Rates v » = aes Ry Sye4 * Py: > » > e > ae > > >, .? >? 5 % ¥, ie 7 °, » PA? ear seneaeets eiese ses Z > be S > ees > > 7 t> S45 >Dre > > Se 4% > ay al Pe, Ws iG by Se epee ee 3 55495 edSe5 Sageseed > > Ay, >) se Sco ese woe > >. Ses » > see Ses > >>?» ». seca: ae shee, ie a sete A se Ee ‘Sa 4g Ks > 5? aes » $2> 25>) .S > be > Py > > < Ss * zy > > aus ee >pPnds? hs > > > be > > > > > > > > > > prs? > ate WAY, »A al wx 7 or a re A be oh > StH > 3. ase > Sei 3 bag > ie beta S > » Spas, Oy Woy >>> > Sess > “> EeSatete CaSaeas MPs? peptone}! > basane Seseses > > > Sate seSeSeseses sPdP Py >> >; > > + > > a 8 ot » > nt > > > > ieteten eta tases Be » Ss 3 > 2 >S>>h; <2 se _* P, > Sz > > > > 4 >} » >? ive) > » pory’ > > > » > > > » > <$< > >) ¢, > ibitis use OF THE PRINCETON, ING © er a ee OF PHILADELPHIA, PA. yagouogieas SEMINARY, | Pee | epee pork 4855 i ———— 5==s —S— = Ee OR Br Vog2 W43 er Digitized by the Internet Archive i in 2019 with funding from | ~ Princeton, Theological Seminary Library _ https://archive.org/details/reconcilerattempOOweav - Ei RECON CLEAR. Nw! ~ > * ~ 7 * » as me ‘ 7? " * % sp a _— ‘ ; ’ _* 4 . , - — Pa. asf ‘ ae * 4 - a r pr. * cs * - »” ¢ " i 9 F " a ee «a ae % ' % nf - DISTINGUISHING PRINCIPLES’ AS TO THE “s DIVINE “ GOVERNMENT.” ‘s . « 1. Tuat God’s government, whether by “the law of works,” or by “ the law of faith,” while “ good to all,” is based upon Eauiry: and that since equity is the giving to every one his due, God, as well as man, must have his due. 2. As equity requires that a Testimony should be borne as to God and man respectively, from the conduct of both the one and the other, therefore the law and gospel were both designed for a Testimony. And that, since “ the Lord hath made all things for himself,” it is not to be supposed that he would be in- different to such testimony. 3. That the testimony borne, is such that, while it redounds to the glory of God, and to the shame of man, it makes way for the exercise of a gracious sovereignty, perfectly compatible with the equity and benevolence of the Divine government. AS TO THE DIVINE “SOVEREIGNTY.” 1. That the sovereignty exercised proceeds upon the consideration that God, whose “ understanding is infinite,’ had, from eternity, an infallible foresight of man’s delinquency, not merely as in Adam, nor even as under the law, but also under the Gospel. 2. That therefore it admits of a provision for ‘‘ every creature,” as well as of an election of a “ peculiar people.” 3. That the subject being viewed in the light here exhibited, it will be seen that the freedom and responsibility of man is in perfect accordance with the absolute sovereignty of God: for its language to man is, “ You, notwithstanding all means and motives to the contrary, would have your will and way; and now I will have my will and way: which is, that I will, of my sovereign ‘ goodness,’ keep ‘mercy for thousands,’ and ‘ will pardon them whom I reserve.’” AS TO BOTH. That great importance attaches to the distinction between the will of deter- mination and the will of inclination, which will therefore be found to pervade the whole scheme. * ; is ivqeang . * “* THE RECONCILER: AN ATTEMPT 7 ) EXHIBIT, IN A SOMEWHAT NEW LIGHT, THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT, AND OF THE DIVINE SOVEREIGNTY. BY A QUADRAGENARIAN IN THE MINISTRY. eset, : , Ww Taage : \OPCcryT y;ve *¢ T will ascribe righteousness to my Maker.”—Job xxxvi. 3. ** To the praise of the glory of his grace.”—Ephes. i. 6. ** Surely if there can be a way found to reconcile these two doctrines of the absolute salvation of the elect, with a conditional salvation provided for all mankind, this will be the most fair, natural, and easy way of reconciling these different texts of Scripture”—those having a uni- versal and particular aspect—‘‘ without any strain or torture put upon them,”—Dr. Watis’s Ruin and Recovery, p. 265. Second Edition. “If we can, by our reasonings according to Scripture, cast any happy gleam of light into these darknesses of Providence, whereby any honour may be done to God, any scruple of mankind satisfied, and any angry contentions removed, it is neither unlawful or improper to attempt and seek after such advantages.”—JIbid, p. 291. LONDON : JACKSON AND WALFORD, 18, ST. PAUL'S CHURCHYARD. 1841. > 3% + 43 oat a. ; « | a ie : oe . ro c Se : : ~ . f ¢ - ; a : »* eu 8 faa ’ > 2 — : ¥ * : ti é + = wt es ie oe Ne + ey he - paar % beter aA eet. re ee ‘> i) a ali ‘ ie Dag sy - eee 5 AS =~ ; . se $s y “ + = * } shy ? ~% Y i f i Soa S ae LONDON: PRINTED BY R. CLAY, BREAD STREET HILL. | : “hme i ae Pie tA Tue Author has given in the Introduction and Table of Contents to this work so full an exposition of the occasion of it, its objects, and his views, that he deems it unnecessary to say much by way of preface. A few brief remarks, however, concerning the supposed advantages of it, may not be unaccep- table. He indulges the hope, then, that under a Divine blessing it may assist in removing the difi- culties that naturally arise in thinking minds con- cerning sin and grace, the Divine government and the Divine grace; showing how the operations of God, both in the one and in the other, are compa- tible ;—that it may reconcile apparently discordant scriptures, particularly those addressed to the human will and human ability, with those that relate to electing mercy and efficacious grace ;—that it may show the proper ground of the exhortations and ex- postulations of Scripture ; and the consistency of these, as addressed to sinners, with man’s moral impotence, Viil PREFACE. inspired writer has immediately added, “ It is for the honour of kings to search out a matter.” As far as conducted by the light of revelation, he has made an attempt; and if he has failed, there yet remains to him and his reader the composing reflection, that ‘it is for the glory of God to conceal” whatever we cannot discover; and that we are further reminded, for our satisfaction, in the Divine Word, that God ‘‘holdeth back the face of his throne, and spreadeth his cloud over it ;” and that he is “ a God that hideth himself.” In the mean time, let both writer and reader rejoice that there is one “ greater than Solomon,” who will resolve all “* our hard questions” in heaven ; and in reference to all that is unrevealed, let both join in the devout exclamation of Paul the Apostle— «¢ Oh, the depth both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!” The Author now commits this attempt to the con- sideration and candour of the church of God, under the direction, influence, and control of the great Head of that church. CONTENTS. PREFACE Tue GENERAL INTRODUCTION. — Objects — Occasion — Advantages — Comparative Claims of this Scheme and that of the Wesleyan Methodists considered—That also of the Hyper-Calvinist—Views of Dr. Watts— Concluding Remarks to prevent Bitterness of Spirit or Alienation of Heart, on account of Difference of Opinion on this and similar topics. . ——— PRELIMINARY DISSERTATIONS, Bearing upon the Moral Government of God on the one hand, and upon his Sovereign Grace on the other; and upon Man as a subject of Govern- ment, or as an object of Sovereign WayOUln ewes meee s Cuap. L—The Universal and Particular aspect of the Gospel, containing such scriptural passages as either express or imply such ASPECES. Savi nacunte pieteenrren e se SS . Cuap. IL—On the Human Will—the passages of Scripture that are ad- dressed to it. On the Divine Wili—the passages that infer its prevalence and sovereignty. « BS areto a : Cuap. I1].—On Human Agency—the scripture passages addressed to it. On Divine Agency—the passages that imply our dependence OIE os sd ae ee ets ec cee te eS Cuap. IV.—The above scriptural statement of the universal and par- ticular aspect considered, showing their connexion and consistency. The objections to this comprehensive scheme answered and rebutted. »- - + + = => Cuap. V.—Advantages of the universal and particular aspect—as well as of the above scriptural statement of the human will and human agency; as also of the Divine will and the Divine agency: together with the advantages of the Scheme miteme ther ar an Mirus eer etic cee ees! At>. Cuar. VI.—On the nature of a PROBATIONARY Government, as insisted on in this work. PAGE 24: ab, 36 46 xi CONTENTS. ~ PAGE Cuar. II.—The Scriptural view of what has been called “ REPRoBa- TION,” or “ Predestination to Death ;” showing that there is no reprobation but upon érzal ; no destination to death but upon desert; and no pre-destination but on foresight of such desert. The subject explained—Scripture Re- probation or “ Hardening” illustrated. Thus explained, DT ODED ce ee 0 ae ea scr Sk Ee eee ttn a eae eh Seer Cuap. III.—The Scriptural Doctrine of ExzcTion of persons, and PRE- DESTINATION to blessings, a doctrine of Rexrer, not of Terror; the Election being not an Election of exclusion, but of reservation, for the securing of a People to God in the world: it having been foreseen that, through the per- verseness of men, there would otherwise have been no people of God—no Church inthe world. . - - + + Sect. 1.— Mis-statements concerning the doctrine, and misconceptions corrected and prevented. . . «© « + © + «© © Sect. 2.—The Trur Scripture Doctrine, showing it to be, not an Election of exclusion, but of reservation; for a “ reserve,” on the foreseen failure of all other methods, whether by law or gospel. The Election and Predestination ez- plained and stated « NCL ACTIONS fc) eaee toe cee oe, bots keer a te, me aren enn anaes Cuapr. I.—Misconceptions concerning the Doctrine corrected and pre- Vented: Paes [io w.- remeyeer Vouene Eee ‘ Guap. Il.—The Election, as above explained, proved to be a Scripture ddckrines.< isis ci} st gis) eo Bt eee ea Crap. III. —The doctrine guarded from abuse, and defended against ob- peckionsy. 2:5 s,"s3 hak Pontes sey nates Vea seg =a hea Cuap. [V.—The doctrine ImprovED—by believers—by convinced sin- ners—by sinners in'general . . . . 291 314 335 THE RECONCILER. INTRODUCTION. EXPLANATORY. Autuoucnu the Lord our God “is the rock and his work is perfect—all his ways are judgment; a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is He,” yet, not only such as are versed in theology, but thinking Christians in general,—such at least as, jealous of God’s glory, wish to “ascribe righteousness to their Maker,”—will admit that there are difficulties, en- feebled and darkened as our understanding is by sin, in the sacred science, which are not easy to surmount, and apparent disagreements which it appears hard to reconcile. Hence it is, that we are often obliged to seek relief, not only in some of its first principles, —such as, that “the Judge of all the earth will do right,” that ‘‘ God is love,” that he is “ the only wise God,’—but in the assurance of the wise Solomon, that “it is the glory of God to conceal a thing,” as well as in the consoling anticipation of Paul, that though we now “ see through a glass darkly, here- after we shall see face to face.” As to the difficulties, —do not such questions as these sometimes occur to B 2 THE RECONCILER. us? Why should the “ Almighty” and the “ Good,” foréseeing, as he must, the consequences of sin, suffer its entrance ?—why, when it made its entrance, suffer it to prevail, instead of interposing by his preventing grace ?—how could he consistently express his ‘‘ grief ” at it while he did not interpose thus ?—why were all mankind involved in the fall of one man ?—in so far as he has thought proper to interpose, why not - extend the benefit to all, as well as to some ?—why call to obedience either to the “law of works,” or to the “law of faith,’ when he foreknows that they « cannot” find it in their heart to “be subject to the law,” or to come in at the call of the gospel? And, as to the apparent disagreement in divine truths, although the disagreement is but apparent, yet it is not every one who sees their compatibility ; such for instance as these :—man’s free agency and responsibi- lity, with the sovereignty of God’s grace ; the equitable administration of the moral government of the world under the “law of works” and “the law of faith,” with the sovereign ministration of the Spirit to a chosen peculiar people; the universal benign aspect of the gospel with its particular aspect ; sovereign election of some only, with the declarations of God's benevolence or philanthropy towards all; sovereign decrees, with the freedom of the human will; sovereign decrees, with the freedom of human agency ; the conditional, and therefore contingent declara- tions and promises of Scripture, with the unconditional and certain purposes of God; and the sincerity of the exhortations and. expostulations of holy writ, with its declarations of man’s impotence. Now to many, these INTRODUCTION. 