has ever descended from her giddy elevation, exclai- 
 ming in despair, "Who by sea>rching can find out God? 
 Who can find out the Almighty unto perfeclinn?" and 
 thus ackowledging that nature, can only tearh reason, 
 that there is a God, but informs us not what he is — that 
 eagle eyed philosophy sees not up half way to Deity, 
 and thus confirms the Scriptural testimouy, that the 
 world by wisdom knetc not God. Infidelity has often 
 proudly climbed the ladder of creation, and looked up- 
 on the clouds of night, that surround the divine habita- 
 tion, until dizzy with speculation, she sometimes ima- 
 gines, that she sees the shape and dimensions of Deity; 
 just as superstition staring on the gloom of thick mid- 
 night, sometimes imagines that she beholds spectres and 
 fairies; and hence to one infidel, he has appeared to be 
 the God of chance, and to another the God of fate, 
 whilst others less credulous; but no less philosophical, 
 have candidly confessed, that in gazing upon the vast 
 expanse, they have seen NO GOD, 
 
It is for a mind that can expjind itsi If over all the 
 immeasurable space of the Almii^hty's universe; and 
 dart ifs intelli^'ence swifter than the lii^htning through 
 the pathU'SS duration of a past and a future eternity, 
 and witness the evolutions of his eternal plans and ope- 
 rations — In short it is only for a mind that is Deity him- 
 self, to learn the perfections and character of Deity from 
 his works — Creation is too vast for comprehension — 
 It is higher than heaven what can we do? It is deeper 
 than hell, ivhat can we knowP The measure thereof is 
 longer than the earth; it is broader than the sea. How 
 then can man whose space is but a point; whose dura- 
 tion is hut a moment; atid who in extent and duration, 
 can see a part ten thousand times less, in comparison 
 with the whole creation, than the ten thousanth part of 
 a grain of sand to the dimensions of our globe— how 
 can he look through nature/ how preposterous! — look 
 through nature^ up to nature's God! JSToman theref(»re 
 can know the Father but the Son and he, to ichomsoever 
 the Son will reveal him. The Son lias revealed God 
 in the scrij)tures; and to them we go for his attributes, 
 and his character. Here reason finds her firmest rock, 
 lier purest light, and her loftiest elevation. Here are 
 truths given, on which she may lawfully exercise her 
 nt)blest {>owers — things that are rereahd^ and we may 
 modestly presume, all tijcir (feducible relations, and 
 legitimate consequences are for us. 
 
 The scriptures exhibit God as the only Wise. Wis- 
 dom is the power of jndging rightly. This power is 
 then one of his perfections. It is not an eternally dor- 
 mant power, because all his works are made in wisdom. 
 Works to be made in wisdom must be made so, that 
 they can rightly be judged subervieut to some end; and 
 if so, they must be made according to some plan, and 
 this plan must not only comprehend things themselves as 
 they are made, but must extend to their remotest conse- 
 quences: And as God is the same yesterday, to day, 
 and forever, his knowledge and intentions mast have 
 been forever t!»e same, his plan must be eternal. The 
 ic{5(Zomand immutability of God therefore secure him 
 
103 
 
 an eternal plan — a doctrine which all the providences^ 
 and Prophecies contained in the Bihle amply confirm. 
 
 God has also revealed himself to he tho Mmighty 
 and also that he worketh all things after the counsel of 
 his own will: so that his whole plan is sure to he ac- 
 complished. 
 
 In his own volume he is also described, as a God who 
 hates sin and who has no delight in the death of the 
 wicked. From this we may rationally conclude, that 
 in forming a pUn, in which he would be most deligh- 
 ted, he chose one of those possible systems, in which 
 there wouhl be the most piety and happiness, and the 
 least ^m and misery. And if the question be agitated, 
 why was a system chosen in which any sin atid misery 
 wore suffered to eniei? — we think a reasonable answer 
 dedurible from his revealed perfections. [t was a- 
 gieeable to his infinite benevolence, that the greatest 
 possible amount of happiness, should be enjoyed in the 
 created universe. In order to this, it was agreeable to 
 his wisdom — which it is but modest to suppose always 
 chooses that which, all tilings considered, is the hest^ 
 that there should be a moral system; a moral system aL 
 ways implies natural liberty: it is essential to natural 
 liberty, not to be controlled by the comi)ulsion of phi- 
 losophical Omnipotence, and thus to produce the grea- 
 test amount of happiness, and to exhibit the Maker's 
 greatest glory, moral creatures must be governed only 
 by placing before them the wisest and most powerful 
 motives. And thus he chose a moral system in which 
 sin and misery were foreseen, as certainly finding a 
 place, not because he delighted either in the one or the 
 other; l>ut because in one of the best systems of natural 
 liberty, that could be chosen — one best adapted to pro- 
 duce the greatest happiness to creatures, and to reflect 
 the greatest glory on the Creator— some amount of sin, 
 and some degree of misery, w^ould be the certain though 
 not the rtccessary result. But as he hates sin and mise- 
 ry he chose that system of moral beings, in whi<:'h there 
 would certainly be as little of either as in any other, 
 that could have been chosen. Thus he suffers sin and 
 
wo into the universe; because in any system of natural 
 liberty so extensive as the present, some beings will sin, 
 and it is but reasonable to infer, that he has chosen the 
 present because in it there is as much piely and happi- 
 ness, and as little sin and suffering, as in any other that 
 could have been chosen. 
 
 To understand how tiie actions of moral beings can 
 be decreed, and yet free, just imagine, that wlien God 
 who is of purer eyes than to behold iniquity, determined 
 to place before them the proper moral means to deter 
 from transgression, and invite to obedience, he also de- 
 termined, to leave them, in the exercise of natural liber- 
 ty to act, as coeternally with the choice of his plan, he 
 foresaw they certainly would. Now is any contradic- 
 tion involved in the idea? When he framed the system 
 (if moral being, he determined to place before Adam the 
 tree of knowledge of good and evil; to inform him, that 
 it was his requirement, that of it hc^ should not eat; to an- 
 nounce with the law the penalty, the day thou eatest 
 thereof thou shalt surHy die — and thus to exhibit before 
 him all die motives to obedience, which the holy good- 
 ness of the Lawgiver demanded to prevent the thing 
 which he hated; and then determined to leave him, in 
 the use of natural liberty to choose as coeternally with 
 the adoption of his moral system he foresaw he would. 
 He determined to command Pharaoh to let his people 
 go; to threaten him with plagues as a consequence of his 
 refusing; and then to suffer him, in the exercise of that 
 natural liberty essential to a moral being, to act accor- 
 ding to his choice certainly foreknown. And such were 
 his determinations with regard to the Israelites to whom 
 he pronounced his law and proclaimed the penalty, that 
 in case of transgression, their land should fall into the 
 hands of their enemies, and they should be carried away 
 captive; and after all this, to let them, in the exercise of 
 that natural liberty essential to accountable beings, take 
 the course which he eternally knew they certainly 
 would choose. And in his eternal plan, such are his 
 dealings with the heathen world. He eternally deter- 
 mined to unfold before their eyes the pages of nature — 
 
105 
 
 the things that are made — to reveal for their instructioQ 
 liis eternal power and God head, whence to infer his 
 law and the penalty; and, then to let them make their 
 choice of obedience or of disobedience, to him eternally 
 foreknown as the certain result of their existence and 
 circumstances. This it is believed is the only way in 
 whicli Hh decrees the existence of m\. He decrees 
 not, that it shall he, but merely as the certain result of a 
 moral system, that its existence shall be suffered: and it 
 is sitffered^ because all things wisely considered, it is 
 better that it should be suffered, than that there should 
 Le no moral existences. Fhus if God's moral subjects 
 in his plan are suffered to sin, it is, because in the best 
 plan of moral government they will sin. Now, it is dif- 
 ficult to see, how decreeing lo let creatures exercise 
 their natural liberty, can be the destruction of that li- 
 berty, and yet many assert, that if a creature's actions 
 be decreed, they cannot be free! Divested of all am- 
 liiguities, it is nothing less, than asserting, that the God 
 of Heaven and earth, cannot decree natural liberty 
 to his moral subjects!— An assertion that certainly 
 ought not to be admitted without proof; especially since 
 we find it opposed by a number of Scriptures, such as — 
 Who worketh AH things after the counsel of his own 
 icill. Him being delivered by the determinate counsel 
 add foreknowledge of God, ye have taken and by wic- 
 ked hands have crucified and slain, which can not be 
 evaded but by being converted into figures. Thus even 
 sin falls within his plan; yet he hates it as an abomina- 
 ble thing; tenijits no man to evil; and does all that can 
 be done by a moral governor, to prevent its very exis- 
 tence. And thus we see, that the ingress of sin into 
 the universe, is no argument, that the plan of Him, who 
 Tuleth over all, does not extend to every event — evil as 
 well as good. 
 
 Though, through his great goodness and holiness, 
 opposed to sin in its very existence; yet, since through 
 the abuse of the creature's natural liberty it will find 
 place, be exercises not over it the Providence of "bare 
 permission; but snch as hath joined with it^ a most wise 
 
 14 
 
1U6 
 
 aud powerful bound ins;, and otherwise orderins;, and 
 governing" to *^his own ends; yet so as the sintuhiess 
 thereof [uoreedeth ordy from the creature and not from 
 (rod'"* Ifihe sins of a haughty and a cruel monarch, 
 would not he prevented, GtKl would choose, that they 
 fcihcudd be comoiitted, in the chastisement of the children 
 of Israel for their sins; aud, that they should not hap- 
 pen in any otiier way, he would bar up other aveuues 
 with his own iuterposing providence — And hence his 
 language by the prophet is—/ iciU send him against an 
 lujpucrificat notion, and against the people of my ivrath 
 will I give him a charge, to take the spoil, and to take 
 the prey, and to tread them down as the mire of the 
 streets. Howbeit, he meaneth not so; neither doth his 
 heart think so; but it is in his heart to destroy and cut 
 off nations, not a few.\ If Herod and Pontius Pilate 
 with the Gentiles anil the people of Israel, would not 
 forsake their sins in some form, God presents before 
 them the Saviour and all the circumstances by which 
 he knew, they would be gathered together against his 
 h(dy child Jesus, to do what his hand and his counsel 
 before determined to be done; because, though they 
 meant not so. neither did their hearts think so; yet their 
 sins in this form better than in any other, could be o- 
 verruled, so as to display the brightest glory, that ever 
 shone on the immensity of the intelligent universe. 
 And since the ambition of an Alexander and a Caesar, 
 would not be restrained in its risings by the moral in- 
 structions conveyed by the light, that shone in the things 
 that are made, he gave success to their armed legions, to 
 break down the strong holds of iniquity, to scourge guil- 
 ty nations, and to carry with their conquests, the letters 
 of Greece and Home, and their best heathen civilization 
 from eastern Asia to western Europe, and from the par- 
 ched coast of southern Africa, to the icy shores of the nor- 
 thern sea; that by the former the literature of Greece soon 
 to be eternalized by the Evangelists and the Apostles 
 as the vehicle of inspiration to carry the written Gospel 
 
 •Confession of Faith, chap. r. sec. 4. jlsai x. 6, 7. 
 
107 
 
 to the nations, might be conveyed as far and as wide, 
 as liiscon(]uests, and, that by the other the known world 
 might l)e united in one great empire around the banner 
 of the Roman eagle, and thus the Apostles under the 
 protection of its wings, might traverse the globe and 
 preacli the Gospel to every creature. '1 bus if as a mo- 
 ral governor, he suffers to find place in his universe 
 the least possible amount of sin, and contrcds and go- 
 verns that least possible amount, so as to effect the least 
 evil, and to become subservient io the greatest amount 
 of good, which its nature permits, its existence in bis 
 accountable creation, an<l his governing that existence, 
 so as to |)revent it in one form of disiibedience arnl to 
 permit in another, is entirely consistent with his infinite 
 benevolence which desires the greatest amount of good, 
 with his infinite wisdom, which directs to the l)est pos- 
 sible ends, and with his omnipotence, which eff(^cts all 
 that his goodness directed l)y his wisdom dictates to be 
 done. 
 
 A difficulty arises in the minds of mar>y, because by 
 the Scriptures we are taught, that GimI withhehl from 
 Tyre, Sidon, and Sodom, the privileges which, had 
 they been afforded, would have proved effectual for their 
 reformation, and granted theui to Chorazin, Bethsaida, 
 and (>aperuaum, on whose inhabitants they were unpro- 
 ductive of any good — Wo unto the Chorazin/ Wo unto 
 the Bethsaida! for if the mighty ivorks, which were 
 done in you, had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they 
 would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. 
 But I say unto you, that it shall be more tolerahle^ for 
 Tyre and Sidon at the day of judgment than for you, 
 And thou Cajyernaum; which art exalted to heaven^ 
 shalt be brought down to hell, for if the mighiy works 
 which have been done in thee, had been done in Sodom^ 
 it would have remained until this day. But 1 say unto 
 -lyoie, that it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom 
 in the day of judgment than for thee. Why, it is asked, 
 were those great works fruitlessly done in Chorazin, 
 and Bethsaida, which if performed in Tyre and Sidon, 
 would have produced repentance?— And why were the 
 
108 
 
 inhabitants of Capernaum, by mighty miracles and hea 
 venly doch'iues uuavailingly addressed, and Sodom left 
 without the miracles and the instructions of au incarnate 
 Saviour, to be consumed by fire, when the same means, 
 which by the former were unimproved, in the latter 
 Would have produced a lasting reformation? To say, 
 that the governor of the world, in this acted without de- 
 sign, or, that his design was regulated by a mere capri- 
 cious choice, regardless of consequences or of the consis- 
 tency of his own character, is not such a sulution as 
 affords any relief to an enquiring mind. In teaching 
 that God affords the means of repentance to some 
 which he denies to others, these texts directly contra- 
 dict the doctrine violently advocated by many, who are 
 regulated in their theological opinions, more by caprice 
 or by the prejudices of a mislaken education, than by 
 the good word of life, erroneously suppi)se, tliat God 
 dispenses his means of salvation, equally to all; and in 
 informing us, that these extraordinary means wire with- 
 held from Sodom, on account of which withholding its 
 guilty inhabitants were then enduring <^p vengeance of 
 eternal fire, ^ they would frown into silence anotlier 
 class of objectors, nearly allied (o these, who suppose 
 \hat on account of no means denied to men in this life; 
 will their condition be any worse in a v^orld to come, 
 but they do not teach us, that, because Chorazin, Helh- 
 saida, and Capernaum, had witnessed mii;hfy works, 
 that would have saved Tyre, Si Ion, and Sodom, had 
 they been displayed in those wicked cities, the latter 
 were left destitute of so much of the teachings of nature 
 and Providence, as leaves them without excuse. From 
 the will of God to give in the one case and to deny in 
 the other, we ought to infer, that the dispensation was 
 like himself, wise, just, and good, and a little attention 
 to hints given in the Scriptures, will confirm the conclu- 
 sion. In the economy of a wise and a good God, \i ap- 
 pears reasonable to infer, that the time and the place, 
 best suited to produce the widest exteat of good, would 
 
 •Jndc 7. 
 
t09 
 
 be selected for his operations. But because, by the ad- 
 vent, miracles, and doctrines of Jesus Christ, Sodom 
 might have been .saved, there is no argument tiiat the 
 days of Sodom was the time in which Ins appeaiauce 
 on earth w ould have produced so mucii happii;ess to the 
 universe, or so ^real a revenue of glory to the divine 
 character, or even so much good (o the iidiabitants of 
 this world, as was produced by liis appearing in the 
 fulness of God's on\ n time. It w<»uld be no argument, 
 that a general sh«iu]d march a mighty array on a certain 
 da3% because l»e might then save from burning a few 
 tents, spread along tiie shores of a fisiiery, when by wai- 
 ting to march at a future time, he nuglM save an empire 
 from desolaticn. In tl>e (!r.ys of Hodom. (r.e world 
 was not yet prepared for the Saviour's ij{)|)earance in 
 the flesh. I hus it i-s fuir lo conclude. t!;»t i'hiisL dit! 
 liOt perform his mighly works in Hudom, be( ausr (hut 
 devot^'d city existed not at the best time for the display 
 of his incarnation, and (d' Ifis wrriderwoiki .g pnwer; 
 and. that he did perform them i!» Caperiiauau because 
 the fulness of tin«e had ( ome for God to reveal his Son, 
 niakp a Gospel di^^play of his grace, and to denionstrate 
 by miracles befoie unseen, and by (hx trims b<'fnre un- 
 taught the divinity of his mission, and this not merely 
 for [jroducing faith \\\ utd>elipving rapernaum, but for 
 performing deeds and iiDparting prece|>(s to be preached 
 bv his ministers from asie to ai^e for the recovery of a 
 lost world. 
 
 And as Ihe ai^e of Hodom was not the time, so Tyre 
 and Sidon, were not (he places, in which to display the. 
 testimonials of his mission, 'rhougli the repentancp of 
 the inhabitants of tliese cities, wcsuld have caused Jo// 
 in heaven; yet to produce, no doubt, a greater joy, the 
 Saviour in his bodily jjresence was not sent, but to the 
 lost sheep of the house of Israel. To their? pertained 
 the adoption and the glory, and the cnrenavts, nnd the 
 giving the law and the promise s» whose were the fathers; 
 andean horn, as concerning the flesh, Christ cnme.— 
 To effect the greatest good to the human family — to 
 sanction the living oracles of a dispensation then draw^- 
 
110 
 
 ins; to a close, but to wliich the (Tospcl was a counter- 
 part, to place on Calvary, and ^ntlier around the cross, 
 a bliZH of evidence, that would throw its radiance over 
 the habitable earth, and convey it'^ convictions to tlie 
 latest ag<*s; and to exhil)it to tlie eyes of an intelligent 
 universe a spectacle of hurailiaiion, obedience, and suf- 
 ferin;^;; to tiie most exalted minds, before unknown; and 
 not merely to consecrate, by the august transaction, the 
 earth, which was made its theatre, or the inhabitants^ 
 who became its witnesses, was the ^'reat oljject of tlie 
 Saviour's pil2;rima^e. 'IMiese errand desi£;ns could be 
 best accomplished by confiuinii; Ins opieratious, princi- 
 pally to the holy land, and not by exhiliitius; them to 
 the (rentile inhaf)itants of Tyre and Sidon. or the [)0- 
 ])ulation of any ot'uer, then uncovena»»ted lands. The 
 lime in which to throw to the s^round the partition waW^ 
 that separated the Jew from the Gentile, was not yet 
 fully come. In the best chosen system of redeeming 
 mercy, salvation was of the .lews. And a link of that 
 ii;«>ldeu chain which was to lift millions to heaven must 
 not be broken merely to atchieve the penitence of the 
 few inhabitants of Tyre and Sidon. 
 
 Tiie moral dispensations of God in relation to these 
 riliHs, commnnicatecl by the Saviour, affords a light to 
 conduct us through the shades of mystery that encom- 
 ])ass his Providejice towards the heathen world. Eigh- 
 teen centuries have gone through llieir revolutions since 
 the command passed the lips of the ascending Jiedee- 
 mer '*Go ye into all the world and preach the Gospel 
 to every creature." And yet after a-I the preaching, 
 prayers, and martyrdoms of heaven-lM>rn christiaidty, 
 :)t the present hour, three-fourths of this world's po{)u- 
 lation liave never heard thejoijfal sound. The cloud 
 of idolatry as deep as midnight stretches itself over the 
 whole expanse of tawny Asia and sable Africa, and 
 spreading its wings darkens the skies of a large por- 
 tion of southern and western America and continental 
 Europe, save here and there a spot where the sun of 
 righteousness forces his rays and mingles a twilight 
 \vith the solitude of the gloom. 
 
HI 
 
 When from the wide spreading empire of moral ruin 
 the chrisfian philanthropist hears the cry of millions as 
 the) sink from a dark to a darker doom, his soul melts 
 with compassion and his faith staogers at the protracted 
 march of that providence sniBciently omnij)otent to level 
 every wall and sink every mountain of opposition, to 
 demolish every temple and citadel of idolatry, to cast to 
 the ground every Ijagon, Eaal, and Moloch, and to 
 bear the light of clirisiiaiiity, through all the length and 
 the breadth of the r('i^ion and the shadow of death; but 
 which in the steady marcli of eighteen hundred years 
 has traversed only one quarter of the globe. He asks 
 why in the government of a God whose tender mercies 
 are over all his works —why does the Sun of righte- 
 ousness pour his lifegiving light over so small a pcntiow 
 of the inhabitants of this world and leave such a four- 
 fold majority of millions to the shades and the shiver- 
 ings of a cheerless midnightof moral winter? How is he to 
 resolve the doubt and be prepared to vindicate the ways 
 of God to man? If he say that beathenism equals 
 Christianity in this life, a survey of the abominable ty- 
 ranny of the stronger sex over the weaker, of the adul- 
 teries and idolatries, and of the parricides, infanticides, 
 and suicides of nnchristianized nations, refutes the af- 
 firmation and proves it as contrary to fact as it is to the 
 spirit of the Bible- If he ask the heathen oracles fiu' 
 Immortality, they are dumb, and thus silently acknow- 
 ledge that Christianity only brings life and immortality 
 to light. If he imagine that without revelation the light 
 of nature will conduct the --ubjects of heathenism to hea- 
 ven, God meeting him with acontiadiction declaies that 
 where there is no vision, the j)eople perish. If in a 
 multitude of doubts he suppose that the long reign of 
 heathenism over so large a portion of this world's popu- 
 lation was an aj)pointmetit of God in preference to the 
 universal dominion of Christianity, t!ie revealed lan- 
 guage of refutation is, that he will have all men to be 
 mvedand come to the knowledge of the truth. 
 
113 
 
 Thus borne on tli2wins;of coTijpcture from one moun- 
 tain-lop of theory to another, he at Ihst dismounts and 
 descending; to the valh^y of pious submission, rests on 
 the tnith that tfip Lord reigndh, and, that ihojudsje of 
 nil the earth will do right, i >n such a truth as on a rock, 
 he may securely rest — God is just, and will do right; he 
 is good and the earth is full of his goodness; he is infinite 
 as well as good, and his tender mercies are over all his 
 works; he is omnipotent, and doth his pleasure. i he 
 conclusion, is reasonable that his <lispensations to- 
 wards the heathen, are consistent with himself; and if so, 
 they are under the influence of intinite gnudness, direc- 
 ted l)y a wise and a jusc OmnipoiencF; fiut they ought 
 ever to be regarded in reference', not to a partial, but a 
 general good — Tod is over all; hi^ kingfom is an evprlas- 
 tin;j; li'ingdom^ and to his dominion there is no e,nh 
 The systeQi to whose generul good, the operations of his 
 government tend, is boui'ded un!v by infinite space, and 
 is in proo:ress/r67?2 ^verlnstivg to everlasting. Now if 
 evil be the object of his holy aversioit, ami is suffered 
 into the universe at aM, only because, in the best possible 
 system, some moral agents irill sin, it is impossible 
 tiiat he should delight in the abominations of heathen 
 lands; and it appears agreeable to the divine nature, and 
 to the analogy of his known dispensations, that he should 
 employ all the moral means, consistent with the greatest 
 go(»d of the whole system, to prevent these evils; and this 
 inference, we find, accords with the holy records of facts, 
 tor the invisible thin^^s of him from the creation of the 
 world are clearly seen being understood bii the things that 
 are made^ even his eternal power and Godhead; so that 
 theijare without excuse. Thus, however little, creation 
 may teach us of what God is, it clearly reveals his exis- 
 tence and his power, and tlumgh this knowledge is not of 
 itself sullicietjt to accpiaiid us with the only ??ame given 
 under heaven among men whereby we mu^tbe saved; and 
 though where there is no vis'on the people perish; yet if 
 when men w ilhout God's written word, know there is a 
 power above them, they would yield to fhe conviction 
 naturally produced by t!ie knowledge of his existence. 
 
lis 
 
 that his character, and his will, ought to he sought and 
 known, and would they act on that conviction, hy him 
 who spake to Noah, Ahraham, Joh, and other holy men 
 of the old dispensation, In thoughts from the visions of 
 tke night, when deep sleep falieih upon men, things 
 might be secretly brought to thm, which would reveal 
 a Saviour and the way of obtaining salvation through 
 his name. 80 that with all the deep shades of abomi- 
 nation and misery, that engloom the picture of the hea- 
 then and without adoj)ting the belief, as contrary to fact 
 as it is to the word of God, that the temporal and eter- 
 nal interests of men, are as well secured by heathenism 
 as Christianity, it is entijely possible, that out of his 
 more ordinary course of revealing himself to the world 
 by the canon of his written will, he may speak mercy 
 and redemption in the ear of the serious and seeking 
 son of the forest, whose eye has never been enlightened 
 by a written page. This is a work of goodness and 
 mercy, which God has done under the Old l^stament 
 economy, and which he can and may still do; but after 
 all these possibilities and probabilities the christian who 
 in any considerable degree, partakes of the purity and 
 the benevolence of his Mast( r, can not survey the abodes 
 of the heathen without horror at their crimes, and com- 
 passion at their miseries, or without raising the voice of 
 supplication, (') God, how long shall the adversary re- 
 proach? Shall the enemy blaspheme thy name for ever? 
 O Lord God of hosts, how lung wilt thou be angry a- 
 gainst the prayer of thy people? 
 
 As nations, almost all the inhabitants of the globe have 
 rejected the Gospel. But if God has no pleasure in the 
 death of the wicked, it is asked, <»why does he not era- 
 ploy his omnipotence to prostrate all opposition to his 
 truth, and to scatter every cloud, that casts it deathly 
 shade over the surface of this earth? — Here is the bur- 
 den under which the faith of many a good man totters. 
 This difficulty arises wholly from that system of theo- 
 logical philosophy, which forgetting, that the moral cre- 
 ation is a system of natural liberty, not to be guided by 
 
 15 
 
114 
 
 coercion, hut by moral cause?, strangely .suppo«es, phy- 
 jsical and moral ellects eqiially the ohjects of the divine 
 omnipotence. Whereas the Scriptures constantly re- 
 present God, except in the agencij bij which he rrcre- 
 ntes the sinner after his own image Lost by the fall, as 
 emphjying his omnipotence in the governnient of thft 
 moral world, only in presentins; motives to influence the 
 snl)jects of natural liberty to obedience, by addressing 
 llieir hopes, their fears, or their love by objects of desire, 
 terror, or affection. Thus by iiis mi^;hty icorks the 8a- 
 vi(»nr presented motives, to Chorazin. Jiethsaida, and 
 Capernaum ineffectual, which on the hopes and the 
 fears of Tyre, hidon, and Sndom would so have ope- 
 rated that their guilty inhabitants would have sought and 
 found that regeneraliag Spirit, who in them wculd have 
 produced a happy re|)cntance. So that the subjection 
 of the heathen worbi to the easy and peaceful dominion 
 of the Gospel, is only indirectly the object of physical 
 omnipotence, and their is no discrepance between the 
 omnipotence of Jehovah and his will, that all men be 
 saved. 
 
 So far as the exertion of mere omnipotence is con- 
 cerned, for any thins; we can say, God might regenerate 
 the savage without employing any outward means, ad- 
 dressed either to his hopes or his fears, to influence him 
 to a willingness for such a change; but as the fact is o- 
 therwise -as the whole history of his dispensations 
 proves, that as it was by man's choice influenced by 
 motives presented by the tempter, he lost his Maker's 
 image, so also, by man's choice influenced by motives 
 addressed by the Spirit of merc^'* this image is restored, 
 and as it is presumed, that God's actual mode of dea- 
 ling with man is as consistent with inflnile perfection, 
 as any other possible; the conclusion is unavoidable, 
 that it is not consistent with all the attributes of the di- 
 vine character to re-create a fallen intelligent being 
 without flrst addressing that natural liberty essential to 
 his moral nature. 
 
 By our Saviour, we are taught, that the motives pre- 
 sented by the light of nature, or by the cxampla of 
 
 •See note A . 
 
11^ 
 
 iigliteous Lot, to the inhabitants of Sodom, were not 
 such as prevented them from bc'in^ sinnprs forcei'dhis^ly; 
 Uui that his own mighty woiks, had they been done a- 
 inong that [)to|)le, would iiave been instrumental in 
 changing their character. Thus in other circumstances, 
 motives sufficiently powerful might iiave been presented, 
 to have secured their salvation. On a parity of reason- 
 ing in other circumstances motives might have been ad- 
 dressed to the men of Capernaum so powerful, as to have 
 secured their repentance. And pursuing the thought 
 suggested by our Saviour, we naturally infer, that in 
 certain circumstances motives might be employed suffi- 
 ciently mighty to overcome the obstinacy of the moht 
 hardened and the most embruted of the humankind. 
 But the days of Sodom were not the best time, nor Tyre 
 and Sidon the choicest places for these strong motives 
 exhibited to Chorazin, Bethsaida, and Caj)ernaum, to 
 be presented. And as in the progress of the (riispel 
 di8|»ensation, the evidence of the divine origin of Chris- 
 tianity, has been increasing from the days of our Sa- 
 viour until tlie present hour, as light from the morning 
 dawn to the strength of the full risen sun, perhaps, had 
 the evidence now before us been presented to them, 
 they w ould have repented in sackcloth and ashes. And 
 periiaps should the Gospel march forward accumula- 
 ting evidence in its progress, until it rises to the mere- 
 diaa of the millenial day, motives then so irresistible 
 may be exhibited, as to command the submission of the 
 world, and heavenly truth rise in a blaze so strong, as 
 to dispel from the whole earth every shade of moral 
 night. And thus, as was ihe case with Sodom, we 
 may see, the time has not yet come for Deity, consis- 
 tently with the best plan of his moral operations, to 
 place before the heathen world those irresistible motives 
 by the instrumentality of which the nations will all be 
 given to the Son for his inheritance. 
 
 If then to every human being, that walks the globe, 
 a light is afforded which renders him excuseless, and 
 in the improvement of which a merciful God may im- 
 part more light, and if the means best adapted to man's 
 
llff 
 
 moral nature, and the raost coDsistent witli Infinite Per- 
 fection, and the genenil good of the universe, have e- 
 ver been in progress for the final redemption of the 
 world, then God's ways toward the heathen, may be 
 vindicated before all the hissing legions of imj)ious scof- 
 fers, and faith discover how every mouth shall be stojft 
 and all the world become guilty before God. 
 
 J3esides, for any thing we can tell, God raaj foresee, 
 that in many places, if the Gospel be sent, it will not 
 be received, but only be so abused, as to deepen the 
 condemnation of their wretched inhabitants; and since 
 he foreknows they will force their way to ruin, whe 
 ther the Gospel be sent to them or not, his goodness 
 and mercy may permit them lo sink to their place with 
 only the guilt incurred by the light of nature rather 
 than to increase their guilt by sending them a brighter 
 revelation. 
 
 By some, this view of God's dispensations towards 
 the ungospelized nations, will be supposed to give too 
 prominent a place in the picture, to the will of the crea- 
 ture, and to leave omnipotence too much in the shade. 
 But if the objection suppose the direct agency of omni- 
 potence without the instrumentality of any moral 
 means, prepares the minds of the heathen for the re- 
 ception of the Gospel, and the theory here defended, 
 that the divine wisdom and power were at first employ- 
 ed in constructing and forming that moral machinery of 
 man's nature, whose natural liberty being addressed by 
 motives, equally secures the same results, it is difficult 
 to discover, how the objection presents any advantage 
 in the exhibition of Omnipotence; but easy to perceive, 
 that it fails in dis[)layini; the wisdom of God in his ori^ 
 giniil plan and in reconciling his goodness and mer- 
 cy with his ways in the government of men. 
 
 Thus God not only overrules even tlie wickedness of 
 transgressors, in this world, so as out of evil to produce 
 good; but he holds them as the subjects of his justice 
 and his power in the world to come. When his long 
 suffering has permitted them to fill up the measure of 
 their iniquity ia this life, he commissions death his raes- 
 
117 
 
 senger to cut them down, and bring them prisoners to 
 judgment. Here his invitation, come unto me is con- 
 verted into a terrible command, Depart from me ye 
 cursed into everlasting fire, prepared ^or the Devil and 
 lus angels; and his expostulations of mercy. Why will 
 ye die? into vindicatory displays of omnipotence— to 
 create the worm that never dies, and to enkindle the fire 
 that is never quenched. Here he is seated on a throne 
 of grace; there he asrends a throne of burning justice. 
 Here he holds a sceptre of mercy, there he wields a 
 rod of iron to dash his enemies in pieces. The power 
 and the wisdom, that here work wonders suited to turn 
 them from iniquity and to convert them to righteousness 
 are there employed to inflict eternal pains and enkindle 
 everlasting burnings on all them who will not now know 
 God and obey the Gospel. 
 
 If God rule the wicked, much more his saints. He 
 not unfrequently leads them in strange ways and 
 through deep waters; but ever defendingthem t*hrou«-h 
 floods and fires, he keeps them by his own pcAver through 
 faith unto salvation. On earth he not unfrequently 
 rules them with fftlherly chastisements, but in heaven 
 always with pure love. But we are, 
 
 1£. To consider why the Government of God should 
 he the cause of joy. On this we must be brief. 
 
 It ought to be the cause of joy, that the whole uni- 
 Terse is governed by Deity, accordirjg to a plan the 
 most consistent with his wisdom, justice, and goodness, 
 every part of which will certainly be fulfilled. From 
 the minutest atom to the loftiest seraph, every creature 
 in his government is subservient to some good and wise 
 end. If our comfort and safety in life, be intimately 
 connected with the regular succession of things by the 
 relations usually dt nominated cause and eflfect, it ought 
 to be the matter of joy to know, that his agency is era- 
 ployed to produce this regnlar succession, and that the 
 course of his operations will not be suspended but for 
 ends the wisest and the best. To know that when we 
 take food it shall not become poison, or drink, that it 
 shall not become fire, or, that when we are conveyed in a 
 
118 
 
 chaise or in a sliip, that the vehicle shall not dissolve to 
 atoms, or the earth lose its soruiity, or the Ocean its 
 bouyant power, except for purposes the most wise and 
 merciful, demands the ejaculations of a thankful and 
 a pious joy. 
 
 But as the natural world is subservient to the moral, 
 his j^ox ernmeut in the latter, ought to be still more tfie 
 cause of joy. God identiftt's his people with himself. 
 And as he hath made all things for himself, su all 
 things, whether prossperous, or calamitous, whether life 
 or death — things present or things to come shall work 
 io^ptherftr gjod to tlipm that love God. Even the 
 light aifiiciions of this life, that are but for a moment, 
 shall work out for them afar more exceeding and eter- 
 nal weight ofglorf/. 
 
 The earth and ail the abundance of the isles shoi^ld 
 rejoice, that the Lord and not blind fate, or vagrant 
 chance reigneth, because his purpose is, that all their 
 heathen inhabitants shall be given to the Son for his in- 
 heritance, -and he will overturn, and overturn the na- 
 tions, until all his pleasure be accomplished — Joy to the 
 earth; Cod reigns. — Amen. 
 
 Kf*XiiS3ma9tim 
 
 liemarJi'S concluded from jiage 1)0. 
 In a written sermon, on religious iginnance, preached 
 last January, the Editor addressed \he following Ian - 
 guage to his audience— ^-1 fear, that \}^ some of you were 
 inteVrogated on the history of the jiible, you could 
 scarcely tell who lived first, Paul or Nebuchadnezzai; 
 whether the Jewish captivity was bef(ne or aftiM- the 
 flood; or whetlior Adam or Jesus Christ died to save 
 sinners." This as we are variously informed, was gar- 
 bled from hearsay by a certain clerical individual, then 
 ill this region, and so altered in the carrying as to sub- 
 stitute Arminian or Metfiodist for "-soma of yoii:^^^ In 
 this counterfeit form, it was circulated far and wide; 
 carried into the pulpit; and there no doubt soundly re- 
 futed. And is if it were not enough to prostitute the mi- 
 nistry, and degradii the pulpit, the vile slander has so 
 
119 
 
 far found its way into the good graces of our censor as 
 to obtain a kind of half covered currency in his crude 
 animadversions. Even charity itself, except stone 
 blind, must see, that the spirit which can thus catch such 
 a slander as it flies away and hold it a prisoner to grace 
 the trophies of the pulpit and the press, is nothing high- 
 er than a base bigotry, regardless of truth, and only in- 
 tent on exciting sectarian prejudices. If such a spirit 
 enters heaven, it must be because it is too ignorant to 
 know the turpitude of the sin of lying. We now dis- 
 miss the whole odious subject and only add a few rcr 
 marks tending to develope some of the features of Ar- 
 rainianism: 
 
 In No. 1, the stricfures represent the assertion, made 
 in Christian Preacher No. I, that Arminians and Cal- 
 vinists, agree in supposing, that God chose some and 
 passed by, and did not choose others — as contrary to 
 fact, and denies, that Arminians hold any such doctrine; 
 or, admit any such affinity to Calvinism, That Armi- 
 nians and Calvinists agree in supposing, that God chose, 
 and passed by for the same reasons, or in the same man- 
 ner, is indeed not true, nor is any such intimation given 
 in the Discourse. But Armmianism does teach, in re- 
 ality, if not in so many words, that God passes by, and 
 does not choose those to the blessings of eternal life, 
 who die in unbelief. — See definition of Arminianism, 
 No. I, p. 3. 
 
 The manner in which our Arminian has disposed of 
 the texts — "Whom he did foreknow, he also did predes- 
 tinate" — Rom. viii, 19. ^^According as he hath chosen 
 us before the foundation of the world*'- -Ep. i, 4, de- 
 serves a remark, not for its originality, but because we 
 may thus catch the genius of Arminian exposition. By 
 the assistance of Benson's Commentary, he informs ns, 
 that the Greek word translated prfdcstinate, may he 
 converted into Latin by prius definio. This is not objec- 
 tionable. And then we are told, that 'prius defuiin 
 means to define or describe beforehand. 
 
 To thi*< we object. 'Ihe first meaning of the Latin 
 word defivio is to honvd or liw.it; and our English word 
 
1^0 
 
 define is only a metaphorical siji;nificalion of definio [see 
 any Latin Dictionary]. riius the text is evaded by 
 chans5ing it into a metaphor. In stricture number o. 
 we are taught, that 'Mjefoie (lie foundation of the worhl/' 
 means the Jewish state— before the Gospel was preach- 
 ed!! We Jscarcely know what kind of figure to denonii- 
 nate this. Such a figuring and distorting of Scripture, 
 ou"*ht to make even a Socinian blusli. This is suffici- 
 ent to prove, that x\rminianism, like the theory of Soci- 
 nius, shrinks from a strict interpretation of Scripture, 
 and supports itself only by figurative evasions. Armi- 
 nianism must be rectified before it can be reconciled to 
 a close exposition of the Bible. 
 
 Though we think it is demonstrated in Christian 
 Preacher No. 1, pp. 10-13, that human actions may be 
 scripturally predestinated, and. yet free, the writer in 
 Strictures No. 4 and ;"), without offering an argument to 
 refute our reasoning*?, then befi)re him, gives us the old 
 Arminian cant, that if God decreed human actions, 
 they can not be free, and he mufit be the author of sin. 
 See Christian Preacher, No. Ill, pp. 55-o8, and also 
 the latter part of No. IV. V\' e can regard such asser- 
 tions no more than the rattling of an old bell, except we 
 see them supported with argument. If it be truth, that 
 is asserted, it must be attended with evidence, and 
 tlierefore ought to furnisii arguments. 
 
 If we must have more strictures, let us also have 
 more intelligence and more candor. Ignorance and 
 falsehood can never be subservient to the Christian re- 
 liffion. She scorns such aids. 
 
 In opposition to this doctrine, this text will no doubt occur to the minds 
 of some, "Which were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor 
 of the will of man, but of God, Jno. i. 13 — This text indeed proves, that 
 regeneration is exclusively the work of God, but proves nothing about its an- 
 tecedents. It most literally agrees with the doctrine stated in Christian 
 Preacher No. 2, pp. 42, 43 
 
 Errata in this J^^o. 
 
 Page 07. 1st line in the seimon, for "is silent" read "in silent '* 
 
 101, lOrh line from top, for "Slow to no act," read "Slave to no sect." 
 
 103, 17th line from bottom, for "philosophical" read "physical." 
 
 Krrnta iv the Inst Ao, 
 
 Pa.^c 7'i, 14th line from bottom, for "meditation" read "mediation," 
 — — 96, I3th line from bottom, for "17" read "27." 
 
THE CHRISTIAN PREACHER, 
 
 Vol. 1. jYOVEMBEB, 1827. N^ 6. 
 
 THE FALL OF MAJV. 
 
 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and 
 that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one 
 wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her 
 husband with her, and he did eat. — Gen. iii. 6". 
 
 What a sad page in the history of man! Here is recor- 
 ded the first breach of moral obligation ever practised in 
 our world. Here the mound of obedience was overlea- 
 ped, and innocence forsook the earth. This first disobe- 
 dience of our first parents, it is the design of the present 
 discourse, and of the one following to consider. 
 
 To regulate our contemplations on this momentous sub- 
 ject, it is proposed to pursue the following questions: 
 
 /. IIoiv did man as a perfect being fall into trans- 
 g7^ession? 
 
 11. Into what estate did the fall bring mankind? 
 
 IIL Did God foreknow and decree the fall of man? 
 — and 
 
 IV, How is the fall of man consistent with the idea 
 of the best possible system? 
 
 I. How did man as a perfect being fall into trans- 
 gression? 
 
 As in physics, so in theology, no theories ought to be 
 admitted, but such as are founded on facts. To answer 
 this question theoretically, the following facts are to be 
 considered, 
 
 1. The particulars in which manh original perfection 
 consisted; 
 
 2. The law given him as suited to this perfection; and 
 
 3. The scriptural narrative of his temptation and 
 fall. We consider, 
 
 1 . The particulars in ivhich man^s origijial perfect 
 tion co7isisted. 
 
 Perfection in creatures is only a relative term. Ab- 
 solute perfection is exclusively the prerogative of Deity. 
 
122 
 
 The perfection of a creature consists in an exact adapta- 
 tion to that place in the universe, in which Infinite wis- 
 dom lias located him, and to that end for which Almigh- 
 ty power created him. 
 
 The perfection of our first parents, consisted in the 
 entire fitness of their moral and physical natures to that 
 sphere in the system of univ ersal being, in which they 
 moved whilst the unseduced inhabitants of Paradise. 
 
 Man appears to be the link, which unites the harmonies 
 of the material and the spiritual worlds. As Adam was 
 a compound of the spiritual and the animal creations, and 
 as the Benificent Creator constituted him for the enjoy- 
 ment of happiness drawn from objects in both kingdoms, 
 he had pnnciples of nature precisely adapted to those 
 particular kinds of enjoyment. As in the cup of crea- 
 tion God mingled almost an infinite variety of flavours — 
 rancids, sweets, and tarts, — man was endowed with pow- 
 ers and appetites to relish their tastes, and enjoy their 
 fragrance. As he projected the landscape, and spread 
 the lawn, and painted the firmament, man was so formed, 
 as to derive pleasure from the objects of beauty and gran- 
 deur. And as he opened before him the immense, va- 
 ried, and magniriccnt volume of creation, so he endowed 
 him, not only with the power of becoming wise, but al- 
 so with the desire of wisdom. And so also, as he was 
 designed by his Creator to be a rational and immortal be- 
 ing, and subject to law, he was endued with the princi- 
 ples of moral existence. As relations really exist which 
 involve the distinctions of moral right and wrong, a mo- 
 ral discernment to apprehend these relations, and recog- 
 nize these distinctions, was given him as one of the in- 
 dispensable qualifications for obedience. But as a mere 
 uninterested perception of moral distinction, would not be 
 sufiicient to ensure obedience, man was formed with a 
 moral sense to feel the pleasures of approbation when he 
 obeyed, and the stings of remorse when he transgressed. 
 And finally, as in the economy of the moral system, man 
 was to have obedience and life, and disobedience and 
 death, placed before him as the objects of his election, 
 lie was endued with the power of \ olition for the purpo- 
 ses of choice. 
 
123 
 
 These were the constitutional principles of human na- 
 ture^ and of course essential to man as such. But to re- 
 gulate these principles, and direct them to their proper 
 end, a conformity to the image of God as adventitious 
 principle inhabited the soul. For the existence and in- 
 habitation of this principle in the souls of our first pa- 
 rents, we have the express testimony of God's word: God 
 created man in his own IMAGE ^ in the IMAGE of 
 God created he him, male and female created he them. 
 And that it was an adventitious, and not an essential prin- 
 ciple of human nature, is demonstrated by the declara- 
 tion of the Holy Ghost: The new man — is BEJVE W- 
 ED in knowledge after the IMAGE of him that crea- 
 ted him. "^ Here the man is reported as 7^e72eived ^fter 
 the i?nage of God: and if so, he must have fallen from that 
 image; and conformity to it must therefore have been an 
 adventitious principle, and not essential to human nature 
 as such. 
 
 To avoid mistakes on this very important subject, it is 
 proper to enquire, in what this conformity to the image 
 of God consisted. The testimony of the Spirit is, that, 
 the new man — is reneived in KKOWLEBGE after 
 the IMAGE of him that created him,^ and after GOD 
 is created in RIGHTEOUSA^ESS cmd true HOLI- 
 A^ESS. t This renewal of fallen man, can be neither more 
 nor less, than a reinstatement of that conformity to the 
 image of God, lost by our fwst parents in the fall. Then 
 according to these Scriptures this conformity to the im- 
 age of God consisted partly in knowledge. — Truth, and 
 nothing but truth, was the object of man's contempla- 
 tion whilst, in rectitude, he inhabited his terrestial hea- 
 ven. And truth placed constantly before him the per- 
 fections of God. The changeful seasons in the year pro- 
 claimed to him but the varied Deity. In the diversity 
 of flavours, that in food, delighted his taste; in the fra- 
 grance wafted by the winds from the flowers of Eden; 
 in the flocks that covered the verdant plains; in the 
 hymns of the winged songsters of the grove; in the gran 
 
 ^Colossians iii. 18. fEph. iv. 24. 
 