3 things appear incompatible. There are difficulties then; there are apparent disagreements. In consequence of the difficulties, some, not having that rooted love of truth, which would prompt to a patient investigation, or forgetting that “it is the glory of God to conceal a thing” for the present, are stumbled; and others, although they do love the truth, and will still believe, yet find their spiritual fortitude and courage shaken, and their sacred joy diminished. And, as to the apparent discordances or incompatibilities, some take one side, and others take the other side, of the question, and so become most injuriously partial in their views of Scripture doctrine,—this party con- tending earnestly for sovereign grace, while they neglect human duty and responsibility,—that party as warmly contending for human duty and respon- sibility, while they neglect the doctrines of sovereign grace. Nor does the mischief end here; some who adopt that side of the question, the sovereignty of grace, even feel uneasy when the preacher, in the name of God, calls sinners to repentance, and to the obedience of faith; particularly, when he invites and persuades and urges them to “ choose life, that they and their seed may live ;” while, on the other hand, the advocate of human duty and responsibility spurns at the doctrine of sovereign election and overpowering grace. We would not be severe on those who, in their zeal for the honours of divine grace, overlook the claims of the divine government ; or, on the other hand, on those who, in their earnest desire to “ascribe righteousness to their Maker,” neglect the honours of divine grace, if “to the Lord” they do so. No, far B 2 4 THE RECONCILER. from it. We would respect them for their concern for God’s glory ; and as long as we see in them a humble and teachable spirit, would cherish christian affection for them; but we must wish that both parties would look on one side of the question as well as the other, and would be solicitous to see the consistency of the equitable government of God with his gracious sovereignty, or of his gracious sovereignty with his equitable government. Perhaps few have been more deeply exercised with the above-mentioned difficulties and apparent discor- dances, than the writer of these pages. During the two years of solicitous inquiry, prior to his entering upon preparatory studies for the ministry; then, during the four years and a half in which he was engaged in them; and, added to this, during the thirty-nine years in which he has been employed in the christian ministry, often have these subjects given occasion for interesting inquiry. But he trusts his God has been with him; and, to his own mind at least, he furnishes another proof of his goodness and faith- fulness to those that perseveringly call and wait upon him. By aclue originally afforded him by his much revered tutor, Dr. Edward Williams, by Dr. Watts, in his “ Ruin and Recovery,” and by his own serious investigation into the mind of the Spirit in the Word, he has been led forward through many a difficult path to a state of light and enlargement which he scarcely could have anticipated at the commencement of his ministerial career. And, as it bears upon this attempt, it may not be amiss for him to remark that, although, nearly all the time mentioned, he has been in the INTRODUCTION. 5 habit of penning and preserving his thoughts on the various branches of the subjects handled in this work, and many a time has arranged his thoughts, and stated his propositions for his own satisfaction ; yet it was not until within the last eight years that he had con- ceived the idea of forming his thoughts into a regular and connected plan, as in the work here presented. Being now, however, formed into a plan, it may be considered as the thoughts and gatherings of forty years. The object in this work is to show that God, the “oreat King,” in his government of man, not only proceeds upon the principle of Equity, but that hereby he designs to bear a TESTIMONY concerning him- self and man, respectively ;—that, for this purpose, his government is a government of probation, and that, being probationary, it is necessarily conditional, in its form: a view of things which, it is presumed, accounts, not only for its universal aspect, but also for its appeal to the human will and human agency ;—moreover, that thus, a testimony having been borne to the glory of God and the confusion of man, God, on a foresight of man’s guilt and stubbornness, as well under the gospel as the law, has taken occasion to display his glory still farther by a superadded dispensation of SOVEREIGN GOODNESS as a gracious sovereign, in an election to mercy of such as he in his allwise counsels thought proper ;—yet however, seeing this election, though sovereign and eternal, is on the supposition of foreseen unpersuadableness, and takes effect during the ex- istence of the universal administration of the gospel, that it is not an election of exclusion, but of reser- 6 THE RECONCILER. vation, “keeping mercy for thousands,” where all deserved to be “ cut off” for their stubbornness. The next great point, and indeed the great hinge on which the scheme itself turns, is—that the moral government of God was designed as a TESTIMONY, whether under the “law of works” or the “ law of faith ;” for which cause it is probatronary in its design, and, as probationary, conditional in its form. In accordance with these views, it is here supposed, that God, “the great King,” has not only taken care that his government should be really “a holy, just, and good,”—that is, an equitable and benevolent government,—but that it should appear so,as indicated by such solemn appeals as the following :—‘“‘ O house of Israel, are not my ways equal? are not your ways unequal 2” ‘¢ What could have been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done init?” Nor are these things to be gathered from Scripture alone. Common sense tells us, that if a testimony be borne concerning God and men, they must act AS FROM THEMSELVES ; and that, if man be proud, whatever means of infor- mation be given to him, or whatever motives the divine benevolence may urge to induce him to be obedient, yet that he must be left in the hand of his own counsel ; moreover, that, whether he stand or fall, the affair must not only be conditional, but must be addressed to his own will and his own agency. In farther explanation of our plan, it seems proper to remark also, that we take it for granted that such a scheme must have a wniversal aspect and a universal call; or that the blessings exhibited must be condi- tionally available for all, and be preached to all, INTRODUCTION. 7 without respect of persons; that is, that the propi- tiation must be for all, the justifymg righteousness unto all men, and the salvation a “‘ common salvation,” so that all should be welcome to share in the benefit. Otherwise, there would be no room for trial, and con- sequently there could be no testimony for God as distinguished from man ; nor would he have the glory due to his name; while, this admitted, as Israel was “proved whether they would walk in God's statutes or no,” and so “‘a witness” by their failure was borne for God against Israel, so men under the gospel are proved whether they will walk according to the gospel or no, and so a witness will be borne concerning God and them accordingly. And, if the result of such trial be found to be unpersuadableness on the part of man, and man be brought in guilty and inexcusable, it is then easy to conceive how, man having done ‘as he listed,” God may “do as he list;” it is easy to conceive how sovereign mercy may step in, and say, “I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy >” I will yet “keep mercy for thousands.” And thus too, we see, there arises a particular aspect upon the foreseen failure of the universal one; in which particular aspect the love is special, the election is according to God’s will, the redemption is particular, the calling is effectual, the new covenant is with the spiritual Israel alone, and the mediation and suretyship in such covenant, only for the “ Israel,” and the promised in- heritance, the inheritance only of the saints. Thus we may see also, why, at the judgment day, after men have been judged according to the records in the book 8 THE RECONCILER. of the “law of works” and of the “ law of faith,” there should be occasion for opening “ ANOTHER book, which is the book of life.” Besides the two great parts of this scheme, the one consisting of a declaration of God's equitable govern- ment for probation and testimony, and the other a declaration of God’s sovereign goodness towards a peculiar people, there intervenes a connecting link. on the subject of the Divine foreknowledge and Erricacious grace, which it is presumed will throw light on both parts of the scheme, as well as serve to establish them. ‘There are also preliminary disser- tations, written with the same view. But the table of contents renders any further explanation unnecessary. One thing however in general must not be omitted inregard to the explanation of this scheme, and that is, the TERMs used to express it. ‘The first we notice is that of “equitable,” as given to express the character of the divine government. It is, then, here designed to indicate, not only what is equitable as to man, but also what is equitable as to God; for God must do himself justice, as well as his creature. Now, what is equity? It is, that every one should have his due, or what belongs to him, according to truth. This equity requires then that Gop should have Hrs due as well as man, his creature ; which would not be the case if God had, in neglect of himself, so to speak, by an over- powering agency, kept man from sinning and falling. In such case, neither would the creature have shown himself, or the creator have shown himself. The creature would not have shown himself as he really is, nothing, dependent, mutable, corruptible; and INTRODUCTION. 8) the creator would not have shown himself, as he really is, the all in all,—the great first cause of all things, and on whom all things depend,—the only immutable, the only incorruptible, the only essen- tially and independently ‘“‘ good” being. No: thus neither man nor God would have had their due. But now, according to this scheme, it proves upon trial, that to man belongeth not only nothingness, de- pendence, mutability, and corruptibility, but actual change for the worse, and actual utter corruption, and so ‘‘shame and confusion of face ;” while, onthe other hand, it also proves upon trial, that to God belongeth the glory of being the “all in all,”—*‘ the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the ending, the first and the last,”—the ‘‘ unchangeable” one,—the one who alone is ‘‘the incorruptible,”-—the one alone that is “good.” Thus, we give to man that which is due to his name, and we give unto God the glory that is due unto his name. AND THIS Is EQUITY. Wherefore it is, that we call the government of God, as founded upon this principle, his “‘ equitable government.” But be it farther observed, that we have not in the above taken into account the glory that, it now appears, is Jarther due to him from the glorious additional dispen- sations of redemption and grace. ‘The holiness, the justice, the truth, the love, the mercy, the grace, the faithfulness, the power, the wisdom, and the sovereignty of goodness,—all these emanations of glory,—all this effulgence of the divine glory will be as yet behind. But we must give that also ; and according to the scheme before us, it 7s given ; for the equitable and probationary government here in the first part 10 THE RECONCILER. insisted on, has given occasion for the display of such glory. To him be the glory ascribed of both the one. and the other. As to the term “probationary,” by which we also de- signate this government, we mean that, not only has the result of this government proved what man is, and what God is; but that such was its design, in order that a Testimony might be borne for God, as well as against man. The connecting link of Hjficacious Grace is so de- signated, because it shows that, though the dispensation of government, with all its means and motives, proved ineffectual, yet God’s grace can make them effectual. And the latter part is called the Dispensation of So- vereign Grace, because therein God is seen actually to display his sovereign goodness in the election to salvation. | It may now be proper to say something concerning the proposed ADVANTAGES of the plan before us. And it is hoped that, through the Divine blessing, the scheme here presented to the reader will not only tend to remove the difficulties before noticed, and to recon- cile the apparent discordances adverted to, but that it will be accompanied with numerous positive advan- tages. Thus we trust it will show why such frequent appeals are made in Scripture to the human will and to human agency,—why such exhortations and expostula- tions are addressed to man, with their consistency with man’s impotence ;—it will serve to obviate the chief dif- ficulties in the doctrine of perseverance -— it may serve to throw light on the doctrine of baptism, as far as re- lates to its subjects ;—may prevent the abuse of the INTRODUCTION. 