124 
 
 4eur of the firmament, now illuminated by the sun^ and 
 again spangled by the stars; — in the whole surrounding 
 visible creation; but above all, in the inhabitation of the 
 Holy Ghost in his soul^ and in the audible and visible ma- 
 nifestations of the divine presence, his senses, and eve- 
 ry power of his mind, were exercised on the truth of his 
 Creators perfections. And these truths conveyed to his 
 mind through the appropriate avenues, and like so many 
 rays of light converged to a common point, enkindled that 
 fire of celestial love, which becoming the ruling princi- 
 ple imparted light, heat, and motion to the physical and 
 moral powers of the whole man. God is love, and where 
 his perfections are distinctly seen and felt, they produce 
 a reaction of love. Our first parents viewed God in e- 
 very object that addressed their understanding, and 
 hence their supreme affection conveyed through the ob- 
 jects of creation, as through a channel, terminated on 
 the Creator. And as man is so constituted, that all the 
 principles of his nature, are subordinate to the ruling pas- 
 sion, all the natural and moral powers of our first parents, 
 operated under the immediate controul of Supreme af- 
 fection to the Author of their being. And as this em- 
 ployment of the human principles, is just that for which 
 man is made, under this guidance, they operated each 
 one in its proper sphere, without any jarring in their 
 interests, or any clashing in their movements. As the 
 wheels of a well regulated machine, one more and ano- 
 ther less important as a part, yet the less equally essen- 
 tial with the greater to the complete whole, all turning 
 around in harmonious subordination, the one to the o- 
 ther, and the whole to the power that commimicates mo- 
 tion; so all the principles of human nature, in our first 
 parents, while innocent, acting in subordination, the low- 
 er to the higher, harmoniously moved onwards in the 
 course of obedience to supreme love of God, which o- 
 perated as a power imparting motion to the whole: Or, 
 to use another simile, as the less streams in the wide val- 
 ley of Western America, all, with one consent, flow into 
 the Great Mississippi, and permit their waters to be 
 torne in his majestic channel towards the Ocean, with- 
 
125 
 
 out one seeking a private course for itself, so every prin- 
 ciple of human nature in unfallen man, as if attracted 
 with the greater principle of love to the Creator, flowed 
 into its channel, and was borne onwards by its living 
 current towards that Ocean of love, that moves in the 
 bosom of God. And thus, love is the fulfilling of the 
 law. And hence, as whatever man knew, was an ema- 
 nation of God's perfections, and was surveyed by him as 
 such, and was therefore truth, the very essence of real 
 knowledge producing love in the heart to God, such as 
 to sway every appetite, passion, and power, in the most 
 harmonious obedience to the Maker's law, his original 
 conformity to the image of God, is said to consist in 
 knoivledge. As in this state, man was obedient to his 
 God; was under the condemnation of no law; and was 
 therefore accountel legally righteous, this conformity to 
 the divine Image may be said to have consisted in righ- 
 teousness. So also, as in the innocence of Paradise, the 
 human powers were devoted to the very purpose to 
 which they were appropriated by their Maker; were 
 undefiled by any perversion from their proper employ- 
 ment; and were therefore, morally pure, man's original 
 correspondence to the divine likeness, is said to be in 
 true holiness. Thus man was originally created after 
 the image of God in knowledge, righteousness, and true 
 holiness. From this survey of the particulars in which 
 man's perfection consisted^ we proceed to examine, 
 2. The law given him as suited to this per feetion, 
 God is the first Cause, and his perfect nature is the 
 foundation of all created beings, and of all the relations, 
 that arise out of the existence of created beings. While 
 moral beings abide in the rectitude, in which they are 
 originally placed by the Infinite Creator, their character 
 and relations correspond with the perfection, or the im- 
 age of his nature, just as the figure made on the pliant 
 wax with the seal with which it is impressed. As 
 man's original perfection consisted in a correspondence 
 with the moral attributes of Deity, so the law adapted to 
 his primeval perfection, and given him for a guide, is 
 an image or a picture of those attributes so far as they 
 
126 
 
 relate to man. As God is a Sovereign, law must be gi- 
 ven to his creature man as an image of that Sovereignty: 
 as he is d^just Sovereign, his law given to the creature 
 as a picture of his justice, must be d^just law: and as he is 
 a icooG? Sovereign, his law given to Adam as a transcript of 
 his goodness, must be a good law. To have given no 
 law would have been a denial of his Sovereignty; to have 
 given any but a just and good law, would have been a re- 
 linquishment of his justiceand his goodness. And hence, 
 while all the points of obedience to which man's nature ex- 
 tended, and which it covered, were almost as numerous 
 as the motions of his body, and the operations of his mind, 
 (xod as a just, and a good Lawgiver, made that command 
 which was ordained to life, and which therefore, had it 
 been kept, would have confirmed him in a state of spi- 
 ritual life, consist in one single point of obedience- 
 While he kept that one precept, the Holy Spirit dwelt 
 in his heart, and illuminated his mind to behold his eve- 
 ry duty, and by teaching him that he experienced the 
 goodness of God in every object of both sense and rea- 
 son, he ca^used his alfections to centre on his Creator and 
 his King. But the conditions of his probationary state, 
 were such, that in case of disobedience of the command: 
 of the treeoftheknoiQledge of good and evil y thou shall not 
 eat, this holy inhabitant would forsake his soul, remove 
 from his mind all the divine illumination, which enkin- 
 dled in his bosom that love to God that subjected all his 
 active powers to the service of the Maker, and would 
 leave all the principles of the man to moral darkness^ 
 except so far as the perfections of God, and the relations 
 existing between the creature and the Creator, and the 
 duties arising out of those relations glimmered upon the 
 eye of his understanding through tbc deep glooms of spi- 
 ritual death. This is considered to be the commence- 
 ment of the penalty contained in the threatening: in the 
 day thou eatrst thereof thou sJuilt surely die. 
 
 Thus by the law of Pi«radise, which may be taken as 
 the whole moral law e];itomized, that obedience which 
 secured man's title to life, or plunged him in death, was 
 reduced to a single prohibiting precept, forbidding only 
 
127 
 
 one single act: of every tree of the garden thou mayst 
 freely eat^ hut of the tree of the knowledge of good and 
 evil^ thou shall not eat of it^ for in the day that thou 
 eatest thereof thou shall surely die. This single prohi- 
 bition however, laid restrictions on three principles of 
 human nature: the desire of appetite for that which is 
 good for food; the desire of taste for whatever is pleasant 
 to the eyes; and the desire of wisdom, which delights in 
 whatever is supposed to make one wise. None of these 
 were permitted to be indulged by any interference with 
 the fruit of the forbidden tree. And so long as our first 
 parents were firm in the belief, that the threatened death 
 would certainly be the penalty of transgression, they re- 
 mained in obedience; but eventually, we find the histo- 
 ry of their temptation and disobedience, and it is propo- 
 sed to consider 
 
 3. The scriptural narrative of their temptation and 
 fall. 
 
 It is comprised in the following words: And he [the 
 serpent] said unto the woman^ Yea hath God said, ye 
 shall not eat of every tree of the garden? And the wo- 
 man said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of 
 the trees of the garden, hut of the fruit of the tree ivhich 
 is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, ye shall 
 not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. And 
 the serpent said unto the woman, ye shall not surely die. 
 For God doth knoiu that in the day ye eat thereof, then 
 your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as Gods know- 
 ing good and evil. 
 
 From this narrative we learn, that the Tempter made 
 his first attack upon the understanding of our first pa- 
 rents. Contradicting the threatening of the Sovereign 
 Lawgiver, he said, ye shall not surely die, and repre- 
 sents the divine prohibition as an invidious injunction to 
 prevent .them from participating in the divine Wis- 
 dom: For God doth know, said the Tempter, that in 
 the day that ye eat thereof your eyes shall be opened and 
 ye shall be as gods knowing good and evil. Our first 
 
 "See the note at the end of the sermon. 
 
128 
 
 mother gave credence to the falsehood; she surveyed the 
 fruit, viewed it as good for food, pleasant to the eyes^ 
 and to be desired to make one wise. Thus her under- 
 standing led astray from contemplating the truth of her 
 Maker, and filled with falsehood instead of truth — with 
 darkness instead of light — could no longer converge 
 the rays of divine knowledge so as to enkindle in her bo- 
 som that heavenly love, which only can give life, direc- 
 tion, and harmonious motion to all the principles of her 
 nature, in the course of holy obedience. The Holy 
 Ghost ceased to inhabit her soul, as soon as the lie eclip- 
 sed the light of her understanding: the love of God for- 
 sook her heart; and the inferior principles of animal ap- 
 petite and passion, now deserted by the higher — the 
 light of truth and the love of God — and left in a state of 
 darkness and anarchy, acting no longer either in subor- 
 dination or in concert, arose, each to assert its individual 
 claims, and separate gratifications. We find, that after 
 the mind became blinded by falsehood, the appetite for 
 food, the desire of that which is pleasant to the eyes, and 
 the principle that aspires to wisdom, no longer, as be- 
 fore, operated in obedience to the knowledge and the love 
 of God in seeking their object in subordination to higher 
 objects; but sought their individual enjoyment as the su- 
 preme end of their action. For when the woman saw 
 that the tree w\as good for FOOD, and that it was PLEA- 
 SANT to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one 
 WISE, she took of the fruit thereof and did eat, and gave- 
 to her husl)and with her, and he did eat. Her under- 
 standing that before, had constantly contemplated the 
 divine perfections, either directly, in immediate revela- 
 tion, or indirectly, in the beamings of their glory through 
 the medium of the Creators works, and the affections, 
 that before centred on Infinite excellence, now all went 
 astray; the understanding first, and the inferior princi- 
 ples in the train. No sooner had truth forsaken the 
 mind, than the passions and appetites rushed to seek their 
 own individual enjoyment, regardless of any higher end, 
 and employed the understanding, only to obtain the ob- 
 jects of their gratification. 
 
129- 
 
 With these facts before us, we can account for the fall 
 of man without supposing, that God implanted in him a- 
 ny wicked principles, or loaded him with the chains of a 
 fatal necessity. The simple conclusion from these facts 
 is, that though the knowledge of our first parents even in 
 Paradise, was finite, yet what they had, being divine 
 truth, and therefore, real knowledge, so affected their 
 minds, as to direct the current of their affections towards 
 the Creator, and thus to bring all the inferior principles of 
 the man into his service; but that in the temptation the un- 
 derstanding, the governing power, blinded by falsehood, 
 ceased to be a guide in the way of duty, the moral sense, 
 the volitions, and all the inferior principles, went astray 
 from God, and the Holy Ghost, olfended by man's trans- 
 gression, forsook his soul, and thus conformity to the im^ 
 age of the Maker was lost. 
 
 And if this conclusion be sustained by the facts as le- 
 gitimate, then man\ liability to transgression resulted 
 from the finite nature of his intellect as a creature, and 
 his natural libei^y as a moral agent. 
 
 The facts and principles employed in explaining the 
 first human transgression, if adopted will conduct us to, 
 at least, a plausible solution of the apostacy of the angels 
 who kept not their first estate. It cannot be denied, that 
 Satan's understanding is finite. And it appears equal- 
 ly plain, that when committing his first sin, he was not 
 fully convinced, that all the consequences probably 
 threatened as the penalty of disobedience, would on his 
 transgression, be inevitably executed; because no ra- 
 tional mind can conceive how a holy . being can possibly 
 sin, knowing at the same time, that endless ruin will ine- 
 vitably, and immediately follow. 
 
 It must also be conceded, that in his original and un- 
 fallen state, he possessed like man, constitutional desires 
 which, while under the controul of an understanding, 
 properly regulated and employed, were subservient to 
 the end of his creation. As pride is represented by the 
 Apostle as the condemnation of the Devil, it is reasona- 
 ble to infer, that among his original desires was the love 
 
 vr 
 
130 
 
 of rank, a principle necessary when properly regulated, 
 as a chain to bind every creature to his appropriate 
 sphere in the order of creation. Only imagine, that 
 with his finite intellect, Satan should erroneously judge, 
 that by violating some command of his Sovereign, he 
 might elevate himself to a higher grade in existence, 
 than that which he then occupied, or even to the Supre- 
 macy of the universe; and then, this supposed possibili- 
 ty, viewed by his mind as a matter of fact, would prove 
 as much a temptation to him, as did the forbidden fruit 
 to Adam in Paradise. Now only suppose, that the un- 
 derstanding, when thus perverted from truth and recti- 
 tude, would cease to confine the love of rank to the pro- 
 per sphere; and this desire should rush unrestrained by 
 any governing principle to seek its gratification; and that 
 the understanding, which was formerly employed in con- 
 trouling it, should now become only the minister of its 
 lawless indulgence; and thus we can account for the de- 
 scent of Lucifer with all his host of morning stars from 
 their high abodes. If this theory be correct, the fact, 
 that the most exalted created intellect is liable to err in 
 judgment, is sufficient to explain the introduction of sin 
 into the universe. 
 
 It may however be asked by way of objection to this 
 theory, how is acreature accountable for an error in judg- 
 ment? Theologians who make this objection, appear to 
 suppose, that they have fully explained accountability, 
 when they have traced sin to the exercise of voli- 
 tion w^hence it immediately arises. But unfortunately, 
 tliey can give no more reason why a man is accountable 
 for an error in volition, than for an error in undemtan 
 ding. To answer such an objection it is sufficient to re- 
 tort the question, and ask, how is a creature more culpa- 
 ble for erring in cl^oice, than in understanding? To place 
 the contrast in a clear light: the amount of our theory 
 is, some finite beings are liable to judge wrong: the 
 amount of his is, some finite beings are liable to choose 
 wrong. Asa being infinite and absolutely perfect, is ex- 
 empt from both these liabilities, on either supposition 
 the liability must result from the imperfection of a crea- 
 
131 
 
 ted and finite nature. But as such a nature creates its 
 own liabilities no more in the one case, than in the other, 
 how is the creature acountable for sin, the result of that 
 liability in the one case, any more than in the other? 
 This query ought to be resolved, before the objection is 
 urged against our theory. The soul is an indivisi- 
 ble unit, and is not separated into the different compart- 
 ments of will and understanding. The whole soul wills^ 
 and the whole soul understands; and in cases of moral a- 
 gency, it believes what it chooses, and chooses what it 
 believes. It is admitted that no act is culpable but that 
 which is voluntary; but it is apprehended that it was 
 fairly put to the choice of our first parents, whether to 
 believe God or the Tempter; and to the fallen angels 
 while in a state of obedience and glory, whether to be- 
 lieve the declaration of their Maker, or the deductions 
 of their own finite and fallible intellects. 
 
 Though obedience, and disobedience, were presented 
 to unfallen man, and unfallen angels, as objects of choice; 
 yet had there been no error in intellect, there could have 
 been, so far as we can see, no inducement to a holy be- 
 ing to choose disobedience. Whilst our first parents be- 
 lieved, that if they ate the forbidden fruit, they should 
 certainly die, in the meaning of the threatening, they ap- 
 pear not to have indulged the least inclination to diso- 
 bey; but so soon as doubts began to scatter mists over 
 their minds, then inducements to disobedience, began to 
 operate successfully upon their powers of choice. Then, 
 L but not till then, did they begin to survey the guarded, 
 ^^tre6 as good for food, pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to 
 he desired to make one ivise. So that if we should admit, 
 that the essence of accountability consists in error of 
 choice only, still it is true, that a liability to err in judg- 
 ment, is sufficient to explain the introduction of sin into 
 the moral universe. Without a mistake in the under- 
 standing, there could be no inducement to error in 
 choice. But since it is admitted by all that liability to 
 error, whether in understanding, or volition is morally 
 impossible in an infinite, and absolutely perfect being, it 
 must result from the imperfection of a created and finite 
 
132 
 
 intellect. And if so, how is such a being justly held ac- 
 countable for the results of liabilities, which he had no 
 choice in identifying with his nature? He does dot cre- 
 ate his own liabilities either to choose wrong or to judge 
 wrong. Why then is he to blame, either for error in 
 judgment, or for error in choice? 
 
 The principal difficulty attending this query, arises 
 from the common opinion in theological phihsophy, 
 which supposes that Deity, had he chosen, might have 
 created all the subjects of his moral kingdom so perfect, 
 as to be above all liabilities to sin; that he chose how- 
 ever not to create all of them exempt from these wofal 
 liabilities; but to form some of them with such imper- 
 fections as would certainly be the antecedents to all the 
 sin, ever perpetrated within the space and duration of 
 the moral universe; which is only saying in other vvords, 
 that God actually preferred that some men and an- 
 gels should eventually be sinners, and not always re~ 
 main holy. Now since it is universally acknowledged, 
 that a perfect God will and can not prefer wrong to 
 right, on this hypothesis, it is indeed a hopeless task to 
 arrive at any thing but confusion and contradiction. — 
 And hence to preach on the subject, is in many places 
 a thankless and odious performance. But if we dismiss 
 this philosophy, and suppose, that the foundation of all 
 righteousness is the nature of Deity, and the rule of all 
 righteousness his will; and believe his word when he de- 
 clares sin to be the abominable thing which he hates; 
 and that though he has chosen a system of moral being 
 in which he has decreed to suffer a certain amount of sin 
 as its foreknown imperfection as a creature; yet, that he 
 has selected that system in which there is the least pos- 
 sible evil, and that his nature and his will, secret and 
 revealed, nothing other but the expression of his nature, 
 absolutely prefers righteousness to sin in all his moral 
 subjects, and then we can rationally explain the accoun- 
 tability of men and angels. 
 
 The infinitely just and good nature of God requires, 
 that there should be obedience to his will, and that those 
 who depart from it should be unhappy. This require- 
 
133 
 
 ment is as unchangeable as tlie divine existence. Diso- 
 bedience therefore is in itself wrong, because contrary 
 to the righteous nature of God, expressed in his will; 
 and is attended with misery, because according to the 
 perfections of Deity the former involves the latter. 
 
 God^s nature is in itself righteous and gocd; and in 
 the creature eonformity to that nature is in itself righ- 
 teousness and happiness; and the contrary unrighteous- 
 ness and misery. This it is apprehended is the origin 
 of all moral distinctions. 
 
 Adam then was to blame because he believed and 
 chose that which was forbidden by the divine nature, as 
 expressed by the divine will in the law of Paradise, and 
 the same principle is applicable to all other trans- 
 gressors. Having thus endeavoured to account for 
 man's first transgression it is proposed to enquire, 
 
 II. hito what estate did the fall bring mankind? 
 
 In considering this question, it will be enquired /r*^ 
 Into what estate did the fall bring Mam? and secondly , 
 Into what estate did the fall bring his posterity? 
 
 1 . Into what estate did the fall bring Mam? 
 
 Since the veracity of God was pledged by the condi- 
 tions of the law of Paradise to inflict death on our first 
 parents, on the very day in which they would violate 
 the great probationary mandate, ^^Ofthe tree of the know- 
 ledge of good and evil thou shalt not eat,'' it is reasona- 
 ble to infer, that when violating the command they took 
 and ate, the God of truth executed the penalty upon the 
 transgressors, precisely in the sense in which it was 
 threatened. To ascertain the penalty of this first hu- 
 man transgression, contained in the threatening, thou 
 shall surely die, it is requisite to examine the scriptural 
 import of the word death. 
 
 Death is in Scripture sometimes employed to de- 
 note a separation of soul and body from God's favour in 
 this life. In allusion to this state it is said, '^you hathl 
 he quickened that were DEAD in trespasses and in 
 sins.'' It also signifies the separation of the soul from 
 the body. In reference to this meaning it is written, 
 to DIE is gain. And finally it means a perpetual sepa- 
 
134 
 
 ration of the whole man from God's heavenly presence 
 and glory to be tormented forever with the Devil and 
 his angels. This is the signification where it is recor- 
 ded, Hq that overcometh shall not be hurt of the second 
 DEATH, 
 
 Thus threefold death^ spiritual^ temporal, and eter- 
 nal, is considered as involved in the threatening, and in 
 principle all resolvable into death spiritual^ commenced 
 in our first parents as soon as they sinned. 
 
 When they sinned, the Holy Spirit relinquished their 
 souls as his earthly habitation. This influence, the pow- 
 er which regulated the machinery of the human consti- 
 tution, fled from the soul, and all the principles of the 
 man, like the dillerent parts of a complicated engine, 
 when deserted by the force which regulates and con- 
 trouls them, clashed with each others movements, and 
 dashing one against another, became a confused mass of 
 warring principles with no rule of action, but the blind 
 impetus of appetite and passion. The spiritual know- 
 ledge, which once like the light of heaven shone upon 
 the mind, and melted the soul, until it flowed like a 
 river towiirds the Infinite Ocean of Love, and moving 
 onwards in its course drew every principle of human na- 
 ture to its channel as a tributary stream, was withdrawn; 
 the mind left in a state of dark and dreary winter; the 
 current of heavenly afl'ection congealed; and the pas- 
 sions and appetites, all tlie inferior principles, deprived 
 of the natural outlet for their flowings, rising over their 
 hanks, thwarted each others way, and inundated the 
 fair world of humanity with disorder and ruin. This 
 is conceived to be the nature of spiritual death, into 
 which man was brought by the fall, and which carried 
 natural d'jath as a conse(pience in its bosom. 
 
 Some indeed suppose, that natural death is not at ali 
 one of the consequences of sin, but that according to 
 the analogy of creation around us, man in his original 
 constitution, even while an inhabitant of Paradise, was 
 subject to death; and that natural death may be consi- 
 dered as a blessing. It is julmitted, that for the saint 
 who is ripe for heaven^ to die is i^ain: but this gain is 
 
135 
 
 believed not to result from the nature of death; but from 
 the conquest which the believer through the Author of 
 his salvation, obtains over this stern devourer. But if 
 death be in itself a blessing, why is it employed in the 
 Scriptures as a figure to represent disagreeable scenes? 
 Yea^ says the Psalmist, though I walk through the val- 
 ley of the shadow of death, I ivillfear no eviUfor thou 
 art with me, and thy rod and staff, they comfort me. 
 Here the valley of the shadow of death, is generally un- 
 derstood to mean afflictions and sorrows. If death be 
 in itself really a good, why should it be employed in 
 the Scriptures, to paint the gloomy climax of the most 
 disastrous scenery? Why do they constantly allude to 
 our dissolution as a most painful and mournful event? 
 Why is death the king of terrors? It is said, that the 
 event of death, which to innocent man would have been, 
 but a delightful repose, is made terrific, because man 
 has become a sinner, and sin has given it a sting? — But 
 why then — since it conducts us beyond a boundary 
 whence no traveller returns to render an account of its 
 pains or its pleasures — why do not the Scriptures some- 
 where drop us some intimation, that death was designed 
 as one of the blessings that should attend man in his ori- 
 ginal purity? The opinion is perfectly gratuitous, with- 
 out a shadow of countenance from the Bible, which 
 how^ever represents without any qualification the wages 
 of sin to be death. It is most reasonable, that spiritual 
 death should be attended with death temporal as a con- 
 sequence. The power that controuled and harmonized 
 the principles of human nature having abandoned his 
 once wonted abode, unrestrained they encroach on 
 each other's boundaries. And not rivers overleaping 
 their native banks, and forcing their way through fertile 
 plains and populous cities; not Ocean rolling his moun- 
 tanous floods over the continents that encircle his 
 shores, or tossing his inhabitants from the deeps of his 
 bosom to dwell on parched plains and burning mountains; 
 nor earth plunging her children to become the tenants 
 of the cold and dark caves of the great deep, exhibit a 
 scene of greater confusion, than that produced by spi 
 
136 
 
 ritual death on man's constitution, — Now if the na- 
 tive tendency of disorder is dissolution, it is nothing 
 marvellous, that spiritual death produces the dissolution 
 of the body. Although the eiiects of our jnoral over 
 our physical nature, are not always obvious, yet the in- 
 ordinate operations of lawless principles are often per- 
 ceived by the diinest eye, to be the ministers of death 
 to our physical constitution. How frequently is an ex- 
 cess of love, or joy, or grief, or food, or drink, made 
 the swift messengers of our dissolution! And how much 
 more frequent still, do the operations of avarice, envy, 
 hate, and frequent rage, by slow degrees, prematurely 
 bow the human frame, plant the grey hair in the youthful 
 head; draw deep furrows on the almost beardless face; 
 and place the green sods over him that has scarcely 
 lived out half his days! But how different had man re- 
 mained the sinless inhabitant of Eden, with all his pow- 
 ers divinely controuled, so that each would glide along 
 smoothly, and peacefully in its own appropriate channel, 
 without any impediments or excesses! Then under the 
 sunsliine of his Maker's beatific presence, his soul was 
 filled with light, and love; then no war of principles, no 
 tumults of conflicting passions, and no encroachment of 
 jarring propensities, em!)roiled his blood, swelled his 
 veins, or distorted his frame. And who can prove, 
 that all the health of blooming youth, and of vigorous 
 majihood, might not be as eternal as the soul, if the man 
 were completely free from sins, disruptions and disor- 
 ders? Thus in the moment when our first parents, by 
 the fall became alienated from God, they began to die 
 temporally. Their bodies then began that tendency to 
 dissolution, which continued its progress until the sen- 
 tence was accomplished: Dust thou art and unto dust 
 thou shaft return. 
 
 And as the washes of sin is death without any limita- 
 tion, exposure to the second death, to everlasting destruc 
 tion from the presence of Ood and from the glory of his 
 power, was one of the consequences which Adam incur- 
 red by his first sin, and one which he had endured, as 
 certaiiilv as he did the dissolution of the body, had not 
 
137 
 
 the Saviour been revealed in the promise, the seed of 
 of the ivonian shall bruise the serpent's head. 
 
 This may not however be considered a kind of death 
 entirely distinct from spiritual. It is rather spiritual 
 death continued and enlarged. No doubt an essential^ 
 if not the greater part of the torments of the inhabitants 
 of woe, arises from a total surrender to their depravity, 
 w^hich inhanced by their sins on earth, is still aggravated 
 more and more, by all the successive acts of rebellion 
 throughout the interminable years of their miserable 
 duration. If it be the nature of transgression to pro- 
 duce depravity of heart, and of that depravity by a kind 
 of reaction to multiply transgressions; and if men are 
 miserable in proportion to the malignity of their dispo- 
 sitions, this is sufficient to account for much of the fire 
 that shall never be quenched, and of the worm that shall 
 never die. 
 
 Such is believed to be the state into which the fall 
 brought Adam. It is proposed to enquire, 
 
 2. Into ivhat estate did the fall bring his posterity? 
 
 Into precisely the same as that in which Adam was 
 introduced by his violation of the probationary prohi- 
 bition of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. 
 As Adam for his first sin, was banished from Eden, so 
 all his descendants are born out of its sacred pales. The 
 wages of si?i is death; death has passed upon all men; 
 therefore, all have sinned. Even infants that have not 
 been guilty of any actual transgression die; but as death, 
 is the wages of sin, they must be viewed as guilty of 
 some sin, and as there is no other to w hose penalty and 
 consequences they can be liable, they must be affected 
 with that sin, which exists, not in personal commission, 
 but in nature, usually denominated original sin. Adam 
 in his fallen condition, begat a son, not in the image and 
 after the likeness of God; but in his own image, and 
 after his own likeness. As all men inherit their nature 
 from their first father, so also, they inherit the infection, 
 and the guilt of his first sin: Or in other words, they are 
 introduced into the world, with tlie same destitution of 
 
 18 
 
138 
 
 conrormity to God's image: with the same moral dark- 
 ness of mind; and with the same derangement and per- 
 version of the princ'i])les of haman nature, with which 
 Adam's whole moral man was despoiled as a consequence 
 of the fall, and are all therefore, like him disconformed 
 to the likeness of God; and like him suhject to the ra- 
 vages of natural death. They enter the world, with all 
 the j)rinciples essential to human nature as such; but 
 destitute of that moral conformity to the likeness of God, 
 which our whole nature lost in man's first transgression 
 — that adventitious principle, indispensable to subor- 
 dinate every merely human power to its proper sphere, 
 and direct it to its pro])er object. They possess still 
 the original power of loving; but are destitute of that 
 knowledge, which can discern spiritual things, and illu- 
 mine the pathway of affection to God, who ought to be 
 made the Supreme object of human love. And hence, 
 they love the creature, more than the Creator. Their 
 love is now exclusively devoted to that which delights 
 the eye, charms the ear, regales the taste, pampers 
 pride, feeds avarice, gratifies ambition, or that, in any 
 way ministers to their appetites and passions; and espe- 
 cially to that, which is the strongest, and the ruling 
 principle in their respective constitutions. They love 
 no object, because in it, they see, hear, feel, or taste, 
 the gv-iodness and the glory of their Maker; but wholly, 
 because it is subservient to the enjoyment of some infe- 
 rior principle. And as in the principle of love there is 
 a perversion, so also in the piinciple of hate. They 
 hate that which is o])posed to the lawless indulgence of 
 that passion, or appetite, which predominates in the 
 constitution of each; and especially do they hate God, 
 whose righteous nature, expressed in his holy will, erects 
 the standard which 'makes i^uch a perversion of ])rinci- 
 plcs lawless. And hence all are gone astray; they love 
 that which they should hate, and hate that which they 
 shoidd love. They call evil good and good evil; and 
 put darkness for light and light for darkness; and bitter 
 for sweet and sweet for bitter. . Thus they are like 
 Adam after the fall, spiritually dead; the certain can- 
 
^39 
 
 didates of death temporal; and except saved by faith in 
 the only Mediator between God and man, they are also 
 certainly devoted to death eternal. 
 
 Natural death prevailing over infants who never sin- 
 ned after the similitude of Adam' transgression, is 
 deemed irrefragable proof of the doctrine which sup- 
 poses all Adam's posterity representatively involved in 
 the consequences of his apostacy; confirms the testimony 
 of the Psalmist: behold I was shaped in iniquity; and 
 in sin did my mother conceive me; and accounts for the 
 fact that all men go astray as soon as they are born spea- 
 king lies. 
 
 It is however asserted by some, that the wages of sin 
 is not natural death. It is submitted to the decision of 
 the intelligent, and the candid, whether it has not al- 
 ready been made sufficiently obvious, that the Bible 
 gives not the least countenance to such an opinion. If 
 any doubt, however should remain, the following text 
 appears to be sufficiently conclusive to remove it, if it 
 be at all reasonable: For since by man came death^ by 
 7nan came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in 
 Mam all die even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 
 Here death is said to come by man, and by Adam^ upon 
 all men. And it can not possibly mean any other, but 
 natural death. It appears from the context to be pre- 
 cisely the same kind of death as that from which Christ 
 arose, when he became the first fruits of them that slept. 
 
 In this connexion the words slept^ dead^ and deaths 
 are undeniably employed in reference to the dissolution 
 of the body. The mortality of man's body, is there- 
 fore the result of our connexion with the first man. But 
 how die in Adam? In Adam as he came out of the hands 
 of his Maker, or in Adam after he had lost his original 
 conformity to his Maker's Image? — Undoubtedly in 
 Adam in his lapsed state. In the contrast Christ is ex- 
 hibited, as overcoming this death, which all die in Adam, 
 by making them alive in the morning of the resurrec- 
 tion. Now as Clirist is no where represented as un- 
 doing any blessing which belonged to man in a sinless 
 state; but on the contrary as destroying the works of the 
 
140 
 
 Devil; any other conclusion, but that he counteracts the 
 consequences of man's apostacy by Adam in the pro- 
 duction of death, by raising the dead from their natural 
 graves, is absolutely impossible. And if so death na- 
 tural as well as moral is the wages of sin; and if natural 
 death be the wages of sin, death wherever found, whe- 
 ther in adults or infants betokens the existence of sin. 
 
 The principle of this doctrine * is confirmed by obvi- 
 ous facts. From daily observation we learn, that the 
 condition of children, is often involved in the conduct 
 of parents. If parents through their own folly or ne- 
 glect, are cast upon an inhospitable and dreary island, 
 their children born there become partakers in their so- 
 litude and their sufferings. If a parent through his 
 vices or his indolence squander his paternal inheritance, 
 his children with himself, share the inconveniences of 
 poverty. 
 
 Again the conduct of parents often entail on their 
 children physical evils. The vices of a parent produce 
 disease in his own constitution. The contamination is 
 conveyed from father to son for successive generations. 
 How often do we find families afflicted with hereditary 
 diseases! The descendants of some families are the sub- 
 jects of early blindness; others of consumption; and o 
 thers again of mental derangement. 
 
 The conduct of parents often involve their ofispring 
 in moral evils. All see, and admit, the deleterious in- 
 fluence produced by the example of a wicked parent. 
 Children nurtured and reared in idleness and irreligion, 
 generally live and die as they were educated. 
 
 These are facts, which demonstrate the representative 
 influence of the conduct of parents over the condition 
 of children. 
 
 But it is objected, that this doctrine impugns the justice 
 of God. If however it be taught in the Scriptures, and 
 supported by imdeniable facts, it is folly for mortals who 
 know almost nothing, to pronounce it unjust. It is sup- 
 posed to be unjust, that God should constitute Adam a 
 representative, in whose choice and conduct the moral 
 and phyMcal destiny of all th^. unborn millions of his pos- 
 
141 
 
 terity, should be involved, without our knowledge and 
 without our choice. 
 
 From the positions implied in this objection, it can be 
 fairly demonstrated, that the great principle of repre- 
 sentation, the performance of the will of the represented, 
 is maintained. 
 
 In denying that all men were represented by Adam, 
 this objection virtually denies, that their condition is in 
 the least affected by his fall. The first proposition im- 
 plies the second. If the condition of mankind be in the 
 least degree affected by the first human transgression, 
 Adam must have been constituted our representative to 
 the extent, in which our condition is affected; be that 
 more or less. Call it what you please, Constitiitinn or 
 Representation the principle is the same. And if in the 
 extent for which we contend, it be unjust, narrow down its 
 application as much as you can, still whatever remains of 
 it will remain unjust. You lessen its magnitude, but do 
 not alter its nature. If therefore, it be unjust in God as 
 the objection supposes, to constitute Adam our repre- 
 sentative, so far, that his violation of the command, thou 
 shalt not eat, should involve us in both the guilt and the 
 suffering oi his sin, it was surely no less unjust, to con- 
 stitute such a connexion between us and him, that his 
 disobedience, should involve us in the suffering of his sin 
 without any guilt; which, if the supposition, that we are 
 not representatively guilty, contained in the objection, 
 be true, is the fact with every actless infant that agoni- 
 zes in disease, and wriths in death. Hence if God did 
 not place Adam as a representative, so that our innocence 
 or our guilt, as vvell as our happiness, or our misery, 
 should be involved in his obedience, or his transgression, 
 then God's constituted connexion between the deed of 
 Adam and the condition of his children, was such, that 
 his first sin entailed misery on the innocent; a monstrous 
 conclusion! and is at least as unjust, as to make his con- 
 duct represent our guilt as well as our misery . Conse- 
 quently, all mankind by the representative transgression 
 of Adam, became guilty as well as miserable — the prin- 
 ciple for which we contend — or, the condition of Adam's 
 
142 
 
 children, is not in the least injured by this fall. There 
 is no principle for middle ground. Of course an objec- 
 tor argues upon no principle, or he assumes the position, 
 that ail mankind are born into the world as sinless as was 
 Adam when lie fell from the hands of his Maker. Now 
 if every son and daughter of Adam, that has ever come 
 into the w^orld, and lived to years of moral agency, has 
 sinned, as is proved to be the fact from such texts as 
 declare, that he thatsaithhe hath no sin, is a liar and, the 
 truth is not in him; then every son and daughter of 
 Adam, who arrives at years of moral agency, performs 
 in person the deed of the first father, in disobeying God. 
 Then if all tlie posterity of Adam, had been present 
 when he took the fruit, they would all have followed 
 his example; and then his taking the fruit, was just the 
 thing which they would have approved; and is just the 
 thing that by their present conduct, they actually do 
 aplrrove, Consecpienrly, if tliey had appointed Adam as 
 tiieir representative, and instructed him how to act in 
 that capacity, they would have directed him to the very 
 choice which he made. Where then is the injustice of 
 constituting Adam a representative for his posterity, if he 
 have actually made the very choice which they ^11 ratify? 
 If a minister plenipotentiary sent by our government 
 to Great Britain, represent in a treaty the wishes of a 
 majority of the citizens of the United States, there 
 could be no reasonable complaint of the injustice of his 
 legation; much less, if he represented every individual 
 so well, that if all had been present, they would ratify 
 the treaty. Thus if all the children of Adam enter life 
 as pure as angels — the position assumed by the objec- 
 tion — their own choice proves that the doctrine which 
 supposes Adam as a representative, involves nothing tliat 
 can be legitimately construed, to impugn the justice of 
 such a constitution. But the objection comprehends in 
 itself, tlie materials of its own destruction. It suppo- 
 ses men to be born sinless: it can not but admit that in- 
 fants who have by no deed violated their Maker's law, 
 endure sickness, pain, and death; and thiis by implicar 
 tion. it charges God with the cruelty of inflicting pain 
 
143 
 
 and death upon the innocent, and opposes the revealed 
 truth, that he does not afflict willingly or grieve the 
 children of men. 
 
 But the constitution which made Adam the represen- 
 tative of his posterity? so far from being unjust and un- 
 merciful as the objection supposes, may be shown to be 
 directly the contrary. 
 
 Facts prove, that God designed to bring the human 
 race into the world in a state of infancy and weakness, 
 in their corporal, mental, and moral powers. Now if 
 each one of these had been permitted to stand for him- 
 self so that his first act should involve his future moral 
 condition, there would have been more probability that 
 every one would fall if standing thus for himself, than 
 if he were represented by Adam. He would be exposed 
 to temptation in the years of childhood and weakness, 
 when he might be most easily overcome, wdiilst on the 
 contrary, Adam was introduced into the world, in the 
 bloom of bodily, mental, and moral vigor, and there- 
 fore, better qualified to resist temptation and maintain 
 his moral standing, than any of his infant and youthful 
 children could ever be. Besides, being the represen- 
 tative of all his posterity, he had all the inducements, 
 that could be drawn from the happiness, or the misery, 
 of unborn millions to influence him to stand to his recti- 
 tude. 
 
 Perhaps to this however it may be objected, that men 
 in childhood and early youth, are not moral agents; and 
 not accountable; and that the conduct, which affects 
 their moral condition, belongs to a period of life, in 
 which every individual is as mature in all the powers, 
 both of mind and body, as Adam was when he was crea- 
 ted. This supposition is not admitted as a fact. But 
 suppose it to be so: and still every individual of Adaift's 
 children, during the season of minority, is now under the 
 influence of surrounding example, so that habits are for- 
 med in childhood and youth, which exert a most mischie- 
 vous influence over the morals of more advanced life; so 
 that make the years of accountability when you please, 
 still his circumstances for standing in rectitude are far 
 
144 
 
 inferior to those oi* Adain, who was exempt from the 
 con tarn illation of pernicions example, and all the bias of 
 early contracted evil habits. There was therefore more 
 probability, that the whole family of mankind would be 
 established in a state of felicity by making Adam a rep- 
 resentative by ^^ hose conduct they would either stand or 
 fall, than if every man's moral destiny had been suspen- 
 ded on his own personal probation. This dispensation 
 therefore instead of being unjust and cruel is the most e- 
 quitable, and the most merciful. 
 
 It is imagined by some, that this doctrine makes God 
 the author of sin. If the human race are all introduced 
 into existence as sinners, say the objectors, does not this 
 doctrine suppose that God made them such as they are? 
 
 In answer to this objection, it may be remarked in the 
 first place, that the argument bears equally against all 
 denominations of Christians, who believe that men are 
 born sinners, whether they suppose them to be represen- 
 ted by Adam or not: and in the second place we are not 
 to consider original sin to exist in the implanting of some 
 wicked principle by the hand of God. The Creator 
 now, and ever since the fall, brings man into the world 
 possessing as Adam before his first sin, all the essential 
 principles of human nature, which he himself at first pro- 
 nounced very good, Man's body and soul, the princi- 
 ples of his animality, his intellectual powers, his moral 
 sense, his love and his hate, all the passions of his mind, 
 are in themselves essential principles of the human con- 
 8titution; and are therefore, in themselves still very good. 
 It is only the misapplication of them, the perversion of 
 them to forbidden objects, that is WTong. If therefore, 
 these principles are in themselves good, the creation of 
 them can not be justly denominated the production of e- 
 vil, and God their Maimer can not be charged in this 
 work with the Authorship of evil. The perversion of 
 these good things is the creature's act and not God's. 
 All that in man, is wanting is the inhabitation and the 
 illuniinating,and controuling influences of the Holy Spi- 
 rit, producing that advent it ions principle, conformity 
 to God's image, which man lost by the fall. 
 
145 
 
 Original sin therefore, consists not in any corrupt 
 principles implanted, nor in the withholding of any prin- 
 ciple, which originally made any essential part of man's 
 constitution; but simply in the absence of that conformi- 
 ty to God's image, which was borne away on the wings 
 of the Holy Spirit when for man's first sin he forsook 
 Paradise. According to the laws which God has insti- 
 tuted for regulating the arrangement of the particles 
 which successively enter into the composition of the hu- 
 man body, where an incision is made in the flesh; it is 
 followed by a scar. And as these laws are but the va- 
 ried operations of Deity, it is his power that arranges 
 the particles so that the scar appears as a consequence 
 of the incision. Suppose God should command a man 
 to abstain from wounding his own flesh, and should on 
 the one hand, promise him if he obeyed, that his body 
 should remain free from scars, and on the other, warn 
 him that if he did not, they should be inflicted on him 
 as a penalty for his disobedience; but the man should 
 however in direct violation of his Maker's prohibition;, 
 inflict on his own body a deep and dreadful wound, so 
 that he should become much deformed, and injured by a 
 scar; would not the man himself and not Gocl^ be the 
 author of his deformity? So Adam representing human 
 nature, in disinheriting the Holy Spirit from his soul, 
 by his abominable sin, inflicted on human nature a wound 
 which is followed by the scar of original sin; and is not 
 \\\\md.\\ nature represented by Adam then the proper au- 
 thor of this scar? 
 
 And thus in the language of our Confession of Faith, 
 *^The covenant being made with Adam not only for him- 
 self, but for his posterity; all mankind descending from 
 him by ordinary generation, sinned in him, and fell with 
 him, in his first transgression." 
 
 The moral turpitude of this lapsed condition of human 
 nature, consists in disconformity to that state to which 
 the nature of Deity expressed by his law, requires con- 
 formity; and not in the principles by which it was pro- 
 duced, gr in other, and fewer words: in the nature of 
 
 19 
 
146 
 
 the thing itseJJ) and not in its cause. Not in the prin- 
 pies employed in its production; for they are good; but 
 in the misapplication of those principles. This misap- 
 plication takes its rise in the Jinite understandin:^', and 
 natural liberty of man; or as it would be impossible for a 
 holy being of infinite knowledge to err in choice, it 
 would be more accurate to say, it results wholly from 
 the finite nature of a creature' s understanding. 
 
 But altliough man is shapen in iniquity and conceived 
 in sin, it is not a legitimate consequence, that those who 
 die in a state of inl^mcy are lost. The Saviour's blood 
 which when applied by the Holy Spirit to tl-e soul of an 
 adult cleanses from all sin, will also when applied by the 
 same power to the heart of an inftmt, be attended with 
 the same purifying efhcacy. 
 
 Sinner, dost thou complain of thy representation by 
 Adam? — Behold Christ a better representative! Come to 
 him, and whosoever cometh unto him, he v. ill in no wise 
 cast out. He is ready to send his regenerating Spirit 
 to dissolve, by his heavenly iniluence, thy connexion 
 with the first man, and to unite thee by a living faith to 
 the second, the Lord from heaven. It is now as fairly 
 put to thy choice, whether thou wilt break off thy rela- 
 tion to Adam, and obtain a restoration of the conformity 
 to the divine image, which he lost by the fall, as it was 
 put to his, whether or not, he would eat the forbidden 
 fruit, and forfeit that conformity by his disobedience. 
 Murmer not at his representative act, wiienthouin thine 
 own person, confinnest his transgression by thine own 
 choice. Complain not at his folly in losing his original 
 conformity to the Maker's image, when thou thyself re- 
 fusest its restoration. 
 
 For, its being called the tree of knowledge of good, 
 intimated, that man, if from a T)rinciple of love, he o- 
 bcyed this prol)ationary prece]>t, should come to the 
 knowledge, sense, aiul fru.ition of that good which is tru- 
 ly^ and excellently so, and the full knowledge of which, 
 
147 
 
 is only obtainable by sense and enjoyment. On the o- 
 ther hand when called the tree of hnovAedge of evil, 
 thereby it signified thatman^if found disobedient^ should 
 be doomed to the greatest calamity- the exceeding evil, 
 and wretchedness he should at last know by experience 
 — Witshis on the Covenants. 
 
 The most probable opinion of the tree of life^ is that it 
 was given' to man to enjoy as a symbol of that eternal life 
 which should be his^ on his continued obedience to the 
 probationary precept; and that he was permitted to eat 
 of it so long as he remained innocent; for it was among 
 the trees of the garden over which he at the first had 
 full privilege. But so soon as man had violated the con- 
 dition, he forfeited life, and was no longer permitted to 
 partake of this symbol. If God then had permitted Adam 
 to use it as a symbol of eternal life, it would have been an 
 acknovvledgcment of his right to that which he had for- 
 feited, the acknowledgement of a falsehood for a truth. 
 And hence says God, £.nd noiv lest he put forth his hand 
 and take also of the tree of life ^ and eat ^ arid live forever 
 (according to the condition of this symbol); therefore the 
 Lord God sent liim forth from the garden of Eden, 
 
 JIPPE.YDIX, 
 
 To Joseph Lybrand, Samuel Merwin, Samuel Doughty, 
 John Lednum^ Elisha Andrews, Manning Force, The- 
 mas F. Sargent, Thomas Miller, W. W. Wallace, 
 and Thomas Dunn, committee of publication; and 
 John Clarke Editor of the Religious Messenger. 
 From your ^^'Keligious Messenger of the Philadelphia 
 Conference^' of the 15th inst. it appears, that the story 
 of the oyster-man related in the appendix of Christian 
 Preacher No. 4, p. 93, has given mortal offence. You 
 recognize him as a Methodist preacher, call him an able 
 m^nisttlVV^W — and say, that he was instrumental in 
 bringing manv from sin to holiness; and to cap the cli- 
 max," admit the anecdote to be materially true!!! If we 
 could oBiV be convinced that all these contradictions 
 
148 
 
 are lacts, wc should be prepared to believe^ that the age 
 of miracles has not yet passed away. But no specimen 
 of your theological acumtn, or of your veracity, given 
 in the strictures on the Christian Preacher^ is believ ed to 
 impose any obligation to suppose, either, that you are 
 qualified to judge of the true character of Scriptural 
 holiness, or, that if you were, your assertions are to be 
 accredited without great qualifications. It* is not in- 
 deed to the honor of Methodism, that an Editorial 
 faculty representing the Conference of Philadelphia, 
 should stand before the public in such a predicament; 
 but for the facts, your own strictures, and the Appen- 
 dixes of Christian Preacher Nos. 4 and 5, are re- 
 ferred to as proof. From the specimens there given of 
 your veracity, we consider ourselves perfectly at liberty 
 to believe as few of your assertions as we please. The 
 Apostle Paul informs us, that a Christian minister ought 
 to be ^^apt to teach" [didaktikon]; ^'one capable of tea- 
 ching,*' says Dr. Adam Clarke. Is a public bawier, who 
 makes God an r>?/.9/frman, apt to teach any thing but non- 
 sense? Where has God promised to set the seal of the 
 Spirit to any thing but the truth? If such adeclaimermake 
 converts at all, it must be only from 7iien to oyster -men,. 
 and not from sin to holiwss. Yet under the authority 
 of the Philadelphia Conference, you pronounce such a 
 man, an able preacherW If such be an able Methodist 
 preacher, it might be a matter of curiosity to know the 
 dimensions of a moderate one. 
 
 At a time, when it was fashionable to wear the hair col- 
 lected in an elevation on the summit of the head, a cer- 
 tain minister is said to have selected froni the following 
 passage: Let him u:bo is on the house top not come 
 don^n, these words: Top not come down; and deduced 
 from them a doctrine levelled against to]) knots, the then 
 fashionable mode of wearing the hair. This man accor- 
 ding to your standard may have been an able minister!! 
 
 A gcntJeman descending one of our Western rivers, was detained 
 «evcral days in a neiglibourliood where he spent the Sabbath. Reing 
 told, that a r^^lebrated orator wasex})ected to preach that daj^ he de- 
 termined to go, though the distance was considerable, to become one 
 
149 
 
 «f his hearers. He however was so unfortunate, as not to arrive at 
 the place of meeting until after tne service had sometime commenced. 
 He found the congregation collected in a barn, and all in a state of 
 upr »ar. Some were lying down, some jumping, and others shou- 
 ting; and although he heard the preacher's voice, elevated aboveall the 
 other noise, he was unable on entv:ring the door, to understand the 
 subject on which he apjieared to speak with great fluency and pathos. 
 He drew nearer and nearer the stand on which the Reverend gentleman 
 was located; but was unable to catch the thread ot his discourse, un- 
 til he came almost within an arm's reach of the orator; and then by 
 a close application of his auditory powers, he found, that it consisted 
 in a constant repetition of these words, now in a higher, and agam ia. 
 a lower tone of voice, varymg as he supposed the state oi his congre- 
 gation required: *^T/ie Devil's a liar! The DeviVs a liar! The De-irs 
 a liar! Although the words are true in themselves, and the perfor- 
 mance was less harmful, than an attempt to rtfuie doctrines nut undtr- 
 stood by a speaker, and than those xvretcfied atiacks which "wefrKiUentlj 
 loitness, made in the pulpit on other denonri nations; yet the gentlemen 
 soon hecame weary in hearing so tedious repetition of words, which 
 he always believed were true. All on a sudden some of the hearers 
 began to climb up the sides of the barn, and cried out, that they 
 would go up to meet the Saviour, and get religion, 1 he speaker 
 then elevated h*is key of vociferation, and immediately, a black man, 
 who had been sitting on a long pole, placed ovei head, locking his 
 legs around it, suspended himself over the congregation v;ith his head 
 downw?ards, and clapping his hands, began to vociferate, "glory! 
 glory! glory!" The gentlemen's conscience beginning to accuse him 
 of breaking the Sabbath by wasting its sacred hours in such unmea- 
 ning tumult, he withdrew with all possible expedition to his lodgings. 
 
 When his landlord returned, he enquired concerning the results of 
 the exercises, and was told, that a great many were converttd to day; 
 and, that this minister converted people wherever ht went!!! 
 
 How much this landlord's ideas ot an able ministry, and the con- 
 version of multitudes from sin to holiness, differ from yours it is unne- 
 cessary to enquire. But certainly, this man's claims to ability , are 
 at least equal to those of the oysttrrnan; and there is sufficient reason 
 to believe, that the converts made by the one, are as enlightened and 
 as pious, as those made by the other, if the Conference of Philadel- 
 phia are to betaken as a true represensative of your society generally, 
 in the United States; and if, in their estimation, such be able minis- 
 ters; and such be conversions from sin to holiness; then there is ohvi- 
 ously a distinction between an able Methodist mihisicr, and an abl- 
 Christian minister, and between conversions to Methodism and conver- 
 sions to the Lord Jesus Christ. Jfthis be the standard of Methodist 
 conversions, and ministerial ability; then the fact that at least, one 
 million of the inhabitants of the United States are included in the au- 
 diences of your ministry on every Sabbath day, can be regarded as 
 little less, than a calamity to the spiritual interests of the church. 
 