1] doctrines of grace by our ultra-Calvinists ;—and par- ticularly, the subject at large may assist in determing on the comparative claims of the Arminian scheme and that of the moderate Calvinist ; so also of that of the moderate Calvinist and the ultra-Calvinist. And, in do- ing these things, we hope that it is not too much to say, that it will show how the truly pious and humble of each persuasion may meet, and walk on mm harmony. In fine, the whole, it is presumed, has a tendency to refute calumny,—to remove stumbling-blocks out of the way of sincere inquirers,—to rouse from sloth and carnal security,—to illustrate the methods of Divine grace, —to promote union amongst pious Christians of different persuasions, who “hold the Head,’—and to glorify God both in his government and in his grace, both in his dealings with the world and with the Church. We remarked just now that the view of the Divine government and Divine grace given in this work may assist us in determining concerning the comparative claims of the Arminian and the moderate Calvinist, as well as of the moderate Calvinist and the hyper-Cal- vinist ;—it may be useful to show this; therefore, we assign to it a distinct consideration. THE COMPARATIVE CLAIMS OF THIS SCHEME AND THAT OF THE ARMINIAN OR WESLEYAN METHODIST CONSIDERED. Besides the advantages to our common Christianity in the scheme before us, the writer conceives that it has the following important bearings in its relation to the opposing system of Arminianism. It silences the 12 THE RECONCILER. objection advanced, and so much urged by the Armi- nian, as though ours was a system of exclusion ; —it con- futes their assertion that we infringe on the liberty of the human will ;—while it explains satisfactorily all the passages of Scripture that appear to favour exclusively the Arminian, it explains those also which appear equally to favour the Calvinist, without ‘“ wresting” or “corrupting” either the one or the other ;—1t answers the objection drawn from the apparent incompatibility of the Calvinist scheme with the Divine universal bene- volence, and the expressions of it in Scripture, admitting the full force of the latter equally with the Arminian ;— and it silences their objection against the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints drawn from conditional expressions. Nor is this all. It has several advaniages over Ar- minianism ; for, whereas that leaves the salvation of all to be contingent on the human will, this, while it gives the sinner the very same advantage which their hypothesis does, makes the salvation of an innumerable multitude of them certain ; while it admits all that the Arminian can say respecting the Divine goodness and grace, it brings forward an additional display of that erace In a superadded dispensation. This opens a door of hope, while that shuts him up in unpersuadableness ; for, according to this, there is relief in sovereign mercy and in sovereign power," while that leaves him to the de- termination of his own will. Again, while the Arminian * Has the Gospel spent all its power upon him, and does he yet remain unpersuadable? There is relief in sovereign mercy. Does he say “I have no will to rouse, nor power torise’”’? There is relief in sovereign Almighty power. INTRODUCTION. 13 scheme, by leaving it to man’s wisdom and will to receive what another in his folly and wilfulness rejects, ministers to vain glory,—this tends to humility and self-renunciation. And, finally, while the Arminian, according to his scheme, is ever insecure, this scheme provides for the believer’s security. In reference to the Administration of the Word, also, this view of things is attended with peculiar ad- vantage. he Arminian preacher, it is true, is per- fectly free and unencumbered in making and urging the universal proclamation ; but after he has enforced atten- tion to it by all the motives with which he is furnished, he must leave it to the decision of the human will ; while the preacher of the doctrine here insisted on not only is unencumbered as the other, but has another resource in the superadded dispensation of sovereign mercy and sovereign power. THE COMPARATIVE CLAIMS OF THIS SCHEME AND THAT OF THE HYPER-CALVINIST. The hyper-Calvinists triumph in their superior re- gard to the doctrines of grace, as though they alone were advocates for the “glory of God's grace:” but this scheme will show that we may be advocates of both his justice and his grace, and of the one as well as the other ; for it exhibits the riches and sovereignty of grace in election and effectual calling as fully as they can, while it also exhibits—which their scheme fails to do—the equity and benevolence of the Divine govern- ment. We declare the Divine sovereignty equally with them, while we maintain human responsibility ; which 14 THE RECONCILER. they fail to establish. Sovereign grace herein ts glori- fied, and yet human instrumentality and exertion are encouraged. The particular aspect of the plan of redemption is preserved inviolate, and yet a universal aspect is exhibited, and shown to be consistent with it. The impotence of man and the sovereignty of electing mercy and grace are maintained, while the exhortations and expostulations of Scripture, and the ministerial use of them, remain in their full force. And, finally, mi- nisters, and missionaries, and parents, and individuals, may fill their mouths with all the divine arguments which God has given them in Scripture to win souls, while it turns out at length that God alone forgives and saves them by an act of sovereign mercy and grace. Seeing, then, that such advantages may be anticl- pated, either in whole or in part, from a patient and rayerful consideration of the scheme here proposed, it is hoped that it will not be deemed a useless speculation, or an investigation that will not repay the sincere and inquiring mind. Nor let the subject be dismissed as though it were amongst the inscrutables of Jehovah ; for itis from his own word that we have sought our in- formation and have attempted “in his light to see light.” And though “ it is the glory of God to conceal a thing,” yet, be it remarked, that in the very next verse it is said, as though to discountenance an indolent re- pose in ignorance, “ ‘tis the honour of kings to search out a matter.” Nor should it be forgotten that the same wise writer has said, that ‘understanding is a well-spring of life ;? or that the Lord himself has de- clared, that it is a legitimate cause of glorying, to <‘ ynderstand and know him that he is the Lord, which _ INTRODUCTION. 15 exercises loving-kindness, judgment, and righteousness in the earth;” the declaration of which is a great design of this attempt. To the law and to the testimony we have sought in the investigation of these important and confessedly dif- ficult subjects ; and “to the law and to the testimony” we now appeal for the truth of the statements given in this work. Nor has the direction of Solomon been overlooked, “ Trust in the Lord with all thine heart, and lean not to thine own understanding ;” or the ex- ample of his devout father, whom we so frequently find praying, ‘‘ Teach me thy statutes,” “Give me under- standing,” been disregarded. The writer also adds, that he hopes the inquiry has been made with some measure of that reverence and godly fear which be- comes us in searching after Divine truth; and particu- larly after such truths as have so important a bearing as those before us. If in the sight of ‘the King, the Lord of hosts,” the ‘“ Holy, holy, holy” One, and in the view of the Seraphim all intelligent, all active, all burning with zeal to carry the Divine errands, Isaiah exclaimed, ‘‘ Wo is me, for I am undone, because I am a man of unclean lips,” in regard to what he spake touching “the King” and his government,—surely so ought we to be possessed with humility and sacred awe in our declaration of the same; and as then Isaiah’s “iniquity” required to be taken away, and his sin “purged,” by a coal from the altar of burnt-offering, where the daily sacrifice of the Lamb had been offered, — surely we would seek an application of the offering of “the Lamb that taketh away the sin of the world,” in our case, 16 THE RECONCILER. And so desirous is the Author of following where truth shall lead him, that should any person, whether in the Establishment or among the Dissenters, whe- ther Calvinist or Arminian, whether minister or lay- man, sincerely and intelligently propose his objections to the doctrine here maintained, he promises to give them a fair examination ; and if he sees reason to alter his opinion, he will, if life and health be spared, pub- licly acknowledge his mistaken views. May the Foun- tain of all true knowledge, understanding, and wisdom graciously “guide” the writer and reader “‘into all truth”! But while he thus challenges a fair investiga- tion on his part, he would caution his readers, on their parts too,that, in forming their judgment, they neglect not importunate and persevering prayer for light to the «Father of lights ;” also, against bringing their creed to the work, and weighing it by that, instead of bringing both the one and the other to the only true standard of truth, the Word of God. Nor is this caution con- fined to the sentiments contained in this attempt, but likewise to the words; so that no prejudice may arise in the mind because a favourite phraseology may not be adopted. And yet it may be observed after all, that the writer has not only endeavoured to exhibit ‘“ the things of the Spirit of God,” but to do so “in the words which the Holy Ghost speaketh 5” whose authority is to him, if he knows his own heart, paramount to all other authority. And why should he speak thus? Alas! besides those who, from a laudable zeal for the Divine grace, overlook the honour of the Divine government, on the one hand; or, on the other hand, from a laudable INTRODUCTION. Wy; desire to ascribe righteousness to their Maker, stumble at the Divine sovereignty of grace ;—besides those who, having tasted that the Lord is gracious, seek to feast on those portions of Scripture which treat of his grace, and so little trouble themselves about those portions of it which vindicate his justice ;—besides those who really will not be at the pains, or want opportunity, to acquire a comprehensive and connected view of Divine truth as contained in the Scriptures as a whole, but content themselves with that partial view of things which they embraced under their first impressions ;—-besides these, we say, it is to be feared that, in the professing christian world, there are persons, whose religion is but a graft on their old selfish nature; who, as long as they ima- gine ¢hezr salvation and happiness are provided for, care little about the honour of God’s name; who love him not for ‘‘ his name’s sake,” but for their own only; and caring for themselves, care little about the salvation and happiness of others, or the glory of God as con- cerned in such salvation and happiness. And these— will they give the subjects above discussed a fair and impartial examination? We fear not. Norcan those also be expected to do so, who embrace the doctrines of Divine grace, and abuse them as an excuse for sloth or for sinful indulgences; or, on the other hand, who reject the doctrines of grace, because they wish to in- dulge their pride of self-righteousness and _ self-con- fidence. Well, whatever treatment the following Essay may meet with, or however private individuals may con- tent themselves with a superficial or partial view of the subjects here discussed, yet those who are charged with 6 18 THE RECONCILER. a commission to “ preach the preaching that God bids them,”—who, at their peril, must, according to their instructions, “‘command all men every where to re- pent,’”—call upon them to “repent and believe the gospel”—to ‘consider their ways,” while they are to insist upon the doctrines of grace,—these, we say, will, perhaps, consider the work worthy of their serious and candid consideration ;—they will feel