150 
 
 It entered not into the original design of the Christian Preacher to 
 make attack:s on any deno ninations of Christians; but to be confined 
 exclusively to the discussion of principles; the work is in its nature .uid 
 tendency pacific: it was not imagined that the rej)resentatives of any 
 ecclesiastical body, would assail it with the weapons of isnoratice.y 
 di.shigenHih/,d.nA falsehood. In this hovvever rheie was a mistake, 
 which the attacks in your Religious Messenger have demonstrated. 
 Assailants of such a character, have certainly no claim to forbearance, 
 when the cause of truth is concerned. Indeed so far otherwise is the 
 fact, that from a mere love of peace, to permit the fair empire of truth 
 to be over run, and trampled under foot by such ruthless, and savage 
 •invaders, when by d proper resistance they might be repelled, would 
 be disloyalty to the King of Kings. 
 
 The story of ihe oysierman was introduced not to assail any intelligent 
 ^nd pious Methodist; but as a stroke at the principle, wherever found, which 
 surrenders the pulpit and the press into the hands of theological ignorance 
 awA illiteracy. It is true the operations of the principle had not only been seen, 
 but felt, in the attack made in your scrictures, not only upon the Christian 
 Preacher, but also on t.\\t person of the Editor — An attack of such a charac- 
 ter, as would never have been made hy gentlemen of intelligence and lear- 
 ning; much less by Christian gen lemen of that discription. Under these 
 circumstances, the Committee and the Conference which they represented, 
 were allowed, it is true, to coine in for a full share of the oysterman. For 
 a stroke at such a princij)le no apology need be made. It, is below argu- 
 ment; and 'S therefore, fair game for any other lawful mode of attack. 
 
 In your paper you give what you call a Roland for an Oliver. Of this we 
 utter not a word of coinplaint. In our defence we attacked the principle of 
 placing the ministry of reconciliation, and the defence of sound doctrine, 
 in the hands of ignorance. Njw if there be any principle in the Presbyte- 
 rian church prejudicial to the interests of spiritual, and intelligent Christi- 
 anity, which is below argument, satirize it in welcome. Down with it if 
 >ou can But do yourselves and us, the justice of understanding our princi- 
 ples, and practices, before you commence; and then, you will save yourselves 
 the sjn and the shatne of publishing falsehood, and us the trouble o{ expo- 
 . 5'ngit. 
 
 The amount of your Roland is this; Two ministers, a Mr. C. a Methodist 
 anJ a Mr. B a Presbyterian, met with a view of bringing to the test, each 
 others preaching talents. According to the conditions of this theological 
 duel, the combatants were to rise, and preach in proviptii on whatever text 
 each v/ould give the other. The Presbyterian gave the Methodist the fol- 
 lowing: And B daxmrosc up in the viorning and saddled his Ass. Mr. C. the 
 Mi'thodist arose in the pulpit, and after a few introductory remarks, divided 
 his subjects as fo lows: I. Balaam; II The saddle; III. The As«:, 
 
 In the course of the sermon, Balaam was made to represent certain priests 
 (Prc<^.bvterian mmisters of course), wiio hunt after riches and honors; the 
 saddle their salaries; and the Ass. their peoj)le. The preacher ai:er ha- 
 ving finished his discourse, sat down and as the story is, gave the I'rcsbyte- 
 rian a text on which he was unable to speak at all, and ever after deserted 
 the ])i\lpit. 
 
 Whether the story be true or false, no time will be spent to enquire. As 
 .locile Presbyteri-ins we will jnsf examine whellicr this sermon be more ap- 
 plicable to ourselves than to Methodists. 
 
 / ll^itb regard tn Balaarn.t, 'u.'hn divine for money. Are there more in- 
 ducements in the Prenbytm-ian church, tlian in the Methodist Society, to di... 
 vine for money? Here are. rv.'o young mechanic,; one professes to be a Pros, 
 byterian and the other a Methodist. They become v/eary of tkoir trades. 
 
•151 
 
 and desirous of seme other einploynnent; haveequal and respectable natural 
 talents; both having a standing in the visible church— the form of godliness, 
 but equally destitute of its power. They would be preachers because they 
 dislike labour and covet the distinction. 
 
 The Methodist without any expense, and with almost no study, can be a 
 public speaker in a few weeks, and a preacher in a few months. 
 
 But the Presbyterian must spend, from five to eight years in preparation' 
 for the work; and in his su])p()rt during this long interval of study and 
 preparation, he must spend his own money if he have any; and it he 
 have none, he must receive assistance from the libera! and the pious, orfinal- 
 1} , he must borrow mor.ey if he can find any one to loan him, and enter the 
 ministry after the expiration of five or eight years several hundred dollars in 
 debt. Now if the salary, the saddle, be as good in the Methodist Society as 
 in the Presbyterian church, there is a probabilty of ten to one, that the Me- 
 thodist enters and that the Presbyterian does not, 
 
 II 7he saddle The stated salary of a Methodist preacher is one hundred 
 dollars a \ear; his wife, if he have one, has the same. A house, heavy fur- 
 niture, firewood, table provisions, and in some cases servants, are furnished, 
 or are required to be furnished by the circuit or the church where he labours. 
 On a moderate calculation these provisions for a preacher and his wife will 
 on an average amount to two hundred d( liars more Necessaries are also 
 furnished for keeping his hcrse, equal probably to sixty dollars a year; and 
 to this suna must be added other contingent expenses, such as supplying a 
 horse in case of one being lost, travelling fare, horseshoeing, and such like, 
 amounting probably to forty dollais more. 
 
 The estimate of a Methodist preacher's salary, is something like this: 
 In money for himself and wife 200 
 
 House and provisions, &,c. &c. &c, 200 
 
 Horsekeeping 60 
 
 Contingencies 40 
 
 Total S500* 
 
 If some of the peachers have no wives, others having children receive an 
 addiricnal allowance for them; so that g5C0 a year may be reckoned the 
 med'um salary for each minister 
 
 If one-fiftieth of the Presbyterian ministers residing in cities, receive a sala- 
 ry of ^1800 or g2C00, one half of the whole number in country congrega- 
 tions, do not receive g400; so that any number of Methodist ministers re- 
 ceive annually as much salary as the same number of Presbyterian ministers, 
 
 But in addition to this, the Meihodist preacher has his salary, and the al- 
 lowance for his family continued, in case he becomes superannuated, or 
 from any other cause, unable to preach. If he die, and leave a widow and 
 children, their salary is still paid. On the other hand, if a Presbyterian mi- 
 nister, through age or infirmity, become unable to perform the duties of a 
 pastor, he receives nothing from the church to support and cheer him in the 
 years of infirmity and age; and if he die and leave a widow, and orphans 
 they have no claims on the church for their support. Thus it appears, that 
 the saddle in the Methodist Society, is if any thing, the better of the two. 
 But can a Balaam who would divine for money find an Ms in the Metho- 
 dist Society as readily as in the Presbyterian Church? 
 
 /// Tie Ass is to be considered. We beg the people's pardon for intro- 
 ducing them under so unseemly a figure; but the subject is divided oflf for us 
 by the Philadelphia Conference. 
 
 In the Presbyterian church no minister has a right to enter the pulpit in 
 any congregation, but by the choice of the people. If he become the pastor 
 of a congregation, it must be because the people choose him as such. If he 
 receive a salary, be it great or small, it is because the ^to^W choose to make 
 It. just what it is. 
 
 'See the note at the end. 
 
15^ 
 
 But ill the Methodist Society, the people eiijoy no such privileges. The 
 Methodist Itineranicy are a complete Aristocracy. Thty choose the saddle 
 theni'^elves. They stiplate their own salaries. From a book entitled «'The 
 doctrines and discipline of ihe Methodist Episcopal Church in Am-.-rica," \vc 
 leitrn that as late as Aniio Domini 1812, the salary of each minister was 
 only §80; but now we find it one hundred. And on the same principle as the 
 Society gains strength and inHuence, we may expect lo see tiicm enlarge 
 their own salaries by acts of conference By the j)nnciples Ujjon which the 
 Society is coiisatu-ed the universal sway of Mejihodism, would terminate in 
 universal clerical domination and tyranny. The jiower, by the ver) consti- 
 tution ot the Society, resides totally in the hands of thettergy; the universal 
 sway of Methodism, would afford an opportunity, and present a temptation 
 for the exercise of that power; and we can not say, that we liave discovered 
 any thing in the Methodist clergy more, than in others, that would elevate 
 tliem above the influence of such a temptation. Methodist laymen have \\u 
 more to say in acts of ecclesiastacal legislation, than the dead in the grave. 
 We know not whether thev may enter the door of a confireace house, witii- 
 out a special act of grace. A Methodist congregation, or curcuit, possess no 
 ecclesiastical right to say, who shall be their minister. The mighty hand of 
 the Bishop, mounts on them whomsoverhe will, and pleaded or displeased 
 they must be his Ass for one year; and wh»Tn that year has terminated, he 
 chooses for them another rider with whom they may be just as little jileased 
 as with the first. If any people in this tree c )uatry be pnest ridden, the 
 Methodists most of all 
 
 Thus whilst a young Presbyterian Balaam would encounter great difficul- 
 ties in preparing for the ministry, with nothing before him better, than a 
 perhaps to buoy uj) his hopes of finding a peo])le, that will chouse to give him 
 a saddle and a pleasant ride, the young Methodist Balaam, with the same 
 shoes in which he walked from his shop, can walk into the Conference, and 
 the next day, be nv^unted by the Bishop on a curcuit. We are now willing 
 that the public should judge, where there are/jr.y/'a^/y the most Balaams; and 
 also, what congregations, whether Prebbyterian or Methodist, are most hke 
 li«Alaam*s beast. 
 
 From the signs of the times al)Out Baltimore, it would seem that the ani- 
 mal, that has for many years jigged on ver) quietly under the saddle and the 
 rider, has at last become restiif; and will probably soon kick up under the 
 spur; and if so, there is some ap[)rehension that Mie Bishoi)5, the Balaams, 
 and the oystermen, as well as the top hiots, must all come down 
 
 If the peoj)le should rise, assert their rights, and claim the reasonable pri- 
 vilege of choosing their own pastors, there would probably be a great accession 
 to the secular professions and among athers p',>ssibiy to the oyst'^r trade. 
 
 If this view of the matter be just, vou attempt at a Fola?id, very much re- 
 sembles the attempt of a certain well meaning gentleman to give a saluta- 
 tion ot civility in Latin. Some wag of a school boy told him, that 
 ntultus sum [i am a fool] in Latin, meant "good morning'* Some time 
 afterwards, on meeting a professional man, who had the re|)Utation of pos- 
 sessing high classical attainments, he thus accosted him: stultus sum. Doc- 
 tor. "Nothing new," rc[)lied the Doctor •'! always supposed you to be a lool.'* 
 Your Roland in plain English, is but a further dtvelopment of ignorance. 
 
 NOTE. 
 
 Where a minister's salary is made out in a kind of hidden ivay, in house 
 rent, table tare, horse feed, fuel, Ike &.c. ^c articles whose qualities and i)ri- 
 ces vary so much in different places and at different times, it is difficult for 
 one unacquaimtd with the secret rules of the Society, to arrive at a literally 
 exact estimate of the amount. ^Ve aim at nothing but truth . There is in 
 the calculation no intenticnal error. If however any mistake be detcted on 
 beiag authenuckly inforn-icd we will ch?erful!v correct it. 
 
THE CHRISTIAN PREACHER. 
 
 Vol. 1. DECEMBER, 1827. N°. 7, 
 
 THE FALL OF MAJV. 
 
 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and 
 that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one 
 wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her 
 husband with her, and be did eat. — Gen. iii. 6". 
 
 In the examination of this subject it was proposed, to 
 consider the following question as the 
 
 ///. Did God foreknoii) and decree the fall of man? 
 
 Without passing any censure on those who doubt, or 
 deny this doctrine, let us appeal to the law and the tes- 
 timony. 
 
 1. Did God foreknow the fall of man? 
 
 Now if we can prove that the First Cause has created 
 a single individual foreknowing, that his existence would 
 be attended with sin, then he may create a greater num- 
 ber, and may have created our first parents foreknow- 
 ing the event of their fall. A single instance therefore 
 demolishes the principle which we oppose. 
 
 By the prophet Daniel, God foretells, that after three 
 score and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off. It is ge- 
 nerally admitted, that this prophecy refers to the cruci- 
 fixion of the Saviour, and that it predicts the precise 
 time of its accomplishment. This crucifixion, and the 
 time of its occurrence, God must have foreknown, or he 
 fiould not, and would not have uttered such a prophe- 
 cy. This public murder of him who was holy, harm- 
 less, undefiled, and separate from sinners, is by all ac- 
 knowledged to be a sin; God therefore, foreknew the ve- 
 ry hour on which an exceedingly great sin would be 
 committed. But as this could not be done without a- 
 gents, he foreknew that particular men would at this ve- 
 ry time be disposed to combine in its perpetration. 
 When he proclaimed this prophecy, he foreknew, that 
 Judas would betray him, Pontius Pilate with the Gentiles, 
 and the people of Israel, would take counsel against the 
 Lord of glory, the soldiers part his raiment^ cast lots 
 
154 
 
 lor his vesture, and pierce his side with a spear; and fi- 
 nally, that all would unite for the commission of a deed 
 so atrocious, that at its perpetration the guilty earth should 
 tremble, and the insulted heavens veil their glories in 
 the mantle of night. The conduct of Judas, is foretold 
 in the forty-first Psalm; Yea mine own familiar friend 
 in whom I trusted^ which did eat of my bread, hath lif- 
 ted up his heel against me. Is its application to Judas 
 doubted? Hear its design in the language of him who spoke 
 as never man spake: / speak not of you all; I know whom, 
 Ihave chose?i; but that the scripture may hefulfilled: Ht 
 that eateth bread with me, hath lifted up his heel against 
 me. The actions of the people, and of Pilate were also 
 predicted in the second Psalm: fVhy do the heathen rage, 
 and the people imagine a vain thing? the kings of the 
 earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel togeth- 
 er against the Lord and against his anointed. If it 
 should be argued, that this language does not apply to 
 the crucifixion of our Lord, the refutation is found in the 
 fourth chapter of the acts of the Apostles, in the inspi- 
 red language of Peter and John: ^'Who by the mouth 
 of thy servant David, hast said, Why did the heathen 
 rage and the people imagine vain things? The kings of 
 the earth stood up and the rulers were gathered togeth- 
 er against the Lord and against his Christ. For of a 
 truth against thy holy child Jesus whom thou hast anoin- 
 ted, both Herod and Pontius Pilate with the Gentiles 
 and the people of Israel were gathered together to do 
 whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before 
 to be done.'' 
 
 The division of Christ's raiment by lot among the sol- 
 diery, as also the wound inflicted on his body by the 
 speai', are distinctly foretold. In the twenty-second 
 Psalm it is said. They part my garments among theniy 
 and cast lots upon my vesture: and in the twelfth chap- 
 ter of Zechariah, they shall look on me ivhom they 
 have pierced. If the reference of these predictions to 
 the Saviour s sufferings be disputed the fact will be pla- 
 ced beyond all doubt by an a])pcal to the testimony of 
 the Apostle John: "They said among themselves let us 
 
155 
 
 not rend it; but cast lots for it whose it shall be, that the 
 scripture might be fulfilled which saith: They parted 
 my raiment among them, and for my vesture did they 
 cast lots'' — ^^ And again another scripture saith, They 
 shall look on him whom they pierced/' Now all these 
 deeds were foretold before Judas, Pilate, the people of 
 Israel, and the soldiers concerned in the crucifixion, 
 were born. Therefore, when God created Judas, he 
 foreknew that he wovild betray the Saviour, when he 
 formed Pilate that he would deliver him to be scourged 
 and crucified, and when he made the people of Israel 
 and the soldiers, that they would rage around, part his 
 raiment by lots, and pierce his side with a spear. And 
 if he created these men foreknowing, that the event of 
 their existence would be attended with the commission 
 of so horrible a sin, he may also have created our first 
 parents foreknowing, that eating the forbidden fruit 
 would be the certain consequence of their creation. 
 
 Again it is taught in the Scriptures, that, known un- 
 to God are all his works from the beginning* of the 
 world. This text implies not only his foreknowledge 
 of the existence of the creatures comprehended in his 
 works, but also of all their actions. There are certain 
 of God's works connected with the works of his crea- 
 tures as antecedents and consequences and the reverse. 
 If from eternity he foreknew that he would create the 
 human body of the Saviour as a consequence; he must al- 
 so coeternally have foreknown, that as an antecedent , 
 man would fall, and that an incarnate divine Redeemer 
 would be needed for his recovery. To suppose that 
 God would determine the incarnation of his only begot- 
 ten and well beloved Son without foreknowing some end 
 to be accomplished by this act of humiliation, is an im- 
 plied denial of his Infinite Wisdom. How could he fore- 
 know that he would act wisely without coevally fore- 
 knowing, that he would act in reference to some end? 
 And how could he foreknow, that in creating the hu- 
 man body of the Saviour, he would act in reference to 
 
 •The original is ap'aionoe literally from eternity. 
 
156 
 
 some end, unless he foreknew, that man would fall, and 
 an incarnate Saviour be needed? Eating the forbidden 
 fruit, the creature's luork^ as well as the creation of the 
 Saviour's human body, his own worky God therefore e- 
 ternally foreknew. 
 
 And finally, if it be conceded, that God eternally fore- 
 knew all his works, as the text literally teaches, then a- 
 mong other things he foreknew that he would pronounce 
 upon our first parents the sentence. Dust thou art and 
 unto dust thou shalt return; ^m^ if so, he also foreknew, 
 that our first parents would sin so as to deserve such a 
 curse. To determine to curse them without foreknow- 
 ing a just cause for the execration, would have been to 
 exercise cruelty as well as folly. 
 
 But suppose, it should be granted that when God made 
 Adam, he was totally ignorant of his future transgression; 
 what is gained? Is God any less the author of sin, or man 
 any more accountable? 
 
 It is denied that God's foreknowledge of Adam's sin, 
 can by any logical inference imply, either the one or the 
 other; but if the contrary were true, no difliculty is re- 
 moved by a denial of the divine prescience. If we sup- 
 pose that Deity when he made Adam, was ignorant of 
 the event of his transgression, still he was as much A- 
 dam's Maker as he would have been, had he foreknown 
 that event; and he was as much the author of his liabili- 
 ties in the one case as he would have been in the other; 
 and as sin was the result of human liabilities, he was ag 
 much the author of Adam's sin in the one case as he 
 would have been in the other. 
 
 And if on either supposition, he W2i/5/ be considered 
 the Author of sin, the only difference is, that in the one 
 case, he is made \\\Q,intelHii;cnt author of sin, and in the 
 other, the ii(norant Author of sin. And what is worst 
 of all, according to the opinion of those who say, that 
 God ?/2/i>"/// have foreknown, but tvou Id not foreknow, 
 the fall, he is the ivilfidly iii;norant Author of sin. So 
 that the advocates of this theory by endeavouring to a- 
 void a merely supposed difliculty, run so far to th« other 
 ^idc as to fall into one fearfully reak 
 
157 
 
 Nor does a denial of the divine prescience, increase 
 Adam's accountability. The theory upon which this 
 objection is made, supposes that man's accountability a- 
 rises not from the state of his mind, and the character of 
 his actions in themselves; but from the agents, or the cau- 
 ses, which either directly, or indirectly, produce them. 
 Upon this principle it matters not whether we say, God 
 foreknew, or did not foreknow, the fall of Adam. On 
 either supposition he was equally the author of Adam's 
 liabilities; and as of these his sin was the result, he is by 
 inevitable inference, the Author of the first human trans- 
 gression. For if moral turpitude exist not in the nature 
 of dispositions and actions themselves, but in the causes or 
 agents from which they either directly, or indirectly, a- 
 rise, whether we admit, or deny, the prescience of Dei- 
 ty we release the creature from all guilt and leave it res- 
 ting on the Maker. 
 
 If guilt exist not in the nature of disposition, and the 
 action, which is the expression of that disposition; but 
 in their cause, the moral turpitude of Adam's coveting 
 and taking the forbidden fruit, consisted not in the co- 
 vetous disposition, which desired an unlawful object, 
 nor in the act, which carried that covetous disposition 
 into execution; but in their cause. Adam in believing 
 the serpent, and surveying the tree as good for food, 
 pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make 
 one wise, enlisted his appetite for food, and his desires 
 of beauty, and wisdom, all principles good in themselves 
 and useful when properly directed, around the banner of 
 an unlawful object; and thus created in himself this cove- 
 tous disposition, developed in the forbidden act. But 
 if, according to the supposition, moral turpitude consists 
 not in the nature of the disposition, or state of mind de- 
 veloped by unlawful operations; but in the agents, or 
 causes which produce it, then Adam ivhile producing 
 in himself this covetous disposition by believing the ser- 
 pent, and surveying the forbidden fruit, was guilty 
 as the cause and not afUrwards as the subject of trans 
 gression. 
 
158 
 
 But Adam, until he produced in himself this covetous 
 disposition, was as he came from the hands of his Ma- 
 ker; therefore Adam as the cause of his first transgres- 
 sion, was more guilty as he came from the hands of his 
 Maker, than when indulging a covetous disposition^ and 
 performing an act of disobedience!!! 
 
 Again, Adam howev er the cause of his own covetous dis- 
 position, and his disobedient action, was not the cause of 
 his own existence, or of any original state or liability, con- 
 nected with his existence. The Maker was the cause of 
 all these. And if guilt exist in the cause, and not in the 
 nature of the effect, the guilt of Adam's first sin must be 
 chargeable on God as the cause of Adam's existence and 
 liabilities. Whether he became intelligently or ignorant- 
 /?/ guilty, isa matter of very little moment; if the guilt rest 
 on God, the creature is not accountable. So that, while 
 it is admitted as true, that moral turpitude exists not in the 
 nature of that state of mind which is developed by for- 
 bidden operations; but in its cause, nothing is gained in 
 exculpating (lod, or in fixing guilt on Adam as a sinner 
 by denving the divine prescience; whilst on the contra- 
 ry, if that mischievous principle be surrendered, and 
 the guilt of such a stateof mind be supposed to arise sole- 
 ly from its disconformity to the nature of Deity as revea- 
 led in his v/ill, we are relieved from all difficulty in vin- 
 dicating the ways of God, and in justly charging the 
 blame of disobedience on Adam, at once its subject and 
 its author, and need seek no relief by impugning this es- 
 sential attribute of Jehovah. The objection, that the di- 
 vine foreknowledge of man's first disobedience would 
 destroy or lessen Adam's accountability is therefore 
 groundless. 
 
 If God did not foreknow, when he made man what 
 would be the result of his existence, it is difficult to re- 
 concile the act either with his wisdom, or his goodness. 
 
 Wisdom is the power of judging rightly. A man who 
 would make any piece of mechanism without knowing 
 whether or not it is adapted to any purpose, could not 
 rif^htly judge, that hiso])crations tended to any end: and 
 so, if God when creating man was ignorant of the events 
 
159 
 
 that would accompany his existence, he could not so far 
 as we can see, judge rightly, whether to create him or 
 not: and he must therefore have made him without judg- 
 ing rightly of his creation, and thus have acted unwisely. 
 
 The object of goodness is to promote happiness. But 
 if when God created man, he foreknew not, whether he 
 would remain holy and happy, or sin and become misera- 
 ble, then the promotion of happiness, the proper object of 
 goodness, must have been in the view of the Creator, a 
 mere peradventure, and no more probable than the most 
 exquisite misery. Not therefore the one, or the other, 
 but the bare uncertainty of the one or the other, could 
 have been the object of his creating so important a being. 
 Where then the goodness displayed in that creation, o- 
 ver which tJie morning stars sang together and all the 
 sons of God shouted for joy? 
 
 And especially, was the act of Deity in creating man, 
 destitute of both wisdom and goodness, if he chose to be 
 ignorant of the consequences of his existence, when mere- 
 ly by preferring knowledge to ignorance, he might have 
 foreknown all the events which would certainly attend 
 him in any state in which he might be created; andif by 
 this knowledge, he might have chosen to create him in 
 that state in which his existence would be attended with 
 less sin and misery than it now actually is. 
 
 2. Did God decree the fall of man? 
 That he had decreed it in any manner, which implies his 
 approbation of its existence as sin, is at once denied by 
 the holiness of his character, as well as by such parts of 
 his sacred word as declare sin to be the abominable thing 
 which he hates; but that he did decree it in such a sense 
 as to determine to suffer its occurrence in his eternal 
 plan of the moral universe, as the certain imperfecticai of 
 the best pos?;ibIe system, is as certain as the wisdom and 
 the immutability of his nature. 
 
 His eternal foreknowledge of his own actions, is a 
 proof of his having eternally determined those actions. 
 If he eternally foreknew them as certainly to eventu ate, 
 there must have been an eternal certainty of their oc- 
 currence; otherwise it is absurd to suppose that ithey 
 
160 
 
 could have been eternally foreknown as certain. To 
 speak of foreknowing^ an event as certain, which is in its 
 nature uncertain, is little, if any thing better, than a con- 
 tradiction in terms. But if there eternally existed a cer- 
 tainty of all the divine action*, as the eternity of the divine 
 prescience demonstrates, there must have eternally been 
 a cause of this certainty; but this cause could have eter- 
 nally existed no where but in the nature of God. Nothing 
 but he is absolutely eternal. And as in his nature all his 
 actions are regulated by his will, so, as his will changes 
 not, the certainties eternally foreknown, must have eter- 
 nally resided in his will, or in other words, in his volitions, 
 determinations, or decrees. He therefore, certainly e- 
 ternally determined all his own actions. 
 
 This conclusion is perfectly analogous to our own ex- 
 perience. However we may foreknow the actions of o- 
 thers simply as objects of knowledge, without making 
 them at all the subjects of our determinations, or giving 
 them in any way a place in our plans: yet we cannot 
 foreknow our own actions without also predetermining 
 their performance. Those however who support the 
 contrary doctrine, suppose that although loe con not; 
 yet thiit God can . Their opinion is however unsuppor- 
 ted by any one fact, or any one text in the Bible, and 
 is contradicted by all the experience of our foreknow- 
 ledge as connected with our own agency. We invaria- 
 bly foreknow our own deeds only when we also prede- 
 termine their execution. 
 
 If then the Saviour, who is also God, as well as man^ 
 eternally decreed all his own actions, among others the 
 deed of suffering the pains of his crucifixion, he must al- 
 so have eternally determined to perform. It has just been 
 proved, that he eternally foreknew that Judas would be- 
 tray him, Pilate deliver him to be scourged and crucified, 
 the [>eople rave around in tumultuous accusation, the sol- 
 diers part his raiment by lots, and cruelly pierce his side; 
 and if so, he mustalso have eternally dctert^iined to suffer 
 thera to execute these nefarious deeds, which he eter- 
 nally foresaw, if left to the exercise of their natural li- 
 berty and natural power, they would inevitably perform. 
 
161 
 
 It is a mere verbal evasion of this conclusion to 
 say, that, he simply foreknew that these deeds of 
 darkness and death would certainly be executed, but 
 made no determinations Vvith regard to their occurrence 
 and controul. A determination to suifer them implies 
 that their occurrence found a place in the divine plan. 
 
 If then^ God created Judas, the High priest, Pilate, 
 the Jews, and the soldiers, determining to suffer their 
 sinful agency in the crucifixion of the Redeemer, he may 
 also have created Adam with all his disobedience full 
 before him; and with a fixed purpose of enduring its e~ 
 vent; and if he may have formed such a decree the in- 
 vStant before he created him; he may have done the same 
 at any imaginable period of past eternity. The with- 
 holding of his creating power, would have prevented 
 the sin of our first parents, as well as all the unnumbered 
 sins committed by their degenerate children. His de- 
 termination not to desist from that creating act, involves 
 in itself a determination to endure the commission of that 
 gin, which he foresaw would inevitably follow as a con- 
 sequence. This doctrine is in the most perfect harmony 
 with the Scripture, which teaches us, that he worketh 
 all things after the cou7isel of his own will, 
 
 IF. How is the fall of man consistent with the idea 
 of the best possible system? 
 
 In the solution of this question, it is important to dis- 
 cover, whether in a created moral universe, sin is av^oi- 
 dable on the part of the Creator. If the subjects of the 
 moral kingdom, might have been so created, and gover- 
 ned, as to have remained forever sinless, and happy, then 
 we are inevitably conducted to the conclusion, ei- 
 ther, that the accountable universe is benefitted by sin, 
 so as to become the best by its introduction or that the 
 Holy Deity has chosen its ingress, not because it makes 
 creation best, or better ^ or even so good; but solely be- 
 cause, he prefers, that a portion of his creatures, should 
 be sinful and miserable, and not otherwise. On either 
 supposition, he must be viewed as preferring an uni- 
 verse, attended with a certain portion of sin, misery, and 
 
I6:e 
 
 death, to one entirely exempt from their intrusions and 
 their ravages. This opinion appears to be directly op- 
 posed to such Scriptures, as declare sin to be the abomi- 
 nable thing which God hates. 
 
 According to the conditions of either of these hypo- 
 theses, the Supreme Being is made to choose the very 
 thing, which he awfully proclaims to be the object of his 
 hatred. If such be the legitimate results of the theory, 
 which supposes a sinless moral creation to be properly 
 within the dominion of Omnipotence, there is reason to 
 question its truth, and more, than doubt the solidity of its 
 foundations. There is no evidence to support the fab- 
 rick, except the doctrine of the divine omnipotence. 
 But who knows^ that to give direction to the choice of 
 intelligent and voluntary beings, is the legitimate object 
 of physical omnipotence? Is it said, that ^^omnipotence 
 effects in the sinner's soul, that moral change, which re- 
 stores conformity to the divine image? And might not 
 that same energy have retained that conformity in our 
 first parents, or have restored it as soon as it was lost?'' 
 So far as this may be considered an act of physical omni- 
 potence on man's moral powers, an answer in the affirma- 
 tive is undoubtedly just; but, it is apprehended, that 
 while in the act of regeneration, God thus operates on 
 man's moral nature, by direct acts of his physical ener- 
 gies, it is essential, that in governing him as a moral a- 
 gent, he should address his powers as those of an intelli- 
 gent and voluntary being, by means in their nature en- 
 tirely moral. He might indeed by his power, have sus- 
 tained Adam above all temptations, strengthened him to 
 resist and repel them, or have re-created him as soon as 
 he lost his pristine conformity to his Maker; but he 
 would not then have governed him as a moral subject. 
 It aiipears essential to a moral agent that made the sub- 
 ject of law, and having the best motives to obedience 
 presented, he should be sustained in existence, and in 
 the natural exercise of his faculties, and that he should 
 be left to employ his understanding and choice, without 
 anv "oreign constraint or restrnint. Adam was created^ 
 a^id a law given him, just suited to his nature and condi- 
 
163 
 
 tion; of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil than 
 shall not eat; and the penalty annexed: /or in the day 
 that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die, Satan in- 
 formed him that eating he would not die. The false- 
 hood was believed, and as a consequence^ the act of dis- 
 obedience performed. By an act of his power^ God 
 might have convinced Adam, that the assertion of the 
 Devil was a falsehood. He might at once have enlarged 
 the capacity of his intellect, or infixed on his mind an 
 impression, that the suggestion was untrue; but this 
 would not have been leaving man to the natural exer- 
 cise of his understanding, and choice, without any for- 
 eign constraint; and therefore, would not have been 
 governing him as a moral being. 
 
 To have secured him from transgression, by elevating 
 his intellect, would have been nothing less, than to make 
 him the possessor of infinite knowledge. Any thing 
 less than omniscience, except confirmed by moral means, 
 is liable to err. Angels that excel in strength, mistook 
 their best interest. This then would have been to 
 change man's nature, and rank, and to give the glory of 
 God's omniscience to another, which is as impossible, as 
 that there should be more Gods than one. 
 
 And in every case of temptation, to have made 
 on his mind an impression of the falsehood proposed, 
 would have been to govern him not as a rational agent, 
 by addressing his reason, but as an irrational animal, by 
 something like the power of instinct. 
 
 Although therefore, it is the sole operation of divine 
 power, that renews man, dead and trespasses and in sins, 
 and rectifies the derangement produced by the fall; yet 
 God's dispensations towards him as antecedents to regene- 
 ration — the admonitions of judgment, and mercy, presen- 
 ted in his providence, the warnings, and exhortations of 
 his word, and the strivings of his Spirit, in his common 
 operations, all demonstrate, that the renewal of the man, 
 is but a part of God's moral economy If it be one part 
 of his economy to do this deed of mercy, it is al^^o a corres- 
 ponding, but another distinct part, to be enquired of by 
 the house of Israel to do it for them. If one part be to give 
 
164 
 
 the Holy Spirit, another part is that it be to them that 
 ask it; and if men ask, it must be because they are ope- 
 rated upon by moral means so as to teel their guilt and to 
 see their danger. And thus men's willingness to im- 
 plore the divine mercy, presented in the Gospel, pro- 
 duced in their souls by the convictions and alarms of 
 these antecedent dealings of God, make an essential part 
 in the economy of the moral system. So also it is ap- 
 prehended as man's hopes and fears are now addressed 
 to induce him to bow to the sovereign mandates of the 
 Gospel, and thus to obtain the restoration of his Makers 
 image; Adam's hopes were addressed by the promises of 
 life and his fears by the threatening of death, to per- 
 suade him to abstain from the forbidden fruit and thus 
 to preserve in his soul the image of his Maker. In 
 both instances, man is addressed by moral means and 
 as an intelligent and voluntary being; in the one to re- 
 tain, and in the other to recover, the Maker's image. 
 And who can prove that such an economy is not in- 
 dispensable to the very nature of a moral system? 
 And if it be, then since liability to err in moral judg 
 ment isan inevitable imperfection of created minds when 
 not confirmed, and since they can be confirmed only by 
 moral convictions, produced by examples of punishment 
 for disobedience; and since no such examples could have 
 been exhibited to Adam before he fell; the introduction 
 of sin into the universe was unavoidable on tbe part of 
 the Creator: Or in other words, sin is the certain though 
 not the necessary result of the best possible moral uni 
 verse. And if so, the option of Deity was not between 
 a system in which there would be no sin and one like 
 the present in which there is some, but between that 
 now existing and others in which there would have been 
 more evil. 
 
 If then God foreknew that on any plan of moral crea- 
 tion and of moral government sin and misery would cer- 
 tainly arise, and if he foreknew that with all these cer- 
 tain imperfections of a created moral system, there 
 would still be more happiness enjoyed and more glory 
 displayed, than without it would be possible^ then cer- 
 
165 
 
 tainly to determine the existence of such an universe 
 upon the very best plan would be a determination glori- 
 ously consistent with infinite benevolence. 
 
 Suppose that Virgil's hero^ .^neas, after Troy was 
 laid in ashes by the victorious Greeks, knew that if he 
 remained in his country, he and his companions must die an 
 inglorious death, but that if they adventurously cast them- 
 selves with their navy upon the waves, they would find 
 an Italy, and enjoy in it long life, with freedom and 
 happiness. But suppose, he foreknew, that while by 
 this adventure they would as a company redeem their 
 lives, and enjoy happiness and honor, and that the re- 
 verse would be their fate if they remained hovering a- 
 round the ashes of Troy, yet that some individuals, 
 known to him by name, would on the very best plan of 
 government, mutiny and make capital punishment ne- 
 cessary as a means of preventing all the others from in- 
 surrection; but, that by suffering these few to disobey, 
 and by punishing them for their disobedience, he would 
 ultimately secure order, harmony, and happiness among 
 all the remainder of his company. 
 
 One of these two things he must have chosen; either to 
 rem.ain where he was, and undergo a disgraceful death, 
 or encounter the difliculties that would certainly attend 
 his migration. He would understand, that with all the 
 evils certainly to attend the latter, it was almost infinite- 
 ly preferable to the former. 
 
 Then he might wisely, and benevolently, have plan- 
 ned, determined, or decreed, to prefer the latter and to 
 suffer the resistence of the rebellious to eventuate; and to 
 punish them for an example to others. 
 
 So also if Deity foresaw, that on the best plan of moral 
 government, Adam and some of the Angels would cer- 
 tainly sin, but yet, that a good almost infinitely greater, 
 would arise from the existence of a moral creation, than 
 would otherwise be possible, it must be admitted to have 
 been wisdom and benevolence in Deity, to decree the 
 adoption of such a system in preference to none. 
 
 Is it objected, that ^neas ought to have left those 
 whom he foresaw to be certainly rebellious, and to de- 
 
166 
 
 mand capital punishment for their crimes, and to have 
 taken none but such as could have been foreseen to be 
 orderly and obedient, and that so, if Deity made any 
 plan of moral being, it ought to have been one, in which 
 no being should be introduced foreknown certainly to 
 become the subjects of sin and the objects of endless 
 woe? This objection takes for granted what the suppo- 
 sition denies. As it is believed to have been already 
 proved, that on the best plan of moral being, sin will find 
 an introduction: so in the illustration it has been suppo- 
 sed, that iEneas could not have selected a company so 
 virtuous, but the general good would eventually demand^ 
 that some of them should be capitally punished. It is 
 also supposed, that he foreknew that subordination was 
 to be maintained among his men only by suffering the 
 disobedience of the offenders to eventuate, and by pun- 
 ishing them for their crimes, and that, therefore, if he 
 should leave behind him those whom he foresaw if taken 
 would become justly the objects of capital retribution^ 
 others without the impression produced by a survey of 
 their disloyalty and its penalty, would mutiny, and that, 
 if these should be left, others would; and others, and o- 
 thers; so that the result must be, he could have no obe- 
 dient companions, unless he determined to suffer the wick- 
 edness of some to occur, and to be punished for an example 
 to others. As according to the supposition, the choice 
 of a band of immaculate companions was impossible, his 
 choice would have been, between the death of himself 
 and all his companions, and his admitting certain ones 
 of them in the service of his expedition, who would cer- 
 tainly prove disobedient. All must acknowledge that the 
 latter would be far preferable. And if in such circum- 
 stances, itvvoidd have been good and wise in the Trojan 
 chief to determine to introduce into the ch'cle of his com- 
 panions, some, who he foreknew would become disobe- 
 dient and require the infliction of capital punishment; so 
 also it was wisdom and goodness in Deitv, to introduce into 
 being Adam as apart of the best possible system, although 
 he foreknew, that he would certainly become a trans- 
 gressor of the law, and the subject of its woful and ever- 
 enduring penalties. 
 
167 
 
 AisOj since on the supposition, that in the best mode 
 of government, crime could not be excluded from the 
 circle of ^Eneas' best chosen companions, it was better, 
 that he should not only know all the events of his expe- 
 dition, but, that he should also, determine every particu- 
 lar, even the crimes that would attend it, according to 
 the best possible plan. So also if on any system of moral 
 being, and moral government, some sin will certainly ob- 
 tain a place; it is most certainly better, that Deity should 
 not only foreknow, but also predetermine, every event, 
 even Adam^s sin itself; so that it should eventuate in the 
 least evil, and in the greatest good. From the conside- 
 ration of this subject a few reflections naturally arise. 
 
 1. God is not the author of Jldam^s sin. He created 
 him in the state, and governed him in the manner, best 
 adapted to prevent his aberration. His determining to 
 suffer its introduction as the certain imperfection of the 
 best possible system, no more involves him in the author- 
 ship of it, than does his foreknowledge. His merely de- 
 termining, by any act of his physical omnipotence not 
 to hinder its occurrence, could surely, no more pro- 
 duce the act, than could his bare foreknowledge, that it 
 would certainly happen if not prevented. 
 
 2. Man is accountable f 07' his sin. Demerit resides 
 in the nature of sin, and not in any cause immediate or 
 remote. In nature, it is the violation of the righteous 
 law of heaven, and therefore, is in itself the very essence 
 of demerit. It is in itself the abominable thing which 
 God hates, and is not so because it arose from this or that 
 particular cause, whether more or less direct. And 
 man is justly guilty, because sin in itself really deme- 
 ritorious, becomes apart of his veryconstit'ition. He is 
 guilty, because, he is the agent, who commits it; and not. 
 because he was led to commit it from this or that cause; 
 or when existing in a state of sin he is guilty, because he 
 is the subject of a state forbidden by the law of God, and 
 not on account of his having been introduced into this 
 state by this or by that means. And because sin is in its 
 nature opposed to God. and ill deserving, and because 
 in its effects, it is deleterious, God has associated its com- 
 
168 
 
 mission with the feelings of remorse in the conscience of 
 
 man. 
 
 Thus the authorship and the guilt is man's; and God is 
 justified when he speaks, and clear when he judges. If 
 God decreed the best possible plan to prevent man's first 
 sin, and decreed to suffer its existence only as that abo- 
 minable thing, that ivould not be prevented by the best 
 moral means, surely then, it is all Adam's and his, justly 
 all the guilt and all the penalty. 
 
 3. Ab man has any reason of complaint on account 
 of Ids representation by Adam. It has been shown in 
 the discoui^e immediately preceding this, that the 
 chance of all mankind for standing, was by the repre- 
 sentation of Adam, better than it could have been, had 
 all have been left to stand for themselves on the ground 
 of probationary obedience. But especially, sliould eve- 
 ry mouth be stopt from murmurs, and be employed in 
 praises, since infinite mercy has provided a Mediator, 
 who having already become a propitiation, and thus 
 thrown all Adam's children upon the arms of mercy, as 
 fairly offers himself to become an atonement and redemp- 
 tion; and as ftiirly offers his Holy Spirit to sanctify and 
 restore the lost conformity to the Maker s image, as he 
 offered life to Adam as the consequence of his abstaining 
 from the forbidden tree. Who art thou, O man, that 
 replies t against God? Instead of uttering murmurs a- 
 gainstthe constitution of the infinite Jehovah, and instead 
 of cavilling at those most sacred truths of his word, which 
 reveal thy present moral wretchedness, and thine expo- 
 sure to unending ruin, look upon the remedy, the re- 
 deeming Jesus. Instead of complaining, that the world 
 should become involved in sin, by the one act of Adam, 
 Behold the Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the 
 word. Instead of murmuring at your condition, and pe- 
 rishing in your ruin, look to him and be ye saved, all the 
 ends of the earth. — Amen. 
 
THE CHRISTIAN PREACHER 
 
 Vol. 1. JAjYU^RY, 1828. N^ 8. 
 
 THE BEST POSSIBLE SYSTEM. 
 
 My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure. Isaiah 
 dvi. 10. 
 
 For thou art not a God, that hath pleasure in wickedness; neither 
 «an evil dwell with thee. Ps. v. 4. 
 
 To proclaim the immutability, the eternity, and the 
 holiness of the divine counsels, the raptured prophet 
 wrote, and the. siveet psalmist of Israel sung. In recor- 
 ding by the hand of the prophet, the first part of our 
 text, God proclaims his plan, as unchangeable. My coun- 
 sel shall stand; and as the one of his choice, Itvilldo all 
 my PLEASURE. And since, according to the in- 
 spired psalmist^s sacred song, the Holy One has no plea- 
 sure in tvickednesSf and evil cannot dwell with him; the 
 doctrine most obviously, and naturally, drawn from these 
 texts, taken together, is, that in the creation and govern- 
 raent of his rational and accountable subjects, God has a 
 plan, embracing all the parts, and descending to all the 
 particulars in the universe, and, that this plan is one of 
 ■:he best possible, to encourage holiness and to prevent 
 sin. 
 
 The design of this and the following discourse, is to 
 ■explain, and prove this doctrine, and to consider its prac- 
 tical consequences. 
 
 In the explanation, it is proper to premise, thatGod^s 
 glory — the exercise and exhibition of his natural and mo- 
 ral perfections — is the ultimate end of all the divine plans 
 and operations. For, the Lord hath made all things for 
 himself; yea the wicked for the day of evil. Whether, 
 therefore, ye eat or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to 
 the glory of God. And as this is true now; so it is pre- 
 sumed ever to have been true through eternity past; and 
 ever to continue the same throughout eternity to come. 
 Now, as the ultimate end is eternally one, so God^s sys- 
 tem of operations for the attainment of this end, is eter- 
 
170 
 
 tiallv one. He did not foresee certain conditions, and on 
 this foresight clioose his system, nor yet choose his system, 
 and fro n this choice foreknew all its consequences; but 
 with a never-beginning and a never-ending choice, 
 and with a never- beginning and a never ending know- 
 ledge,* coexisting in the eternal state of the unchangea- 
 ble Mind, he knows all things possible and impossible, 
 and chooses that system of possible things, which has e- 
 ver existed, and will forever exist. 
 
 Thus the divine purpose is supposed to be adopted with- 
 out any reasoning or com))arison between this and other 
 systems, which might have been possible, had they been 
 made the objectsof the supreme choice. Such a process 
 it would be a kind of blasphemy to impute to him, whose 
 intuitive omniscience supersedes the necessity of reason- 
 ing. For since a process of raciocination implies chan- 
 ges, as the mind passes over the successive steps of com- 
 parison, such a supposition would rob God of hisimmuta- 
 bility.t Yet it is maintained, that the system actually 
 chosen, is one of the very best, that possibly could have 
 been selected to promote righteousness and to oppose sin. 
 That no process of comparison preceded its adoption, is 
 no proof, that it is not one of the very best. The perfec- 
 tion of God's nature intuitively directs him to the best, and 
 therefore, there can l)e no possible motive to suspend his 
 preference or to direct his mind to any other as an ob- 
 ject of choice. 
 
 As natural liberty enters into the very essence of a mo- 
 ral creat ;re, and as in finite beings unconfirmed, this im- 
 plies in its very terms, a liability to transgression^ as 
 well as to continued obedience, it remains yet to be 
 proved, that in any system of finite and created moral 
 brings under any form of government, consistent with 
 their nature, there will not rpr/fl^m///, though not iiecesa- 
 rjliu be a greater or a less degree of moral evil. In any 
 such a system, some beings tvi II sin. And thus, some 
 de'^n'ee of evil, is believed to be a certain imperfection, 
 which will accompany any such system of beings — an 
 
 '*S«e Chvisfian Prencbcr No. 1. r^^-t. 8, 30. +See Chr;r/.ian Preacher No. 
 1 Noie B p, :iU $N'). 1. pp. 11, I?. 
 
171 
 
 imperfection, however^ which results not from the neces- 
 sity, but from the liberty of their nature. 
 
 According to this view of the moral system, it is con- 
 stituted upon the condition, that the volitions of the crea- 
 ture, are to be left uncoerced by any direct operations 
 of Omnipotence. This perfection of Deity is employed 
 in sustaining the creature in existence, and in the exercise 
 of that liberty essential to his moral nature; in perform- 
 ing wonders of judgment and mercy, as motives to ad- 
 dress the hopes and the fears of his accountable subjects, 
 thus to encourage them to holiness and to restrain them 
 from sin;* and also in 7'e instating his own image, lost by 
 thefall-\ in such of the human family, as in the exercise 
 of their natural powers, so regard the teachings and ad- 
 Hionitions of his works, providence, word, and common o- 
 perationsof his spirit, as importunately, and persevering- 
 ly to seek his grace and mercy;{ but never by direct and 
 compulsive operations to regulate volition, as when exer» 
 cised in the transformation and translation of matter. 
 And therefore, it is supposed, the utter exclusion of sin 
 from the moral universe, falls not properly within the 
 province of omnipotence; and also, that since Deity cre- 
 ates and governs all things in the best possible manner to 
 promote righteousness and resist sin, and after all this, 
 creatures will sin, every degree of evil in such a system, 
 will not be excluded by any thing, that can be done by 
 him consistently with his character as the Supreme Crea- 
 tor and moral Governor. And if all be done by him, that 
 can, consistently with his sustaining such a character, 
 and yet transgression and suffering find place, through the 
 abused agency of the creature, there is no departure, ei- 
 ther from truth or reverence, in maintaining, that in a 
 moral system, some degree of both are unavoidable on the 
 part of the Creator — On his part, he creates and governs 
 in the best possible manner to exclude them from his 
 works; on the part of the delegated freedom of the crea- 
 ture, however, they enter, reign, and desolate. With 
 this natural liberty, the relation which he himself has 
 
 ^See No. 3. pp, 52, 53- jSee No. 5, p. 114. ^See Nq. 2. p, 35, 
 
17:^ 
 
 constituted^ forbids him as Creator and mora! Governor, 
 to interfere; therefore, they are unavoidable, so far as he 
 is concerned, unless he had wholly dispensed with a mo- 
 ral creation.* And since on the best plan of moral being, 
 sin will not be wholly excluded, the Holy one has only 
 endured its existence, as the certain imperfection of tr.e 
 best intelligent and accountable system. And since it 
 will find an introduction into his moral kingdom, as the 
 Most Wise, Holy, and Merciful Creator and Ruler, h.v 
 exercises his pleasure in wisely choosing, and powerfully 
 controuling the mode of its existence; so as to make it the 
 unwilling means of promoting good.f Thus as the cer- 
 tain imperfection of the best created moral system he 
 chooses to suffer its intrusion; because by the existence 
 of an universe of which it is the certain though not the 
 necessa?y concomitant, a greater amount of happiness, will 
 be enjoyed by creatures and a more glorious display of 
 the Creator's perfections be made, than would otherwise 
 be possible. And hence rather than there should be 
 no moral creation, God determines and chooses to en- 
 dure the ^r?>/and dispkasio^e occamoned by the fall 
 of man and angels, by the sins of the old world, of Pha- 
 raoh in not letting the children of Israel go, and of the 
 Jews in crucifying the Lord of glory; and in fine, by all 
 the sin and misery, v/hich tlie natural liberty of men 
 and angels has ever produced. 
 
 This view of the best moral system, it may be seen, 
 differs essentially from that advocated by Leibnitz, Woll^ 
 President Edwards, and their foUov/ers. Theirs sup- 
 poses, that the omnipotence of Deity, might have forever 
 prevented the introduction of sin into the moral universe; 
 but, that the divine glory, and the good of the whole in- 
 telligent creation, required its exlsteiict;: a?id therefore, 
 he so constructed and governed the system as to procure 
 the amount of evil which actually obtains. T/iis on the 
 contrary asserts that sin is a positive evil to the universe, 
 and unnecessary as a means to promote the divine glory, 
 
 •No 1. p. 18. nlso p. 3'1 Note C. No. Z. p. 48. No, 3 54, 55, fNo. 3. 
 pp 59, 61. No, 5. pp. 105. 70r. 
 
17o 
 
 and, tliat it has obtained an introduction, neither through 
 the choice nor the power of God; but entirely by the a- 
 buse of the natural liberty of the creature. 
 
 It now remains to prove, that God has a plan, reaching 
 to every being and event, within the compass of eternity; 
 and iinally, that this plan is the best possible. 
 
 A part of this subject, will be deferred to another dis- 
 course. At present it is only proposed to consider the 
 existence^ the immutability, ?iY\6.t\i^ eternity of this plan. 
 
 1. God has a plan according to which, he creates and 
 governs the universe. This is not only reasonable; but it 
 is asserted in the Scriptures. TJlwm he did foreknow, 
 he also did predestinate to he conformed to the image of 
 his Son. According as he hath chosen us in him, he^ 
 fore the foundation of the ivorkL that we should be holy 
 and without blame before him in love. If however, it 
 be imagined, that this predestinating and choosing some 
 men to holiness or conformity to the image of Christ, is 
 no positive proof, that God predestinates and chooses 
 every being, and event, the answer is, that to this scrip- 
 ture proof of the divine determinations in ordaining men 
 to holiness, or in other words, to conformity to God, is 
 also added the inspired declaration, that he ivorketh all 
 things after the counsel of his oivn will. And again, 
 he doeth his ivillin the armies of heaven and among the 
 inhabitants of the earth, and none can stay his hand or 
 say unto him, what doest thou? And besides this, we 
 have the testimony of the four and twenty elders, who 
 falling dow^n before him, that sittethon the throne in the 
 heavens, and say. Thou art worthy O Lord to receive 
 glory J and honour, and power, for thou hast created all 
 things, and for thy PLEASURE, they are and ivere 
 created. Now^ if language can be taken as the symbol 
 of thought, all things exist in exact accordance with the 
 pleasure of God. 
 
 2. This plan is immutablt. In God there is no vari- 
 ableness neither shadow of turning, and he is the same, 
 yesterday, to day and forever. Nor is there any cause, 
 either in scripture or reason, why these texts should not 
 
174 
 
 be understood in their most obvious signitication. Some 
 passages in the Bible appear indeed to stand literally oppo- 
 t*ed to these: we sometimes read, that God repents. The 
 form of the word in the Hebrew Testament of which our 
 word repent is a translation, used in relation to this subject, 
 signifies both to console and to repent. VVIien used in 
 the latter sense it either signifies a change of mind or 
 displeasure of mind and is translated in the Septuagint 
 vei'sion of the Old Testament by different Greek words, 
 corresponding to both these significations. The text in 
 which it is said, that it rel)entedthe Lord^ that he had 
 made man upon the earthy and it s:rieve.d him at the 
 hearty would he more literally rendered, the Lord ivas 
 caused to be displeased^^- bfj means of his havins; made 
 man upon the earthy and he grieved kmii^elf at the heart. 
 As a consequence of having made man upon the earth, 
 &?!! was introduced into the world, and being so much 
 opposed to his holy nature, it always occasions him dis- 
 ])leasure and grief. Yet since no moral creation ivill 
 exist without some evil, and such a creation, with all its 
 iriiDerlections and consequent evils., aii'oi*ds more happi- 
 ness and displays more glory, than without it would be 
 possible, God determines to endure the displeasure and 
 grit'f. occasioned by the comparaticehj Utile evil, for the 
 sake of tiie positivehf greater good. The text taken m.ost 
 literal! V, says not, that God changed his vaind in relation 
 to his \vorkma»>ship; but simply, that tliis workmiirisliij) 
 orrasioned liini displeasure and grief) without intimating 
 the least interruption of his general plan, 'iliough his 
 jiresent plan occasioned him some grief; vet he did not 
 Y,ish to alter it; because, any other would Ov-casion him 
 as nuich: and most others per!);i|)s more: and no inteiii- 
 li-enV universe to enjoy his goodness and reflect his gloi*}-, 
 would ])i*obably grieve and disj>lease him more, than all 
 the sin and misery, which human and angelic agency la 
 the abuse of liberty has ever ])roduced. 
 
 There jire liowever other texts in which this Hcbrev/ 
 word usually rendered iaco Kuglishby \\\i^iQvia repeat) is 
 
 »'Vlic Grefk w-.rd in the SepMu^iat it. LuetUutiicthe Ijom Enthiiinco, I 
 -ir >voke to aj-i^^irr ur d»ij)lca.tiurt . 
 
175 
 
 translated in the Septuagint by the GveekmetarnoeOy sig- 
 nifying properly a cliange of mind; as in this text — If 
 that nation against whom I have pronounced; turn from 
 their evil^ Iivill repent (change my mind J from the evil, 
 that I thought to do unto ihem.^ Here an absolute 
 change of mind in God, is not asserted; butonly a change 
 towards this people. He repents of the evil threatened 
 to them. His holy nature opposed to sin, always directs 
 evil against the wicked. But here the wicked are sup- 
 posed to change; they no longer occupy the place to- 
 wards which a holy God directs the shafts of his displea- 
 s^'.re: but now tread the court over which waves the ban- 
 ner of peace. M hey leave the vales darkened by the 
 clouds of his justice, and stand upon the mountaiiis en- 
 lightened by the sunshine of his mercy. And thus though 
 his mind absolutely changes not; yet it varies its relations 
 towards them, just as the mountain, standing by the river 
 side, to the passenger borne along by the stream, appears 
 at first before him; then opposite; and at last, it withdraws 
 in his rear. The mountain stands firm on his moveless 
 base; the traveller only has varied his situation; and yet* 
 the local relations of the mountain towards the man, have 
 materially changed. And the same is true of other 
 texts of this class. Such modes of speech, therefore de- 
 note no changes in the divine intentions — For any thing 
 that they teach, it may have been the everlasting design 
 of the King Eternal, at certain times and in agreement 
 with certain changes in the character of his creatures, to 
 vary his relations and cor<duct towards them; not because 
 he changes; but because they change. Now since the 
 intentions of Jehovah, exist in the state of his infinite 
 jnind; if he change not, the state of his mind changes not; 
 and so neither can his intentions alter, and therefore, in 
 truth his counsel shall stand, 
 
 3. God^s plan is eternal. If it be conceded, that he 
 nniv has a plan, this plan is eternal. Because, its adop- 
 tion implies determination, and every new determination 
 a new state of mind, and every new^ state of mental 
 
 * J'.' vein i all xv'ri 8.. 
 
•I7(> 
 
 eonditon a change in God; and if so, lie could not sa\ 
 with truth, I change not. 
 
 Again an eternal plan is argued from God's eternal 
 prescience. Known unto God are all hh loorks from 
 the beginning of the roorlcl [\wovQ literally froa eterni- 
 ty). Now an event foreknowu a:^ certainly to happen, 
 must have its future existence infallibly secured; Ijecause, 
 otherwise it is, in truths an uncertainty, and in truth, 
 it ca n only be foreknown as such. To foreknow a u uncer- 
 tainty to be a certainty is as maul festl}' a contradiction as 
 to know a falsehood to be a truth, or a thing to be and not 
 to be at the same time. If therefore God foreknew from all 
 eternity, that he would send his Son into the^world, it must 
 have been, because, coeternally with this foreknowledge, 
 lie had determined to send him, or at least, because, he 
 had determined to determine to send him: For if his mis- 
 sion was undetermined 1, it wa'^, while it remained thus, 
 uncertain and therefore could only be foreknown as such. 
 To say, that whilst it was undetermined and, therefore an 
 uncertainty, God forekiiew it as a certainty, is just asser- 
 ting in other words, that he foreknew that which he 
 knew might be d. falsehood, to be certainly a truth. 
 
 Nor is this dilViculty surmounted, as it is sometime> 
 supposed to be, by saying, that the future existence of an 
 event, may have been eternally certain, although God 
 had not determined it from all eternity. For although the 
 Supreme determinations of themselves, are not the agents 
 or causes of future events; yet in these determinations, 
 God caiises the certainty of these future events. 
 
 The supposition contained in the argument is that events 
 may be eternally certain^ timugh not eternally decreed. 
 Now if this certainty existed from all eternity, it must 
 have had a cause from all eternity; and this cause must 
 have existed either in the intentions of God, the events 
 themselves, or the creatures that produced them. 
 
177 
 
 But neither the events themselves, nor yet the crea- 
 tures that produced them, are eternal; so that from eter- 
 nity it existed not in them. If therefore, it existed not 
 in the state of the Eternal mind from all eternity, it had 
 no existence from all eternity; and from all eternity, 
 must have been causeless, or have been the cause of it- 
 self, which is plainly impossible. 
 
 To avoid misapprehensions, it is proper to add, that 
 when speaking of God's causing in his determinations, 
 the certainty of future events, language is employed on- 
 ly in accommodation to popular usage. Strictly spea- 
 king, an eternal certainty exists m, and coexists with, 
 his eternal determinations; these determinations exist in, 
 and coexist with^ the state of his eternal mind; and the 
 state of his eternal mind coexists with, himself; and 
 therefore a certainty involved in the state of his eternal 
 and uncaused Being, is itself eternal and uncaused'^ yet, 
 since that certainty could not eternally exist, apart from 
 God J in a kind of figurative sense, God may be said to 
 PMUse that certainty. But the argument divested of all 
 figure is simply this: Since the certainty of a future e- 
 vent, apart from the eternal and unchangeable state of 
 the divine existence, can not be eternal, it can not be 
 known from all eternity. But the scriptures teach, that 
 every being and event, and therefore the certainty of 
 every being and event, are known from all eternity; and 
 consequently since this certainty could not possibly exist 
 from all eternity, in any other way, it must have existed 
 in the intentions of the divine mind, and these intentions 
 must have been eternal. 
 
 But Arminians, who admit the doctrine of the divine 
 prescience, say, that by some power, beyond our com- 
 prehension, which can dart through all uncertainties 
 and descry things afar off as certain, although they are 
 uncertairij God foreknows all possible things. This is 
 just asserting, that he has the power of knowing a thing 
 to be certain, which is admitted to be uncertain; that a 
 thing will certainly be, which certainly may never he; 
 and that a thing vAll certainly be t?'iie which may cer- 
 
 23 
 
178 
 
 iainly be false. But perhaps some good reasoning can 
 he advanced, which will demonstrate this proposition, 
 strange as it appears, nevertheless to be true. This we 
 liave a right to expect. Our common sense, which dic- 
 tates, that a thing can not be foreknown as certain^ until 
 it is certain^ ought not to be contradicted without clear 
 demonstration. Now what is the process by which our 
 common sense is shown to be in an error? Has God in the 
 Scriptures revealed himself as possessing this apparently 
 absurd power? — No. Revelation on this subject is silent. 
 What then is this demonstration? Simply this: All things 
 are not eternally decreed or eternally made certain. 
 He however eternally foreknows all things thus uncer- 
 tain as certain; and therefore, possesses the power of e- 
 ternally foreknowing things uncertain as certain. 
 
 It is a first axiom in Logick, that one of the premises 
 must contain the conclusion, and the other must show, 
 that the conclusion is contained in it; in this demonstra 
 tion however, both the major proposition, asserting, 
 that all things are not eternally decreed, or eternally 
 made certain; and the minor announcing, that Deity eter- 
 nally foreknows uncertainties as certain, are taken for 
 granted; and what is this, but assuming the conclusion to 
 be true? If the premises which contain the conclusion 
 be assumed, the conclusion itself is assumed. And if so, 
 this professed demonstration turns out to be but a beggiiii^; 
 the very question, that ought to have been proved.* If 
 then inspiration be not mistaken in proclaiming. Known 
 unto God are all his works from the beginning of the 
 world, the plan of God is eternal. 
 
 Arminians however fre(piently admit, that so far as 
 consequences can be legitimately drawn from metaphysi- 
 cal reasoning, the doctrine of an eternal and divine plan 
 in creating and governing the universe, would appear 
 
 •If it should be snicl, that ahhough Gnd did not from all eternity foreknow 
 the ciriainty of future events as cf<?r;ia//v existing; yet, he eternally foreknew, 
 that this certainty would ultiviately exist; nothing is gained Because this 
 is only asserting, fhat fr~.m eternity, he foreknew the certaivty of iht certainty 
 of these even's: and the question again arises, Whence the cau^^e of thec- 
 t9rnal certainty oi their certainty? It must have eternally existed in the 
 State of the divine mnid, or had some cause without God. 
 
179 
 
 to be true; but affirm, that when they submit their rea= 
 son to the guidance of the divine word, they are irresis- 
 tibly conducted to the contrary conclusion. But on ex- 
 amining their ideas on this subject, it is found, they sup- 
 pose, this doctrine necessarily denies the liberty of man 
 and makes God the author of sin; and is therefore oppo- 
 sed to the Bible, which teaches, that God has no pleasure 
 in the death of the wicked^ and, that the only reason, 
 why the wicked are not gathered, is because they will 
 not. But since the doctrine here advocated, is that so 
 far from interfering with the liberty of the moral creation, 
 it is a part of God's plan, that accountable creatures shall 
 he free; and that so far from making God the author of 
 sin, one of the very best possible plans has been eternally 
 chosen by him to prevent sin, it most obviously follows, 
 that in the present case, these hackneyed objections fall 
 lifeless to the ground, and will be recognized as wholly 
 inapplicable by all, but such, as are either too weak or too 
 prejudiced to reason. Except these however, argument 
 professed to be scriptural, against this doctrine there is 
 jione. There being thus no arguments, either from rea- 
 son or revelation, legitimately opposed to this doctrine, 
 the only question now is, whether by interpreting lan- 
 guage in its most literal and obvious signification, can it 
 ])e deduced from the Bible? — We say by interpreting 
 language most literally, and obviously; because, if any o- 
 ther course be adopted, the Scriptures, or any other 
 book, may be tortured so as to affirm, or deny, any thing, 
 that the imagination, the weakness, the wickedness, or 
 predjudices of men may invent; and thus cease to be guides 
 to those, who would be conducted by them, to the temple 
 of truth. The literal meaning of a word always stands 
 first; and in the interpretation of language, can never be 
 departed from, until such reasons be found, as say, that it 
 7nust be understood figuratively; and when such reasons 
 are perceived to exist, as decide, that it must be under- 
 stood figuratively; then all things equal, the meaning nea- 
 rest the letter, or least figurative, is to be preferred to 
 one farther from the letter, or more figurative; conse- 
 quently, when a word can not be understood strictly lite- 
 ral, wx are to interpret it as nearly so as we can. 
 
180 
 
 Regulated by this principle, which must be to all, ob- 
 vously just, let us examine what proof our doctrine finds 
 in the Bible: 
 
 Knownunto God are all his ivorks f?^o?72 the hegimiins^ 
 of the worlds or from eternity. Now his foreknowledge, 
 and his predestination, are so coupled together by the 
 apostle Paul, as to intimate, that they are coexistent — 
 IVhom he didforeknoxo^ he ALSO (not afterwards) did 
 predestinate. For, if they be not coexistent, then there 
 must have been a period w^hen he foreknew some, 
 whom he did not predestinate. 
 
 Again, e/^s he hath chosen us in him hef or et lie found a- 
 lion of the worlds that we should be holy and ivithout 
 blame before him in love. This text is literally render- 
 ed from the original. It is admitted, that taken by it- 
 self, it does not say certainly, that this choice was made 
 from all eternituj but it does say before the foundation 
 of the world — before time began, and therefore, from at 
 least a part of eternity; and as it is not said hou) longhe- 
 fore the foundation of the world, it no more literally 
 means ?ipart, than the z^'/io/e of the duration before the 
 foundation of the world. It will be admitted even by 
 an opponent, that this choosing was included in the de- 
 termination, /A«/ the Gentiles should he fellow heirs 
 and of the same body with the holy apostles and pro- 
 phets; and the partakers of God^s promise in Christ by 
 the Gospel, called a mystery; which fromthe beginning 
 of the ivorld [or ap'ton aionon, most literally from eter- 
 nities] hath been hid in God:* and this, accord i7ig to the 
 eternal pur fjose [or kata prothesin ton aionon, literally 
 according to the purpose of eternities,!] which he pur- 
 posed in Christ Jesus Our Lord. % Here this mystery — 
 the calling of the Gentiles as well as the Jews — accor- 
 
 •Eph. iii. 5, 6. 
 
 fit is an objection among the weakest of the weak, to say, that because 
 this mystery is reported in the filrh verse of this chapter to have been hid 
 from a^f'S.we must understand tffe;7i/</e.y hereto sij^nifv^ agrs or geiier at to7i5 — 
 If it was hid from ttennthi, bv the axiom that a luA^/e includes all the parts,, 
 it must have been hid from a^^c . 
 
 :|Eph. iii. IL 
 
181 
 
 Sing to the eternal purpose of him that worketh ail things 
 after the counsel of his own will, existed from ail eterni- 
 ty, and consequently this choosing^ to holiness included 
 in this mystery must also have existed from eternity ac- 
 cording to his eternal purpose. Now, if the Greek 
 word aionon in these passages properly signifies eternity, 
 the proof is complete. Dr. Adam Clarke, although he 
 wishes to limit the word in these places to the ages of the 
 Jewish dispensation, yet frankly acknowledges, that ^^the 
 grammatical meaning oith^worAi^everduringov endless 
 duration^^ — a candid confession on his part, that the 
 theological system, which he advocates does not strictly 
 agree with ^^the proper grammatical meaning^' of the 
 Bible. This ^^grammaticaP' decision of Dr. Clarke, is 
 worthy of a scholar, whatever he may be as a divine. 
 It is confirmed by authorities unbiased by our theologi- 
 cal controversies and who^e classical knowledge of the 
 Greek language nothing but ignorance can dispute. 
 Philof says, that in aion nothing is past or future; but 
 in its very nature, it is one.'' By Aristotle^ aion is des- 
 cribed as ^^embracing a duration beyond which there is 
 nothing;'^ and ^^the interminable duration and infinitude 
 of all;" and also, as derived from aei^ ever, and einai^ 
 to be; and thus as signifying everbeing. 
 
 With this athorized application of aion before us, other 
 texts may be introduced to prove the eternity of God's 
 plan. JK'^ow to him that is of power to stahlish you ac- 
 cording to my Gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ 
 according to the revelation of the mystery ivhich teas 
 kept secret since the world began [kronois aioniois, du- 
 ring eternal times]. Whether this mystery be under- 
 stood to mean the whole Gospel plan, or only that part 
 of it, which relates to the Gentiles; yet it is conceded to 
 be a plan which the apostle declares to have been hid 
 during the eternal times. As the word aionios, has been 
 proved and admitted properly and grammatically to 
 mean eternal, the only question now to be decided, is 
 whether it is here to be understood literally or figuratively. 
 
 *Kph, i. 4, tin Libcro de illundo. ^De Corlo lib 9. 
 
182 
 
 The word is here indeed in connexion with KROA^OSy 
 usually translated time; and on account of this associa- 
 tion, it may be supposed, thatitis not to be literally inter- 
 preted. Since time properly must have both a begin- 
 ning and an end, eternal times may be imagined to be a 
 contradiction. But this difliculty vanishes into empty 
 ?pace when on approaching it we find, that such an au- 
 thority as Aristotle employs Kronos as synonomous with 
 duration. He teaches us, that aion [eternity] embra- 
 (^es Kronon apeiron [endless duration] on this authority 
 we may venture to give as a legitimate rendering of the 
 words eternal durations instead of eternal times. If it 
 j^hould be objected, that the words are here found in 
 the plural, and, that a plurality of endless duration, is a 
 plurality of absurdity, the answer is, that among the an- 
 cient classic writers generally, and espeeially among the 
 writers of the Scriptures, nothing is more customary, 
 than to substitute the plural number for the singular. 
 Tiiat the plural is sometimes used, when no meaning 
 diflercnt from the singular is intended, may be seen from 
 tlie following texts; ^^But Israel shall be saved in the 
 1 .ord, with an everlasting salvation; ye shall not be a- 
 shamed, nor confounded, world without end.* And 
 they that be wise, shall shine as the brightness of the 
 firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness, as 
 stars for ever and ever.'' |- The word everlasting and 
 the phrase 7vorld without end in the first text, are ex- 
 pressed in the Hebrew by the plural of olam [eterni- 
 ties]; but are rendered in the Septuagent by aion, sin- 
 gular [eternity]. The phrase ^^for ever'' in the second 
 text, is in the Hebrew olam. singular [eternity]; but is 
 rendered in the septuagent, eis tons eiionas. })lural [to e- 
 ternities]. These cases are indisputable proof, that the 
 plural and the singular, are sometimes interchangeably 
 nsed, when no difference of signification is designed. 
 
 Again, God is said to save us — ^^not according to our 
 works: but according to his own purpose and grace, 
 which was given to us in Christ Jesus before the\vorld 
 
 ^Isaiah xiv. 17. fDar. xii. 
 
183 
 
 began. ^^ Before the ivvrld began, is in the original /?rd 
 kronon aionion. [literally before eternal duration]. 
 Some critics say that this phrase ought to be rendered, 
 the time before the ages of the Jeivish dispensation, be- 
 cause, before eternal duration involves a contradiction. 
 But however anomalous it may appear^ precisely the 
 same kind of language, is employed by the Septuagent 
 in the eighth chapter of Proverbs, where the wisdom of 
 God, which all agree was from eternity , is personified. 
 The phrase from everlasting in the twenty- third verse, 
 in the Hebrew ma-olam [from eternity], is by the se- 
 venty translated pro aionon [before eternities], whicli 
 renders it entirely certain, that in their estimation, pro 
 aionon, is one way of expressing eternity. Now as aion 
 and hronos aionios, have been shown to convey the same 
 extent of idea, so also must />ro aionon and pro kronon 
 aionion. If then the former, in Prov. viii. 23, be pro- 
 perly translated Froin everlasting, as none can dispute; 
 why should not the latter, in 11. Timothy i. 9, be ad- 
 mitted to the same latitude of signification? 
 
 Although it be admitted, that the word aion is frequent- 
 ly used to denote the age of man, a dispensation, the du- 
 ration of the world, and perhaps other finite periods; yet 
 from the authorities already quoted, it is clear, that its 
 literal meaning, is eternity; and this signification, or the 
 nearest to it allowed by the connexion of the word and 
 the scope of the passage in which it is found, is the sense 
 in which it ought always to be understood; otherwise lan- 
 guage ceases to be the vehicle of thought. 
 
 Though aion naturally, is the symbol of eternity; yet 
 when it is said; Jls he spake by his prophets since the 
 world began [ap'aionos], it is plain, that the word can not 
 here be understood in its native sense; because the pro- 
 phets have spoken only since the creation of the world. 
 
 Again, when our Saviour speaking of the sin against 
 the Holy Ghost, declares, that the man guilty of this sin, 
 shall not be forgiven, neither iyi this world [en touto 
 aioni], neither in the world to come [en to mellonti], aion 
 is found associated with committing sins, and enduring 
 
 *U Tim, 1. 9. 
 
184 
 
 punishment; facts which the scriptures invariably repre- 
 sent as belonging, the former to sinners in the present 
 life, and the latter to them in the life to come; and there- 
 fore, to understand it here to mean any thing, but the 
 present and the future state of man, would be totally to 
 disregard the scope of the passage, and the most obvious 
 signification of almost every other v/ord in the text. 
 
 But in the texts, which we have quoted to prove the 
 eternity of God's plan of the universe what in the scope, 
 or connexion, or letter to forbid, tliat aion should not be 
 taken in all the extent of its native latitude? — Nothing. 
 The only imaginable reason, tliat can be rendered for the 
 unwearied labour of certain critics and theologians, in 
 these texts to narrow down the unlimited meaning of the 
 term, is because, in the expanse of its native signiiication, 
 it is death to the peculiarities of the Arminian system. 
 A fact however, that rises to all the power and dignity 
 of a demonstration, that the peculiarities of this s)^stem 
 are at variance with the most obvious interpretation of 
 some parts of the Bible. 
 
 All this inveterate opposition to the doctrine of the e- 
 ternity of the divine plan, arises, no doubt in many cases, 
 from an honest, although we can not say an enlightened 
 conviction, that it makes man a mere machine and God 
 the author of sin; and from a strong desire of obviating 
 these difliculties. But these clifficulties are only imagi- 
 nary. They arise from entertaining unscriptural as well 
 as unreasonable notions with regard to the nature of the 
 divivine determinations. Ah^eady it is believed to be 
 proved in the course of this work, that Deity may have 
 an eternal plan, and yet not be the author of sin, or in the 
 least interfere with the freedom of the creature. And 
 this for the very simple reason, that his plan is, that the 
 creature s /mil be free and the best possible means shall he 
 employed to prevent sin. Now the demonstration, that 
 this doctrine impugns, by any legitimate consequence, 
 either the holiness of God or the natural liberty of the 
 creature remains yet to be exhil)itcd; and it may be ad- 
 ded that no stronger proof, than bold vociferous assertion is. 
 anticipated. 
 
185 
 
 But suppose these objections were real instead of ima- 
 ginary, still the Arminian system annihilates no difficul- 
 ty, which adheres to the most ultra Calvinism. He in- 
 deed conceals the difficulty from the unobserving and 
 the superficial; yet he whose careful feet tread, and 
 whose scrutinizing eye penetrates, every apartment of 
 this edifice, whose front is so carefully swept and gar- 
 nished, will ultimately find the unclean spirit, sometimes 
 associated with seven others worse than itself. 
 
 Suppose it to be a doctrine of ultra Calvinism, that God 
 created a certain portion of the human and angelic hosts 
 with an eternal purpose of their being sinners; and of ma- 
 king them throughout eternity, the miserable objects of 
 his vindicatory justice; and therefore formed them after 
 such a manner, placed them in such a state, and employed 
 upon their minds such a coercive influence, as to secure 
 the exact amount of sin and consequent misery, which he 
 desired, what is gained by adopting the Arminian system? 
 
 The Arminian says ^^.strictly speaking there is no fore- 
 knowledge'^ any ^^more than afterknowledge with God; 
 but all things are known to him as present from eternity 
 to eternity.'' 
 
 Now according to this representation, he eternally 
 views all things and events, either as certainly, or con- 
 ditionally, to exist and happen. 
 
 In the first place, suppose, that he eternally views 
 them as certain. Then, seated on the throne of eternity 
 high and lifted up, he beholds the lake burning with fire 
 and brimstone, filled with human souls and angelic spirits 
 bound in the chains of darkness; and the smoke of their 
 torments ascending with the voice of their wailing forever 
 and ever, as the certain consequence of sin; and sin as the 
 ceiHain consequence of men and angels formed in a par- 
 ticular manner and placed in a particular State; and fi- 
 nally, these men and angels thus formed and thus placed, 
 as the certain consequence of his oivn choosing to form 
 and place them thus. So that he views all this sin and 
 auffering, as arising from the certainty, that he himself 
 yjili choose to form creatures with the very Ijabilites, and 
 
 24 
 
186 
 
 to place them in the very conditions, which will certain 
 ly produce the full amount of sin and sullering commit- 
 ted and endured. Now what difference whether this 
 choice be made from all eternity or only innnediately be- 
 fore the formation of the creature, since the liabilities and 
 circumstances foreseen as productive of sin and destruc- 
 ticn, were selected by the Creator himself, before the 
 creature had existence? If God had no pleasure in the 
 death of the wicked, why at the moment oi' creation^ any 
 more than/ro/?z a/l ttetniity, did he choose to create men 
 and angels with liabilities, so as certainly to become sin- 
 ners, and the certain subjects of eternal suffering? 
 
 But suppose, from all eternity God beheld all things 
 conditionally. Here he saw the burning lake with all the 
 unnumbered myriads of impenitent men and sinning an- 
 gels eternally before him, griped with their chains and 
 writhing in their fires, for ever and ever, to he certain, 
 upon the condition, that there should be men and angels 
 that would sin; men and angels that would sin, upon the 
 condition, that they should be formed with certain lia- 
 bilities, and be placed in certain circumstances: and fi- 
 nally, men and angels th\is formed, and thus placed, upon 
 condition, that he himself would choose to form and place 
 them thus. Suppose all this foreknowledge to have re- 
 mained conditional in the eternal mind, until that pe- 
 riod in duration arrived, when he created men and an- 
 gels; and tJien, in clioosing to create them unth the par- 
 ticular liabilities, and in the particular circiunstances, 
 which he viewed as certainly the antecedents to their 
 sins and miseries, he chose the very condition on which 
 all the others depended. Now wliat though all these 
 things through a great part of eternity, were uncertain; 
 since by the choice of the Creator himself, they were ren- 
 dered certai'iu soon enough to produce all this imagined 
 miscliief, which he is supposed to liave foreseen, to be the 
 certain, though the con ditio7ia I consequence of his choice? 
 And what though they were conditional, since God se- 
 lected the very condition on which li|i foresaw all the rest 
 would certainly turn? — So that, in this matter, the prin- 
 <'ipal difitrence between the ultra Calvinist and th^* 
 
187 
 
 conditional Arminian^ appears to be simply this: the 
 former supposes, that God chose his whole system from 
 all eternity, and the latter, that he chose the condition on 
 which he foresaw all the other conditions would certain- 
 ly turn, at some advanced period in eternity; perhaps 
 just before the creation of the world. But if God had no 
 pleasure in the death of the wicked, why, either from e- 
 ternity or from the foundation of the world, did he choose 
 either the whole system, or the conditioti on which he 
 foresaw the whole system would turn? — As the Arminian 
 supposes, that he eternally knew all things; and conse- 
 quently all things within the compass of his own power, 
 why, unless he have delight in the iniquities, the bur- 
 nings, the groans, and the wailings of the guilty and the 
 miserable, did he not choose that condition, which he 
 knew would not be followed with such wicked and woful 
 consequences? In fine, how is he any less the author of 
 sin by choosing a condition, on which he foreknew all 
 the other conditions — some wicked and woful— would 
 certainly turn, than by choosing the whole system at once, 
 without any conditions? — And how is he any less the au- 
 thor of sin by choosing this conditional system of certain 
 sin and misery at the creation of the world, and not from 
 all eternity? Why choose it at all, either conditionally y 
 or unconditionally, in tiine or eternity'^ 
 
 It is however alledged, that Arminianism supposes, 
 that God in creating his moral subjects foresaw that they 
 would sin freely; but ultra Calvinism, that he coerces 
 them to sin, and that thus the former recognizes the li- 
 berty of man; but the latter denies thatlibepty. 
 
 Then the difference is only this: the former supposes, 
 that God chose to create moral beings in that state of na- 
 tural freedom, which he eternally saw to be the certain 
 condition on which would turn all the sin and suffering 
 ever to be perpetuated and endured on earth and in hell; 
 and the latter, that God chose to create moral beings in 
 such a state and govern them in such a way as infallibly 
 to secure the same guilty and miserable consequences. 
 Or more concisely, ultra Calvinism supposes, that God 
 has chosen to create and govern his moral subjects so that 
 
188 
 
 they shall sin; and Anninianism, that he has chosen to 
 create and govern them so that they will sin. Or per- 
 haps, as there is no Calvinism so ultra as to deny human 
 liberty in every sense, it would be more proper to say, 
 that the one supposes, that God has chosen to create and 
 govern his accountable creatures so that they shall sin 
 freely; and the other, that he has chosen so to create and 
 govern them that they infallibly imll sin freely. 
 
 The partition between ultra Calvinism and Arminian- 
 ism, so far as regards making God the author of sin, is 
 as thin as the diameter of a hair. In the one case he is 
 supposed to choose a certainly ivill sin; and in the other, 
 a certainly shall sin. But if he be a God, that has no 
 pleasure in wickedness, why not chuse to create and go- 
 vern the universe in adopting such a condition as could 
 be foreseen neither with a certainly shall sin, nor with a 
 certainly ivill si7i; but with a certainly 720 sin? 
 
 And if it be imagined, that God created the moral uni- 
 verse, knowing that creating it as he did, it would be the 
 condition on which so much rebellion and misery would 
 be decided, but without determining or choosing to cre- 
 ate it; this is supposing, the act of God, by which he cre- 
 ated all the intelligent armies of the heavens and the 
 earth, to have been like the movements of the brute mat- 
 ter, without intelligence or design; and thus to have been 
 as unmeaning and as merciless as the reach of the fiery arms 
 of the god Moloch to receive the devoted infants; and as the 
 grasp by wiiich he embraced them to his burning bosom. 
 
 Again, if it should be alleged that when God created 
 men and angels, he chose to render all future events con- 
 cerning them contingent; and not to know what would be 
 the certain results; this is adopting a position in itself in- 
 capa])le of ivny proof: and yet, directly denied by such 
 scriptures as teach, that known unto God are allhisivorks 
 from the beginninij^ of the irorhh and that he has made all 
 his works in wisdom; and as fully as the sternest Calvinism, 
 it implicates the Holy one with the authorship of sin.* 
 
 The last argument for the eternity of the plan of God's 
 moral system, is the consequences to which the contrary 
 
 •See No 1 note B pp 31 3"^: 
 
189 
 
 hypothesis legitimately conducts us. It is intuitively ob- 
 vious, that where no determinations are made, there is no 
 plan adapted, if therefore God has not determined every 
 being and event in the universe, every being and event is 
 not embraced in his plan, and then he has an universe 
 stupendous indeed, but in part without a plan. 
 
 The universe is one and will continue in progress 
 throughout eternity to come; if there be any thing there- 
 fore, now undetermined, which will however happen or 
 exist in future, the universe is now in part without a plan. 
 If the actions of men are not all determined, they are not 
 all embraced in God's plan, and then the universe is in 
 part without apian. If there ever was a period since cre- 
 ation began in which there was a future being or event 
 undetermined, then the universe was in part without a 
 plan. 
 
 Now to suppose there is a single appendage viewed by 
 the eye of omniscience as belonging to his own universe, 
 to which his determinations have given no appropriation, 
 or assigned no meaning, appears like more than indirectly 
 implicating the only Wise God with the possibility of folly. 
 Shall the writer, who would deface his own well written 
 page with unappropriated characters, or the orator who 
 would intersperse his speech with unmeaning sounds, be 
 justly charged with folly, and yet, shall we say, that God 
 strew^s the expanse of his harmonious universe with un- 
 intended events and unmeant beings and still not im- 
 pugn his infinite wisdom? 
 
 If from eternity, the Divine being has had no plan, 
 which reaches every event in the universe; and if all his 
 determinations are conditional, he must either have had 
 no designs at first, or found them constantly thwarted. 
 To suppose, that he created the moral universe without 
 any design, appears too preposterous to be for a moment 
 admitted. And if there be any intention admitted to 
 have existed in the infinite mind on the subject of crea- 
 tion, next to his own glory, must have been their happi- 
 ness. He then designed to create moral beings, that 
 they might be happy; behold! after he had designed 
 them for happiness, man and numbers of the angels fell, 
 
190 
 
 and a great link in the chain is broken. On the foresight of this dis- 
 aster he determines to let a portion of the fallen angels lie in the pit 
 into which by transgression they had fallen, there to endure unspeak- 
 able and unterminable woe; but resolves to give his only begotten and 
 well beloved Son wMth the full purpose of saving the whole human 
 race. But here again his design is thwarted. He discovers, that all 
 will not believe. On the foresight of the faith of one part of the hu- 
 man race, and of the infidelity of the other, he lastly determines to 
 save the former, and to consign the latter to unending wretchedness. 
 Thus his designs must have been constantly broken. 
 
 Besides, upon the Arminian hypothesis, that God's plan is not e- 
 ternal, and that all his determinations are conditional, he becomes a 
 changeable Being. He determines to create men and angels. In 
 this determination the state of his mind becomes different from what 
 it was before he had formed such a design. Because he saw man lost, 
 he decrees to send a Saviour. Here again he passes into another state 
 of mmd. He foresees, that some will not believe and forms the de- 
 sign of surrendering them to interminable misery. Here he under- 
 goes a third transmutation. Now if this be so, how can God say I 
 change not? 
 
 Again, Arminianism makes the creature so far as the moral uni- 
 verse — the most important part of God's works is concerned, rule 
 the Creator. If God's choosings in relation to the creature be condi- 
 tional, then the choice of men and angels to sin moved God to plan 
 destruction for the rebellious angels and a Saviour for rebellious man. 
 By the choice of some men to believe the Gospel he is influenced to 
 decree their salvation; but by the free will of others to refuse the mes- 
 sai^'fs of mercy he is induced to ordain them to destruction and thus 
 he is operated upon in all the infinite variety of his creature's choo- 
 sings. So that by consequences drawn from this doctrine apparently 
 legitimate, the unchangeable Jehovah is made to float in theory like 
 a feather in the air liable to be carried North or South, East or West 
 or whithersoever the capricious breath of creature volition may move. 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 To Jo<;eph Lybrand, Samuel Merwin, Saniiul Douj^hty, John Lednum, E- 
 lisha Andrews, Manninp^ Force, Thomus F. Sargent, Tlionias Miller, 
 W.W.Wallace, and Thomas Dunn, Committee of pul)hcation; and 
 John Clarke, editor of the late Religious Messenger. 
 
 As the Religious Messenger professed to be edited, and published for the 
 Philadelphia Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church; and as you 
 have given your names to the world as its Conductors and Editors; it is 
 presumable and presumed, that you owed your elevation to the appointment 
 ^f that body; and, that you appeared before the public, as its regularly con- 
 "tituted organs. 
 
 This elevaiion entitles you to a notice, which from motives of a proper 
 uclf respect, of the offivial dignity of a n\inister of Jesus Christ, and of the 
 peace of the church by avoi<ling to condescend to a certain class of men and 
 matters, might otherwist' b" reasonably withheld. 
 
 In addressing you. it is believed, that no vindictive feelings are indulged. 
 It is devou'^ly wished, that you all v.'ere more enlightened in the doctrines 
 •n' owr Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, than from some of your publications 
 
191 
 
 you appear to be: and, that you were so deeply imbued with that spirit of 
 chanty, which gives these doctrines power over the heart, as to prevent 
 you fronrt descending to the low walks of bigotry, to pander for circulation, 
 reports of things, that mnay be discoloured by prejudice, perverted by depra- 
 vity, or distorted through the obscure naedium of naental inibecihty. 
 
 But for the individual interest of any of us, the general interest of truth 
 and religion ought not to suffer. Better that the personal character of any of 
 us, or of all of us together, should be sunk a thousand degrees below the centre 
 of the world, than that one pin in the temple of truth should lie buried in 
 the rubbish of our ignorance, prejudice, or sectarian bigotry 
 
 When the Remarks published in the Christian Preacher were written, it 
 vas supposed that a faculty, that could send forth strictures, such as 
 those on which the remarks were made, would become fractious on seeing 
 their falsehoods unmasked and their ignorance ridiculed. In this there was 
 no disappointment — To sustain the mean personal attack made in your 
 strictures, upon the Editor in the slanderous misrepresentation of his sermon, 
 on religious ignorance, and in the Christian Preacher, No. 4, p 96, and 
 No 5. pp 118, 119, challenged as a falsehood, you have introduced an ano- 
 nymous letter. In this letter probably written 6y some blackguard, as cer- 
 tain approbrious language which it contains would rather indicate, it is repor- 
 ted, thai the offensive part of the sermon was taken down by one of the au- 
 dience, and is as follows: "You do not know, whether St, Paul or Nebu- 
 chadnezzar lived first; whether Jesus Christ or Judas Iscariot was crucified 
 to save sinners; or whether the Jewish captivity was before or after the 
 flood: — In fine your religious atmosphere is as dark as the smoke which 
 ascends from the bottomless pit." This letter also informs us, that this 
 language being reported to a clerical individual*, he carried it into the pul- 
 pit, and quoting it to the people, informed them, "that were he to apply 
 such language to them he should tel! an untruth, or in other words a lie "— . 
 This anonymous letter writer also says "we maintain, that we do not mis- 
 take, or do violence to his warning, when we state, that his (the Editor's) 
 remarks were levelled at Metbodi&ni.'' 
 
 The language of the sermon as given by this reporter is a falsehood, for 
 which you are held before the public accountable as the panderers and pub- 
 lishers until you surrender your atuhority. Now it is certain, that even in- 
 telligent and skilful stenographers, who come prepared for reporting ser- 
 mons and speeches, frequently misap]:>rehend the speaker, and commit great 
 errors, the public should liave been informed, and that too by better autho- 
 rity than that of some vulgar anonymous letter writer, whether this profes- 
 sed reporter is not some ixeak, prejudiced, gossiping bigot, unacquainted with 
 stenogiaphy and destitute of every other qualification requisite in a reporter. 
 
 But even supposing the reporter to have been competent and the words, 
 to have been delivered as reported, and the speaker to have known that, as 
 the anonymous letter states, one half of the congregation were Methodists, 
 by what kind of logick could the language be construed as levelled at them ' 
 Of the remaining half of the congregation present some were Presbyterians 
 and some were Episcopalians; why might not they as well say, that it was 
 levelled at them? Why nobody take offence but Methodists? And why scarcely 
 any of them?! Why did not the Episcopalians, on the first opportunity, charge 
 their minister to quote the offensive language to their congregation, and give it 
 the /te of the church? Upon the principle here assumed, even in our own houses 
 cf worship, we must not J>.?Ly "Feligious ignorance,^' or Methodist preachers wWl 
 thunder the//> at our heads from the pulpit, and the Philadelphia Conference 
 will rise upon us in masse, znd rend us in more pieces than Sampson did the 
 
 *It is but justice, that the public should know, that the performer of this 
 gallant exploit is said to be, The Rev. Solomon Higgins. 
 
 fin justice to the Methodists of Smyrna it is believed that gll this mischief 
 making^ business was confined to a very small number of their society. 
 
192 
 
 lion. If we may be allowed to compare mean thinj^s together, this resem- 
 bles the story of Portugese Joe. He was fond of intruding himself into the 
 company of gentlemen. In such attempts he was sometimes ridiculed; 
 and being of rather a swarihy complexion, he was frequently, humorously 
 called black Joe, and told, that he was better suited for the company of mu. 
 lattoes than that of gentlemen. Joe did not perfectly understand English, 
 but he began to Hnd, that there was someihing not verv dignitied associated 
 tvith the term black, and this he was determined henceforth to resent. Soon 
 afrerwards Joe happened to be standing near two men in conversation, and 
 in the course of their colloquy, one of them chanced to repeat the word black. 
 Immediately, almost burning with rage and drawing his hand from his 
 pocket, Joe squares himself before the gentleman, and exclaims, with ven- 
 geance in his eye, "you call me inlaci! me ronipe yuii viy knife" And so it 
 seems we must not say to our hearers, ignoraficc, or the Philadelphia Con 
 ference will rompc us in the Religious Messenger. Perhaps wc ought to 
 make for them very much the same kind of allowance, that we would for 
 poor Joe 
 
 In your Messenger of Dec. 13, you represent the Editor of the Christian 
 Preacher, when called to converse v.'ith a person, who was the subject of a- 
 wakening grace, and who was under apprehensions that his day of mercy was 
 .past — as soothing him by telling him "that God had begun a good work in 
 him, and that, as he had begun, so he would complete it in his own good 
 rinie, to the glory of his grace, that the Holy Spirit was at work and would 
 .sustain him through the merits of Christ." You also report the distressed 
 person as taking comfort from the conversation and returning peaceably to 
 his sins: This representation, or rather, this misrejjresentation is -xjalsehood^ 
 
 Tau are arraigned before the bar of the public as its procurers and publishers. 
 The publication of this anecdote, has in it, more of certain o?/)er qualities of 
 the dove, than its hannlessuess; and more of certain other qualities of the 
 serpent, than its cunning. 
 
 The malignity of this story is only equalled by the ignorance which it pro- 
 claims. This anecdote you adduce as a practical comment on spending 
 years in studious prejiaration for the work of the ministry. No stronger 
 proof however, can be adduced in one thing, than this, for the necessity of 
 such preparation If you have represented in this fabrication, as a doctrine 
 of the Presbyterian church, that, which is probably the ductrine oi no church. 
 Who believes, that every convicted, and alarmed person will assuredly be- 
 come a christian? If you had spent a few years in diligent study, you would 
 probably have known better, than to have inij)utcd any such a doctrine to a 
 Presbyterian minister. The man who framed this story may have had a 
 heart bad enough; but not a head good enough to contrive even a feasible lie. 
 And none but a pack of blockheads, could have given it publication, because 
 any others would have known, that it would proclaim the:r own ignorance. 
 Even Satan himself, much as he delights in falsehood, no doubt blushes to 
 behold ^iich devil-like wickedness, beleaguered by the dove-like weakness that 
 enters into the composition of this lie; and if its inventor and publishers do not 
 blush. It is because they have all the Devil's impudence without any of his 
 good sense. 
 
 The pages of the Christian Preacher are intended to be devoted to the 
 doctrinal and practical exhibitions of divine troth; and it is very much re- 
 gretted by the Editor, that the Publishing Committee and Editor of the Phi- 
 Jadelphia Conference, should have mixed with their animadversions on doc- 
 trinal subjectr., mean faUehoods (fa personal character, and thus have render- 
 ed it necessary, that some of our pages should be devoted to mere personal 
 vindication. 
 
 Henceforth refute our doctrines if you di-^like them and the refutations shall 
 be treated as the Editor thinks they deserve, re.,pect/uUy, if they be intelligent 
 and temperutc; 'uith .':excrit. and ridicule, if they be of a dilTerent character; 
 but confine yoursclve'; to his luorks. The course you have pursued will no 
 longer be endured, withnnt recording your names in a document different 
 frT>m the Christian Preacher. l^To be continved.) 
 
THE CHRISTIAN PREACHERc 
 
 Vol. 1. FEBRUARY, 1828. N°. 9, 
 
 THE BEST POSSIBLE SYSTEM. 
 
 My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure. Isaiah 
 xWu 10. 
 
 For thou art not a God» that hath pleasure in wickedness; neither 
 can evil dwell with thee. Ps. v. 4. 
 
 Having established the existence^ the immutability^ 
 and the eternity of God's universal plan^ the design of 
 this discourse, is, 
 
 4. To prove, that it is one of the best possible, to pro- 
 mote righteousness and to prevent sin. 
 
 There are three distinct classes of opponents to the 
 theory advocated in this discourse: 
 
 First, Those who deny the doctrine of God's eternal 
 decrees, and who of course, say, that he has no eternal 
 plan, reaching every being and event in his moral em- 
 pire. 
 
 Secondly, Those who hold, that God has an eternal 
 plan, and, that he might have created and governed a 
 moral universe so, as to preserve it forever, totally ex- 
 empt from transgression and suffering; but that all things 
 wisely considered, it would not be so good as one like the 
 present, in which iniquity and misery abound and, that 
 therefore, since the moral creation would be made better^ 
 and best J by sin, he wisely made provision for its intro- 
 duction. According to thesje. Deity chose sin, because, 
 all things considered, it was wisely pronounced good. 
 
 Thii^dhjj Those who also finally advocate the immuta- 
 bility, the eternity, and the universality of the divine 
 purpose; and believe that God might have chosen a mo- 
 ral system, in which sin would never have spread its pol- 
 lutions and its miseries; but, that he chose this system of 
 disobedience and death, not because it was viewed either 
 as better, or best or even so good, but simply because it 
 was his pleasure so to choose. According to these, he 
 ivould because he ivould. 
 
194 
 
 In the preceding discourse, it was distinctly shown* 
 that the Arniiniau v\ ho denies the eternity of the divine 
 plan, or who, at most, makes it an eternal plan of con- 
 ditions, by adopting a theory which necessarily suppo- 
 ses, that God cJwosts the very conditioiu upon which all 
 the sin and death in the imiverse depended and turned^ 
 as really implicates the Holy One with the authorship 
 of sin, as the Calvinist, who supposes, that God chose the 
 same universe without any conditions. And if so, it 
 appears, that however much these three classes of op- 
 ponents, in other matters, differ among themselves, they 
 all agree, either by acknowledgment, or by inevitable 
 inference, that God act\ially chose a moral universe, sha- 
 ded by sin and ravaged by death, when either condition- 
 ally, or unconditionally, he might have selected another, 
 in which disobedience, woe, and dissolution, would be 
 utterly unknown. 
 
 From these preliminary observations, w^e pass to the 
 consideration of our arguments. 
 
 'llie constitution of moral beings, so far as we are ca- 
 |)able of judging, appear to be adapted in the best possi- 
 ble manner, to be influenced to holiness by moral mo- 
 tives. 
 
 As it was essential to man's moral existence, that he 
 should be the subject of law, and be influenced to obedi- 
 ence through the instrumentality of motives, he was cre- 
 ated with an intellect, and a moral sense, to understand 
 und feel existence and the obligation of law, as well as the 
 presentation and the power of motives. 
 
 Without an understanding to discriminate the distinc- 
 tion, between nght and wrong, man coidd no more be 
 the subject of moral law, than could a clod or a stone. 
 To require him to perform that, of which he had, and of 
 which he possibly could have, no knowledge, would be 
 visibly unreasonable. It was sufficient however, thate- 
 very gi-ade of moral beings, had understanding compe- 
 tent to apprehend laws given to their respective natures. 
 It would ha\ e been as unreasonable to enjoin on man. 
 laws suited to the capacity of angels, as to n)ake a w^orm 
 subject to laws, suiied to tlie capacity of man. And it 
 
195 
 
 was as unnecessary to the moral condition of man, that, 
 to keep the laws adapted to his nature, he should possess 
 the intellect of an angel, as to the irresponsible condition 
 of the worm, that, to fulfil the design of being, he should 
 possess the understanding of a man. 
 
 And thus no excuse for disobedience, can be made by 
 beings of a lower order and less intellect, any more than 
 by beings of a higher order and a greater intellect; be- 
 cause the understanding of both, were adapted to their 
 respective circumstances. Here are two men: one of 
 them possesses strength sufficient to lift and carry four 
 hundred weight; the other, but power competent to raise 
 and bear away two hundred. If it be the duty of both to 
 lift and carry these different hundreds, the obligation of 
 the weaker, is as great, and his failure as reprehensible, 
 as the obligation and failure of the stronger; because they 
 are equally competent for their respective duties: So 
 man in his original estate, was as competent in intelli- 
 gence for his law, as the angels were for theirs. Had 
 God given Adam angelic powers, there is no reason to be- 
 lieve, that he would have been any better qualified for 
 obeying the law of Paradise. It therefore can not be 
 imagined, how it would have been possible to create an 
 intellect better adapted to a sphere of obedience, than 
 man's was to his; and the same is presumed to be true of 
 the angels. It is however certain, that finite intellects 
 of every grade, from the loftiest, down to the meanest or- 
 der, are all liable to be deceived, and therefore, not ex- 
 empt from error. And no remedy for this appears pos- 
 sible, except to change them from finite to infinite minds; 
 and this is impossible; because infinite knowledge is the 
 exclusive prerogative of Deity. It is then no impeach- 
 ment of his omnipotence to say, that he can not create a 
 mind so perfect, that in itself, without any supernatural 
 aid or influence, it is, while unconfirmed by moral means, 
 above all liability to error. He can not, because he can 
 not create another God. He cannot but himself be the 
 Supreme. He cannot^ because he c6{?^^^o/ deny himselfo 
 To suppose, that he can, is to suppose a departure from 
 
196 
 
 the harmony of his perfections and from the rfectitude of 
 his being. 
 
 If this survey of finite moral intellect, be sustained, it 
 is not for us to say, how the understanding either of men 
 or angels, could be better adapted to the obedience of 
 their respective spheres. 
 
 But a moral sense also enters into the composition of 
 an accountable being. 
 
 Man is so constituted, that he not only sees^ hut feels. 
 He not only apprehends an object of pleasure, but he al- 
 so feels a pleasurable emotion. He not only beholds an 
 object of terror, but he also feels himself terrified; and so, 
 when he wanders from the rectitude of the divine law, 
 he not only perceives, that he has erred, but feels, that 
 he is guilty. This feeling, acknowledged even now to 
 operate upon the minds of all the variety of lapsed man, 
 their thoughts always, either accusing or else excusing 
 one another^ may be recognized in its effects upon our 
 first parents, when they hid themselves from the divine 
 presence, among the trees of the garden; and may rea- 
 sonably be supposed to have existed in tlieir bosoms in all 
 its purity and vigor before they had, by transgression, 
 lost their Makers image. So long as their understand- 
 ing viewed their moral movements to be within the li- 
 mits of the holy law, the feeling of approbation glad- 
 dened their steps, and, when to induce to aberration, a- 
 ny siiggestion was offered which the understanding re- 
 cognized as false, this moral sense met the falsehood with 
 a frown, and fdled the mind with the forebodings of fu- 
 ture guilt and of future wrath as the inevitable conse- 
 quences of transgression. 
 
 As there neither is, nor can be, any doubt of the ex- 
 istence and the action of a moral sense in the constitution 
 of man, the jirincipol question to be decided in relation 
 to our general proj)osition, is, whether in kind and de- 
 gree^ it was in our iirst T)arents, the best possible, to 
 guide them in the path of holiness, and to warn them 
 from the wanderings of sin. 
 
 In kind, it involves the compound feeling of guilt and 
 fear — guilt wl^ch recognizes the law as holy, just, and 
 
197 
 
 good; and a fear which bows to a power omnipotent to 
 enforce its sanctions; and thus it was a sense embracing 
 all the considerations of both duty and interest, the stron- 
 gest principles, that can possibly be conceived to exist 
 in the bosom of a finite intelligent being. 
 
 As to the cleg7^ce, the history of our first parents war- 
 rants us in the assurance, that so long as the dictates of 
 the understanding remained unsubdued by deception, 
 and reported as truth the sanction of the Lawgiver, in 
 the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surety die, so long 
 the moral sense approved obedience, and frowned at trans- 
 gression; and approved and frowned in such a degree, as 
 to pursue the one, and to avoid the other. As this sus- 
 ceptibility of mind, from the nature of the case, was, in 
 its province confined to the decisions of the understan- 
 ding, and constituted solely for the purpose of giving 
 them efiiciency; so any degree of feeling more than that 
 necessary to give these decisions effect, would have been 
 no more subservient to the purpose of obedience, and 
 might from its extreme acuteness, have produced much 
 unnecessary unhappiness. 
 
 Now if these representations be correct, as they are 
 certainly believed to be, there is no possible way con- 
 ceivable, in which the moral sense could have been bet- 
 ter adapted to promote the beauties of holiness, and to re- 
 pel the invasions of sin. And as the same has been pro- 
 ved to be true of man's understanding, and as natural li- 
 berty is allowed him on all hands, it is not imaginable, 
 without indeed leaving the regions of possibility and 
 wandering over the wilds of perfect absurdity, how man 
 could have been better formed as the subject of a moral 
 empire; and the same is reasonably presumed of all the 
 higher orders of the intelligent universe. But was man 
 governed, as well as created in the best possible manner 
 to promote the happy dominion of righteousness, and to 
 prevent the desolating intrusions of sin? 
 
 When God had created him, he spread before him all 
 the luxuriance of Paradise, and elevated him to the domi- 
 nation of the world. All the inhabitants of ocean, earth, 
 and air, bowed at his feet, and owned the Sub-sovereign- 
 
198 
 
 ty of their divinely appointed lord. All on this earth, 
 that could delight the eye, charm the ear, or regale the 
 taste, were his without restriction, with the exception 
 of the fruit of a solitary tree. Only by maintaining an 
 exclusive right, to a single tree, did God assert his own Su- 
 preme Sovereignty over the world. If he had placed 
 man over this ample inheritance without any law, he 
 would have disowned his own Supremacy and thus have 
 denied himself; and since according to the infinite rec- 
 titude of his own perfect nature, he 7nust have no crea- 
 ture without a law, what more reasonable, more easily 
 understood, or more easily obeyed, than the Sovereign 
 mandate which encircled, and guarded, the forbidden 
 tree? — It was most reasonable; its obedience implied no 
 protracted, difficult, or painful exertions, either of body 
 or mind; it was simply to withhold the hand. It was 
 most easily understood: it involved no complicateness ei- 
 ther of thought or language: of the tree of the knowledge of 
 ij^ood and evil thou shalt not eaty is a proposition so sim- 
 ple in thought, and so plain in language, that it can be 
 j)s perfectly comprehended by a man as by an angel. 
 It was finally most easily obeyed; because the beneficence 
 of the Creator, in giving him all the abundance of the 
 world as his empire, elevated him above all the tempta- 
 tions of want. 
 
 And to induce him to continued obedience no stron- 
 ger motives could be annexed than the sanctions of life 
 and death, contained in the threatning and the promise. 
 
 And as if to make the iiiducement still stronger, Adam 
 stood as the representative of his posterity. 
 
 If l\c obeyed, they came into the world holy, harm- 
 less, and undcfikd; but if he sinned, they would enter life, 
 the subjects of depravity, and the candidates of death. 
 Now here were the best possible law, and the strongest 
 possi!)le motives. 
 
 But notwithstanding all tills, />// one man sin entered 
 info the ivorld. The serpent said ye shall not surely 
 die: the falsehood v/as accredited; and as the error was 
 not perceived by the undei-standing, ^o'lt could not be felt 
 by the moral sense. Man's understanding was finite, 
 
199 
 
 mid, therefore, was not above all the wiles of deception, 
 that a wise Devil and a cunning serpent might invent. 
 Here was the unavoidable inlet for the possibility of sin 
 in the best possible system. 
 
 Our first parents ought to have believed God, and not 
 the serpent; but still to a different result there was a na- 
 tural liability, in their finite minds. To have removed 
 them from this liability was impossible, so far as we can 
 judge, except by endowing them with the attribute of 
 omniscience, so as to render them exempt from all error 
 in understanding; or by some supernatural agency coun- 
 teracting the natural perfections and volitions of the soul; 
 or finally, by exhibiting to their view, other beings, 
 their enduring punishment for similar trasgression; and 
 thus convincing them, that the threatened penalties 
 would inevitably follow transgression, and, that if they 
 sinned, they would assuredly die. But in rendering 
 them omniscient God would have given his glory to ano- 
 ther. In counteracting, by a supernatural influence, 
 the natural operations of their minds, he would have in- 
 terfered with that personal agency, essential to intelli- 
 gent, voluntary, and probationary beings. There could 
 not possibly be any trial, where God by his own agency 
 would sustain them above all error. Nor, was it possi- 
 ble, without a supernatural infiuence upon their minds, 
 by the way of vision or otherwise, to cause them to be- 
 hold fallen beings, suffering death as the wages of sin. 
 No bodily beings, whose sufferings only could be exhibi- 
 ted to human eyes, had yet sinned; and to have revealed 
 to them the fall of the angels and their sufferings already 
 commenced, would only have been, to tell them, that he 
 had done to others, for their disobedience, what he threa- 
 tened to do to them, if they disobeyed. But this fall, 
 and these sufferings, of angels revealed to man by the 
 voice of God, would not so far as we can see, have been 
 any additional evidence of the infallible connexion be- 
 tween the sin and the penalty; because this history of the 
 angels as much as the threatening denounced against ea- 
 ting the forbidden fruit, would have entirely depended, 
 for credence, on the veracity of God; and since, in the 
 
200 
 
 hour of temptation, man disbelieved the threatening, no 
 reason can probably be assigned^ why he could not have 
 also disbelieved the declaration. If he doubted when 
 God said **in the day thoii eatest thereof thou shalt surely 
 die,'' and believed the serpent who said *S'c shall notsure- 
 lydie;'' would he notas certainly, have doubted; if in vi- 
 sion, Ood had said to him, ^'for disobedience angelic spi- 
 rits now endure total banishment from heaven, and in the 
 chains of darkness are held as the prisoners of justice, 
 until the judgment of the great day, there to be adjud- 
 ged to deeper and more woful penalties,'' and have be- 
 lieved the tempter who would have said, ^^angelic spirits 
 indeed have disobeved, but i/r; not and will not surely suf- 
 fer."' 
 
 Thus so for as our minds are capable of judging of the 
 iitnessof the divine dispensations, it appears, that in a 
 moral system, where probationary obedience is essential 
 as an antecedent to the more perfect state of confirmed 
 obedience, no better means for displaying the divine ho- 
 liness, and for counteracting the ingress, and the ravages 
 of sin, existed within the whole range of moral possibili- 
 ties, than those which God actually employed with man, 
 whilst he remained a probationer under the blissful bow- 
 ers of Paradise. 
 
 Here, however this question may meet us: ^"If the 
 best system of moral discipline, was pursued by the Cre- 
 ator, in relation to man in Eden, why did he provide a 
 tempter?" Man was not the only, nor yet the most im- 
 portant being in the universe. All things therefore in 
 the moral system were not made for Adam. The temp- 
 ter was once a glorious angel of light. He with all his 
 fallen associates once stood unconfirmed as probationers 
 for a confirmed state ofholyand happy existence. Like 
 man in Paradise, they enjoyed natural liberty and were 
 the subjects of moral motives; but exalted as were their 
 spheres, and mighty as were their intellects, their under- 
 standing, was still finite, and like his, liable to error: 
 and their moral condition being thus mutable, like man 
 in his primeval inheritance, they were liable, in case of 
 transgression, to be hurled from their spheres. And 
 
201 
 
 though their powers of intellect were vastly superior to 
 man's and they commanded vastly more strength to re= 
 sist temptation; yet as a man^ on the summit of a moun- 
 tain, comprehends in his view a wider circumference, and 
 surveys a greater number objects, than can the little em- 
 met from the top of liis mole hill, so with their semi-in- 
 finite powers, seated on their elevated thrones, these an- 
 gelic spirits, might behold within the almost measureless 
 circle of their vision, innumerable objects of temptation, 
 utterly unknown to the humble tenant of the garden. 
 They no doubt like man were forew arned of the direful 
 consequences of disobedience, and then were like him 
 left in all the liberty of choice, either to believe or dis- 
 believe. Had they fully accredited, that the wages of sin 
 was death, it is impossible to think, that they would 
 have transgressed; because no sentient being can love 
 pure misery. Finite in their intellects, they may have 
 conceived, that God would not carry his threatening in- 
 to execution, and, that by rebellion they might usurp a 
 supreme pre-eminence in the universe. And this is not 
 mere conjecture since wx are informed by the apostle, 
 that pride is the condemnation of the Devil . And thus 
 they may have sinned and have been cast forth under 
 the curse of a just Sovereign to wander like Cain as the 
 vagabonds of creation. 
 
 To have planted heaven's artillery, and have set le- 
 gions of cherubim with flaming swords all around the 
 bowers of Eden to guard every avenue, at which the 
 tempter could have entered this Sacred abode of ter- 
 restrial bliss, and thus to have prevented him from the 
 seductive act, by which sin entered into our W'Orld, 
 must be admitted to have been perfectly within the com- 
 pass of omnipotence; but for any thing w^e know to the 
 contrary, it may not have been consistent with the best 
 plan of moral government, to confine the angels who 
 kept not their first estate so closely in the chains of dark- 
 ness unto the judgment of the great day, as to hinder 
 them from traversing to and fro the earth, or as to re- 
 strain them from the exercise of that natural liberty with 
 
 26 
 
202 
 
 wiiich they were created, and by which they fell. And 
 if this be admitted, then, since evil became their pro- 
 per element of action, and since in despite of all moral 
 motives, sin they would pursue, God may have suffered 
 the temptation of man as a means of restraining the ad- 
 vei^ary from some greater injury to the moral creation, 
 as he permitted the selling of Joseph to the Ishmaelites 
 in lieu of permitting the destruction of his useful life. 
 So that the permission of the tempter is not inconsistent 
 with rational ideas of the best possible moral system, 
 and therefore can not be urged, with any cogency, as an 
 objection. And moreover since armies of angels enter- 
 ed the lists of rebellion against their Maker, without 
 the influence of a Tempter, so man, surely not more 
 powerful or less peaceable than they, might ultimately 
 have sinned, had Satan never been permitted to tread 
 the walks of Paradise, or to whisper in his ear ye shall 
 not surebj die. 
 
 And as before the fall, so since, the best possible 
 plan, for the prevention of sin, is pursued in the dis- 
 pensations of God. 
 
 To be understood, it is necessary to remark, that in 
 judging of the fitness of the divine dispensations with 
 regard to man, since the fall, it will be all along sup- 
 posed, that the principle elsewhere contended for in 
 this work is true. It is briefly this: Man still is, as he 
 then was, a free agent and a subject to be governed by 
 jnotives; with this difference however; he then posses- 
 sed his Maker's image, and his natural liberty was then 
 addressed by the awful motives of life and death to pur- 
 sue the obedience by which this image would he retain- 
 ed: But nmv as a fallen being he is destitute of that 
 image, and his natural liberty is now addressed, by in- 
 finite and eternal motives, to seek, in the regeneration 
 of the Spirit, the restoration of that lost likeness offered 
 to him ill the mercy of the Gospel, without money and 
 without price. 
 
 Although this position is argued in another part of this 
 work,^' yet as it lies at the foundation of some observa- 
 
 •No. 2, throughout. 
 
203 
 
 tions now intended to be made it may tend to satisfy the 
 mind of the reader merely to state the following consi- 
 derations in its support: 
 
 1 . If this position be not admitted^ then^ there is no 
 constituted connexion between any means pursued by an 
 unconverted man, and his obtaining the grace without 
 which faith and repentance are absolutely impossible; 
 and therefore, it matters very little, what course of life 
 he pursues, because, according to the supposition, God 
 has revealed to him as a sinner, no certain way by the 
 pursuit of which, he may infallibly obtain the grace 
 indispensable to change him from a sinner to a saint. 
 And as there is thus no certain connexion between any 
 improvement, which he can make of God's providential 
 dispensations, and obtaining that grace which is unto 
 salvation, so all these dispensations must be utterly use- 
 less as motives employed in preparing him for accep- 
 ting that gift, which only can make him a new creature 
 in Christ Jesus; and of course, they cannot be consider- 
 ed adapted at all, as means for the restoration of men; 
 nor xdewed as any displays of wisdom in relation to this 
 subject. All this is obviously at variance with, both 
 the letter and the spirit of the Bible, and with the gene- 
 ral aspect of the whole economy of salvation. 
 
 2. In Chorazin and Bethsaida, mighty works were 
 unavailingly performed, which in Tyre and Sidon, would 
 have been followed with repentance in sackcloth and 
 ashes. These however were not works of regeneration, 
 because Chorazin and Bethsaida were upbraided for 
 their unbelief; and yet, the Saviour himself, who spake 
 as never man spake, declares, that had they been done 
 in other circumstances, an evangelical repentance, and 
 of course, a saving faith, would have been the certain 
 consequences. Here is taught, a certain connexion be- 
 tween the manner in which unregenerated men treat the 
 dispensations of God and their experiencing the spirit of 
 regeneration; as also the adaptation of the common means 
 of grace in addressing the natural liberty of man, to pre- 
 pare the mind for realizing the necessity of the regene- 
 rating operations of the Holy Ghost. 
 
204 
 
 With these prelinunary observations in view, we pro- 
 ceed to consider the providences of God towards manaf= 
 ter the fall. 
 
 On the day of his ruin a Saviour was revealed. T^Ier- 
 cy fell from the lips of God in the promise, the seed of 
 the ivonian shall bruise the serpen fs head. 
 
 As all certainties existed iru and coexisted irlthj the 
 eternal state of the infinite mind, there could be no un- 
 certainty of the exact number of the human family, that 
 would be so operated upon in their lost estate, by the 
 means and the motives of the Gospel as in the exercise 
 of their natural liberty to come to Christ, and to ask for 
 the spirit of regeneration; and therefore in the divine 
 plan, the advent of the Son of God was justly viewed as 
 the greatest possible moral means of counteracting the 
 deleterious effects of human apostacy. 
 
 In the economy of the Gospel, offended justice was ap- 
 peased by the Saviours propitiation, and the Spirit en- 
 gaged to recreate the soul, and transform it to tlie lost 
 image of its Maker. 
 
 Had the Saviour appeared in the flesh, as soon as hu- 
 man apostacy required a Mediator, the necessity of his 
 taking upon him the form of a servant, and humbling 
 himself to the accuKsed death of the cross, would not 
 have been so plainly seen, or so universally felt, as it wa«i 
 by waiting, until four tliousand years should pass through 
 their revolutions, and human nature unaided by the divine 
 light of revelation, should also appear, in all the phases 
 of its waxings and wanings, in its own wisdom and its own 
 folly. His appearance on earth was deferred, until the 
 experiment was fully made, that the icorld by wisdom 
 hnciv not God; wliilst during all this dreary intei'val of 
 long and dark centuries, the blood, streaming from ten 
 thousand victims, and the fire blazing upon ten thousand 
 altars appeared as lights and landmarks, to guide the pil- 
 grim to a Saviour to come. And whilst the day spring 
 from on high, that glimmered in the first promise, was 
 spreading ])roader and broader towards the dawn of the 
 Gospel morn, the judgments of heaven pursued the guilty 
 footsteps of all, that closed their eyes against the ligh^ 
 
205 
 
 and turned their faces from the briglitness of its rising. 
 When all flesh had corrupted its way^ the windows of 
 heaven were opened^ and the fountains of the great 
 deep broken up^ and all the earth's living inhabitants 
 with the exception of the tenants of the ark were en- 
 tombed in a watry grave. When the inha])itants of So- 
 dom and Gomorrah became sinners exceedingly before 
 God, the fires of heaven flashed, and consumed the de- 
 voted cities. When the iniquity of the Amorites was 
 full, God commissioned the tribes of Jacob, to extermi- 
 nate the guilty race. And Tyre, Sidon, Ninevah, E- 
 gypt, Babylon, and Jerusalem, were in their turn, each 
 desolated, by the judgments of an offended Heaven. And 
 why all this? Was it because, his eyes, were delighted 
 with the floods and the fires of desolation, or because, 
 the weeping and wailing of the distressed, and the 
 shrieks of the dying, were music to his ears? — No. It 
 was that they might be an enmmple to those that after 
 should live ungodly.'^ At last the light of the Saviour's 
 advent gilds the tops of the distant mountains, and angels 
 ushering in the day, sing, On earth peace and goodwill 
 to men. He appears a babe in the manger, endures all 
 the indignities, toils, and pains of a lowly, earthly pilgri- 
 mage, expires a victim on the cross, and descends from 
 the cross to the sepulchre; and thus drinks the cup of hu- 
 miliation, and misery, to the very dregs, until it is fi- 
 nished. In all this he bare our sins, he carried our sor- 
 rows *, he magynfied the law and made it honourable, and 
 suffered the just for the unjust, that he might bring us 
 to God. But he also has arisen from the dead, and the 
 opening heavens, with the greeting of angels, have recei- 
 ved him until the restitution of all things. In these most 
 august and solemn transactions, God gives man not only 
 an opportunity of returning from his rebellion, and his 
 ruin, but also the strongest motives to return. On the 
 one hand he sees exhibited as the strongest pledge of his 
 Maker's benevolence, his love and mercy, sealed by the 
 blood of the Saviour. On the other, he may survey the 
 
 •2 Pet. ii. 6 
 
206 
 
 stern justice^ and the inflexible truth of his Sovereign, 
 wno spared not his only begotten Son^ when for man he 
 took ttie place of a vicarious sufferer. Oh! what a les- 
 son of justice and truth is taught on Calvary! If God 
 spared not his own Son^ though^ himself^ holy, harmless, 
 iindeliled and separate from sinners^ when only for o- 
 thers he bowed his head to the stroke of justice, how 
 much less, will he spare the impenitent, who in the ne- 
 glect of olfered mercy, and in despite of the Spirit, tram* 
 pies under foot the blood of the covenant, and thus vo- 
 luntarily assumes the responsibility of his own sins! 
 Life and death are now^ set before man, not in the mere 
 voice of an abstract threatening and promise, as to Adam 
 in Paradise; but, drawn on the banner of the cross, with 
 all the deep crimson of the Saviour's blood, in the infi- 
 Tiite magnitude of eternity. Here are motives for obedi- 
 ence presented, which in the nature of the case, could 
 not have been exhibited to our first parents. They in- 
 deed heard the tiireatening pronounced: we not only hear 
 it pronounced, but also see it fulfilled. 
 
 They beheld, in Paradise, no being suffer in human 
 nature for human transgressions; but we see the earth 
 now deluged with water, and now with blood; and above 
 all, tlie Son of God humbled, suffering, and expiring, 
 on the cross, in the punishment of human disobedience. 
 
 Perliaps had Adam scejj the woful penalties of sin thus 
 exemplified, and the justice, truth, and mercy of God thus 
 magnified, he had never eaten the forbidden fruit of Pa- 
 radise. And perhaps these demonstrations of God's truth 
 and justice, and these melting exemplifications of infinite 
 love and mercy, may be motives ever before the eyes of 
 the redeemed, in the realms of bliss, to confirm them in 
 their restored obedience throughout all the revolutions 
 of measureless years, and all the ceaseless progress of 
 their ever-enlarging joys and their ever-increasing glo- 
 
 Thus in the infinitude of the divine mercy, apparently, 
 the best possible system of moral means, has, ever since 
 the fall, been in progress, for the recovery of erring and 
 ruined man, and for confirming him in a state of immor- 
 
207 
 
 tal rectitude and immortal felicity. And this stupen- 
 dous system of moral operations, will move onward 
 through its cycles, from conquering to conquer, subjec- 
 ting new armies to its power, adding new empires to its 
 triumphs, and accumulating brighter and brighter glo- 
 ries, until the rays of conviction shall be reflected from 
 its banners on every human eye, and the sound of the 
 Gospel trumpet fall pathetic on every human ear, and all 
 the rebellious nations, convinced, awed, and melted, 
 will, in the exercise of their natural liberty, bend before 
 their offended Maker, and invoke his regenerating and 
 pardoning mercy. And then, 
 
 Jesus shall reign where'er the sun, 
 
 Does his successive journies run: 
 
 His kingdom stretch from shore to shore, 
 
 Till moons shall wax and wane no more. — Watts, 
 
 But we may venture a step further, and say, that the 
 cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, in all probability, presents 
 the infinite motives of terror, and mercy, which make 
 all the heavenly armies, burn with love and fall w^ith awe, 
 when they catch the sound of their Makers mandates. 
 As soon as Satan and all the revolting hosts of angels sin- 
 ned, omnipotent justice dislodged them from their celes- 
 tial seats, and flung them down from their glorious dig- 
 nities. The angels that still stood guiltless, when they 
 saw these clusters of morning stars fall from the firma- 
 ment, and sink in endless night, from the fatal catastro- 
 phy, must have learned, that not in \ ain was it written 
 by the hand of justice, on every gate of the holy city, 
 and in the statute book of every world, the soul that sin- 
 neth it shall die. Here they saw it verified; when they 
 beheld Adam driven from Eden, they saw it confirmed; 
 but when they surveyed the Redeemer, suspended, for 
 the sins of men, upon the cross, and heard him pro- 
 nounce it finished, they viewed it sealed, by the blood of 
 the Son of God, and ratified by the same voice, that said 
 let there he light and there was light. 
 
208 
 
 And if there should be any orders of heavenly beings 
 above those angels^ that for their sins were cast down 
 from their principalities, lest t he i/ should say, ^^though 
 men and the inferior angels are punished forever for their 
 first disobedience, yet should zvc^ the inhabitants of 
 thrones, and powers, and more august principalities, 
 ti'ansgress our legal boundaries, perhaps in consideration 
 of our nobler natures, and loftier elevations, God would 
 not with the same hand of just omnipotence, desolate our 
 habitations, and consign us to the deep of death and night, 
 to be reserved for the judgment of the great day^' — lest 
 there should be any doubts in the ranks of moral beings, 
 high or low, ^'whether or not, the result of sin is inevi- 
 tably death," God sent him, who is above all thrones, 
 powers, and principalities — above all armies of cheru- 
 bim, and seraphim — him, lu/io being in the fonn ofGoch 
 thought it not robbery to be equal ivith God — him, to 
 assume a human body, and take the place of human trans- 
 gressors — and him, who is his only begotten Son, when 
 he stands in the siimer's stead, he spares not. Thus mo 
 ral beings all, in a spectacle of the most awful, and au- 
 gust exemplification, behold the threatened penalty of 
 disobedience sealed, and ratified on the cross; and all 
 are taught, that sulfering and death, God hath insepara- 
 bly joined with sin. And thus the sufferings of impeni- 
 tent men, and sinning angels, and above all, the suffer- 
 ings of the redeemer, are most probably made the moral 
 means of confirming all the holy armies of the universe 
 in perpetual obedience. Stronger motives of love and 
 terror, are now ])resented, than before the introdiiction 
 of sin, were])ossible, and thus, the most Wise and Bene- 
 ficent Sovereign, overrules the imperfeet'ion of the mo- 
 ral universe, to confirm the obedient part of the moral 
 universe in allegiance and felicity. 
 
 It is entirely /;ro/;r//^/^, nay, we may say, morally cer- 
 tain, that with such exemplifications of God's truth and 
 j\istice before their eyes, Satan and his satellites; had ne- 
 ver rebelled, and sinless man had never sinned. 
 
 From this survey of the subject, it is evident, thatthe 
 fact, that Ciod maintains the holy angels and the saints in 
 
209 
 
 heaven in a state of confirmed obedience, is no argu- 
 ment, that a sinless moral creation is possible. Before 
 there were sinners to punish, either in their own persons 
 or in the person of their surety, the penalty of sin, could 
 only be threatened in the ears of the moral universe, but 
 could not be exhibited mfact before their eyes. But 
 now, it is not only proclaimed, but exemplified, not only 
 heard^ but seen ?iXi^ felt. 
 
 From a careful attention to the facts in the economy of 
 God's moral kingdom, my mind can conceive of no sys- 
 tem of government possible, better adapted to restrain 
 from transgression and induce to obedience. 
 
 It is, how ever admitted, that our inability to conceive 
 a better mode of creating and governing, is of itself no 
 complete and conclusive proof, that the best possible 
 mode of creation and government, has actually been a- 
 dopted and pursued; yet it serves to bear the mind on- 
 wards towards such a conclusion, and prepares it well for 
 other kinds of proof. 
 
 It is a mode of reasoning universally employed and 
 from this fact, appears to rise out of the principles of the 
 human mind, that a man 's system of action, will be like 
 himself. And upon this principle, we judge and act eve- 
 ry day of our lives. We will have confidence in one 
 man, because he is esteemed a person of integrity, and 
 we suppose, that if relied on, he will not deceive us. 
 We will not trust another, because he is generally consi- 
 dered dishonest, and we conclude, that if depended on, 
 he will probably prove faithless to us. In adopting this 
 common sense mode of judging, we take nothing for gran- 
 ted in the principle, however much we may be deceived 
 in the facts, w^ith which it may be occasionally associa- 
 ted. If we open the newly-grown husks on a stalk of 
 corn, w^e find the ear in miniature, and probably were 
 our vision sufficiently penetrating to examine the seed, 
 we should there find, in a still smaller miniature, the 
 whole stalk with all the ears. Because the grain really 
 contains the same stalk, and ears, which time and oppor- 
 tunity exhibit to us in such magnified forms. In the 
 
 27 
 
210 
 
 same manner the principles of action contain the germes 
 of action. Power comprehends the germe of action. 
 Power united with wisdom, the germe of w^ise actions. 
 Power associated with wisdom and goodness, the germe of 
 wise and good actions. And where these principles of 
 action are found, time and opportunity only, are wanting 
 to the exhibition, or full developement of corresponding 
 actions. 
 
 Hence an eflicient, wise and good man, involves all the 
 miniature of good and wise actions, and time and oppor- 
 tunity only, are the additional requisites to the actual 
 occfirrence of those actions. 
 
 And this scale of Judging is not only sanctioned by 
 the pi inciples and feelings of the human constitution, 
 but is also recognized by the authority of revelation it- 
 self. In allusion to this very subject, the Saviour de- 
 clares, that a good tree hringeth forth good fruity hut 
 a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit; and also^ 
 that a good man out of the good treamre of his heart, 
 bringeth forth that tvhich is good; and an evil man out 
 of the evil treasure of his hearty bringeth forth tJtat 
 ivhichis evil^ for of the abundance of the heart the mouth 
 speaheth. 
 
 Now only suppose a good and wise man who is efficient 
 according to his goodness and wisdom, to become immu- 
 tal)le, and tlien we would expect, that his system of ac- 
 tion would invariably be good and wise, to the w hole ex- 
 tent of his goodness and wisdom; but conceive his wisdom 
 and goodness together with his power to become infinite, 
 and we shoidd judge his whole system of operations to be 
 unchangeably an\l infinitely good and wise — the best pos- 
 sible. Such a being is (iod; unchangeable, and infinite- 
 ly powerful, good, and wise. Now if we allow him these 
 atti ibutes and yet deny that his system of operations is 
 the best possible, vve desert the feelings and principles 
 of the human constitution, and above all, the scale of 
 judging which the Saviour himself has graduated, and 
 gi' e nmre credit to the power, wisdom, and goodness of 
 the creature, according to the degree in which they are 
 
211 
 
 found to exist in him, than to the same qualities in the 
 Creator himself. 
 
 But God has taught us to reason in the same manner in 
 regard to himself. If he reveal himself to be the Judge 
 of all the earth, the mode of our reasoning is to be, 
 Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right? If a God 
 of might and wisdom, we are to infer that, he changeth 
 the times and the seasons; he removeth kings and set- 
 teth up kings; he giveth ivisdom unto the ivise and 
 knoivledge to them that know understanding: He re- 
 vealeth the deep and dark things. If he proclaim, 
 Return thou backsliding Israel, and I loill not cause 
 mine anger to fall upon thee, it is because he is MER- 
 CIFUL. If that, the Lord your God ivill not turn 
 away his face fro^n you if ye return unto him, it is he- 
 cause, he is MERCIFUL. Thus when he reveals him- 
 self to be a wise, omnipotent, just and merciful being, 
 he teaches us to suppose, that his operations will never 
 be inconsistent with these perfections. 
 
 This theory is sometimes opposed, because by some 
 men of speculation it is imagined to take away the li- 
 berty of Deity and bind him in the chains of a fatal ne- 
 cessity. 
 
 But surely, a liberty to deny himself and become a 
 false, inconsistent, and subordinate being, is a kind of 
 liberty which it is apprehended a holy God requires not 
 at our hands. It is believed, that the Scriptures no 
 where teaches us, that he wills so and so, merely because 
 he wills so and so; and that what he wills is right, just 
 because it is a Sovereign that wills. If this system be 
 true, he might by a sovereign act of his will convert his 
 ov/n holiness into pure sin, and all the iniquity of the 
 Devil into perfect righteousness. 
 
 We rejoice that God is a Sovereign, but it is because, 
 he is a wise, just, good, and true Sovereign. We re- 
 joice, that his Sovereign will is done in the armies of hea- 
 ven and amongst the inhabitants of the earth; but it is be- 
 cause, we believe, that his Sovereign will most perfect- 
 ly accords with the most perfect wisdom, justice, good- 
 ness, and truth. We rejoice, that the Lord reigneth; 
 
212 
 
 but it is because we most firmly believe^ that this glori- 
 ous Sovereign wills all things in the very best possible 
 manner. 
 
 But in the nature of the case, this objection is without 
 any reasonable foundation. jVecessiti/ is a word which 
 ought to be exploded, from the vocabulary, employed in 
 discoursing on the voluntary operationsof intelligent be- 
 ings. It is a kind of Proteus, which by one man is taken 
 to mean one thing, and by another another. In disqui- 
 sitions on the voluntary operations, of mind, substitute 
 ^^certainty" in its place, and misapprehension vanishes. 
 
 The certain harmony of God's choice, with all his infi- 
 nite perfections, is no proof of any infringement of liber- 
 ty. To suppose the contrary, is to desert our manner 
 of reasoning in regard to men. Who acquainted with 
 language^ supposes, that a prudent and benevolent man 
 acts, not freely, because his choice of action strictly har- 
 monizes with the qualities of prudence and benevolence? 
 To attribute to God a latitude of choice, which may se- 
 lect for its object, things at variance with any one of his 
 perfections, is to suppose, that his will may beunharmo- 
 nious with his attributes, and is to make his choosings, 
 acts of mere caprice, and not of rational choice. If 
 in acts of choice, he have no regard to mercy, he may 
 become cruel; if none to his justice, unjust; if none to 
 his truth, false; if none to his immutability, changeful. 
 Or if his choosings may have only a partial harmony 
 with these attributes, then his acts may become partial- 
 ly cruel, unjust, false, and changcfil. But it is belie- 
 ved, that there is no medium between the /°/2 //re hanno- 
 mi of the divine choice, and the divine perfections, and 
 no harmony at all. lint if no harmony at all, then we 
 see, that the divine Being may change himself into a 
 monster of falsehood, cruelty, and injustice, the thought 
 of which isimpious:but x'ixSxQv^h^^ perfect harmony^ he 
 has certainly^ hut freely adopted one of the best possible 
 vsystems. 
 
 Some imagine, that the best possible system supposes 
 God, under a kind of necessity to exercise mercy to sin- 
 ners; and to be thus opposed to the Scriptures, w hich al- 
 
213 
 
 ways represent mercy^ a free act. It has just been shown, 
 that the theory as here advocated supposes a necessary 
 choice to be no choice at all^ and^ that the certain har- 
 mony of God's choice with any of his perfections^ and 
 consequently with his mercy, is no infringement of ration- 
 al liberty, and, that any other kind of liberty is mere 
 caprice. The objection only hides its weakness under 
 the ambiguous term necessity; remove the term, and the 
 fallacy is visible to every observing eye. 
 
 This theory is sometimes supposed to annihilate all dis- 
 tinctions between right and wrong, between sin and 
 righteousness. 
 
 It is confessed, that the theory heretofore denomina- 
 ted optimism^ lays ample foundation for the objection. 
 Its advocates suppose, that God might have created and 
 governed the moral universe, so as forever to exclude 
 sin, but, that all things considered, it was more useful 
 and therefore better, that sin should be introduced into 
 the system, and for this cause, in the creation and go- 
 vernment of the universe, he made provision for its intro- 
 duction and controul. And thus according to this hypo- 
 thesis, any possible moral system without sin, would not 
 be the best; and the present is made the best by the sin 
 and misery with which it is attended. To exhibit in one 
 view the positions, expressed and implied in this doctrine, 
 in connexion with their legitimate consequences, the 
 statement is briefly this: — 
 
 Utility is the foundation of virtue; therefore whatever 
 is useful is virtuous; But in the moral universe taken as 
 a whole, sin is useful; Therefore sin is virtue!!! 
 
 Again, As utility is the foundation of virtue, a useful 
 being is virtuous. But if sin be useful, Satan the author 
 and promoter of sin must be a useful being; Therefore 
 Satan is virtuous!!! 
 
 It is with regret admitted, that this doctrine so appal- 
 ling in its positions, and so monstrous in its inevitable 
 consequences, is advocated in the writings of very great 
 and good men in our own country, as the best possible 
 system. But the very terms in which the doctrine of 
 
'^14 
 
 this discourse is announced, ought to redeem it iVom the 
 imputation contained in the objection. 
 
 Again, God professes toha\'e no pleasure in the death 
 of the wicked, and not to afllict willingly, or grieve the 
 children of men. Now since in all things possible, to will 
 and to do, with him are the same, to select a moral sys- 
 tem with any amount of sin, whilst another which would 
 be perfectly sinless, might equally well have been cho- 
 sen, the existence of any degree of transgression, is a 
 matter, soltly of the divine choice. And as sufiering 
 and death are so inseparably joined with disobedience, 
 as to be identified with it, they must also obtain being, 
 as matters, solely of the divine choice; and therefore, ei- 
 ther he chooses to afllict unwillingly, and chooses that 
 in which he has no pleasure, when consistently with all 
 his perfections, he might have chosen that in which he 
 would have had entire pleasure; or he does afllict wil- 
 lingly and grieve the children of men, and has pleasure 
 in the death of the wicked; or, finally, he has chosen the 
 best possible system; and the moral evil found in it, ari- 
 ses not either, from the divine choice, or the divine pow- 
 er; but wholly from the imperfections of the ])est formed, 
 aiid l)est governed plan of moral being. But as the first 
 supposition contradicts common sense, and the second, 
 the word of God, of consequence, the third and last on- 
 ly, can be the doctrine of Scripture and of reason. 
 
 One pai't of our text afiirms, that God docs all his plea- 
 sure. Of course the plan which he has eternally adop- 
 ted, taken as a whole, is the one of his pleasure; but if it 
 have not in itthe least possible aggregate of sin, ithasin 
 it, some sin, which the Creator and Sovereign might 
 have avoided, and this avoidable sin v»as introduced iY?/(- 
 /// by his Sovereign will: and therefore, he cillier chose 
 that Which he was not pleased to choose, or he had plea- 
 sure in wickedness. But the former is a contradiction 
 in terms; aiid the latter is confronted by the other part 
 of our text, which declares, tliou art not a God that 
 tiuth pleasure in wic/udness. 
 
 This text is confirmed by such other Scriptures as 
 these: — ""Let none of you imagine evil in yqur hearts a- 
 
215 
 
 gainst his neighbour, and love no false oath; for all 
 these are things that I hate saith the Lord.'^^ ^^These six 
 things doth the Lord hate; yea seven are an abomination 
 unto liiui; a proud look, a lying tongue, and hands, that 
 shed iiiuocent blood; an heart that deviseth wicked ima- 
 ginations; feet that be swift in running to mischief, a false 
 w itness- that speaketh lies, and him that soweth discord 
 among brethren."*! And others might be added indefi- 
 nitely which variously denounce sin as the abominable 
 thing which God hates. 
 
 If he might equally well have chosen a moral system, 
 that wouJd have remained forever untarnished by these 
 abominations, then he chose them not, as on his part, 
 the unavoidable imperfections of a moral creation, but 
 simply as imperfection its very abstract self. Accor- 
 ding to tliis theory the moral universe might have been en- 
 tirely sinless, had God willed it to be so, and he might have 
 willed it to be so, in consistency with all his perfections, 
 yet without acting in harmony with all his attributes, he 
 chose, that it should not be sinless, and to accomplish this 
 choice, he so constructed and governed his accountable 
 creation as to introduce iniquity, and thus, the theory 
 opposite to ours, impliedly teaches us, that the Divine 
 Being chooses the very things which he solemnly declares 
 that he hates. 
 
 The Bible also testifies, that The just Lord will not 
 do iniquity, X ^^d that, God can not be tempted of evil, 
 neither tempteth he any 7nan.^ 
 
 Since to govern the moral empire in the best possible 
 manner to resist sin, and not in the best possible manner, 
 are equally in subjection to the pleasure ofGod,if hewill 
 not do iniquity, nor tempt any man to evil, it is reasona- 
 ble to infer, that he would not create moral beings with 
 any liabilities to sin, but such as unavoidably arise out of 
 the constitution of finite intelligent and free agents, and, 
 that he would not expose them to any inducements to 
 disobedience, but such as would unavoidably attend their 
 circumstances and relations in the scale of being. 
 
 *Zechariah viii. 17, fProv.vi. 16, 19. :fZephaniah iii, 5, §James i 3, 
 
216 
 
 If he did not create them with the fewest liabilities to 
 sin^ and govern them with the fewest inducements to sin, 
 that in their nature, circumstances, and relations, were 
 possible, it must have been according to the supposition, 
 because, he would not, and not because he could not. 
 These texts imply, that it would be wrong in God to do 
 iyiiquitij himself or to tempt men to its commission. 
 But, designedly, to communicate to others any liabilities 
 to do evil, or to influence individuals to tempt others to 
 crime, is hi the eye of common sense and in tiie estima- 
 tion of our moral judgment equally criminal with actu- 
 ally perpetrating the crime, and with personally temp- 
 ting others to its perpetration. Suppose, that judging, 
 that if a certain man should become intoxicated and 
 should in this situation be operated upon by the conver- 
 sation of others, he would commit murder, I should urge 
 upon him the intoxicating draught, and should employ 
 persons as my agents, to inflame his passions and incite 
 his mind, until he commits the fatal deed, would it avail 
 me to plead, that I neither committed the murder nor 
 tempted him to the commission? 
 
 And so, if it would be inconsistent with the character 
 of God, either himself to do iniquity or to tempt men to 
 evil, for any thing we can see, it would be equally in- 
 congruous with the holiness of his being, either to create 
 his moral subjects with any avoidable liabilities to sin, 
 or to cast in their way any avoidable inducements to 
 transgression and to conse(iuent misery. In either case, 
 he ineviably becomes the author of sin, and the elector 
 of misery. 
 
 Finally, all certainties eternally exist in the state of 
 the Infinite Mind, and eternally coexist in the divine, 
 choice, and in agreement with all the perfections of the 
 divine nature; of course the certainty of this supposed 
 avoidable amount of sin, must have eternally existed in 
 the state of the Infinite Mind, and coexisted in the di- 
 \'ine choice and in agreement with all the divine perfec- 
 tions, and therefore avoidable sin, — sin purely as sin — 
 is eternally the object of the divine choice, and eter- 
 nally aerrecs with the perfections of the divine nature- 
 
217 
 
 But this agreement or harmony of the divine perfections^ 
 emanating in the divine choice^ constitutes Suprene ho- 
 linessj therefore sin enters into the very essence of per- 
 fect holiness, and as God dehghts in holiness, he must he 
 pleased with the ivicked every day. 
 
 The only, or at most the principal objection to the doc- 
 trine of this discourse, is that there is something sounding 
 like an impious audacity in aflirming, that the Omnipo- 
 tent can not create a better moral universe. 
 
 To meet this objection, it ought to be sufficient, to 
 ask the objector, how much less of impious audacity, 
 sounds in the proposition which contains his creed: 
 '^God chose, that some men and some angels should not 
 remain holy and happy, but should sin, and weep, and 
 w^ail, and gnash their teeth amidst devouring flames and 
 everlasting burnings, when simply, by his willing differ- 
 ently, they might all have remained holy and happy for- 
 ever?'" — There is no neutral ground between these pro- 
 positions. Either God has chosen the universe in ^vhich 
 there is the least possil)le sin and misery, and which is 
 therefore, the best, or in selecting one ivo7\se than the 
 best, he has actually preferred, that some of his creat?ires 
 should be sinful and misemhle. And this is not only 
 implied in the creed of the Calvinist, who rejects the 
 best possible system, but also in that of the Arminian. 
 It has already been shown, that by unavoidable inference, 
 Arminianism supposes, that God actually chose the ? Try 
 condition o\\\N\\\e\\d\] the '!^m and suffering of the univeree 
 depended and turned — on which turned the first sin of 
 the Archfiend with all his apostate armies, and the sin of 
 man in Paradise: and also, all the adulteries, idolatries, 
 rapines, and murders, that ever have defiled, enslaved, 
 desolated, and stained the world, and all that ever will; 
 and on which turned, all the agonies, felt by the unnum- 
 bered millions, both of infants and adults, that have ever 
 writhed in death since the destroyer began his desola- 
 tions: and all that ever will endure the pains of dissolu- 
 tion; as well as all the unending torments, that shall be 
 endured in the hiiniing lake by the hapless armies of lost 
 
 28 
 
218 
 
 men and sinning angels. Thus Arminianism supposes, 
 that God chose tiie condition on which depended this uni- 
 verse with all its inteinninable disobedience, and all this 
 everduring misery. But why did he choose the condi- 
 tions — the ctrtain conditions of such an universe? Was 
 it because, in his infinite and eternal survey, he viewed 
 it as the very best possible plan so to choose? No. Ar- 
 minianism denies, that God has ever adopted any eter- 
 nal plan, that reaches to every being and event. Why- 
 then did he choose this condition on which turned such a 
 vast amount of sin and suffering? — The only answer pos- 
 sible, on this hypothesis, is, that he chose it just because 
 he rcilled to choose it — He ztw^A/. just because, he would. 
 Here the Arminian and ihe Calvinian theories of philo- 
 sophical divinity, after pursuing different routs, meet at 
 the same point, and equally implicate a holy and merci- 
 ful God with the authorship of sin, and the electorship 
 of misery. Either conditionally or unconditionally, ac- 
 cording to these theories, God chose disobedience and 
 death as the lot of a part of his creatures, not because they 
 were the certain results of the best formed, and the best 
 governed moral creation; but simply, because he prefer- 
 red their existence to their non-existence. 
 
 It awkwardly becomes the patrons of such creeds to 
 comjjlaiu of harsh sounding propositions. What can 
 more grate* horror on the ear of Bible piety, than the 
 anti-scri])tural dogma, that re])rcscnts a lioly and merci- 
 ful fiod as the author of sin and the elector of misery? 
 
 It has however been already sho\vn, that when we say, 
 thnt God can not create a moral system every part of 
 whicli will ccrtiiinly nevei' sin, we only say, that he can 
 not deny himself by creating beings as absolutely perfect 
 as himself — he can not, because he can not but act as 
 God. If he create, he creates ereaiureSn and the most 
 exalted creature inicon(irmed, is fallible. 
 
 A few practical consequences will conclude this dis- 
 course. 
 
 •See note at the end of ihe sermon. 
 
^19 
 
 If in the creation and government of the moral unit 
 verse, it be true, that God has eternally adopted the bes- 
 plan possible, to counteract the existence of sin; if sin was 
 produced neither by the choice nor the power of God, 
 but wholly by the abused free agency of the creature; 
 and if God decreed sin only in determining to suffer the 
 creature to act in the exercise of his natural liberty as he 
 eternally knew that in the best possible plan of moral 
 government he certainly would act, then the vortex of 
 Arminianand Calvinian philosophy, which whirls us into 
 the deep presumption of inferentially charging a holy 
 God with the authorship of sin, is completely avoided; 
 and the Presbyterian can understandingly adopt the 
 Sriptural language of his Confession of Faith and say ^^God 
 from all eternity did by the most wise and holy counsel 
 of his own will, freely and unchangeably ordain whatso- 
 ever comes to pass; yet so as thereby neither is God the 
 author of sin; nor is violence offered to the will of the 
 creatures, nor is the liberty or contingency of second 
 causes taken away, but rather established.^' 
 
 The adoption of this doctrine furnishes us with a key 
 by which we are enabled to unlock the ark of mystery that 
 to the minds of many, shuts up the meaning of such texts- 
 as these: T/iou ivilt say then unto me. Why doth he 
 yet find fault? for who has resisted his ivill? 
 
 As God has decreed to suffer your sin only as the cer- 
 tain result of your own abuse of natural liberty, from which 
 you will not be restrained by the best possible course of 
 moral means, he decreed it only as an imperfection which 
 your abuse of liberty makes certain in the best possible 
 moral system. And hence he merely determined to suf- 
 fer it in preference to no moral system. He wills it not 
 as a thing in itself desirable, but as a real evil to be endu- 
 red however, rather than to endure the non-existence 
 of an universe in which, although as a creature imper- 
 fect, there is almost infinitely more good than evil. 
 Therefore to say, that he decrees, determines, wills, or 
 chooses, to endure it as the certain imperfection of the 
 best universe, is not saying, that he decrees, determines, 
 chooses, or wills it as sin, A benevolent physician may 
 
220 
 
 hate the travel of a dark and stqj^my night, or the perfor- 
 mance of a difhcuit and dangerous surgical operation; 
 and yet, in his endeavours to save the life of a pati'-iit, 
 he may determine to endure either one, or hoth of tiiesc 
 things which he hates. Thus, while God determiiiLS to 
 endure your iniquities as the certain imperfections resul- 
 ting from the best universe, lie hates them as sins. You 
 however love them as sins. Here you and God are at 
 variance. And by doing the thing which he hates^ 
 though he wills to suffer your disobedience, you' have 
 resisted his will, and are therefore amenable at his high 
 tribinial. The perfections of the Most High, afford us 
 ground for the strongest assurance, that his system of o- 
 perations, is the very best. Then, O maa^ who art 
 thou^ tfiat repliest against God? Shall the thing formed 
 (as if the Maker could possibly do wrong) say to him 
 that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Hath 
 not the potter power over the clay of the same lump, to 
 make one vessel to honour and another to dishonour? 
 
 God has a right to pursue the best possible system of 
 operations, even though he knows, that while a great por- 
 tion of his works, will be confirmed in honour, a small 
 portion of them, by the abuse of their own liberty, and 
 his goodness, will bring themselves to dishonour. Espe- 
 cially, since by punishing the small portion of disobedi- 
 ent, he confirms in allegiance the great portion of the obedi- 
 ent; and since, if these disobedient had not been created, 
 had notfallen, and suffered, and thus become, as ensainples 
 of terror or mercy, the means of preventing others from 
 disobedience, some of those others, now confirmed, could 
 not, in that case, have had before them this means of 
 prevention, and woidd therefore, have fallen, and have 
 become sinful and miserable, and thus, sin would not still 
 have been prevented; and the amount of happiness in the 
 universe would have been less than at present. If you 
 should ask, **Iiow could God mercifully create us, intending 
 to suffer us to sin, and to endure everlasting woe as a 
 means of confirming others in ha])piness?'^ this is the an- 
 swer: The mercy of God is but a modification of his 
 goodness. His goodness is best displayed, in pursuing 
 
221 
 
 that course of operations by whicli^ he can conimimicaie 
 the greatest amo' ait of happiness. It hae. just been ] ro- 
 ved, that if God had not ci*eated you, as much hap; iness 
 as there is, could not noA' be in the universe; and thus, 
 it was more merciful in Deity to create you. although he 
 knew, that you would rebclliously choose for yourselves 
 disobedience and wrath; asid although, he determinedt o 
 suffer your wretched choice; than to have omitted your 
 creation. 
 
 But let us pursue this objection out to its consequences: 
 You say that the Supreme Being could not mercifully 
 create you, knowing that you would certainly sin and 
 become eternally wretched, even though your disobedi- 
 ence and misery, should be the effects of your own. 
 choice, and be made the means of confirming unnumbe- 
 red other beings in endless obedience and happiness. 
 Then suppose your objection to be valid, and that you had 
 not been created: Others now confirmed would then 
 have been without those means of confirmation which 
 your transgression and misery have afforded them, and 
 without these means some of them would have fallen; and 
 their sin and ruin would have been held up as motives to 
 prevent others from rebellion and w retchedness . But they 
 might, on equal ground with yourselves, make the same 
 objection. And if admitted to you, so equally to them, 
 and if to them, to others, and to others, indefinitely, until 
 the result would be, God could not, mercifully, create 
 any beings liable to sin and suff'ering; and as all moral be- 
 ings unconfirmed, are in their very constitution thus lia- 
 ble; and as in consistency with the freedom of their in- 
 tellectual and moral nature, they can be confirmed, only 
 by a survey of the wrath, and the mercy, displayed in 
 the punishment and pardon of sin, a moral universe, ac- 
 cording to the objection, could not be mercifully crea- 
 ted. And thus according to this hypothesis the capri- 
 cious and rebellious choice of a few creatures, ought to 
 prevent all the happiness and glory ever enjoyed and 
 displayed in all the immensity of God's moral kingdom. 
 This would be to sacrifice the happiness of the many to 
 the caprice of the few^ and is undeniably unreasonable. 
 
222 
 
 And lieiice it is, that God loUling to show his lorafh 
 and make his power kaown, endures with much long 
 suffering the vessels of wrath fitted (by their sins) for 
 destruction; that he inight make known the riches of 
 his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he afore pre- 
 pares unto, glory. Over-ruling all things for good. 
 God endured the presumptuous disobedience of Pbaraoh, 
 that in punishing him for his sins, he might make such 
 demonstrations of his wrath and power, as placed on re- 
 cord, should be exhibited to the sons and daughters of 
 disobedience from age to age, as motives of terror to warn 
 them of a future judgment, and awe them to repentance; 
 and thus to become the means of preparing them to be 
 the vessels of glory and honour: And as of Pharaoh so 
 of other wicked men. 
 
 The doctrine of this discourse, speaks comfort to the 
 christian when almost overwhelmed in the deep waters 
 of affliction. Troubles come not by chance: The Lord 
 reignethj and if he send trials to afflict his children, it is 
 for their good; for, all things work together for good to 
 them that love God, to thein loho are the called according 
 to his [jurpose. If your heavenly Father corrects you, 
 your sins have demanded this correction. It is designed 
 and adai)ted for good, if you only look to him for grace 
 to improve it for good. 
 
 If improved, the light afflictions that are hut for a 
 moment shall work out for you^ afar more exceeding 
 and eternal weight of glory. 
 
 It proclaims terror to slothful professors of religion, 
 and hypocrites. If God determine every being and 
 event in the universe in the best possible maimer to 
 prevent sin and promote ])iety, tliink not to find i\ shelter 
 for your lukewarmness and liypocrisy under the decrees 
 of your Maker. He decrees, that you shall be free to 
 choose, and to act as you choose; and also he decrees to 
 emidoy with you the best possible means to induce you 
 to choose aright, and woe, woe, woe, unto you U ye will 
 not\ 
 
 Here is the greatest encouragement for wounded spi- 
 rits, who convicted of their sins and alarmed at their dan- 
 
223 . . 
 
 ger, would flee to some refuge from the wrath to come. 
 He who rules the universe in the best possible manner to 
 counteract sin^ and prevent misery, seated on a throne 
 of grace and wielding a sceptre of mercy, proclaims: to 
 this man will I look ven to him, that is poor and of a 
 conh^ite spirit and trembleth at my word. Christ has 
 already made a propitiation for your sins, and now of- 
 fers to become to you, atonement and redemption; and 
 only come to him, and he will give you the Holy Spirit 
 to create in you a new heart, and thus enable you to re- 
 pent and believe. Come then unto him, and whosoever 
 Cometh unto him, he will in no wise cast out. 
 
 Finally, this doctrine seals eternal silence on the lips of 
 cavilling sinners. If your sins arise not, either from the 
 choice, or the power of God, but wholly from your own 
 abuse of your moral nature, and, if he holy and merci- 
 ful, exhibits before you all the motives, both of mercy 
 and wrath, to invite you, and warn you, and yet ye will 
 not^ in the day, the terrible day of judgment, your mouths 
 shall be stopt, and you shall all become guilty before God. 
 Therefore, seek ye the Lord ivhile he may he found, call 
 u[)on him ivhile he is near. Let the loicked forsake 
 his way, and the ^mrighteous man his thoughts, and 
 let him turn unto th^ Lord and he will have mercy up- 
 on hvm, and to our God, for he will abundantly par^don. 
 
 JVOTE, 
 
 ^*It grates upon the ear cf peity to be told, that the ex- 
 istence of evil is unavoidable in the best possible system, 
 and, that the present system includes the greatest amount 
 of good which the power of God can effect.'' 
 
 Christian Jldvocate, vol. v. JVo. 58. p. 449. 
 Had the writer of this article recognized any distinc- 
 tion between the best possible system as advocated in the 
 Christian Preacher, and the theory of Optimism as gene- 
 rally understood, he had passed unnoticed in this work. 
 This omission of an act of justice however, renders some 
 notice necessarv as a means of self defence. 
 
224 
 
 Those who happen to dissent from this part of the wri- 
 ter's philosophy, might pro])ably say, that if the word 
 pre/ iidice, were substituted for ///e/y, the sentence would 
 contain as much argument, as much truth, and as much 
 charity as in its present form. 
 
 If the disobedience of moral creatures be not imavoi- 
 dable on the part of the Creator, the reverse must be true 
 — there is no medium — it is avoidable; and it exists sole- 
 ly as the o])iect of his preiVreiice. Of course this wri- 
 ter advocates the doctrine, that God prefers, that the u- 
 niverse should not be sinless, and that there should be in 
 it, just the amount of sin that actually exists — that the 
 fallen arch-spirit should be a Devil, and not an angel of 
 light; Adam should sin, and twt remain the holy and 
 happy tenant of Paradise; Cain should be a murderer, 
 and not an acceptable worsliipper; the antediluvians 
 should corr\\\^t their way, and fill the earth with violence, 
 and 7iothe the children of righteousness; the inhabitants 
 of Sodom and Gomorrah, should be sinners exceedingly, 
 and 72ot holy men of God; and finally, that hypocrites, 
 profligate men, and lukewarm professors of religion, 
 shonld all be just as they actually are, and no hetferW 
 
 If this be all truth, it ought to be faithfully preached. 
 Should then the writer happen to be the pastor of a con- 
 gregation, let him ascend his pulpit, and solemnly pro- 
 claim to lukewarm professors of religion, and to hypo- 
 crites and profligates — to all, that they are just wliat 
 God prefers they should he, and then let him ask his pi- 
 ous hearers, whether such a doctrine falls not melodiously 
 on their ears? 
 
 Whilst justice to the sacred cause of sacred truth, re 
 quires, that some strictures should be passed on these 
 essays in the Christian Advocate, entitled ^*Philosophy 
 subservient to religion," yet it is believed to be but 
 truth to say, that they betoken a mind capacioiis, vigo- 
 rous, cultivated, and enlightened, which though like all 
 other human intellects, is not ai)solutely above all er- 
 ror, is still above niany errors. The general features of 
 their ])hiloso])hy arc iinobjectiouable to the views de- 
 fended ill the Christian Preacher. Should Providence 
 
225 
 
 grant time and space, these essays will again be noticed. 
 Since the name of the Christian Advocate, has been 
 introduced, the opportunity is employed to recommend 
 the work to my readers generally, and especially to the 
 people of my charge. It is edited by the Rev. Ashbel 
 Green, D. D. L. L. D. one of the most aged, learned, 
 judicious, and profound ministers in the Presbyterian 
 church, who having through the infirmities of age re- 
 signed the Presidency of Princeton College, is now em- 
 ploying the evening of his days in the more retired and 
 tranquil, but scarcely less laborious and perhaps no less 
 useful office of editing the Christian Advocate. The 
 work is what might be expected from such an Editor. 
 It is such as w^ould be valuable to any christian, but al- 
 most invaluable to a Presbyterian, who would become 
 thoroughly acquainted with the principles, usages, and 
 state of his own church. Without professing to adopt, 
 in toto, the sentiment of every writer who may be per- 
 mitted to contribute to its pages, I should rejoice to 
 see it in the hands of every family in the Presbyterian 
 church. 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 (Continued from page 192 ) 
 
 To Joseph Lybrand, Samuel Merwin, Samuel Doughty, 
 John Lednum, Elisha Andrews, Manning Force, Tho- 
 mas F. Sargent, Thomas Miller, W. W. Wallace, 
 and Thomas Dunn, Committee of publication, and 
 John Clarke, Editor of the late Religious Messenger. 
 Were you not the agents of the Conference of Phila- 
 delphia, and had not your publications come before the 
 world, under the authority of that body, they might pos- 
 sibly be permitted to pass with as little regard, as a cer- 
 tain class of sermons not unfrequent on the Peninsila, 
 in which certain denominations of Christians, are desig- 
 nated by appellations, such as stiff-kneed Presbyterians, 
 prayer-book Episcopalians, muddy headed Baptists, and 
 sundry other epithets too unseemly to be repeated. A 
 
 29 
 
^26 
 
 class of discourses that excite a smile, and are generally 
 dismissed by saying, ^*such abuse is unworthy of notice. 
 It is only the nonsense of old or young A, B,C, orD/' as 
 tiie case may be from the beginning to the end of the 
 Alphabet. Even the Reverend and Solomon act of the 
 Reverend Solomon Higgins, in giving the lie to the Ed- 
 tor of the Christian Preacher, from the pulpit, was not 
 publickly noticed, until it appeared in print under the 
 authority of the Conference. And any one who reads 
 the first number of the Christian Preacher, in the review 
 of v\ hich, you first began to open the flood gates of per- 
 sonal defamation, sees that it contains a purely doctrinal 
 discussion, without any odious pei'sonal or sectarian al- 
 lusions, unless indeed so far as the consideration of ab- 
 stract principles may be construed to involve such con- 
 Sequences. 
 
 Appointed by the Conference of Philadelphia to give 
 utterance to their views and feelings, and to expound 
 their principles of operation, and give them efficiency, 
 you may be taken as a kind of index of the piety and 
 theological knowledge of the Conference. If the Con- 
 ference say you have acted unworthy of their confi- 
 dence, the explanation will be admitted, but if not, we 
 shall judge, that such as is the committee, such the Con- 
 ference. 
 
 The following may serve as a specimen of precisioyi 
 in language, dignity^ charity^ and truth. In your Mes- 
 senger of Dec. 13, 1827, you say: 
 
 *^The trickery of theological charlatans" (and ignora- 
 muses you might have added), ^'has ever been the curse 
 of religion." — ^'^There appears in all their conduct to be 
 so much zeal blended with interest in their movements, 
 that like the royal Psalmist, instead of being eaten up 
 wi^^b the zeal of (jod's house, they seem i7icUned to eat 
 up God\s house and all they can get in it^ 
 
 The royal Psalmist's own language is, ^'For the zeal 
 of thine house hath eateii me up." But you tell us that 
 this man after God's own heart, was inclined to eat up 
 God's house and all to be found in it!!! A most outrage- 
 ous calumny if you really mean what you really say!!! 
 
227 
 
 The public will no doubt rightly judge, that an Editor 
 and a committee of ten, who can obtrude on their rea- 
 ders, in the name of the Philadelphia Conference, such 
 a farrago of nonsense, are at least, as well qualified for ex- 
 ercising the knife and fork over a wing of bacon, and a 
 dish of Irish potatoes as either for writing strictures on 
 theological systems and Biblical criticism or superinten- 
 ding the press. 
 
 Again you say: ^^Indeed, if we may judge from the 
 large pretensions and little labours of these monopolizers 
 of public teaching, we would reasonably infer, that the 
 considerations of eating alone is the mainspring which sets 
 in motion the whole machinary of their operations.'' 
 Then you add by way of a note — ^^Since writing the a- 
 bove article, and while it was in the hands of the compo- 
 sitors, we have learned, that Mr. C. has deserted his call 
 at Dover for a louder one at Church Hill, Md. fully con- 
 iirming our remarks about eating.'^ How hungry must 
 this Editor and Committee have been for calumny!! 
 They appear to have been as keen in appetite, and as far 
 scented for a little slander as so many starved crows in 
 pursuit of their fetid provender. The report was heard, 
 no time must be lost to learn whether or not it was true. 
 While the article was in the hands of the compositors ^ 
 the precious morsel must be thrown into the mess, and 
 doubtless gave it such a seasoning as made the Editor and 
 the Committee smack their mouths over this sweet colla- 
 tion. Mr. C. never deserted a call at Dover, nor accep- 
 ted one at Church Hill . The report is absolutely a false- 
 hood^ for the publication of which you are held accoun- 
 table before the public. 
 
 Weakness leagued with falsehoods appears to attend 
 the labours of this Committee and Editor. Even if it 
 had been true, that Mr. C. had relinquished a call at 
 Dover and accepted one at Church Hill, there are so 
 many reasons which may frequently, not only ^m^^//?/, but 
 require^ a minister to change his location, that it really 
 is difficult to decide whether we ought most to detest the 
 meanness^ or pity the iveakness which the publication 
 of this falsehood betrays. 
 
228 
 
 Having disposed of the persona! calumnies which ne- 
 ver ought to liave been hrojight into the controversy we 
 proceed to your arguments. ^ 
 
 In your Messenger of Dec. 6th, 1827. we meet with 
 some strictures over the signature ^'Jeremiah.'' We 
 are there informed, that Clarke, Parkhurst, M'-Knight, 
 and others, warrant us in translating the Greek prepo- 
 sition en [see Christian Preacher No. 4. p. 94.] through 
 and by as well as in. Who ever doubted the posi- 
 tion? But what is that to the purpose? The Christian 
 Preacher sa\s [see No. 4. p. 94.] that it mo^t strictly 
 and literally means 2?i. Then, because it sometimes 
 means throuv^h and hy^ it does not most strictly and lite- 
 rally m.ean in\\\ The very profound of logic! Prove to 
 us by these authorities that it does not most strictly and 
 literally mean in^ and then you will have done something 
 to the purpose. 
 
 ^^Jeremiah" also says, ^'In Hcb. iv. 3. where apoka- 
 taboles kosmou, occurs it is manifest from the context, 
 that it has a very different sense from that Mr. C. says 
 it has.'' Where has Mr. C. told you that he believes 
 to be the sense of apo kataboles kosmou? No where 
 in the Christian Preacher. Had there been a writer 
 and publishing committee selected from the madhouse^ 
 they could not have written and published any thing 
 less to the purpose. 
 
 In the Messenger of August 30th, 1827, ^^An Armi- 
 i>ian" says, ^"Mr. C. supports the first proposition thus: 
 The eternity of tlie divine foreknowledge and divine 
 determinations: — They are ecjually eternal according to 
 the scri])tures — Known untD (lod are all his works from 
 the beginning of the world: — Here we have his eternnl 
 foreknowledge. Again, as he liath chosen its h<\fnre the 
 foundation of the ivorld;'^ Here we have his eternal 
 determination or choice: — ^*The two scrij)tures above 
 quoted" ('"An Arminian'' proceeds to say) ^"'to prove the 
 coeternity of the divine foreknowledge and the divine 
 determinations of God-^ (divine determinations of God\ 
 What tautology!!) ^^if literally taken prove no such 
 thing. Fiom the foiindatio?i of the world'' (from the 
 
S529 
 
 beginning of the worlds according to oar English Tes- 
 tament, but misnomered by '*An Arminian/'' who is 
 evidently a quack in theology) '^does not literally mean 
 from all eternity. Nor do the terms '^before the foun- 
 dation of the ivorld^''^ necessarily mean from all e- 
 ternity.'' 
 
 Thus it is evident; that Acts xv. 18. is the text about 
 which this Arminian is soignorantly and asvkardly bab- 
 bling. As his assertion is an outrageous misrepresenta- 
 tion of the original of that text, the Editor of the Chris- 
 tian Preacher hurls it back on him without correcting 
 his mistake, in misnomering, ^^from the foundation of 
 the world/' for '*from the begimiing oi the world.'' — 
 That this was the fact may also be seen from the refer- 
 ences made in the Christian Preacher (No. 4, p. 93.) 
 The original of this text is not apo kataboles Jiosmou, but 
 ap^ aionos. For the meaning of the word <:/"o»2, *^ An Ar- 
 minian" was referred to R. Watson's book, at the begin- 
 ning of his chapter on the Omniscience of Deity, where 
 it is said that it should be rendered '^from all eternity <^^^ 
 and to Aristotle [De coelo Lib. I. cap. 9]. If you are 
 not satisfied by a reference to these authorities consult 
 Wesley's notes on the text. Here is the authority of a 
 man after your own heart — the very father of Metho- 
 dism. Should you have leisure, you may just glance the 
 eye over the Christian Preacher No. 8. p. 181. where 
 the meaning of the word aion is argued. And then/?6r- 
 haps^ [v^'^^d^y perhaps because judging from the past, you 
 appear capable of committing any outrage on truth) — 
 perhaps the good sense of the theological community 
 will not again be shocked with the illiterate babblingy 
 that this text does not mean from all eternity ^ or that Mr. 
 C. says apo kataboles kosmoii me^nsfrom all eternity. 
 
 If it could be imagined that you can feel shame at be- 
 ing convicted of ignorance before the public, this might 
 be supposed to be one of the cases, in which your faces 
 would redden with confusion. Of this hov^xver there is 
 not the least probability. It is one of the peculiar privi- 
 liges of the ignorant, not to be ashamed of ignorance: — 
 
 ^^The wise are happy, nature to explore 
 And i\it fool is happy that he knows no more." 
 
230 
 
 Such specimeTis of Biblical criticism are a disgrace to 
 the 1 0th century and become only the dark ages. With 
 regard to the text under dispute, it is believed that ally 
 friends and foes, with the exception of Universalists and 
 Socinians, are against you. The world may now judge 
 of your competency in Biblical criticism. 
 
 You tell us by the mouth of Jeremiah (not the prophet), 
 that if Jeliovah's plans existed from all eternity they are 
 essential perfections of his eternal essence/' and appear 
 to suppose, that by this, you have crowded us into a dis- 
 mal dilemma. It is to be sure a Solomon like argu.ment! 
 It has in it all the true spirit of a Duellist, who for the op- 
 portunity of shooting a pistol at the head of another, will 
 give another a pistol to shoot at him. In your Messen- 
 ger of Aug. '^'Oth. 1827, ^'An Arminian"' by your per- 
 mission and under your authority says: ^-'Now — we admit 
 the foreknowledge of Ood in the fullest sense of the term 
 as a doctrine of the Bible/' Now your gun will shoot 
 yourselves as well as us. We may retort your argument 
 ;?nd say if Jehovah's foreknowledge existed from all e- 
 lernity it is an essential perfection of his eternal essence. 
 Remember that as foreknowing is the exercise of omnis- 
 cience, so decreeing or choosing, or willing is the exercise 
 of the power of volition. Then if we must not believe, 
 that Jehovah's decrees, choosings, or volitions are eternal 
 lest we make them essential perfections of his eternal es- 
 sence, why should we believe that his foreknowledge is 
 eternal, since in the same manner we make it an essential 
 perfection of his eternal essence? This is one of the re- 
 sults, when 1/carlinfi; theologians catch new principles, just 
 as madmen would catch wild horses, and mount and ride 
 ofl' without knowiiify whither these strange and untutored 
 beasts will carry them. By your own nrgument, you 
 are brought to clioose one of two things; eith-r. to Q:ive up 
 the doctrine of God's eternal foreknowledge, or, admitit 
 to be an essential perfection of liis eternal essence. But 
 if vou believe the doctrine and admit, that it eternally 
 exists in the divine essence, then wdiy not acknowledge, 
 that the divine volitions n»ny eternally exist in the divine 
 essence? 1 can just as readily conceive a perfect being, 
 
231 
 
 w\\hovLt foreknowledge as without meaning or intention , 
 There is to my mind something avjfutly profane m the 
 thought, that the eternal God should ever have existed 
 without meaning; that an infinite God should ever have 
 lived without i?i/inite meaning; that an unchangeable 
 God should ever change in his meaning; and that a per- 
 fect God should ever have been Imperfect in meaning. I 
 do therefore, most certainly believe, that meanings^ in- 
 tentions, decrees, are absolutely essential to God as a per- 
 fect being. It is indeed a sage arument, especially when 
 coming to us under the authority of the Conference of 
 Philadelphia, to be told, that if the decrees of Jehovah 
 are eternal, they must be just what we most sincerely, 
 and rationally, and scripturally believe they are!!!! To 
 convince you that this is not my ipse dixit, and to pre- 
 vent you, if possible, from displaying before the world in 
 future, such a shameful deficiency of theological know- 
 ledge, I will add some authorities. 
 
 Cum ergo non possint accidentaliter Deo competere, 
 necesse est, ut in Deo dicanturessee.?5e?7im/z7er, ut actus 
 immonentes voluntatis ipsius, cfun schesie et termina- 
 tione ad extra, quique ideo non dilFerunt realiter ab ipsa 
 Essentia Dei, dim voluntas Dei, cum qua identificantur. 
 nihil aliud sit quam ipsa Essentia volens inadsequato con- 
 ceptu a nobis apprehensa. 
 
 Francis Turrettin, vol, 1. p. 342, 
 
 ^^Since therefore they*^ (the decrees of God) ^-cannot 
 belong accidentally to God, they must be said to be es- 
 sentially in God as the emanating acts of the very will 
 with state and termination to things without himself, 
 and which therefore, really differ not from the very es- 
 sence of God, seeing the will of Deity with v»^hich they 
 are identified, is nothing else, but the very essence wil- 
 ling, in a manner not understood by iis.'^ 
 
 Dr. D wight in his Divinity, vol. 1, p. 241, speaking 
 of the divine decrees says, that they are "no other than 
 an unchangeable state of the divine mind.^^ Those 
 who believe in the eternity of the divine plan generally 
 so far as I know, suppose, tliat it exists in the divine es- 
 sence, just as meaning in the essence of an intelligent 
 
232 
 
 being. To tell an opponent as you have, that if his doc- 
 trine be true, he will be compelled to admit another, 
 which he believes to be equally true, may pass for the 
 arirumeiitum ad if^norantirmi inverted^ and is one of 
 the blissful effects of having never, either read books, 
 or studied systems, and of being profoundly ignorant of 
 the doctrines of an adversary. 
 
 fTo be continued, J 
 
 Errata in oivr last JVb. 
 
 Pag€ irO, 3d line from the top for Jhreknev) re^idforeincm, 
 «• 173, JOth line from bottom in phrase '-ani^ say" omit and. 
 
 185, 3d line froin top '' He indt-ad conceals" &c. read It indeed &c. 
 
 188, 16th line from bottom, for of tbe hrwe matter, redLd of brute matter. 
 
 189, 3d. line from top, for ad'tptel read adopted. 
 
 189, 5h line from bottom, tor creation read c-eatures. 
 
 190, 11th line from bott(<m, for Edi'.or^ read Editor. 
 
 191, 20ih line from bottom for "Now it is certaiii" read Now as it 
 IS certain. 
 
 192, 27th line from bottom, for "z/'you have represented," omitting- 
 if, read vou have represented 8cc. 
 
 193, 17th line for beleaguered read burlesqued 
 
 181, in marginal reference, for ^'illundo,'* read Mundo, and for "Cnr. 
 loV Ccclo. 
 
 Errata for the preaent Ao, 
 
 Page 193, 9th line from bottom, for fnally mzd firmly 
 
 194, 20th line from bottom, 'for appear read appears 
 
 194, 13'h line from bottom, ''for feel existence," redid feel the existence. 
 
 195, 4ih line from top, for 'uf being, ''^ read of /j/\y benig, 
 195, 9th line from top, for ''understanding," read understandings, 
 395, 14th line from top, for "hundreds," read burdens. 
 
 195, 12 h Inie from bottom for "a)id therefore," re^d and are therefore 
 199, 12th line for top for "perfectirms, ' rcdd perceptions. 
 199, 14th line irom top, for "there" read then 
 
 199, 18; h line from bottom, for "wheie" read %gben^ 
 
 200, 10th line from top, for "there," read then. 
 
 201, line 5rh from top, for iniviber objects number o/" objects. 
 202 15th line from top, for peaceable read peccable 
 
 208, 4th line from bottom, for satellites; had read satellites had. 
 
 211, 11th line from bottom for teache: read teach 
 
 216, 16th line from bottom for ineviab.'c read inevitable. 
 
THE CHRISTIAN PREACHER 
 
 Vol. 1. MARCH, 1828. N^. lO, 
 
 BIBLE ELECTIOJV. 
 
 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ to the strangers scattered throuo-h- 
 out Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and. Bithynia, b LKCT accor- 
 ding to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification 
 of the Spirit unto obedience, apd sprinkling of the blood of Jesus 
 Christ.— I. Pet. i. 1,2. 
 
 Whether these scattered strangers^ addressed in the 
 text, were Jewish or Gentile converts, is a subject of dis- 
 pute among the learned. To the proper understanding 
 of this epistle, the decision of this controversy, is howe- 
 ver, a matter of mere indifference. As the Jews were 
 scattered abroad among the nations, there were probably 
 converts, both Jewish and Gentile, in the churches to 
 which the apostle Peter addressed this circular. But 
 however they were scattered, and in whatever sense they 
 were strangers, they appear to have been gathered into 
 the fold of salvation, and to have been the frie?ids of the 
 Saviour. They were elect, chosen ones, and elected or 
 chosen of God. To elect or choose is variously employ- 
 ed in the Scriptures. Christ is called ELECT: — Behold 
 my servant whom I uphold, mine elect in whoinmysoul 
 delighteth. The tribes of Jacob were elected or chosen 
 in their national character:- — The Lord did not — choose 
 you because ye were more in number, than any people^ 
 The angels, who have never sinned, are called ELECT: 
 / charge thee before — the elect angels. By many the 
 terms elect and chosen, are supposed to be frequently 
 applied in the Scriptures to all those, whether Jews or 
 Gentiles, who are set apart by the sanctifying influence 
 of the Holy Ghost to the spiritual obedience, and the spi- 
 ritual privileges of the Gospel. In this latter sense, the 
 election alluded to in the text, will Ke explained and de- 
 fended in this discourse. 
 The election in the text is. 
 
234 
 
 1 According to the foreknowledge of God the Fa- 
 ther; 
 
 2. Through, or more strictly^ in the sanctijication of 
 the Spirit; and^ 
 
 3. Unto obedience and the sprinkling of the blood of 
 Jesus Christ. 
 
 1. These strangers are elect according to the fore- 
 knowledge of God the Father. It has already been ar- 
 gued, that God's plan of operations, is eternal and rea- 
 ches every being and event in all the space, and duration 
 of tlie created universe. As a result of this general doc- 
 trine, it follows, that the design of electing these stran- 
 gers, was eternal. In confirmation of this, we need at 
 present only call God to witness, that he hath chosen [e- 
 lected] us in him before the foundation of the ivorld. 
 
 It has also been proved in another part of this work, 
 that God's foreknowledge and determinations are coeter- 
 nal, and coincident. To avoid unnecessary repetition 
 the doctrine will in this place be sustained only by a sin- 
 gle text: — ^'Whom he did foreknow he ALSO''(j^ot after- 
 wards) *^did predestinate''. If this predestination be not 
 coeternal with the foreknowledge, then there must have 
 been a period of duration, when God must have foreknown 
 vSome, whom he had not predestinated. So that his de- 
 terminations, and his foreknowledge are coeval. Butas 
 the scripture testifies, that Known unto God are all his 
 works bifore the foundation of the ivorld (or according 
 to the original ap'aionos, from all eternity), his foreknow- 
 ledge must be absolutely eternal; and if with it his de- 
 terminations be coeval, they also must be absolutely eter- 
 nal. God's prescience and his plan are therefore coeter- 
 nal. And as according to this position, there is between 
 them no precedence in the order of duration, the one 
 can not be the cause of the otlier: and the relation be- 
 tween can not be that of caiis*^ and eflfect, or of antece- 
 dent and consccpicnt; but solely that of coincidence or 
 agreement; au(l this squares literally with the language 
 of the text: Ekct ACCORDING to the foreknowledge 
 of God. In iK^rcement with his foreknowledge of the 
 manner in whieh these ])articular persons in the exer- 
 
235 
 
 «ise of their natural powers of mind^ would on hearing 
 the Gospel preached^ regard its warnings, and seek its 
 mercies, God determined their election. Coeternally 
 with his foreknowledge, he determined to choose those, 
 whom consistently with his glorious perfections, he 
 could choose. And as he creates and governs the uni- 
 verse in the best manner to promote righteousness and 
 repel sin, his eternal plan of creation and government, 
 is such, as to induce the greatest possible number, to 
 tremble at the terrors, and seek the salvation of the Gos- 
 pel; and thus to become subjects, that could be foreknown 
 as suitable candidates for his electing mercy. And 
 thus, these strangers were elect according to, or in a- 
 greement with, his foreknowledge of their being so affec- 
 ted by his providences, word, and Spirit, as to come to 
 Christ, and to implore the spiritual blessings of the Gos- 
 pel. And although this coming to Christ, and imploring 
 all the requisites of salvation, arose merely from the cre^ 
 dence given to truth, by minds unenlightened by the 
 rays of spiritual life, and comprehended in it, no repen- 
 tance, but such as arose from a fear of future wrath, and 
 consequently involved in it nothing, but what when 
 compared with a holy law, is essentially sin, and brought 
 with it nothing that was well pleasing in God's sight; yet 
 in the mercy of the Gospel, the Holy Spirit met them, 
 and in regenerating them, creating them in Christ Jesus, 
 he carried into effect the election, designed before the 
 foundation of the world in God's universal plan, to be 
 completed in due time. That this election was perfor- 
 med by the agency of the Holy Spirit, we learn from 
 the text, for these strangers were elect. 
 
 2. Through^ or more literally in, the smictification 
 of the spirit. The agency of sanctification, is not un- 
 frequently attributed in the Scriptures to the Godhead 
 universally; to the Father, and also to the Son as well as 
 to the Spirit. "By the Father we are sanctified, as we 
 are chosen by him unto sanctification, as by his good 
 pleasure and free grace the atonement of Christ, and the 
 sanctifying agency of the Spirit, exist. By the Son we 
 are sanctified, as his death is the only means by which 
 
236 
 
 we ever become holy; and by which the Spirit came 
 into the world for the benevolent purpose of making us 
 holy. By the Spirit we are sanctified^ as the immedi- 
 ate Agent in applying to us the blessings of Christ's Re- 
 demption; particularly in renewing and purifying our 
 hearts and lives."* 
 
 Sanctification signifies setting apart from a common 
 to a sacred purpose. God sanctified the seventh day 
 by setting it apart from a common to a religious service. 
 Under the law, the tabernacle, the temple, the priests, 
 the altars, and the sacrifices, were all sanctified or set 
 apart from secular to sacred purposes. Now as man- 
 kind in their natural condition, are represented as in a 
 state of darkness, and under the power of Satan, and 
 of death, that act of the Spirit, which translates th^m 
 from darkness to light, and from under the power of 
 Satan to God, and quickens them that were dead in tres- 
 passes and sin, undeniably sanctifies them by setting 
 them apart from an unhallowed to a holy purpose, from 
 a death of sin to a life of righteousness. And this can 
 be none other, but the omnipotent act by which a sin- 
 ner is born again, and puts on the new man which after 
 God is created in righteousness. 
 
 These strangers were elected by the sanctification of 
 the Spirit only. No human co-operation is recognized 
 in the transforming act by which they were elected. 
 
 Although according to the system of agency which 
 God is believed to have established in the moral crea- 
 tion, in recovering man from his a])ostacy. the creature 
 is addressed as a being possessing natural liberty and the 
 Spirit is ofi'ered to him to become his Sanctifier just as 
 Christ is ofi*ered ready to become for him atonement and 
 redemption, and motives infinite and eternal are urged 
 upon him to induce him to flee from the terrors, and 
 seek the mercy of the Gospel; yet in the recreating act 
 by which the soul is set apart from sin to holiness, and 
 by which it becomes prepared for the obedience of the 
 Gospel, the sinner has just as little agency as in the 
 
 ^Dwtght's Tbeology vol, ii. p. 518, 
 
237 
 
 sufferings by which the Saviour became his atoning 
 and redeeming sacrifice. So far from co-operating in 
 this work, he no more understands the mode of its ope- 
 ration, than he does the varied movements of the wind 
 blowing as itlisteth; and thus all cause of boasting is ex- 
 cluded, and the language of the apostle is literally ap- 
 plicable to every new man: For who maketh thee to dif- 
 fer from another? And what hast thou that thou didst 
 not receive? now if thou didst receive it, why dost thou 
 glory as if thou hadst not received it? It is not in either 
 the physical, or moral power of fallen men to will upon 
 themselves this radical change of moral disposition; 
 for, it is not of him that WILLETH, nor of him that 
 runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. The sons of 
 God are horn, not of blood, nor of the WILL of the 
 flesh, nor of the WILL of man, but of God. The con- 
 victed and alarmed sinner might call for mercy until his 
 voice should weaken into silence, writhe under the ago- 
 nies of a sin smitten conscience, until his whole frame 
 should be distorted with anguish, tremble at the flashes 
 of perdition, until every bone in his body should be dislo- 
 cated, and weep, until he should extort tears of blood, and 
 all would not give the natural man discernment to know 
 the things of the Spirit, nor enable him to delight in the 
 law of the Lord after the inner man. It is only the 
 same voice which called light from darkness in the for- 
 mation of the world, that can make the light shine in a 
 dark place, and the day dawn, and the day star arise 
 in the sinner's heart, and thus enable him to see the 
 beauties of that law which when spiritually discerned, 
 will ravish his soul with delight. 
 
 But great as is this change, and far as it is beyond, 
 and above, all the physical and moral powers of man, 
 in the merciful economy of the Gospel, God meets the 
 sinner who would flee from the wrath to come, and who 
 importunately and perseveringly seeks the mercies of 
 the Gospel, and grants his regenerating Spirit to elect 
 Tiim by his transforming influences. But these strangers 
 were elect, 
 
238 
 
 7j. Unto obedience and the sprinkling of the blood of 
 Jesus Christ. 
 
 They were elect in the sanctification of the Spirit 
 unto obedience. The first spiritual act of a regenerate 
 man, is the exercise of faith in obedience to the Gospel 
 command, Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ. 
 
 And faith, the exercise of the creature, and also, the 
 gift of God imparted in the act of regeneration, is the 
 principle which gives life and soul to every thing that 
 can be denominated spiritual obedience; for whatsoever 
 is not of faith is sin. And thus God elects or chooses a 
 pecfple to be holy and without blame before him in love. 
 He also elects them in the sanctification of the Spirit, 
 
 Unto the sprindling of the blood of Jesus Christ. So 
 soon as the sinner believes, the Saviours obedience to 
 the divine law, and his endurance of its deadly penalty, 
 are imputed to him for righteousness, and are accounted 
 in the estimation of justice as satisfactory, as if perfor- 
 med and endured in the transgressor's own person: and 
 hence, Christ becomes the end of the law for righteous- 
 •ness to every one that believeth. Thus a sinner becomes 
 justified by faith. 
 
 JustiAcation makes not a man morally pure, but legal- 
 ly acquitted. One man injures the person of another; 
 the injured man arraigns the other before a tribunal of 
 justice. The latter is found gnilty of the ofTcnce, and is 
 under a legal arrest until he makes the amends awarded 
 to the injured by the court. A third person lays down 
 on behalf of the criminal the amount of penalty deman- 
 ded. The court receive it as such, and thus imputing 
 it to the criminars account, they pronounce him legally 
 acquitted or justified. This sense agrees witii the evi- 
 dent meaning of the word justify in such texts as these: 
 Twill not justify tJieivicked. They shall justify the 
 righteous. In these passages it is supposed, that a man 
 not i-ightcous might be justified, and also, one righteous 
 might not be justified, and in agreement with this con- 
 clusion, we read in the Scriptures of those who justify 
 fhe wicked for reward. 
 
239 
 
 In the act of regeneration, the sinner is chosen to obe- 
 dience and justification; he obeys as a consequence of 
 this sanctifying change in exercising faith; and as a con- 
 sequence of his believing^ the Saviour tenders to justice 
 his own obedience and sufferings as the price of penalty 
 for the sinner's disobedience: and finally, justice accepts 
 the price as satisfactory and relinquishing all claims, 
 pronounces the transgressor acquitted or legally justifi- 
 ed. Thus as a consequence of his election, the transgres- 
 sor becomes free from condemnation through the applica- 
 tion of Christ's blood. And hence the appropriate lan- 
 guage of the apostle: Who shall lay any thing to the 
 charge ofGod'^s elect? It is God that justifieth; who is 
 he that condemeth? It is Christ that died, yea rather 
 that is risen again. And if the man were to die as soon 
 as this justifying act is performed on his soul, he would 
 immediately pass into glory, for those who are redeemed 
 by Christ's being made under the law, receive the adop- 
 tion of sons, and if sons then heii^s, heirs of God and joint 
 heirs ivith Christ. And those that are justified by faith, 
 not only have peace with God, but rejoice in the hope of 
 the glory of God; and also those that are elected are cho- 
 sen unto salvation. 
 
 Thus, these scattered strangers were elected m sanctifi- 
 cation unto obedience, because by the life giving and sanc- 
 tifying act in which they were elected, a principle of spi- 
 ritual life was infused into their souls, by which they were 
 morally enabled to obey the requirement of the Gospel, 
 ^"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ;" and unto the 
 sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ, because all the 
 justifying efiicacy of the sufferings of the Son of God, 
 typified under the law by sprinkling the blood of the 
 victim upon the mercy-seat, was, by the exercise of that 
 faith given in the sanctifying act of electing mercy, im- 
 puted to them for justification of life. 
 
 It may pei'Iiaps be supposed, that in this discourse, the 
 word sanctification is taken out of its usual meaning, and 
 completely confounded with regeneration. 
 
 Although it be true that the term more frequently 
 xlenotes tliat purifying operation of the Holy Ghost. 
 
240 
 
 performed in the new man after he is not only regenera- 
 ted, but justified; yet in its more extended sense, it in* 
 eludes regeneration as well as that purifying^ which fol- 
 lows justification. ^*For really/*' says Witsius, "^^sancti- 
 iication differs no otherwise from the first regeneration 
 and renovation, than the continuance of an act, from the 
 beginning of it."* Also Francis Turrettin speaking of 
 the sanctification, says, **Truely, this real change of the 
 man, is made in various grades, either through effectual 
 calling, which imports the donation of faith, and repen- 
 tance through faith, and a translation from a state of siu 
 to a state of grace; or through regeneration, which 
 means a renovation of corrupt nature; or through the 
 infusion and the practice of holiness. Hence sanctifi- 
 cation widely taken extends to the whole state of the be- 
 liever.''! ^^Sanctification," as given in the Confession of 
 Faith of the Presbyterian church, ^^is a work of God's 
 grace, whereby they whom God hath before the founda- 
 tion of the world, chosen to be holy, are in time through 
 the powerful operation of his Spirit applying the death 
 and resurrection of Christ unto them, renewed in their 
 whole man after the image of God, having the seeds of 
 repentance unto life, and all the other graces put into 
 their hearts, and those graces so stirred up, increased, 
 and strengthened, as that they live more and more into 
 sin, and rise unto newness of life. "J 
 
 This view of sanctification is reasonable as well as Scrip- 
 tural. Regeneration is distinguished from sanctifica- 
 tion, only as a part from a whole, and may justly be con- 
 sidered as ihe act which begins the ivork of sanctifica- 
 tion, and is in nature a puiifying, as well as a life-giving 
 act. So that, although our authors on divinity, gene- 
 rally tell us, that sanctification in the order of time fol- 
 lows justification, the fact is, taken in its extensive sense, 
 it/6>//ow\v justification and />/*e«'6/^^5 it too. The former 
 is a work beginning in regeneration, and continuing in 
 progress, until sin is entirely crucified, and the latter is 
 
 •Wit.sius on Cov vol. ii. p. 106, f Francis Turrettin vol ii. p. 754. 
 ^Lart^e Catechism Question 75. 
 
241 
 
 an act (not a work) in which as a consequence of the 
 sinner's believing^ he is pronounced acquitted by the 
 imputation of Christ's righteousness to him. And hence 
 it will follow^ that when the Scriptures speak of sancti- 
 lication after justification^ they mean simply the work 
 of purifying; when of sanctification in the abstract, both 
 purification and regeneration; but when of sanctification 
 before justification^ as in the text, they simply mean re- 
 generation. 
 
 The sanctification in the text, is ^^unto the sprinkling 
 of the blood of Jesus Christ," which can not be natural- 
 ly interpreted to mean any thing, but ^^unto justifica- 
 tion'' together with all its consequences. And if so, the 
 sanctification here designated must precede justification, 
 and therefore can be none other, but that part of sancti- 
 fication performed in regeneration. 
 
 And this interpretation is confirmed by another con- 
 sideration. The strangers in the text are addressed, as 
 though they were already elected, and of course the act 
 by which they were elected, must have been complete; 
 but this act is in the text said to be the sanctification of 
 the Spirit, and therefore this sanctification must have 
 been finished. This however, could notbe true of sanc= 
 tification as a progressive purifying operation; because 
 in this sense their sanctification was still in progress; yet 
 this would be strictly true of regeneration; because if 
 these strangers were Christians in all the spirituality of 
 the appellation, their regeneration as well as their elec- 
 tion must then have been finished. 
 
 Again, to elect is an act^ not a vjork; but purifying 
 sanctification is a work not an act. Now to speak of 
 God performing a simple act of choice by means of a 
 progressive work, is to employ language, w hich conveys 
 nothing like tolerable sense, and to associate ideas totally 
 incongruous, whilst on the contrary, if we understand this 
 simple electing act to consist in the simple sanctifying 
 act of regeneration, we can perceive in the Apostle's 
 composition, the strictest congruity of thought and the 
 most entire harmony of language. 
 
 31 
 
242 
 
 Thus we see, that God chooses or elects men, not af- 
 ter^ but most literally f/?,* the sanctificationof the Spirit. 
 
 There are two Arminian opinions with regard to this 
 election. They shall be considered in order. 
 
 The first is, ^"that God from all eternity determined to 
 bestow salvation on those, who, he foresaw, would per- 
 severe unto the end,'^ which converted into other lan- 
 guage, is simply saying, that God from all eternity de- 
 termined to elect those who should believe, and perse- 
 vere in the faith to the end of life. 
 
 This however can not be the election of our text; be- 
 cause these strangers of whom it is affirmed, are not said 
 to be elect in design, but in fact, in tht sanctijication of 
 the Spirit. They are addressed as already elect, not af- 
 ter obedience and the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus 
 Christ. hwUinto this obedience and this sprinkling. The 
 conditions of this text, can not literally comply with this 
 Arminian idea of election. To have employed language 
 corresponding with this doctrine, the apostle ought to 
 have said, not*^Elect," but •^•hereafter to become Elect/'' 
 not 'Un^*^ thrortf^h, or by means of the sanctification of the 
 Spirit," but "after t\nt sanctification of the Spirit," not 
 "unto obedience and the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus 
 ('hrist," but "after obedience and the springling of the 
 blood of Jesus Christ." The Arminian will however in- 
 form us, that God calleth those thin2;s that be not as 
 thoufrh they ivere. But this quotation is nothing to the 
 purpose. God gives us no intimation, that he calls things 
 so here. And as he generally speaks to men after the 
 mannnerandin the language of men, it is most reasonable 
 to s!ippose the same to be his mode of communication in 
 this text. But it is unnecessary to press the matter far; 
 the very attempt at evasive interpretation testifies, that 
 this theory of Arminian election, shrinks from a rigid com- 
 parison with the literal aiid most obvious interpretation 
 of the Scriptiires, and like the dogmas of Socinus, seeks 
 its refuge from the light of open scripture day under fi- 
 gurative inventions. 
 
 •Greek EN. 
 
243 
 
 Another Arminian opinion is^ that the election in the 
 epistles generally, denotes God's choosing all, both Jews 
 and Gentiles, who become professed Christians, to all the 
 privileges of the Christan church, just as he formerly 
 chose the Jews to the privileges of the Old Testament 
 dispensation. 
 
 But neither can this opinion coincide with the condi- 
 tions of the text. For, since this Arminian notion of e- 
 lection is nothing more or less, than choosing men to 
 church membership, the act in, or by means of which, 
 they were elected, can be nothing else, but that which 
 constitutes men members of the visible church. Since 
 in the text they are said to be elect in, or by means of 
 the sanctification of the Spirit, the unavoidable result of 
 this Arminian doctrine is, that the sanctification here 
 introduced, can only mean to set men apart to the mem- 
 bership of the church. And as it has been shown in 
 this discourse, that the sanctification of the text, is no- 
 thing other, but regeneration, theinevitable consequence 
 is, that regeneration signifies becoming a professed mem- 
 ber of the visible church, and as men become professed 
 members members of the visible church by baptism, as a 
 consequence from this hypothesis, regeneration must be 
 baptism. Hence if you adopt this Arminian and we 
 may also add this Unitarian^' explanation of election, you 
 must either be inconsistent, or else also adopt this low 
 Arminian and high Unitarian notion of sanctification and 
 regeneration. How one departure from Scripture sim- 
 plicity as it moves downwards, draws on others in its 
 train! The beginning of error is like the letting out of 
 water, which enlarges the breach, and widens in its on- 
 w^ard and downward course. To Unitarians and one 
 class of Arminians, this is not supposed to be any argu- 
 ment. They glory in these consequences, because they 
 hate the religion which lives in the heart, but to all Ar= 
 minians, that with Dr. Adam Clarke, believe sanctifica- 
 tion so be, ^^significant of that change, which is to take 
 place in the heart*by the grace of God, producing that 
 
 *See the note at the end of the sermon. 
 
244 
 
 obedience cominanded in his woid/^* it ought to be con- 
 sidered mighty, and irrefragably conclusive. 
 
 Nor will it avail to attempt an escape by separating 
 the election from the sanctification named in the text in 
 paraphrasing it thus: **Elect by your /onwer/?/ having be- 
 come members of the visible church, ^^o?/^ in a state of sanc- 
 tification unto obedience and the sprinkling of the blood 
 of Jesus Christ;" since this would be putting a harsh and a 
 forced construction on the text, and especi^ry, since if 
 we were to grant this paraphrase to be admissible, there 
 is another text containing the same objection which puts 
 such a gloss at defiance: ''God hath from the begin- 
 ning chosen you to salvation through'^ (in or by means of) 
 ^'sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth." 
 Herein the sanctifying operation of the Spirit beginning 
 in regeneration, and in its progress producing a belief in 
 the truth, these believers were elected. Here we are 
 not only told, that they were chosen, but also informed 
 how they were chosen. It w^ould be disregarding all 
 the laws of language to suppose, that the sanctification of 
 the Spirit here refers to the state of the persons addressed 
 and not to the manner in which they were chosen. 
 
 From til e preceding Scriptural fticts and consequen- 
 ces, we are \^'arranted in the conclusion, that neither of 
 the foregoing kinds of Arminian election, is sustained by 
 the conditions of the text. And it may be added with- 
 out any fear of successful refutation, that by no literal 
 construction of language is either of them taught in the 
 New Testament in reference to the Christian church. 
 Show us a single text within the lids of that volume,, 
 which informs us, that God'^s electing or choosing men in 
 the Christian dispensation, merely signifies making them 
 members of the visible church, or barely selecting them 
 to the enjoyment of the heavenly inheritance after they 
 have believed and persevered in the faith to the end of life. 
 It' there beany such texts, it is freely confessed, that 
 they have not fallen within the Compaq of my knowledge. 
 
 But on tiie contrary, the election ex])lained and vin- 
 dicated in this discourse, we have taught in the sacred 
 
 •See note on the 13th puge of his Preface to his Commentary on the E- 
 jljistle to the Romans 
 
245 
 
 volume in almost so many words: ^^He hath chosen'' [e- 
 lected] ^"usin him before the foundation of the world." 
 For vvhat? merely that being professors of Christianity 
 we should be conditionally holy and ivithout blame be- 
 fore hhn in love? No verily; but ^*'that we should be" 
 (without any peradventure expressed) ^%oly and with- 
 out blame before him in love."* But has he chosen us 
 to be holy and without blame^ only after we have lived 
 and died in the faith? The contrary is obvious. His 
 command to Christians while here, is to be holyf and 
 blameless^'t — the sons of God without rebuke. But how 
 was this election, made in design before the foundation 
 of the world executed in time? Merely by making men 
 members of the visible church, as is one Arminian hypo- 
 thesis, or introducing them into heaven after they have 
 lived and died in the faith as is the other? Neither of 
 the two. Let the Bible answer: ^^God hath — chosen 
 you" (not after, but) ^^IN sanctificationofthe Spirit and 
 "belief of the truth." 
 
 And this Bible view of election, is entirely exempt 
 from any objections, that can be legitimately urged from 
 the deductions of reason: — 
 
 It contemplates man from first to last in the full pos- 
 session of his natural liberty. The theory of the Chris- 
 tian Preacher, is that God has decreed that men shall be 
 free to choose or refuse the offered Gospel; that he em- 
 ploys the best possible moral means to induce them to 
 escape from death and choose life; and that coeternally, 
 and in agreement, with his foreknowledge of their choo- 
 sing or refusing, he has unconditionally determined ei- 
 ther to elect them or to pass them by; and hence it is 
 undeniably evident that according to this system no man 
 is passed by in the operation of electing mercy? but such 
 as resisting the best means employed by a gracious God 
 for their recovery, will not come to Christ to receive the 
 electing regeneration of his sanctifying Spirit. He has 
 eternally and unconditionally determined to elect them' 
 that will come, and he has eternally and unconditionally 
 
 *Literally from the original: He hath chosen \:%—to be holy and without 
 Warn?, 8cc, +1 Pet. i. 15. tPhil. \'u 15. 
 
246 
 
 decreed to pass them by that will not. If we would 
 only say that such a decree is conditional, even the Ar- 
 minian himself could not but acknowledge the thing de- 
 creed to be in itself reasonable. Why then should he ob- 
 ject, when we argue, that God is so perfect, as to fore- 
 know and foredetermine the same thing with absolute 
 certainty without any conditions and consequences pre- 
 ceding and following each other in the operations of the 
 Infinite mind? 
 
 Nor can the stale objection, thatif God have decreed a 
 particular number to be lost, they must be lost, con- 
 stantly urged against the doctrine of election as exhi- 
 bited by the ]>atrons of the Calvinian philosophy, be 
 intelligently made against the theory here explained and 
 defended. Because it is supposed, that God decrees, 
 not to influence men either directly or indirectly to the 
 soul destroying sin of rejecting the Gospel, but after 
 employing with them, motives infinite and eternal, to in- 
 duce a different choice, simply to svjfer them to choose 
 as he eternally foreknew, that in the best system of mo- 
 ral government they certainly woidd, and that he has 
 decreed their destruction, not because he delights in 
 misery, but because it is the just desert of their chosen 
 transgression, and demanded for the discipline of the 
 moial universe. 
 
 Suppose that God had not foreknown, that they would 
 neglect the Gospel, and that he employed with them no 
 moral means either for or against their acceptance of its 
 mercies, then all could not but admit, that he did not 
 influence them to choose wrong. Again, suppose that 
 after being for a period of his existence ignorant of their 
 fatal choice, he siiotiid !)y some means become informecl 
 of the certainty of that fact^ then it would be equally e- 
 vident, that simply foreknowing the event, could cer- 
 tainly exert no in/luence in its ])roduction. And final- 
 ly, suppose he should decree to su ircr it lo be j list as he fore- 
 saw it would be, how can it be demonstrated, that in 
 thus decreeing he would become any more, an agent in 
 producing or modifying its existence? But according to 
 tlie theory here advocated, God is not supposed to de 
 
247 
 
 termine even to suffer a soul to sin, and be lost, without 
 employing the means provided in the best system of mo- 
 ral operations for prevention and recovery. With what 
 khid of intelligence then can it be urged agahist us, that 
 if God have decreed to passanysinner by in the act of his 
 electing sane tifi cation, that there is therefore imposed 
 on the transgressor some fatal necessity that he must sin 
 and be lost? 1 hose that are disposed to advance against 
 us that trite objec ion, are bound to demonstrate, that 
 God can not decree to suffer wicked men to act as he 
 foreknows they will choose, without interfering with 
 their natural liberty of choice, or in other words, to de- 
 monstrate, that he cannot determine, that they shall be 
 free without destroying their liberty!!! 
 
 Nor can it be rationally argued, that this Bible the- 
 ory of personal election involves God in the authorship 
 of sin or in the production of misery, since in his crea- 
 tion and government it is supposed, that he pursues the 
 very best system of moral operations to prevent the fall, 
 and after the fall to induce men to escape from its ruiii, 
 and to accept his sanctifying, electing, and justifying 
 mercy, presented in the Gospel. 
 
 Imagine at the liead of an army raised for the purpose 
 of defending an invaded empire, a general placed, who 
 by the inspiration of some supernatural power, is in- 
 formed of all the future certainties of his intended cam- 
 paign. He knows, that if all his men would obey his 
 commands, the enemy would be defeated without his sus- 
 taining the loss or the injury of a single individual, but 
 at the same time, he is apprized of the certainty that 
 some of his soldiers will not obey his most wise and rea- 
 sonable orders, but by disobedience will render them- 
 selves proper subjects for the necessary penalties of mar- 
 tial law: that however by the disobedience and the pun- 
 ishment of these offenders, whom he foreknows by name, 
 he can maintain authority and promote obedience and 
 order throughout his camp, and linally, obtain success in 
 defending the lives and liberties of his countrymen. 
 With all these events as certainties before him, he de- 
 termines his whole system of warfare. He resolves to 
 
kI4S 
 
 govern his army in tlie best possible mariner to secure 
 the obedience of all, and to siiiFer these men, \vhom he 
 foreknew certai)ily to become disobedient, to choose the 
 very course which he foresees they will, and also to pu- 
 nish their insubordination as a means of preventing others 
 from similar disalFection. He considers it better to 
 determine to sufler and punish the irregularity of 
 the few, who he foresees will, in despite of the best 
 means of prevention, disobey, and t-uis to impress the 
 necessity of obedience on the minds of all the others, 
 and so maintain the discipline of his army and save his 
 country from destruction, than to disband his forces on 
 account of these foreseen evils, and surrender his country 
 to the ravages of an invading foe. 
 
 Now every event connected with the management of 
 this army, is supposed to be elected or determined be- 
 fore hand by the general, yet who can say, that any 
 thing is so elected or determined as to implicate him in 
 the prodiiction, either of the disobedience or the suffer- 
 ing introduced into the camp? The men are supposed to 
 be left entirely at liberty to choose obedience or disobe- 
 dience. He is considered as presenting the best motives 
 to induce their choice to a direction in which there would 
 be neither transgression nor misery. The cause in which 
 he pursues this- best system of plans and operations, isa- 
 mong the most sacred on earth, the preservation of life 
 and liberty. 
 
 Though in tips supposed system of warfare, every e- 
 vent is determined by tlie commander, it is submitted to 
 the judgment of every reflecting man, who admits at all 
 the lawfulness of defensive war, whether there is invol- 
 ved in this plan any infringement of rational liberty, or 
 any de])artMre from the benignest humanity, and whe- 
 ther, all things considered, it is not far better, that the 
 general should not only foreknow, but also in agreement 
 with his foreknowledge of all the possibilities connected 
 with the subject, fore- determine every event of his sub- 
 sequent operations according to wisdom and benevolence, 
 than 10 close his eyes to future certainties, refuse to form 
 any plan for his future management, and surrender all 
 
249 
 
 tht concerns of his army, and with them all the interests 
 of his country, to the wild vagaries of chance, and thus 
 to pursue a system of trackless and traceless confusion. 
 So it is believed, that Deity to effect the greatest possi- 
 ble created good, prefers the best and the wisest plan of 
 moral liberty to no plan at all, as much as he prefers or- 
 der to confusion, and knowledge to ignorance. 
 
 Some perhaps will imagine, that humanity in the gen- 
 eral, would require him to dismiss from his ranks, the ||^ 
 particular men, whom he foreknows to become certainly ^ 
 rebellious if continued in his camp, before they have diso- 
 beyed, and thus to prevent both their crimes and their 
 sufferings, and that so God to be fully vindicated in his plan 
 from the authorship of sin, ought to be supposed not to 
 create a single being, knowing that disobedience howe- 
 ver chosen, and eternal misery however imperiously de- 
 manded by the demerit of his transgressions, would be 
 his certain conduct, and his certain interminable destiny. 
 Though this objection bears with as much weight against 
 any other theory, which recognizes the eternal fore- 
 knowledge of Deity, as against the general doctrine of 
 this discourse, we will not take this advantage of obviating 
 it, but will face it fairly, and remove it, and will simply 
 request them who urge it upon us to do the same if they 
 can. 
 
 Suppose the general knew, that if these particular 
 men v/ere sent home, and their insubordination and their 
 punishment were not permitted to eventuate, and be exhi- 
 bited to the survey of the whole camp, so as to impress 
 their minds with fear, others would disobey, and that if 
 these^ others should also be sent away, to prevent their 
 disloyalty, and suffering, their example of punishment 
 being in that case wanting, others without this exhibi- 
 tion of terror, would transgress, and that if these should 
 be sent away, others for the same cause would disobey^ 
 and so others, and others indefinitely, so that eventually, if 
 he did not determine to suffer some to choose transgres- 
 sion, and endure punishment as a terror to the others, 
 he would finally have no army to defend his country; s© 
 
250 
 
 that the question would ultimately be, whether his coun- 
 try should be lost, or he would determine to endure the 
 crimes, and permit the punishment of a few of his re- 
 bellious soldiery. Even so, if God make the commission 
 of sin and the infliction of punishment a means of display- 
 ing his wrath, and making his power known, and of ex- 
 hibiting an enmmple to those that after should live un- 
 godly, and if these displays of wrath and power, and en- 
 samples of sullering, be made the moral means of deterring 
 unfallen beings from disobedience, and of awing some of the 
 fallen, so that from fear they seek to be restored to their 
 pristine allegiance, and in this manner he maintains the 
 harmony of the moral universe; if such be the best moral 
 means of confirming the intelligent creation in loyalty to 
 their Maker; and finally, if those that are actually brought 
 into being and suffered to choose sin and endure misery, 
 were not they suffered to be exhibited as examples of ter- 
 ror, to prevent the rest from the violation of their Crea- 
 tor'slaw, others without these exemplifications, would sin, 
 and if the existence of these had been suppressed, others 
 for the same reason would have iiillen into transgression, 
 and others, and others, until the final question is resol- 
 ved into this: ^^shall God determine to suffer the sins 
 freely chosen by some of his creature's in despite of all 
 the means his wisdom employs for their prevention, and 
 permit the misery, that is the inevitable consequence of 
 those sins as the best means of confirming all the armies 
 of the moral creation in rectitude and happiness, or shall 
 he suppress all the happiness and glory, that shall arise 
 from the creation of all the numberless worlds through- 
 out the progress of eternity?'^ Now if it would be ob- 
 viously unreasonable for the general to sacrifice the li- 
 berty, and the life, of an empire to the wicked caprice 
 of a few soldiers, so it would be equally unreasonable for 
 Deity to relinquish all the happiness and glory of the 
 created universe, for the guilty choice of a few crea- 
 tures, that would not by the best moral motives be pre- 
 vented from their folly. 
 
 Thus we find, that the doctrine of personal election, 
 not only coincides with the letter of the Bible, but also 
 
251 
 
 can sustain the most rigid scrutiny of reason^ and justi- 
 iiesat once in the sweetest harmony^ both the wisdom and 
 the goodness of God. 
 
 Having disposed of the objection placed by the Ar- 
 minian at our door, in turn we will try his strength by 
 placing it at his. Arminianism properly so called, re- 
 cognizes the prescience of Deity, and therefore supposes, 
 that in the creation of moral beings, he had before him 
 all the events of their immortality. Accordingly, when 
 he created Satan, he viewed him as ultimately becoming 
 a sinful and eternally miserable spirit; before he created 
 Adam, and before he creates every individual of the 
 sons and daughters of Adam, he surveyed and surveys 
 their future character, and all the interminable duration 
 of their happiness or misery. As agreeably to our 
 doctrine, God has a plan, and the best plan, and every 
 being and event in it has a reference to the general good. 
 we can systematically say, God mercifully and wisely 
 suffers the existence of evil, as the certain though not 
 the necessary imperfection of the best system of moral 
 beings, because, in it there is almost infinitely more good 
 than evil, and of consequence, there are more goodness 
 and glory displayed and more happiness enjoyed, than 
 could otherwise be possible. But as the Arminian de- 
 nies that God ever determined every event in the uni- 
 verse, no one particular thing in creation, can, accor- 
 ding to the supposition, have any reference to the whole. 
 The admission of that reference, is at once the full ac- 
 knowledgement of a plan, in wiiich God has foreordain- 
 ed whatsoever comes to pass. But if he created beings 
 without any view to the general ^oo6.j he must have cre- 
 ated them for their individual ^ood or for no good at 
 all. But how could he create them for their individual 
 good, whose creation he foresaw would certainly be fol- 
 lowed by eternal sin and misery? 
 
 It were better for Satan, had he never been created. 
 It were better for any lost man, had he never been born. 
 This the Creator must know, before he creates them, and 
 then upon Arminian principles, how could he introduce 
 them into existence with any design for their good, un- 
 less indeed, w^e can suppose, that he intended;, that which 
 
252 
 
 he knew would never be accomplished, or designed his 
 own deception. Yet the Arminian theology supposes, 
 that God creates every spirit, that is eventually lost, with 
 all its sins, and its everduring darkness, chains, burnings, 
 and agonies full before him. For what purpose? — be- 
 cause they are the unavoidable imperfections which at- 
 tend the general good? This the Arminian denies, w hen 
 he rejects the system of God's universal plan, and of course, 
 his system supposes, either that God creates them without 
 any purpose, or meaning whatever, or else, that his eyes 
 are delighted with their unquenchable fires, and his ears 
 with the sounds of their never ceasing woes. When he 
 foreknew, that such would be the eternal and miserable 
 consequences of his choosing the conditions of creating 
 them, why unless he have pleasure in sin, and in the 
 death of the sinner, did he choose the condition on which 
 turned all the eternal world of sin and woe? So that ac- 
 cording to this theory. Deity, either brought into being 
 every lost spirit without any meaning in the operation, 
 or he really preferred, that there should be just the a- 
 mount of sin that is actually perpetrated, and misery that 
 is actually endured; just the number of lost angels thatare 
 now reserved in chains of darkness unto the judgment of 
 the great day; and just the number of infatuated men, that 
 are actually living, and will die, in the neglect of the sal- 
 vation of the Gospel. Is a system of theology drawing 
 such horrible* consequences in its train, the divinity of 
 the Bible, which declares sin to be, the abominable thing 
 which God hates, and the death of the sinner to be, that 
 in which he has no delight! O Reader, tell it not in 
 Gath, publish it not in the i-treets of Ashkelon, the Ar- 
 minian philosophy, whilst it professedly denies the doc- 
 trine of personal election^ carries the doctrine o^l perso- 
 nal reprobation in its bosom, hidden indeed from the 
 passing eye, but still existing in'all the magnitude of life!! 
 If this philosophy be true, God created a particular num- 
 ber to be lost. He chose that they should be lost, or 
 else why did he give them being knowing that they 
 ivoidd be lost? Knowing that if they were created, they 
 as certainly wo\^ld be miserable, except he preferred 
 
§53 
 
 their destruction^ why did he not stay his creating hand? 
 But it is said, the destruction of every eternally misera- 
 hle being, is the effect of his own choice. True. This 
 however removes no difficulty. Why/ unless God de- 
 lights in sin, and has pleasure in the death of the wicked, 
 does he create a beings which he knows will certainly 
 make a choice of sin, and thus render himself the sub- 
 ject of eternal wretchedness? If it were better he had 
 never been born, why was he ever born, unless God de- 
 lights in the objects of sin and wretchedness? 
 
 Arminianism makes God, either act without any mea- 
 ning whatever, or else choose the very condition on 
 which are suspended all the unbelief in the world, and 
 all the misery that ever will result from that unbelief. 
 According to the principles, which it involves. Deity 
 eternally beheld the unbelieving enduring eternal tor- 
 ments, upon the condition that they would certainly die 
 in their sins, they would die iu their sins upon the con- 
 dition^ that they would not believe and obey the Gos- 
 pel, they would not believe and obey the Gospel, upon 
 the condition^ that they were created in a particular 
 manner, and placed in a particular state, and finally, 
 they would be thus created, and thus placed, upon the 
 condition^ that himself would choose their existence and 
 their circumstances. Thus Arminianism conducts us to 
 the conclusion, that God really preferred that unbelievers 
 of every grade, should be jist as they are, and no better; 
 that one man should be a liar and not a man of veracity; 
 that another should be a drunkard and not a man of so- 
 briety; that a third should be a man of blood, and not a 
 man of innocence; and the same of men of sin of every 
 order, and character; for if he did not choose that they 
 should he just so, why did he create them at all, or if he 
 have not created and governed them in the best possible 
 manner to prevent sin and promote holiness, why unless 
 he chose that they would be no better, did he not choose 
 to create and govern them according to the best possible 
 system? 
 
 The theory of the best possible system, is the only 
 possible relief from these Bible denying, and God accu- 
 
25i 
 
 sing consequences; but if the doctrine of the best possi- 
 ble system be true, the Bible doctrine of particular per- 
 sonal election, just such as is taught in tiie Presbyterian 
 Confession of Faith, and in the thirty-nine articles of the 
 Protestant Episcopal church, is true. 
 
 Reader since the election here explained and defended 
 supposes, that in the sure plan of the divine mercy, be- 
 tAcen the use you make of the word, and providences 
 or God, and of the common operations of his Spirit, and 
 your obtaining the special act of the Holy Ghost, that 
 will elect you, be entreated to come to Christ ?iou\ and 
 thus make your calling and election sure. It will be in 
 vain, that you believe the doctrine, if you neglect to par- 
 ticipate in the blessings which it conveys. Come, and 
 be assured, that God is both able and ivilling to elect all 
 that will come. He is no respecter of persons, but who- 
 soever Cometh unto him, he will in no wise cast out. 
 Come then, and partake freely in the riches of his elec- 
 ting grace. He ofiers to elect you. Will you accept of 
 
 his electina: love? 
 
 A'OTE. 
 
 Lest this should be construed into an odious and a 
 grou)idless allusion, our authority shall be given, and that 
 authority is none other, but Dr. Adam Clarke. From 
 his preface to his Commentary on the Epistle to the Ro- 
 mans the following is extracted: 
 
 ^•From the manner in which this Epistle hiis been in- 
 terpreted, and applied, various most discordant and con- 
 flicting opinions have originated. Many commentators 
 forgetting the scope and design of it, have applied that 
 to men in general, which most obviously belongs to the 
 Jews as distinguished from the Gentiles^ and to them only. 
 From this one mistake, the principal controversies, that 
 have agitated and divided the church of Christ, concer- 
 ning the doctrines of unconditional reprobation and e- 
 Icction, have arisen. Men eminent for their talents, 
 learning, and piety, have interpreted and applied thr 
 
255 
 
 whole on this mistaken ground. They have been oppo- 
 sed by others, not at all their inferiors, either in religion, 
 or learning, who not attending to the scope of the A- 
 postle, have rather argued from the perfections of the 
 divine nature, and the general concurrent sense of Scrip- 
 ture, and thus proved that such doctrines can not com- 
 port with those perfections, nor with the analogy of faith; 
 and that the Apostle is to be interpreted according to 
 these, and not according to the apparent grammatical 
 import of The phraseology which he employ s.^^ 
 
 "To compose these difterences, and do justice to the Aposile, and set an. 
 important portion of the word of God in its true and genuine light; Dr. Johrs 
 Taylor of Norwich, a divme, who yielded to few in coinmand of temper, be- 
 nevoient feeling, and deep acquaintance with the Hebrew and Greek Scrip, 
 tures, undertook the elucidation ot this much controverted Epistle. The result 
 of his labours was a paraphrase, and notes on the whole book, to which is 
 prefixed a j^ey to the Apostolic Writings." — "T/bis Key is, in them.ain, a most 
 invaluable work; and has done great justice to the subject. Christians, whe- 
 ther advocates for generator particular redemption, might have derived great 
 service from this work, in explaining the Epistle to the Romans: but the 
 author's creed, who was an AR.IAN (for he certainly can not be ranked with 
 modern Unitarians,*) has prevented many from consulting his book " 
 
 Dr. Clarke candidly acknowledges, that before the appearance of thiy 
 Unitarian guide, the apostle was not mterpreted by Arminians according to 
 '*t/je apparent grammatical hriport of the phrasedogy ii:btch he emplovs"/.'' 
 This is always the killing sin of heresy: but it is the part of the humble 
 believer togo whithersoever the most natural, and obvious construction of the 
 Bibie will carry him, and net presume to say, that when God speaks one 
 thing he means another The object of the Christian Preacher is, to prove, 
 that when we do this, we also act, in the strictest accordance, with Christian 
 philosophy. It is believed, that the most literal, and the most natural sense 
 of the Bible, and the most accurate process of moral reasoning, will always 
 harmonize; because the Bible is given by the author of reason. 
 
 Dr John Taylor's theory advocated, and partially adopted by Dr. Adam 
 Clai-ke, is briefly this: In the Old Teftament the terms saved, bought, re- 
 deetned, called, ELECT, created, nnode, farmed, born, and sanctified, when 
 applied to the Jewish nation, iimply mean the act in v hich they were 
 separated from the world, to the professed visible membership of the Old 
 Testament Church; and so, when these same terms are employed in the New- 
 Testament, in relation to the New Testament dispensation, they merely sig- 
 nify the act by which men whether Jews or Gentiles, become the professed 
 members of the Christian church. 
 
 This Unitarian theory takes two propositions for grantedr^r^f, that these 
 terms among the Jews were understood to refer wholly to visible member- 
 ship in their national covenant, and secondly, that they have a corresponding 
 application in relation to the Christian church. 
 
 -It is a petitio principii [begging the question] in a douhle sense. In the 
 first place, it is not generally admitted, that such is always the meaning of the 
 tern'S in relation to the Jews, and m the second place, if it were admitted, it 
 
 *The term Unitarian picperly signifies all, who deny the Supreme divini- 
 to of Jesus Christ, and the personality < f the Holy Spirit, and ])roperly in- 
 cludes Arians as well as Socimavis. The term is however more generally 
 applied to Socinians. 
 
256 
 
 does not involve the consequence, that these terms must mean nothing more 
 in the Christian dispensation. If the Jewish Church was but the shadow 
 of good things to come in rhe Christian church, then if in the termer these 
 terms only referred to a protession of religion, in the latter they ought to be 
 considered to signify the realiry of which a profession is made. 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 To Joseph Lybrand, Samuel Merwin, Samuel Doughty, John Lednum, EU- 
 sha Andrews, Munning Force, Thomas F Sargent, 'I'h^nuis Mill-r, W 
 W. Wallace, and Thomas Dunn, Committee of publication; and John 
 Clarke Editor oi' the late Religious Messenger. A 
 
 In your Religious Mcjssenger of Dec 6'h, 1827, by way of Editorial re- 
 marks you say, "An Arn^inian is able but not nxsiliing to enter conrr.versj 
 with Mr. C while his remarks are so wide a dejiarture from the language 
 of a Christian minis::er." If "An Arininian" wMshed to be treated as a gen- 
 t eman, and aChri^^tian he ought to have avoided writing down falsehoods, 
 and making anv odious pers'^nal allusion founded on falsehoods. The wri- 
 ter, the commiriee, and ihe Conference that can make themselves the ped- 
 lars of the small wares of personal defamation, have no particular claims to 
 the treatment due to eirher gentlemen or Chiistigns. As to the complaint 
 of unbecoming language, any one who reads the Nos. of the Religious 
 Messenger alluded to will see verified tlie proverb, "the real thief will always 
 cry out, "Stop thief the loudest." W'e are told, "An Arrninian is able but not 
 xaiUtug*^ — he retires from the field out of pure meekness and modesty It 
 must be a Moses like meekness and a virgin-like modesty, that can retire 
 from *he arena when convicted before the world of IGNORANCE and 
 FALSEHOOD. [See remarks Christian Preacher. Nos 4 and 5]. 
 
 ••This subject, ' you however intormed us, "will be made plainer be- 
 fore Jeremiah has concluded," But, 
 
 Quid dignum ranio tuiit hie Promisor, Hiatu? 
 In the Messenger of Dec. 27, ^he hero appears with doubtless lofty ex- 
 pectations. But alashow changed! His golden days were gone! You tell him 
 "that his second paper is published more from the previous notice of its 
 forthcoming," "than otherwise " 
 
 Currente Rota cur urceus exit? 
 It was a lecture on style. But thsau-hor was told by the editorial faculty 
 "The style of Mr. Campbell is not good, but Jeren^iah has not mended it," 
 A raw lad who had never seen the whole world, in passing along the high- 
 way espying among a number of other marvellous things, an animal with 
 iong ears, exclaimed with astonishment *'wbat fine horns that coio has!''' 
 on coming up a little nearer, again he called out, '*But tbat\ a queer cow/'"' 
 And finally, feeling the cars with his hand, he remarked very sagely 
 2.ndY)VLt\\ct]ca.\\v,"s(>ft is your hir?! poor beastP** So it appears, the Editor 
 and 'he Committee of the Religious Messenger, once thought Jeremiah had 
 a fine head and horns. On approaching however they began to vhink he 
 was af]iiecr be.ist for a cow; and finally discovered the secret, that he was an 
 animal 'with sof; horns!! This argues more sagacity in the Editorial Commit, 
 tee of the Lunference of Philadelphia, than we had supposed they possessed. 
 We have received, 'hrough the mediun\ of the post-office a small abusive 
 and anonymous pa'nphlet, purporting to be a reply to the appendix of the 
 Christian Preacher No. 8. apparently written by some Methodist in Smyrna, 
 Del. The performance is such as might, if placed in the hands of some De- 
 laware attorney, possibly elevate its silly and obscure author to the distinction 
 of the whipping post Anon»mous attacks on persotial character, injure e- 
 ven a good cause, and always make a bad one icorse. The author and his 
 pamphlet are alike below any other kind of jiotice. Where nothing better 
 is expected, falsehood is harmlem- 
 
THE CHRIS! IAN PREACHER 
 
 Vol. 1. J2PRIL, 1828. N°. 11, 
 
 Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in hea« 
 Tren. — Math. vi. 10. 
 
 Tlie efficacy of prayer in the conversion of the world. 
 
 Since in this work it is advocated^ that in pursuing 
 the best plan for recovering the greatest possible num- 
 ber of lost men^ God regenerates all such, and general- 
 ly , none b^t such, as choose to accept his atoning and re- 
 generating mercy, it is probably asked by some, ^^How 
 can the prayer of one man operate upon the conversion 
 of another? If the man be already willing, then accor- 
 ding to the doctrine of the Christian Preacher, God will 
 certainly regenerate him without the interference of a- 
 nother; and if he be not, then his change is out of the 
 ordinary course of God's regenerating operations. ^^ Al- 
 though it be true, that if a man be now willing, a new 
 heart will be given him, even if he should not be made 
 the subject of another's prayer, and although, if he be 
 not willing, it be equally certain, that in the usual 
 course of dispensing his regenerating blessings, God will 
 not change him, until by the common means of grace, 
 addressed to him as a moral agent, he consent importu- 
 nately and perseveringly to implore divine assistance 
 to believe; yet, in answer to the prayer of fervent faith, 
 God can consistently with the constitution of his moral 
 government, operate upon the minds of men more power- 
 fully in the common strivings of his Spirit to produce 
 this willingness, than he could without such prayer; and 
 also, consistently with the fact, that it is the way of God 
 generally to regenerate such only, as from a sense of 
 guilt and danger, seek his salvation, he may transcend 
 the boundaries of his usual operations, and in answer to 
 importunate and pious prayer, made for another; in a 
 moment, in the twinkling of an eye, without any previ- 
 ous work of conviction or alarm, make the most thought- 
 less human being the subject of iiis regenerating power. 
 
258 
 
 The objection falls before the following propositions: 
 
 1 . Prayer for others may becomeM means of producing 
 in them a willingness to accept the Gospel; and 
 
 2. In answer to the pious prayer of others, God may 
 depart from his usual mode of operations y and reiew 
 the careless and the wicked without their previous wil- 
 lingness. 
 
 Both these propositions are legitimately deducible from 
 the general truth, that God will accomplish certain e- 
 vents in answer to prayer, which he otherwise would 
 not. That in his eternal plan of moral operations, prayer 
 finds a place in the production of events, is an acknow- 
 ledged doctrine of the Bible. If God foretell the res- 
 toration of Israel from all their captivities, he also adds 
 as an essential means of fulfilment, / will yet for this he 
 enquired of by the house of Israel to do it for them: If 
 he promise to the Son, the heathen for his inheritance 
 and the uttermost parts of the earth for his possession, he 
 says, ASK and Iivill give thee. And if he reveal in the 
 sure word of prophecy, that the kingdoms of this ivorld 
 will become the kingdoms of our Lord and his Christ* 
 he also directs us to pray, thy kingdom come. 
 
 Blessings are provided without restriction in answer to 
 prayer. Ask and ye shall receive; seek and ye shall fin d; 
 knock and it shall be opened unto you. For every one 
 that asketh receiveth; and he that sccketh findeth; and 
 to him that knocketh it shall be opened. But is this sup- 
 posed to relate exclusively to personal hlessings? The 
 supposition is refuted when we are informed, that 
 WHATSOEVER ye shall ask the Father in my name, 
 he will give it you. We are also divinely taught, that 
 the effectual fervent prayer of a righteous 7nan availetk 
 much when made for others in sickness and in sin. Is 
 any sick says the Spirit? let him call for the elders of 
 the cJiurch* and let them pray over him. And the pray- 
 er of faith shall save the sick; and the Lord shall raise 
 him up. If he have committed sins they shall be forgi- 
 ven him. 
 
 In al^ these cases, it is obviously implied, that prayer 
 is considered efficient as a means of producing events, 
 
259 
 
 which without it, would be different. In some of the 
 passages just cited, and alluded to, temporal blessings are 
 promised. But if God give temporal good things in an- 
 swer to prayer, how much more spiritual? If lie so far 
 regard the petitions of the pious as to heal the sickness of 
 the body, how much more will he cure the soul of its 
 moral maladies? If when besought by the house of Israel, 
 he will restore them from all their captivities, how much 
 rather deliver souls from the slavish dominion of Satan? 
 But according to some of these texts, spiritual gifts are 
 evidently communicated as the consequences of prayer, 
 and hence, the doctrine that God dispenses the blessings 
 of his grace, as well as the bounties of his providence at 
 the fervent entreaties of the pious, ou,e:ht to be acknow- 
 ledged as a truth of revelation. And if so, he may 
 
 1. Employ means in answer to i^rayer, which by con- 
 victions and alarms, may constrain the most careless and 
 the most obdurate to seek the regeneration and the re- 
 demption of the Gospel; and thus prayer may become the 
 instrument of producing a willingness to accept the terms 
 of salvation. With the mighty works performed in a 
 Chorazin, a Bethsaida, and a Capernaum, he may so ope- 
 rate on aSv^dom, a Tyre, and a Sidon, as to induce them 
 to flee from the wrath to come, and seek a saving re- 
 pentance; and still, mightier works of conviction and a- 
 larm, he may perform, to secure the repentance of a Cho- 
 razin, a Bethsaida, and a Capernaum. At the fervent 
 supplications of his people, from heaven, he may flash 
 terror on the e^^esof a persecuting Saul, unti] trembling 
 and astonished, he shall anxiously enquire. Lord what 
 loilt thou have me to do? Who can say that Deity can 
 not; and that when addressed in the devout supplications 
 of his church universally, he will not, exert on the hearts 
 of all flesh, such a resistless convicting and alarming power, 
 as shall prepare them for seeking and finding that renew- 
 ing of the Holy Ghost, which is at once demanded and 
 offered by the Saviour? The thunders of his power ivho 
 can imderstand? Or he may, 
 
 2. do more. By a Sovereign act of his power, when 
 fervently invoked by the prayer of his people, he may 
 
260 
 
 for any thing we know, consistently with all the perfec- 
 tions of his moral nature, and the best interests of his mo- 
 ral kingdom, in some cases, desert the nsual ways of dis- 
 pensing his grace, and renew thousands and millions, 
 without preparing their hearts by any previous convic- 
 ting and alarming operations. 
 
 Having beneath his immense and eternal survey, just 
 the number for whom the prayer of faith would certainly 
 be offered, he may have eternally determined, so to affect 
 their minds by the common workings of his Spirit, as to 
 bow them before the footstool to invoke his salvation; or 
 by a less usual demonstration of his mercy, to reinstate 
 in their souls the lost conformity to their Maker's image, 
 without pursuing his ordinary mode of antecedent ope- 
 rations. 
 These positions are not only consistent with reason and 
 Scripture, but are apparently suppoi'ted by facts. In 
 seasons of revivals of religion, when cluirches become a- 
 wakedfrom their slumbers, and offer prayers importunate 
 and persevering for all around them, the very atmos- 
 phere becomes consecrated by their breath, and fre- 
 quently, an unaccountable impression is made on the 
 minds of men, who do not frequent the places of prayer, 
 or mingle in the courts of God with the great congrega- 
 tion. Some of these neglecters of this great salvation, 
 whilst pursuing their usual avocations, beyond the rca^'h 
 of any visible means, and without being affected in the 
 least by any cliange in temporal circumstances, have 
 been suddenly seized with such misgivings of mind, and 
 stings of conscience, and forebodings of future wrath, as 
 have driven them from their worldly ])ursuits to seek on 
 asylum in the sanctuary, which the}^ had long deserted, 
 and dispised;and to persevere in seeking, until they have 
 found the renewing of the Holy Ghost and the sprinkling 
 of that blood, which spcaketh better things than the 
 blood of Abel; whilst others of the same character, in 
 such seasons, are sometimes reported as having been 
 changed from Satan to God by a single stroke of tlie di- 
 vine mercy, without any appeal to their conscience^, or 
 address to their fears. Thus He is often found by them 
 who seek him nor. 
 
261 
 
 This subject most naturally introduces us to some re- 
 flections on the efficiency of prayer^ in the conversion of 
 the world. 
 
 The earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof. All 
 its nations, as well as the beasts of its mountains, and the 
 cattle upon its ten thousand hills are his. The promise 
 has passed the lips of truth, that the mountain of the Lord's 
 house shall be established in the top of the mountains, 
 and be exalted above the hills; and that all nations shall 
 flow to it; and that to the Saviour shall the gathering of 
 the people be; yet in the accomplishment of these 
 grand events, the glory of the latter day, prayer is recog- 
 nized by the word of truth as an indispensable instru- 
 ment. It is indeed one of the deep things of God, why 
 the petitions of mortals should give direction and impetus 
 to omnipotence. But certain it is, and it is a truth e- 
 nough for us to know, that infinite wisdom, by a strange 
 identification, has associated the converting energies of 
 that power, which garnished the heavens, balances the 
 earth, and rolls unnumbered worlds and suns along in 
 their orbits, with the prayrful aspirations of the humblest 
 and meanest penitent. 
 
 How exalted the privilege of him, who can offer the 
 prayer of pious faith! Angels sung, over the plains of 
 Bethlehem, the Saviours advent, they strengthened him 
 in the agonies of the garden; they no doubt filled the 
 heavens over his head as he passed from Gethsemane to 
 the judgment seat, and thence to Calvary; watched his 
 cross, and sounded their dirges over his sepulchre. And 
 now their armies bend before their Maker and wait with 
 reverence to hear his commands, or swiftly move with 
 rapturous joy to perform the messages of redeeming mer- 
 cy, accounting any agency in the accomplishment of 
 that great salvation, which the Saviour died to secure, 
 an honour which demands their praise in the loudest an- 
 thems. Whilst engaged in prayer for the conversion of 
 men, the believer is exalted to participate in a work in 
 which angels and God delight, and a work which strange 
 to tell, the Almighty Majesty himself with all the un- 
 numbered myriads of angelic hosts in his train, chooses 
 
262 
 
 not to consummate but with the co-operating agency of 
 saints on earth. 
 
 And if the privilege of co-operating with angels and 
 God be exalted, so also is the object to be effected by the 
 co-operation ^rand — nothing less than the revolution of 
 the ivorld from Satan to God. It is not merely to save 
 our globe from the impiety of the fooFs creed, ''There 
 is no Gody^^ nor from the Satanic delusions of magic, in- 
 cantations, soothsaying, and witchcraft: nor from idoli- 
 zing the luminaries of the skies, the shades of departed 
 heroes, lifeless forms of wood and stone, birds and beasts 
 and creeping things, the fruits of the field, and the herbs 
 of the garden, and all the thirty thousand forms of gloo- 
 my superstition; but to guaranty the rights of consci- 
 ence as existing not between man and his fellows, but 
 between man and his Maker; to restore justice and mer- 
 cy to the society of men; to elevate one half of the human 
 kind from the abjectedness of slaves to the dignity of 
 companions: and above all, to save from the woes of an 
 eternal hell, a whole world of ruined men, and exalt them 
 to the unspeakable felicities of an eternal heaven, is the 
 object to be achieved by the prayers of the faithful. 
 Compared with these the conquests of a. Cyrus, an Al- 
 exander, a Cjt' sar, and a Bonaparte are more insignifi- 
 cant than grains of dross, compared with globes of gold, 
 or than sparks of light, shaken from the wing of the fire 
 fly, compared with suns. Eternity stamps infinite worth 
 on a single soul, gained in the glorious conquest. To 
 know what is gained in the value of one soul, we should 
 be able to estimate the amount of joy, which, over every 
 sifuier that repenteth, reverberates from vault to vault 
 through the heavenly courts; to pursue the redeemed 
 spirit as it soars upwards and upwards, from glory to 
 glorvin its opproximationsto the unattainable perfections 
 of the infinite Glory; and above all, to compute the price 
 paid in the sufferings of the Son of God, when he endu- 
 red the sorrows of the garden and the agonies of the cross. 
 But it is for minds only, that can comprehend the eter- 
 nal aggregate of joy, that shall fill heaven for a world of 
 repenting sinners; the amount of all the exceeding and e- 
 
^^63 
 
 ternal weights of glory that shall rest upon the whole ar- 
 my of ransomed souls; and the eternal weight of woe that 
 pressed the Saviour when pronouncing it finished he 
 sunk from the cross to the sepulchre — it is for such minds 
 only 5 to estimate the conversion of the whole living fa- 
 mily of the human race. 
 
 What inducements to pray, Thy kingdom come\ 
 Christians awake from your slumbers and survey the con- 
 dition of man. Here you may see within the bounda- 
 ries of those kingdoms over which the banner of the cross 
 waves nominally triumphant; yea, within the courts of 
 the sanctuary, and around the altar, millions, your 
 friends, your parents, your brethren, your children, 
 alas! millions, with eyes, yet they see not, ears yet they 
 hear not, and with hearts, yet they do not understand 
 the power of the blessed Gospel. Three- fourths of the 
 earth's population are Turks and Heathen. Behold the 
 ways to Mecca crowded with their tens of thousands of 
 Mahometan pilgrims, who infatuated by superstition go to 
 appease the offended Deity by presenting their emaci- 
 ated bodies in devotion at the shrine of the false pro- 
 phet. 
 
 Who expose aged parents on the banks of desert rivers 
 to the mercy of tygers and other beasts of pray, burn the 
 living widow with the body of her dead husband, and 
 roast their infant children in excavated ovens, to appease 
 the God of mercy for the parents crimes? The hea- 
 then, the most numerous class of this world's inhabitants. 
 What uttermost continents and disiarit isles crowded 
 with the habitations of heathenism! What armies mutter- 
 ing their incantations, performing tlieir senseless witch- 
 craft, or to obtain the imaginary favour of some lifeless 
 idol, pursuing pilgrimages in which the hungry vultures 
 are fed with their flesh, and the ways, and the fields, 
 strewed with their naked bones! These are tie heathen, 
 the inhabitants of the uttermost parts of the earth and of 
 the distant isles. But for .the Saviour it is written in the 
 recordsof heaven audit is revealed on earth TiieJteathe'n 
 for thine inheritance andtiieuiterwost partsof the earth 
 for thy possession, and the isles shall icaii for thy law. 
 
264 
 
 Strange it indeed appears, and strange it really is, but 
 it is nevertheless true, O Christians, that your prayei^ are 
 demanded to give eyes that w ill see, ears that will hear, and 
 hearts that will understand to the millions and tens of mil- 
 lions that in christian lands are blind, and deaf, and unfee- 
 ling to all that in the Gospel is precious and saving: to dis- 
 pel the delusion of the false prophet; to convert his priests 
 and his pilgrims to the faith of the Gospel and demolish 
 his temples; to break the chains of magic and the power of 
 witchcraft, to save the deluded devotee from the sangui- 
 nary worship of his idol and from the self immolation of 
 his superstitious pilgrimage; the aged parent from fierce 
 tygers and devouring lions; the widow from the funeral 
 pile; the smiling infant from the burning alter; and final- 
 ly, a world from eternal woe. Look upwards! Behold 
 the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords with his sword 
 on his thigh, and his armies in his train, ready to go 
 forth conquering and to conquer! See the King stays his 
 chariot and his millions of myriads pause; and all look 
 down upon the saints on earth. Hark! the trumpet 
 sounds, To the help of the Lord, to the help of the Lord, 
 against the jnighty. Arise, Christians, put on your 
 armour; God awaits for your co-operation; and the world 
 is sinking in death. Will you withhold the prayer, 
 "Thy k'mgdom eome-^ when God spared not his Son, 
 and Jesus shed his blood? — Amen. 
 
THE THRIS^IAN PREArHEl^ 
 
 Vol. 1. 3MY, 1828. N^ 12. 
 
 SCRIPTURAL PREACHING. 
 
 If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God. 
 
 —1 Pet. iv. 11. 
 
 If it be enjoined on all men to take heed what they 
 hear, surely it is no less required of ministers of the 
 Gospel to ponder well what they speak. That their in- 
 sructions may become a savour of life unto life; that they 
 may save both themselves and those who hear them, 
 they must speak, not after the wisdom of men, nor ac- 
 cording to philosophy falsely so called; but according 
 to the oracles of God. Let us therefore consider — 
 
 I. What is speaking according to the oracles of God; 
 and 
 
 II. The motives enforcing the duty, 
 
 I. What is speaking according to the oracles of God? 
 If the Scriptures be admitted the only rule, by which 
 the Christian minister is to measure the length and 
 breadth, the height and depth of every doctrine, 
 which he delivers, and of every duty which he incul- 
 cates, it is obviously a dictate of reason, that these ora- 
 cles should be interpreted in their most natural, and so 
 far as possible, in their most literal sense. The licence 
 too often taken in figurative interpretation, has ever 
 since the days of Origen, been the bane of theology and 
 the curse of the church. To preach truly scripturally, 
 is to proclaim doctrines arising from comparing spiri- 
 tural things with spiritural, so as to give the most op- 
 posite texts the most literal interpretation admitted by 
 the comparison. 
 
 The eternity of Deity, is most distinctly recognized 
 in the scriptures. From everlasting to everlasting he 
 is God. 
 
 So also his immutability; in him there is no vaynahh" 
 ness neither shadow of turning; but is the same yester-- 
 day, to day and forever. 
 
266 
 
 In the language of his inspiration, he reveals his own 
 foreknowledge to be eternal. Known unto God are 
 all his works from the beginning of the ivorld. 
 
 If the testimony of the bible be admitted^ he is of 
 purer eyes than to behold iniquity/; and one with whom 
 no evil can dwell. He is declared by the heavenly 
 hosts to be, the Holi/, holy, holy Lord God Almighty. 
 
 But he is also merciful and compassionate. "The 
 Lord is mercifuP and "full of compassion,^^ has no 
 pleasure in the death of the wicked, and is unwilling 
 that any should perish. 
 
 The Scriptures represent him no less eternal in his 
 purpose, than in his being. They declare, that he has 
 now a counsel that shall stand, and a pleasure which he 
 will perform. And if so; then if he change not, that 
 counsel, and that pleasure, must be as eternal as his 
 being. This is taught in those Scriptures, which ex- 
 press the eternity of his design in choosing men to ho- 
 liness: '^According as he hath chosen us in him before 
 the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and 
 without blame before him in love." ^^Whom he did fore- 
 know, he also did predestinate, to be conformed to the 
 ima8:e of his Son." This predestination is associated 
 with the divine foreknowledge, which has just been 
 proved to be eternal: With this, the divine predestina- 
 tion must be cr?- eternal: otherwise there must have been 
 a period in duration, in which he did ndt predestinate 
 those whom he did foreknow. 
 
 Now if his foreknowledge, and his purpose, be both 
 script' irally eternal, and co- eternal with his existence, 
 thev are aiso co- eternal with each other. And neither 
 can be to the other, antecedent or consequent, or cause 
 or effect; but they coincide, as the co- eternal operations 
 of the infinite mind. This is an obvioiis conclusion 
 from the oracles of God as the premises. He is now a 
 God u bo has neither any pleasure in wickedness, nor in 
 the death of the wicked. As he changes not, he was 
 ever the same. Then in forming his eternal system of 
 th^^ moral universe, he so constituted it, as to involve in 
 its consequences, the least possible amount of sin and 
 
267 
 
 suffering; and evil was introduced, neither by his ap- 
 probation, or agency, but found its way as tl?e certain, 
 though not the necessary imperfection of one of the very 
 best moral systems. 
 
 The natural liberty or moral freedom of man is a 
 doctrine of revelation. God tempteth no man to evil 
 but ^*every man is tempted when he is drawn away of 
 of his own lust and enticed.^' '•Lo! this only have I 
 found, that God hath made man upright; but they have 
 sought out many inventions.-' Moral freedom implies 
 a surrender of the creature to the liberty of employing, 
 in acts of intelligence and choice, his faculties of under- 
 standing and will, addressed by moral motives, but un- 
 influenced by any direct agency of Omnipotence. Man 
 is a finite being. He is liable to misjudge the motives 
 presented to influence his choosings. An error in jud- 
 ging motives immediately produces a temptation to an 
 error in choice; and hence, natTiral liberty in a finite- 
 being, unconfirmed by moral means, implies a liability 
 to the transgression of moral law. Our first parents, 
 placed in Eden and addressed by the prohibition, 0/ 
 the tree of the knowledge of good and evil ye shall not 
 eatj and by the sanction, in the day thou eatest thereof, 
 thou shalt surely die, were left at liberty to exercise 
 their understanding in judging the prohibition, and 
 the sanction, and their power of volition, in performing 
 the choice, which their understanding might dictate. 
 Their understanding being finite, was liable to be de- 
 ceived, and to accredit the serpent and to discredit the 
 sovereign mandates of their Maker. The consequence 
 was, they believed the Tempter. This error in judg- 
 ment prepared their minds for the fatal choice, 'SYhich 
 brought death into our world and all our woe.'' Had 
 the Moral Governor restrained their judgment and voli- 
 tion by any supernatural means, he would have destroy- 
 ed their moral being. Moral agency consists essential- 
 ly in liberty. And to have elevated them above all 
 liability to be deceived in judgment and to err in choice, 
 he must be conceived to have imparted to them his own 
 omniscience. An absurdity as monstrous^ as to suppose 
 
268 
 
 the creation of another God. Yet nothing less could 
 have placed them above exposure to temptation and 
 error. The introduction of sin is therefore, most ob- 
 viously an imperfection, against v^hich no system of go- 
 vernment, however wise, could possibly secure an uni- 
 verse composed of finite moral beings. 
 
 It is no objection, that some such beings are ultimate- 
 ly confirmed. They are confirmed by witnessing the 
 penalties of transgression endured by the disobedient. 
 But under the view of our first parents in Paradise, no 
 such penalties could have been executed. As yet no 
 visible beings, whose sufferings only, could, with bodily 
 eyes, be surveyed, had sinned and become subject to pe- 
 nal sufferings. 
 
 If then it be scripturally ti-ue, that no plan of creation 
 and government, however good and wise, could have 
 secured to an universe of finite moral beings, the very 
 essence of whose nature consists in liberty, an entire 
 exemption from all liability to transgression; if God's ha- 
 tred to sin and his foreknowledge of all beings and 
 events, l)e co-eternal with his adoption of the present 
 system of creation and providence; and if he be sup- 
 posed ever to plan and act. consistently with his own 
 perfections, then, notwithstanding the existence of evil, 
 the most simple conclusion from these obviously scrip- 
 tural truths is, that in the exercise of the most perfect 
 omniscience, and the most uncompromising opposition 
 to sin, he projected the mighty plan of accountable 
 creation. And then, if it be true, that in wisdom he 
 performed all his works, the design must have been 
 conceived in reference to consequences the most remote, 
 as well as the more immediate; and then also, if \vc ad- 
 mit, that the Holy One regarded his own holiness, his 
 eternal projection of moral nature, as well as his own 
 perfections, must, in the last degree, be opposed to 
 evil. Thus the result of the whole is, the divine ora- 
 cles sustain the conclusion, that the frame of moral be- 
 ing eternally formed in the infinite mind, and now in 
 the progress of fulfilment, involves the least possible ag- 
 gregate of evil, and the sum that actually obtains, results 
 
269 
 
 not necessarily, but morally from its imperfections as a 
 creature. 
 
 But if sin and suffering be the certain imperfection 
 of a moral creation, the question will naturally occur, 
 why did an infinitely perfect being, all the attributes of 
 whose nature are opposed to evil, originate such a sys- 
 tem? An answer to this enquiry is evidently deducible 
 from those scriptures, which reveal the goodness of 
 Deity. It must be visible to every beholder, that not 
 withstanding all the deductions from the general happi- 
 ness, made by the wickedness and misery which we wit- 
 ness in the world, there is still such a balance of happi 
 ness, that more good is produced than could be, if no 
 such world existed. Now if another world could not 
 have been created in which there would have been less 
 evil, then the choice of Deity as an infinitely good being, 
 could not have been between this and a better; but be- 
 tween this and a worse, or between this and none. The 
 supposition, that he preferred this to a worse, is an ob- 
 vious acknowledgment of his goodness in the choice 
 which he has made. And if so much happiness could 
 not be enjoyed had no world been created; and if the 
 proper object of goodness be the production of happiness, 
 then Infinite goodness would require the creation of this 
 world, attended with all its concomitant evils, in pre- 
 ference to none; just as a mortal might prefer a life in 
 the general happy, but variegated with infelicitous 
 events, to absolute annihilation. 
 
 The universal depravity of mankind is a doctrine of 
 the divine oracles: ^"As by one man sin entered into the 
 world, and death by sin, and so death hath passed upon 
 all men, for that all have sinned.'^ ^"In Adam all die.'' 
 ^^The wages of sin is death.'' ^^All have sinned and 
 come short of the glory of God." 
 
 In connexion with this humiliating truth, the preach- 
 er influenced by the spirit of the Bible, will speak to 
 his hearers of the danger which follows closely in its 
 train. In tones as loud and shrill as the sound of a trum- 
 pet, he will proclaim, "The wicked shall he turned 
 into hell and all the nations that forget GodP 
 
270 
 
 But whilst he convinces men of their sin, and warns 
 ihem of their danger, he will also praclaim the riches of 
 that mercy, which has provided, and now oiTers, the 
 means of recovery. By the living oracles he is warran- 
 ted to say, that if God have concluded all in unbelief, 
 it is that he may have mercy upon all: "Yov God so loved 
 the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that 
 whosoever believeth upon him should not perish but 
 have everlasting life." 
 
 The work of salvation executed in time is but the 
 fulfilment of the system of mercy planned in the highest 
 eternity. According to the scriptures the death of 
 Clirist, appears to be contemplated in the system as a 
 ransom for all; and a propitiation for the sins of the 
 whole world, A ransom is literally the price of redemp- 
 tion, intended or offered for the liberation of captives 
 which may or may not be accepted for the purpose for 
 whicn it is intended or offered: To propitiate signi- 
 fies to appease. A propitiation is that whicli appeases. 
 The death of Christ, has so far appeased divine justice, 
 that God now sustains the whole world under a dispensa- 
 tion of mercy. 
 
 So also in the same eternal plan, his death appears to 
 be contemplated, as it proves to be in fact, an atone- 
 ment, and redemption, to all such, and none but such, 
 as believe. Atonement literally signifies setting at one 
 such as were at variance. It is a reconciliation between 
 contending parties. Redemption means the liheration 
 of a captive by a price. The sinner who believes is 
 set at one with his Maker. God and he arc reconciled. 
 When he believes, he is also redeemed., liberated by the 
 price of the Saviour's su.^'erings from the captivity by 
 which he was held a prisoner to jiistice. The language 
 of revelation is: "By whom WE" (christians) "have now 
 received the atonement." "Forasmuch as ye know that 
 ye" (elect according to the foreknowledge of God the 
 Father) "'were not redeemed with corruptible things 
 as silver and gold from your vain conversation — but such 
 with the precious blood of Christ," 
 
 Thus it is Scriptural to teach, that the death of 
 Christ was in eternity designed and is in time made m 
 
271 
 
 effect^ a ransom and a propitiation for all men and a.- 
 tonement and redemption to those who believe. 
 
 The death of Christ, already a ransom and a propitia- 
 tion for all, is freely and sincerely offered to those who 
 come to God to be made Atonement and Redemption to 
 them when they believe. And as they are dead in tres- 
 passes and in sins, and thus morally disqualified for ex- 
 ercising scriptural faith, he also offers his Spirit to re- 
 new by the infusion of spiritual vitality, all those, that 
 will come to him, that they may have life. Thus God 
 calls upon all men to come, and promises to those who 
 obey his call, his Spirit to perform in them, the work 
 of regeneration enabling them to believe; and the obe- 
 dience of the Saviour, to be made to them atonement 
 and redemption, when they do believe. When the sin- 
 ner believes, God and he, once at variance, are set at 
 one; for we have peace with God when justified by faith: 
 When by faith we can overcome the world we partake of 
 redemption; for when saved from our vain conversation 
 we are redeemed by the precious blood of Christ. Thus 
 the blood of Christ designed from eternity to become, 
 to all such as were foreseen as coming to Christ, atone- 
 ment and redemption, is made such by an actual appro- 
 priation when they become believers. 
 
 As in the exercise of moral freedom, man lost his ori- 
 ginal conformity to his Maker's image, so also in the 
 economy of salvation, through the use of this same free- 
 dom, this conformity is restored. It is left as mucli to 
 his choice now whether to receive that renewinp- of the 
 Holy Ghost, which enables him to believe, and whether 
 to make the Saviour's obedience, an atonement and re- 
 demption to him, as it was to the choice of the first 
 man, whether he would eat the forbidden fruit. On 
 the ground of the ransom, paid in the Saviour's suffer- 
 ings, and the propitiation effected by the sliedding of 
 his blood, God furnishes guilty and ruined men with 
 the means of coming to Christ to receive from the Holy 
 Ghost that spiritual life, which enables them to believe. 
 He addresses them even while in their natural state as 
 intelligent and voluntary beings. By his word provi-^ 
 
272 
 
 vidence and Spirit he proclaims to them their guilt, 
 and warns them of their danger, informs them of their 
 helplessness, invites them to come to the Redeemer, and 
 promises spirit-ial and eternal life to every one who 
 comes. It is no more at the option of an unrenewed 
 man, whether he will walk to a house of worship and 
 hear a discourse pronounced, than whether he will come 
 to Christ and obtain the regenerating operations of the 
 Holy Spirit. It is no more at man's choice, whe- 
 ther he will eat when he is pained with hunger, or drink 
 when he is parched with thirst, than when convinced 
 of his sin and alarmed at his danger, he will come to 
 Christ to ask the spiritual life, which enables him to be- 
 lieve; and that atonement and redemption, which be- 
 come his as a consequence of believing. 
 
 And it is not only optionary with man whether he 
 will, when convicted and alarmed, seek the grace of 
 God which bringeth salvation; but also, whether he will 
 em])loy the means, by which as an unawakened and un- 
 renewed man, he may become awakened and renewed. 
 Whether he will attend to the dispensations of Provi 
 dence, the teachings of the Scriptures, and to the con- 
 victions which often flash upon his conscience, making 
 also the awful truths which they communicate the sub 
 jects of his daily and his nightly meditations, and whe 
 ther he will cherish the feelings of guilt and terror 
 which they awaken, is as much at his option, as whether 
 he will choose the course which leads to wealth and 
 honor, or any other earthly object. 
 
 And stronger assurances of success attend the use 
 of the means of salvation, than can possibly accompa- 
 ny the employment of means for any earthly pur- 
 pose. If God have constituted a connexion between 
 the preferences of the man who chooses to plough and 
 sow, and liis obtaining the fruits of the harvest, yet he 
 has no where promised the husbandman, that the seed, 
 which he sows, shall certainly be productive. But he 
 has promised that they who seek him shall find him, 
 and that whosoever asks shall receive. The Saviour as- 
 signs as the only reason of man's ruin that men will not 
 come unto him that they might have life. 
 
273 
 
 But whilst the Book of God so clearly teaches, that 
 the sinner who chooses to attend to the means of grace, 
 and immediately to find grace in using them, shall ne- 
 ver be disappointed, it also distinctly instructs us, 
 that no exertion of his, restores divine life to the soul: 
 For ivho maketh thee to differ from another? Jlndwhat 
 hast thou that thou didst not receive? now if thou 
 didst receive it, why dost thou glory as if thou hadst 
 not received it? The sons of God are horn, not of blood 
 nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man but 
 of God. As the ploughing, sowing, or watering of the 
 husbandman, can not of itself, shoot the blade or mature 
 the harvest, so the meditations, tears, and prayers of the 
 transgressor, can not restore divine life to the soul. — 
 But as the Author of goodness follows the work of the 
 husbandman with that operation of Omnipotence, which 
 nourishes and creates the grain, so also he succeeds the 
 seeking of the sinner, physically and morally unable to 
 enkindle in himself the least dawning, or awake in him- 
 self the least moving of spiritual life, with that trans- 
 forming act, by which he that was dead in trespasses and 
 sins, becomes quickened and raised from the grave of 
 moral depravity. 
 
 As God eternally determined;, that Christ's blood should 
 be atonement and redemption, to all who believe; and 
 that the Holy Spirit should renew every sinner co-eter- 
 nally foreknown as coming to Christ so as to qualify 
 him for believing; and as he declares, that he is not 
 willing that any should perish; but that all should come 
 to repentance, so it is an obvious inference, that would 
 any more come to Christ, their coming would have been 
 eternally foreknown, and co-eternally with this fore- 
 knowledge God would have decreed that the Holy Spi- 
 rit should reinstate in them the life, which they lost by 
 the fall; and that the Saviour's blood should become 
 atonement and redemption to them. 
 
 And hence if any are passed over, in the eternal elec- 
 tion by which God's people are chosen before the foun- 
 dation of the world, and by which Christ's death be- 
 comes appropriated to them for the purposes of recon- 
 
 35 
 
274 
 
 ciliation and redemption, it is, because they will not 
 choose to come, and therefore, could not be eternally 
 foreknown as the objects on whom God could consist- 
 ently with all his perfections, eternally determine to be- 
 stow the renewing of the Holy Ghost and the blood of 
 the covenant for redemption and reconciliation. If 
 therefore, they are not elected, and Christ's blood was 
 never designed for them as a redeeming and atoning sa- 
 crifice, it is because, they were eternally known as in 
 time refusing to come to receive that life which the 
 Spirit offers to all that come to Christ; and because, God 
 could not as a perfect being, determine that which 
 would contradict all his perfections, to perform. 
 
 He who speaks as the oracles of God, will urge unre- 
 newed men to come immediately to Christ, and hninedi- 
 ately to believe, and repent.^ Every exhibition of Chris- 
 tian doctrine, which he makes from the sacred desk, he 
 will accompany with the scriptural, and practical truth: 
 Behold, 710W is the accepted time; behold now is the day 
 of salvation. 
 
 And finally, he will teach, that every moment, spent 
 in neglecting faith and repentance, accumulates guilt. 
 If on coming to Christ, the Holy Spirit be offered* in 
 all his Omnipotent agency, to qualify the unregenerate, 
 by renewing them to spirit'ial life, for scripturally belie- 
 ving and repenting: and if on their believing, and re- 
 penting, Christ be offered.! to be actually appropriated 
 to them, as atonement and redemption, no man is excu- 
 sable for living even the shortest time without a new 
 heart; without faith and repentance; and without an 
 actual application of the Saviour for all the piirposes of a- 
 tonement and redemption. If any arc spiritually dead, 
 it is because, they will not come to Christ, that they may 
 have life. 
 
 Thus on the plea of neglecting the great salvation, 
 every mouth must be stopped, and all the ivorld become 
 guilty before God, 
 
 II. The motives enforcins; the duties of speaking ac 
 cording to the oracles of God, are to be exhibited. 
 
 •See No. 2, p. 4r. Nos 2 and 3. :JNo. 4. 
 
275 
 
 1 . The philosofMcal difficulties mid scriptural con^ 
 tradictionsy incorporated in both the Calvinian, and 
 Arminian systems of metaphysical theology, are by 
 preaching scriptur ally, ivholly avoided. 
 
 The divine purpose, when admitted by the Armini- 
 an in any form, amounts merely to this: That God as a 
 consequence of foreknowing the future choice of his 
 accountable creatures, predetermined the particular e- 
 vents of his moral, government — that foreknowing the 
 fall of man, he determined to send his Son to save the 
 w hole human kind. But foreseeing that all would not 
 believe, he determined to save those only? who he fore- 
 saw would; and to condemn the others to endless ruin. 
 On this hypothesis, foreknowledge is the foundation of 
 the divine purposes and is anterior to them, both in the 
 order of nature, and of duration. 
 
 This philosophical theory contradicts all our experi- 
 ence in the operations of our own minds, and finds no 
 sanction in the Bible. Although, it be admitted, that 
 we may foreknow events, produced by causes, entirely 
 unconnected with our agency, as mere objects of know- 
 ledge, without making them any part of our system of 
 calculations; yet, all our experience denies, that we can 
 foreknow events as certainly to be produced by our- 
 selves, without also, determining, that we wall certainly 
 make them the subjects of our agency. A man may in- 
 deed foreknow, that an assembly will meet on a certain 
 day, to hear a public speech: and yet give the fore- 
 known occurrence no place in his plans; but he cannot 
 foreknow^ that he will certainly be a member of that 
 meeting, without also determining certainly to become 
 such. And so, although Deity might be supposed to 
 foreknow the events, produced by causes, entirely un- 
 connected wdth the consequences of his own agency, if 
 such events were morally possible; yet, when we revert 
 to the truth, that every cause producing mora! events, 
 is itself, either mediately, or immediately, the effect of 
 his own power, and, that with every one of these Events, 
 he foreknows some one or more of his own acts to corres- 
 pond, we feel, that to suppose them not to make a part 
 
276 
 
 of his plan^ would contradict all that we experience in 
 the operations of onr own minds. Could we imagine a 
 world to exist some where beyond the limits of infinite 
 space, and beyond the reach of Omnipresence^ uncaused 
 by the divine Omnipotence, and uncontrouled by the 
 divine providence, then we might also conceive the sins 
 and sufferings of its inhabitants to be foreknown by 
 Deity assubjects of mere speculation, without hisdecree- 
 ing either to prevent, or to permit them; but when we 
 are informed, that God made the world, with every ac- 
 countable being which treads its surface, and breathes 
 its air; and, that with every moral act of the creature, 
 he eternally foreknows some future act of his own to 
 correspond — that for every sin he will inflict a penalty, 
 and that for every act of rigliteousness he will render a 
 reward — to suppose then, that he exercises a mere neu- 
 tral prescience, is to relinquish in our credence all the 
 experience, furnished by the laws of our own constitu- 
 tions. 
 
 Also this Arminian hypothesis, by inevitable conse- 
 quence, inverts the relations between the Creator and 
 his creatures; and denies the immutability of him who 
 changes not. It supposes the unchangeable Jehovah to 
 reverse his designs, and revoke his cotmsels as frequently 
 as his erring creatures choose to violate his laws, or ne- 
 glect his mercies. The tenor of this metaphysical creed 
 runs thus: God determined when he made man, that he 
 sho:ild be haj)py. But no sooner was this creature 
 viewed in prospect as made, than the whole design was 
 beheld as broken! Man was foreknown as fallen. As a 
 consequence of this foreknowledge, the disappointed 
 Deity resolved to send his Son into the world to save 
 the whole human race. But here again his purpose was 
 defeated! Some were foreseen as not accepting his mer- 
 cies. Again the disconcerted Jehovah amends his plan, 
 by determining as a consequence of their foreknown 
 neglect of his mercy, to destroy them and to save those 
 only vvliom he foresaw, as certainly, to give an obedient 
 credence to the Gospel. Thus, this doctrine elevates 
 
277 
 
 the creature to the throne^ and degrades the Creator to 
 the footstool. 
 
 This peculiarity of Arminianism^ also contradicts all 
 our ideas of the wisdom of Deity. 
 
 If when the Creator made man, he acted in reference 
 to no plan, it is difficult to discover any wisdom in the 
 end for which he created this part of his works. To 
 create a being, without designing any end for his exis- 
 tence, is to act without meaning, and is obviously un- 
 wise; and to create him with a design foreknown to be 
 afterwards frustrated, as this tenet supposes, is scarcely 
 any less devoid of wisdom. If then this doctrine be 
 advocated, the Bible, which teaches, that in ivisdom 
 God made ail Ms ivorAs, is in part denied, unless indeed 
 it be proved, as we verily believe it can never be, that 
 it is ivise in God, not to exercise his wisdom. 
 
 Besides, it inferentially charges God with the au- 
 thorship of sin; and therefore, denies his goodness. — 
 Arminianism under its different modifications, some- 
 times supposes, that God eternally foreknew, and 
 at other times, that he did not eternally foreknow, all 
 the conseqiiences of creating the moral universe in the 
 manner in which he actually did create it. But it al- 
 ways appears to acknowledge, that, had he so chosen, 
 he MIGHT have foreknown every event; and might have 
 constituted the moral universe so difterentiy, as for ever 
 to have excluded the introduction of sin and misery. — 
 According to this theory, God must have been so reck- 
 less of the well being of his entelligent creation, as ei- 
 ther not to select a system in which there might be less 
 sin and suffering, than he foreknew would certainly pre- 
 vail, and which has prevailed in the planless fabric 
 which he has selected; or, as to be unwilling to fore- 
 know, when he might, what would be the certain result 
 of introducing moral beings into his universe. This 
 when divested of all circumlocution and ambiguity, is 
 just saying, that the wise, merciful, and compassionate 
 Jehovah chose to create moral beings, capable of obey- 
 ing his laws, and becoming eternally happy, or, of dis- 
 
278 
 
 obeying his laws, and becoming eternally miserable; but 
 was so regardless of their weal or woe, as not to adopt 
 even a plan to secure their obedience and bliss, or, as 
 not even to be willing to foreknow, whether they would 
 by obedience secure eternal happiness, or by disobedi- 
 ence, sink themselves into everlasting destruction!!! If 
 then to adopt a system — it matters not, whether a sys- 
 tem of order or confusion — a system which produces sin, 
 when another might have been chosen with all the good, 
 and without any of the evil, constitutes an agent the 
 author of evil, then the unavoidable consequence of 
 Arminianism, is that God is the author of sin!! It can 
 be legitimately argued, that he must delight in sin and 
 suffering: or how could he have been so heedless of se- 
 curing the obedience and the happiness of his moral 
 subjects, as to be unwilling to foreknow the events of 
 their existence; and as to devise no plan for uninter- 
 ruptedly perpetuating their well being? 
 
 If this inference be just, the Arminian most unappo- 
 sitely appropriates, to his service, the texts of scripture 
 which declare, that God has no pleasure in the death of 
 the wicked^ and, that ^xn is the abominable thing which 
 he hates. The Scriptures whose authority he makes 
 the chief corner-stone of his temple, are the very ones, 
 which rase its deepest foundations. Such are the con- 
 tradictions with which this first principle of philoso- 
 y)hical Arminianism, confronts both reason and revela- 
 tion. But, whilst this philosophy falsely so called ^ con- 
 tradicts our reason as well as the Bible, by inferentially 
 teaching us, that God eternally foreknew all the events 
 of his own universe with a meaningless survey^ that he 
 in whom tliere is no variableness nor the least shadow 
 of turnings changes with all the capricious choosings 
 of his creatures, and is thus governed by their will; that 
 he created the universe, not in wisdom, or else it is wis- 
 dom to create it without a plan; and above all, that he is 
 the author of sin and misery; he who speaks as the ora- 
 cles of God, will avoid all these horrid tenets. He will 
 spiy: God's foreknowledge and determinations are co~ 
 
279 
 
 eternal,^ and therefore, he never surveyed a single event 
 without perfect meaning. All his own doings, and all 
 the doings of his moral subjects, with which his own 
 correspond, are the parts of his plan,t which he freely 
 elected in eternity, and therefore, himself, and not his 
 creatures, must be the Supreme Governor. When in 
 his eternal mind, he adopted this plan of the universe, 
 he had before him all possibilities, and out of these, he 
 selected, without any beginning and succession in his 
 mental operations, the very bestX possible plan; and 
 therefore, in wisdom he made all his tvorks. And fi- 
 nally, he has chosen one of those possible systems of mo- 
 ral existences, which involve more moral good, and less 
 moral evil,§ than any others, that could have been cho- 
 sen. And thus having employed the very best means 
 to produce the greatest moral good, and the least moral 
 evil, God can not be the author of sin. He hates it as 
 an abomina])le thing; and as he lives, he has no pleasure 
 in the death of the ivicked. 
 
 Again Arninianism teaches, that election signifies. 
 either selecting men to eternal life, after they have lived 
 and died in the faith, or simply making them members 
 of the visible church. \\ Both these definitions are per- 
 fectly gratuitous. They find no support, or even coun- 
 tenance, in the w ritten word of God; but appear to be 
 carved out by the necessities of a system, already showqi 
 to be in other respects antiscriptural, as the doubtful 
 alternatives of a laboured interpretation. This theory 
 of theological philosophy, instructs us, that he hath cho- 
 sen [elected] us in him during the Jewish state before 
 the Gospel zvas preached,^^ that we should become 
 members of the visible church, or, that if we believe, 
 persevere, and die in the faith, we should be partakers 
 of the heavenly bliss; but the book of God teaches us, 
 that he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of 
 the world, that (without any peradventure expressed or 
 doubt suggested) we should be holy, and without blame 
 
 *SeeNo,l,p 8. jNo. 1, p II. :fNo. 1, p 16, and No. 8 and ? 
 
 throughout. §No. 1, 16, 23, also No, 4, p. 91, and Nos.7, 8,9, throughout. 
 IjNo. 10, note. *»No, 5, p. 120. 
 
280 
 
 befoi*e him in love. And as such chosen persons are 
 elsewhere said to be elect (already elected) according 
 to the foreknowleds^e of God the Father through sancti- 
 f cation of the Spirit unto obedience, and the sprink- 
 ling of the blood of Jesus Christ, it is legitimate reason- 
 ing to infer, that they were chosen to be, even in this 
 life, holy and without blame before God in love.^ Thus 
 he who speaks as an Arminian, teaches a doctrine, not 
 only not supported by the Bible, but even contradicted 
 by its most literal testimony; but he who speaks as the 
 oracles of God, will say, that co- eternally, and in coin- 
 dence, with the foreknowledge of those, who would be 
 influenced by the common means of grace, to come to 
 the Saviour, in eternity Deity chose such in design, 
 and in time chooses them in efftctj by the renewijig of 
 the Holy Ghost, that they should be holy and ivithout 
 blame before him in love; and that all true christians are 
 ELECT according to the foreknowledge of God the 
 Father — ELECTED through sanctification of the Spi- 
 rit unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus 
 Christ. 
 
 Besides, Arminianism supposes, that in the change 
 by which a man is translated from death unto life, and 
 in which, old things pass away and all things become 
 new, the creature operates with the Creator.f But this 
 idea is utterly irreconcileable with facts, taught by su- 
 preme authority: ^^For who maketh thee to differ from 
 another?'' ^^And what hast thou that thou didst not re- 
 ceive?'' ^^Now if thou didst receive it, why dost thou 
 glory as if thou hadst not received it?" ^^It is not of him 
 that willeth, or of him that runneth; but of God that 
 showeth mercy." *^The sons of God are born, not of blood, 
 nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of 
 God." "\X, is God that worketh in you, both to will and 
 to do of his good ])leasure," ^^You hath he quickened 
 who were dead in trespasses and sins." ^^A new heart 
 also, will I giv e you, and a new spirit will I put within 
 you." 
 
 •See No. 10, 242, kc. fSee Nos. 2, 3 and 4. Sec No. 2, p. 43. No. 
 10. p. 2.'?6. 
 
281 
 
 The Arminian arrogates to himself a co-operation in that 
 holy work, the honor of which, the Spirit claims as ex- 
 clusively his own, because texts are found, which say to 
 the sinner: Wor^k out your own salvation; a?^ise from the 
 dead; flee from the wrath to tome; make you a new heart 
 ayid a new spirit. His is wholly a doctrine of inference. 
 Man isexhorted to malce him a new heart and a new spirit. 
 The Arminian therefore infers, that the creature assists 
 the Creator in this operation. But this inference is flatly 
 opposed to the words of the Holy Ghost when he says: 
 *B. new heart also will /GIVE you; and a new spirit 
 ivill IPVT within you. How can man co-operate in 
 the production of what God GIVES, and in the creation 
 of what he PUTS within him? How can he co-operate 
 in the change by which he becomes a new creature, if 
 it be performed iiotofthe WILL of the flesh nor of the 
 WILL of 7nan, but of God? Especially when he no 
 more understands the mysterious mode of the Spirit^s 
 operations, than he does the invisible movements of the 
 wind? If these two classes of texts be understood to re- 
 late to precisely the same thing, they obviously conira- 
 dict each other. This mode of interpretation has oc- 
 casioned much strife about words. 
 
 But he, who teaches as the oracles of God, will avoid 
 these strifes, and contradictions, by teaching, that the 
 texts which require men to make to themselves new 
 hearts, and new spirits, are simply exhortations to meet 
 God in the way of his own appointment, that consistent- 
 ly with the divine perfections, and with the economy of 
 the dispensation of grace, the Spirit may GIVE them, a 
 new heart, and PUT w ithin them, a new spirit. Men may 
 be said to make to themselves a new^ heart and a new spi- 
 rit, when they pursue the method, which in the plan of 
 the divine mercy, God will assuredly follow with a new 
 heart, and with a new spirit, just as they are said to accu- 
 mulate wealth, when they pursue the course, which God 
 is pleased to crown with success.* Parents are said to 
 
 *See No. 2, p. 45. 
 
 36 
 
rear a family, when they feed, clothe, and protect their 
 childi'en, and yet, it is not in their power to add a cubit 
 to the stature of a single child. The agency of the pa- 
 rents, is indeed the antecedent to the operation, which 
 conforms the body and increases the stature of the child; 
 but makes no part of the operation itself. If Howard 
 the philanthropist, beholding a Chinese parent, about to 
 commit his new born infant to the waves, had addressed 
 him thus: ''Do not destroy, but rear the sweet and ten- 
 der babe," who would liave siipposed, that the good 
 man intended to intimate, that the father would co ope- 
 rate with the divine agency, in conveying the food ta- 
 ken by the child, through the different parts of his sys- 
 tem; and in all the varied, intricate, and mysterious 
 process, by which the miniature frame of the infant, 
 woidd be increased to the vigor and stature of a man! 
 Therefore every one speaking as the oracles of God^ 
 will say, and every christian preacher ought to say, that 
 when the Spirit exhorts Work out your own salvation^ 
 he means, come to Christ, that God may work in you botk 
 to will and to do of his good pleasure; when he com- 
 mands, arise from the dead^ he intends, come to Christ, 
 that the Spirit may quicken you who are dead in tres- 
 passes and sins; when he warns to flee from the wrath 
 to come, he requires you to go to Christ, that he may 
 deliver you from the wrath to come; and finally, when 
 he commands to make you a new heart, and a new spirit^ 
 he directs, to come to Christ, that the Holy Comforter 
 may may give you a nerv heart and put within you a 
 new spirit.'^ With this application of these two clas- 
 ses of texts, confusion and contradiction vanish, and 
 when the sinner is exhorted, he has a definite duty pre- 
 sented to his view. But who that teaches him, that in 
 the change by which he becomes a new creature, he 
 must co-operate with the Almighty, exhibits before him 
 any tangible, visible, or comprehensible duty? If the 
 nature of the operation, be as incomprehensible, as the 
 movements of the wind; of which we can only say, ^'we 
 
 •^See No. 2 throughout 
 
283 
 
 hear the sound thereof but can not tell whence it Com- 
 eth or whither it goeth/' who can describe the sinner's 
 duty in this assumed co-operation? He therefore, who 
 exhorts sinners to co-operate with God in making them- 
 selves a new heart, and a new spirit, exhorts them to do 
 he cannot tell what!! 
 
 And finally^ Arminianism in teaching, that Christ has 
 made atonement and redemption for the sins of the 
 whole world, assumes a position unsupported by anv one 
 text in the Bible; and of conseqiience it must be mista- 
 ken in the nature of the atonement and rede^nption of 
 the Saviour. The Arminian's atoneinent and redemp- 
 tion are but the propitiation taught in the Bible. It is 
 scriptural to say, that Christ is a PROPITIATION for 
 the sins of the whole world. Ilo propitiate signifies to 
 appease. The scriptures undeniably teach, that God, 
 through Jesus Christ, is so far appeased, as to hold all 
 the race of man under a dispensation of mercy; but they 
 no where intimate, that either in determination or in 
 facAj God is reconciled, or atoned to the wicked, or that 
 he has redeemed them, ''released them by a price from 
 the penalties of their sins.*'* Aiid thus the Arminian 
 allows no meaning to such texts as say: '*In Vv horn WE'' 
 (saints and faithful brethren in Christf) ^'have redemtion 
 through his blood even the remissions cf sins.'' ^^-IVE" 
 (beloved of God and called to be saintsj) ^^also joy in 
 God through our Lord Jesus Christ by whom WE have 
 now received the atonement." 
 
 The teacher, who speaks as the divine oracles, will 
 not suffer the shackles of a cramped, metaphysical sys- 
 tem, so much to trammel him, as not to give the fullest 
 meaning, sustained by the most literal interpretation of 
 every text, which relates to the extent of the Redeemer's 
 mediation. He will say, that as God co- eternally with 
 forming his plan of mercy, foreknew, who would and who 
 would not, come to Christ, so he determined that the Lord's 
 death should be a RANSOM, and a PROPFIIATION 
 for all men, but an ATONEMENT, and REDEMP^ 
 
 ♦See No. 4. fCol. i, 2, |Rom. i, 7, 
 
284 
 
 TION, for those whom he co-eternally foresaw, as com- 
 ing to Christ, obtaining spiritual life, and savingly be- 
 lieving the Gospel. 
 
 It is soHietiines imagined, that by denying an eter' 
 nal and particular election, and a limited atonement, 
 and redemption, the Arminian renders the Christian 
 system more simple, and as a consequence, more easily 
 understood. Supposing the observation to be true, it 
 argues badly for the verity of Arminianism. The Bible 
 teaches us, that some of its own truths are hard* to be 
 understood. A system therefore, which involves na 
 such truths, may be simple, and easily comprehended, 
 but it can not be a system which embraces all the grand 
 doctrines revealed in the Scriptures. He who infers 
 the truth of the Arminian theory from this professed 
 simplicity, arg\ies very little more wisely, than the 
 cluld, who after tearing out all the difficult lessons from 
 his school book, should suppose now its contents being 
 more simple, more readily learned, and more easily com- 
 prehended, it is preferable to those of his fellows. 
 
 Speaking as the oracles of God, will also demolish all 
 the difficulties and scriptural discrepancies of philo- 
 sophical Calvinism. 
 
 This theological philosoi)hy supposes the determina- 
 tions of God to be the foundation and the antecedent of 
 his forcdnowledge; and, that although, he might have 
 created and governed the moral universe so as to have 
 preserved it for ever sinless, and uninterruptedly hap- 
 py; yet for the manifestation of his justice and mercy, 
 he preferred that the system, should be so created as to 
 produce the certain sum of sin and misery which actually 
 exists. 
 
 Tbe corollary of this doctrine, is, that God is the Au- 
 thor of sin. Not more so indeed, than he is made by 
 the Arminian philosophy; but still visibly, and undenia- 
 blv so. And just as visibly and undeniably, is this co- 
 rollary at war v\ith these words of revelation, '^^O do 
 not the abominable thing that I hate.'^ ^^The just Lord 
 
 •ii P. Ill, 16, 
 
28a 
 
 "will not do iniquity.'' "God can not be tempted of evil 
 neither tempteth he any man.^' This philosophical 
 dogma, so obviously antiscriptural, is also at variance 
 with the Presbyterian philosophical Calvinist's own 
 creed, which testifies: "Neither is God the author of 
 sin." 
 
 He adopts this uncomely tenet, not because he finds 
 it contained in the language of sacred writ; but because 
 he supposes it to be the inevitable consequence of the 
 scriptural truth, that God "worketh all things after the 
 counsel of his own will; and, that the Lord reigneth and 
 doeth his will in the armies of heaven and among the in- 
 habitants of the earth.'^ 
 
 This discrepance, he who speaks as the oracles of God 
 will remove; and these apparently opposing texts, will 
 he reconcile, when he teaches, thatco-eternally, andco- 
 incidentally, with his infinite foreknowledge of all e- 
 vents, Deity chose, that system of moral creation, which 
 his unerring wisdom dictated, to be best adapted to pro- 
 duce the most obedience and felicity, and the least trans- 
 gression and suffering. So that, whilst on the one hand, 
 he will hold it, as true, and reasonable, that ruling in the 
 armies of heaven, and among the inhabitants of earth, 
 and working all things after the counsel of his own will, 
 he chose to create and govern the universe as it first ex- 
 isted, and as it now exists; on the other, he will pro- 
 claim it equally true, and equally reasonable, that hating 
 sin as an abominable thing, and having no pleasure in 
 the death of the wicked, God chose to create and go- 
 vern it, as the universe in which there is the least possi- 
 ble sin and death. 
 
 This philosophy also, whilst it scripturally recogni- 
 zes the death ofChrist as designed in God's eternal plan, 
 and actually made by appropriation in time, atonement 
 zx\A redemption to only those who believe; yet in many 
 cases denies the ransom, and the propitiation, which 
 the Saviour has made for the sins of the whole world. 
 This is undeniably opposed to the literal acceptation of 
 such Scriptures as teach, that Christ gave "himself a 
 
286 
 
 ransom for all to be testified in due time;'' and that he is 
 ''*the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours but also 
 for the sins of the whole world." 
 
 This Scriptural contradiction can never thwart the 
 way of the Christian preacher, who exhibiting the ora- 
 cles of God in the most obvious signification, will teach, 
 that while Deity in his eternal plan of moral government, 
 determiued, that the death of Christ should be atone- 
 ment iind7'edemf)tio?i for such only, asco-eternally with 
 the formation of his plan, he foresaw coming to Christ, 
 he also decreed it to be a ransom and a propitiation 
 for the sins of the whole world. This is the manner in 
 which the Scriptures most literally and obviously inter- 
 preted, constantly represent the Saviour's death. 
 
 This metaphysical philosophy also su))poses no cer- 
 tain connexion to be constituted between any endea- 
 vours of the unregenerate man, and his receiving the 
 spirit of regeneration. Because the testimony of sa- 
 cred writ, is that the thoughts and sacrifices of the wic- 
 ked, and the prayer of him that turneth away his ear 
 from hearing the law, are an abomination to God; and, 
 that if I regard iniquity in my heart, the Lord will not 
 hear me, it is inft:rred by the advocates of this doctrine, 
 that the unrenewed man has no warrant to suppose any 
 divineiy appointed means in the use of which he can 
 successfully seek a new heart. All this argument is 
 based on the supposition, that nothing but holy prayers 
 are regarded by a holy God. But if this were so, w^hat 
 petition from a fallen creature of earth, co\ild enter the 
 ears of the holy, holy, holy. Lord God of Sabaoth? 
 What flesh of this world so pure, as to be justified, when 
 God lays judgment to the line and righteousness to the 
 plummet? 
 
 Let us examine the proofs separately. First those 
 texts which represent the thoughts and sacrifices of the 
 wicked an abomination to Grod. 
 
 Although sin is universally an abomination to the Holy 
 One; yet he has revealed mercy for sinners and for the 
 very chief. Although the sacrifices, and the thoughts 
 of a sinful Mary MagdAlene, and of a bloody Manasseh, 
 
287 
 
 were an abomination to Jehovah; yet he visited them 
 with his rich mercy; cleansed them from all their ini- 
 quities; and saved them with a great salvation. These 
 Scriptures indeed prove, that God surveys sin as an a- 
 bomination; but not, that he will not have mercy upon 
 sinners. To prove that sin is the object of divine ha- 
 tred is one thing, and to prove that God will not have 
 mercy upon alarmed and seeking transgressors is quite 
 another. 
 
 Secondly, Let us examine those texts, which say, ^^He 
 that turneth away his ear from hearing the law even his 
 prayer shall be abomination;'^ and, '^if I regard iniquity 
 in my heart the Lord will not hear me.'' Here are par- 
 ticular classes of sinners described: those who w ill not hear 
 the law and those who regard (revolve or meditate) ini- 
 quity in their hearts. Now does the anxious sinner, w ho 
 has been alarmed by the threatenings of the law; and 
 who calls for help to escape from the wrath to come, fall 
 under either of these denominations? He indeed sees 
 no beauty in holiness; yet seized by the terrors of future 
 wrath, and pierced by the arrows of the Almighty, he 
 turns not away his ear from hearing the law; but hears 
 it with fear and trembling. He indeed finds not in his 
 heart to love God, yet fearing, lest iniquity should be 
 his ruin, he -regards, revolves, or meditates the way of 
 escape; and therefore, does not regard, revolve, or me- 
 ditate, in his heart the pursuit of iniquity. These texts 
 at the most, prove only, that the thoughts, prayer and 
 sacrifices of those w ho desire not either from the princi- 
 ple of love, or of fear, to lay aside their sins, and who 
 when they make any acknowledgement to their Maker 
 at all, oiler him but an hypocritical service, are unhee- 
 ded by the Author of mercies and the hearer of prayer. 
 
 Again, this doctrine is also argued from such texts as 
 teach, that the sons of God are born, not of blood, or of 
 the will of the flesh, or of the will of man: but of (iod. 
 These words of holy w rit, and others of the same class 
 indeed teach us, that the renewing by which a man 
 passes from death unto life, and becomes a new creature, 
 
288 
 
 is exclusively God's; and denies all human co-opera- 
 tion; but gives us no designation of the character of the 
 antecedents to this operation, or of the agency by which 
 they are produced. 
 
 Thus the most literal exegesis of these scriptures with- 
 out in the least limiting their meaning by a comparison 
 with others, affords not the smallest support for the doc- 
 trine; whilst to say nothing of its discrepance with such 
 scriptural exhortations as say: ^^ Arise from the dead; 
 •^flee from the wrath to oome;'^ ^'make you a new heart 
 and a new spirit;'' and of its incongruity with the whole 
 tenour of God's dispensations to sinful men; and not to 
 name the appalling consequences to which it inevitably 
 conducts us, it is sufficient for its refutation to repeat 
 the language of the Saviour: ^^Ask and it shall be given 
 you;" '^seek and ye shall find;'"' ^^knock and it shall be 
 opened unto you." But lest any should suppose that 
 this is addressed to such only, as can ask with a holy 
 prayer, and that anxious sinners are excluded, the Redee- 
 mer also says ^'EVERY one that asketh receiveth." 
 
 This Scriptural contradiction disappears in the prea- 
 ching of him who speaks as the oracles of God. To pro- 
 duce the greatest amount of ha])piness, he will teach, is 
 the proper object of infiuite goodness. This can be 
 produced, only by the existence of a system of intelli 
 gent and voluntary beings. Composed of finite beings 
 in the perfection of their nature not exempt from error 
 in judgment, and consequent error in choice, any such 
 system, is liable to a greater or a less degree of sin and 
 its attendant misery. As an infinitely good being, God 
 therefore, chose not only an intelligent and moral system, 
 but one the very best of its kind — one, in which, al- 
 though there is a liability to evil; yet a liability to the 
 least possible. Co eternally with the ado])tion of this 
 best plan, Deity foreknowing, who among the genera- 
 tions of Adanvs children would come to the Saviour, 
 and who would not, determined, without any uncertain- 
 ty or conditionality, to grant to those coming, power to 
 become the sons of God. And as he believes this com- 
 ing to Christ consists in the importunate and persevering 
 
289 
 
 seeking of an anxious sinner, he will teach, that there is 
 a divinely constituted and infallible connexion, between 
 seeking and finding grace to become a new man and a 
 spiritual christian. 
 
 2. Speaking on these topics as the oracles of God, if 
 universally adopted, ivould remove the principal causes 
 of difference between all Trinitarians, loho hold the 
 the eternity of future rewards and punishments. 
 
 If the views of doctrines exhibited in these discour- 
 ses, be as the oracles of God, surely, in adopting them, 
 neither Arminians, nor Calvinists have any thing to lose; 
 but every thing to gain. If the doctrine of God's free 
 mercy to all men, he secured to the Arminian, what can 
 he lose by admitting, that the All Wise has eternally 
 planned every event in the universe, according to the 
 wisest and best counsel? And if it be granted, that the 
 Spirit is freely given to all who ask him, what loss can 
 be sustained in believing, that this Spirit himself re- 
 news the sinner, withowi diHy human co operation? And 
 if Christ's propitiation (all that appears to be meant by 
 the Arminian's atonement and redemption) for the sins 
 of the whole world, be acknowledged, what injury in 
 supposing, that God eternally designed the Saviour's 
 death really to become in time, atonement and redemp- 
 tion to none but those who believe? 
 
 Again, if the Scriptural doctrine that God worketh 
 all things according to the counsel of his own will, be 
 retained, why should it be any offence, to the Calvinist 
 to believe the Scriptures literally, which teach, that God 
 would rather, that none should perish; but that all 
 should come to repentance? If it be admitted, that the 
 work of renewing them who are dead in trespasses 
 and sins, is exclusively the Spirits; what if it should be 
 also held, that God gives his Spirit to all, even to the 
 anxious unregenerate who ask it? And finally, if Christ's 
 death be exhibited, as it is scripturally taught to be, 
 atonement and redemption to those only who believe, 
 what fatal danger in proclaiming it also a sufficient ran^ 
 som and an actual propitiation^ for the sins of the whole 
 
 27 
 
290 
 
 world? Where now the loss to either party in adopting 
 the doctrines which are here supposed to he taught in 
 speaking as the oracles of God? Nothing, absolutely 
 nothing is lost, but what is a deformity and an incum- 
 brance to any system, and the avoiding of many difficul- 
 ties is gained. 
 
 He who would speak as the oracles of God^ will view 
 the temple of divine truth, not from a location, from 
 which he can survey only a solitary side or part; but 
 he will go all around the sacred edifice,. and taking his 
 stand, now in the vale below; now in a horizontal range: 
 and again on the mountain clift above, in all its various 
 aspects he will familiarize his eye with its front, and rear, 
 and both its ends, with its pillars and its colonnades, its 
 arches and its domes; and although, to every particular 
 site it presents widely different phases, he will discover 
 a beautiful correspondence in the parts, and feel his soul 
 elevated by the glorious symmetry and transcendent 
 grandeur of the whole. And although he will find, that 
 after all, his mortal sight can not explore the depth of its 
 foundations, laid in the abyss of eternity; or penetrate 
 the inmost sanctuary, the holy of holies, to feed his cu- 
 riosity on the arcana of the Most High; yet he will learn, 
 that the misty clouds which once appeared to hang a- 
 round, covering all but a favourite part with the shades 
 of deep and awful mystery, and exhibiting a legion of 
 unsightly and contradictory shapes, have vanished, and, 
 that on mount Zion illumined by the Sun of righteous- 
 ness stands a beauteous temple of God. 
 
 END OF VOLUME I.