that the sove- reignty of God’s mercy will not be cordially embraced, without a discovery of God's justice in man’s responsi- bility ; and that, until there be correct apprehensions of God’s justice, there will be little comparative value for the operations of God’s grace. He again remarks whatever views may be entertained of this Essay, it is a consolation to the writer to consider that, as far as relates to the “universal aspect” and the universal provision, he has the concurrence, not only of eminent ancient, but of many modern orthodox divines, such as Dr. Watts, Dr. Doddridge, Dr. E. Williams, the Rev. T. Scott, the author of the Com- mentary, &c. 5 all of whom, according to the expression of Dr. Doddridge, consider, at least, that such “ provi- sion is made for the salvation of all, as lays the blame of their ruin, if they miscarry, entirely upon themselves.” And, as to the Established Church of England, not only does it say that Christ “‘ made, by his one oblation of himself once offered, a full, perfect, and sufficient sacri- fice, oblation, and satisfaction for the sins of the whole world,”— but, in the catechism, the catechumen is taught to say, that he believes in “ God the Son, who redeemed him and all mankind;” while, by way of distinction he is taught to add, that he “believes in God the Holy INTRODUCTION. 19 Ghost, who sanctified him, and all the elect people of God ;” in which places combined, we appear to have both the universal and particular aspect, as here main- tained. But the Grounp and the wispom of this dis- tinction as founded in God’s design of bearing a TEs- TIMONY for himself, for which reason he has dealt with man as well under ‘‘the law of faith” as ‘“‘the law of works” in a probationary way, does not appear to have been perceived, or at least insisted on, by any writers with whom the Author is acquainted. As far as relates to the universal provision, a few remarks from Dr. Watts may, perhaps, with propriety be here introduced. The following extract from his work entitled ‘The Ruin and Recovery of Mankind,” would lead one to suppose that the Doctor would not have frowned upon a work like this :—‘‘ The holy writers,” says he, ‘‘ in dif- ferent texts, pursuing different subjects, and speaking to different persons, sometimes seem to favour each of these two opinions”—he means the universal and par- ticular aspects ;—‘“ and men being at aloss to reconcile them by any medium, run into different extremes, and entirely follow one of these tracts of thought, and neglect the other.’* And then he adds, “ But surely if there can be a way found to reconcile these two doctrines of the absolute salvation of the elect, by the obedience, righteousness, and death of Christ procur- ing it for them, with all things necessary to the posses- sion of it, —and also of the conditional salvation provided for all mankind, and offered to them in the Gospel, through the all-sufficient and overflowing value of the obedience and sufferings of Christ,—this will be the * Dr. Watts’s “ Ruin and Recovery,” p. 264, Second edit. @ 2 20 THE RECONCILER. most fair, natural, and easy way of reconciling these different texts of Scripture, without any strain or tor- ture put upon any of them.”* Such was the Doctor’s mind in reference to the desirableness of such a scheme; and, after having treated the subject pretty much at large, he remarks, « Thus, I think, I have proved it pretty clear, at least to my own satisfaction, that the non-elect among men are not predestinated to eternal misery by any absolute act of reprobation; nor are they left in the state of fallen angels or devils, for whom there is no Saviour appointed, and who cannot have any reasonable hope ; but that there is a conditional salvation provided for all men, and offered to them in the Gospel, by the glo- rious all-sufficience and redundance of the merit of Christ.”+ Again, speaking of limiting the extent of the death of Christ, he says, ‘“ Does the doctrine of election of persons obtain any further confirmation by it? No, by no means. Their salvation is secured, whatsoever becomes of the rest of mankind, whether they have any hopes or no. Does the goodness and special grace of God acquire any further honours by this limitation? No, certainly. Divine grace is per- fectly the same towards the elect, as though there were no other person in the world. Are the elect any way discouraged by it? Not in the least; but many per- sons who are awakened to a sense of sin, and are seek- ing after Christ for salvation, by this narrow doctrine may be terribly discouraged from receiving his offers of grace, when they are taught to doubt whether there be any grace provided for them, or whether Jesus be * Watts’s ‘: Ruin and Recovery,” p. 265. q Paget INTRODUCTION. ot appointed to act as their Saviour. It may be a means to drive some poor souls to despair, when they hear that, unless they are elected, they may seek after sal- vation in Christ in vain, for there is none purchased for them, not so much as conditionally; and it may tempt them to begin at the wrong end, and seek to pry into the counsels of God, and inquire after what they can never know, ?. e. their election of God, before they dare trust in grace, or submit to the Gospel of Christ.”* Once more, “Since [says the Doctor] there are so many expressions of Scripture that give us reason to think that Christ lived and died in some respects as a common Mediator of mankind, though with a peculiar regard to the elect, we think this doctrine of the ex- tensive goodness of God is a much more desirable opinion, and should be more cheerfully received by us, as it is so agreeable to our duty of charity to all men, and seems so necessary to us at present, for vin- dicating the justice, goodness, and sincerity of the blessed God, in his transactions with mankind.’T In reference to that part of this work which treats of sovereign election, we may observe, should any person be disposed to ‘“‘murmur” at it, that he stands much in the same situation as those did in the Parable of the Householder, who, although they received that which was ‘“‘ right” in equity, <‘ murmured against the good man of the house,” because he was specially “good” to others in sovereignty, and therefore that he may ex- pect to receive the same answer and rebuke as they : “Friend, I do thee no wrong. Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with my own? Is thine eye evil * P. 276. + P. 275. JF, THE RECONCILER. because | am good?” Rather, however, than murmur, let each one embrace the gospel salvation to which he is welcomed for himself; and whatever difficulties may remain, let him remember that it is yet a true saying, ‘It is the glory of Ged to conceal a thing ;” and that, if it is the duty of a child to place an implicit reliance on his father’s wisdom and integrity, though he cannot perceive the reasons for his conduct at pre- sent, it is manifestly much more so to rely on the wisdom and equity of the God of infinite perfection, provided we are satisfied, on due examination, that he has revealed the doctrine. And to prevent bitterness of spirit and alienation of heart on account of difference of opinion on this and similar topics, the writer would close this Introduction by some remarks, that, under a Divine blessing, may not only answer this end, but promote a spirit of christian charity amongst brethren who are built upon the same foundation, Christ Jesus. He would observe, then, AS TO DISBELIEF, 1. It is one thing to disbelieve and oppose a doctrine from pride and prejudice ; and another to disbelieve it on account of its numerous difficulties, and the dread- ful abuses to which certain views of it may be liable. 2. It is one thing to disbelieve a doctrine because misrepresented and misunderstood ; and another to dis- believe it, when it is fairly understood. 3. It is one thing to disbelieve a doctrine because, from its apparent contrariety to the known character of God, as well as to many passages of Scripture, we INTRODUCTION. 23 may imagine that men have mistaken the sense of the passages that bear upon it ; and another thing to disbe- lieve it, merely for want of a spirit of submission to Divine teaching. AND AS TO BELIEF,* 4. It is one thing to believe a doctrine without an insight into its difficulties and liableness to abuse ; and another thing to believe it with a full view of these dif- ficulties and abuses, and a godly fear of the conse- quences. 5. It is one thing to believe, wpon the whole, that such a doctrine is a scriptural truth; and another to believe it, in connexion with considerable doubt. 6. It is one thing to believe a doctrine so as to make a personal use of it; and another to believe it so firmly, and so unclogged with difficulties, as to publish it before a promiscuous assembly, under the uncer- tainty how far it may be misunderstood or abused. And, finally, 7. When a doctrine has been abused so as to cause some to impeach God’s righteousness,— others, both saints and sinners, to be discouraged,—others, to in- dulge in indolence and supineness,—and others to become presumptuous,—it may be easily accounted for, that a reflecting, conscientious minister, trem- blingly alive to the correctness of his people’s views and feelings, should be backward to bring such doc- trine forward, unless he can, at least, bring it to fudl view, and freed from those mis-statements and mis- conceptions of it which have led to such abuse. * Dr. Watts’s Improv. of the Mind, pp. 276, 277. Breliminary Dissertations, Bearing upon the Moral Government of God on the one hand, and upon his Sovereign Grace on the other; and upon Man as a Subject of Govern- ment, or as an Object of Sovereign Favour. CHAPTER I. ON THE UNIVERSAL AND PARTICULAR ASPECT OF THE GOSPEL REVELATION, CONTAINING SUCH SCRIPTURAL PASSAGES AS EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLY SUCH ASPECTS. Section I. On the Universal Aspect. Tut great subject of the salvation of man, and perhaps its design and plan, was communicated to our first parents after the fall: what formation have we in Scripture as to its extent? Let us begin— 1. With the period from Adam to Noah. Doubtless our first parents would make known the elad tidings of a Redeemer to all their children ; nor is the least hint given of any limitation of the promise to any part of Adam’s seed during this period of 1656 years. Cain, indeed, and his posterity seemed to exclude themselves from its benefit; but God did not exclude them. Nor were those institutions that were designed to prefigure the blessing promised, or to represent man’s obligations to his Maker, restricted. All might offer, or at least, avail themselves of the THE UNIVERSAL ASPECT. 25 sacrifices that prefigured the great sacrifice ; all might use the purifications that were intended to signify sanctifying blessings; and all might adopt the dis- tinction of clean and unclean animals, prescribed, probably, to teach them morals. We read, too, of God’s “holy prophets since the world began ;” and there is no reason to think that their services were then confined. The original promise, as the antidote of the poison taken, assuredly was available for all who would use such antidote. And when God says, “* My Spirit shall not always strive with man,” the declaration must refer to man universally,—to the whole race of man then coming into existence. 2. From Noah to Abraham. Noah, the second father of mankind, would obvyi- ously do as our first progenitor did before him; and there can be no reasonable doubt that sacrifices, and priests, and altars, and purifications, and distinction of meats, have obtained ever since the commencement of this second epoch of time; and, if so, gospel blessings were exhibited and proffered to all on the part of God; that men forgot the original design of these institutions, or abused them to superstitious and sinful purposes, was their fault. And, while these ‘‘figures” of promised “ good things to come,” would indicate to a renewed, but still apostate, world the sacrifice and blessing of a future redemption, the covenant of Noah, being evidently universal in its aspect, accompanied with the token of the rainbow, would have the effect of a universal announcement that God was merciful, and disposed to peace; and that, “‘ in every nation,” he who, in the faith of God 26 THE RECONCILER. and of these ‘“‘good things to come,” should “ fear God and work righteousness,” would—not be justified for his working righteousness—but, as a manifested believer,—“ be accepted of,” or be pleasing to him, as all such now are under the Christian dispensation. Of these was ‘“ Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the most high God.” 3. From Abraham to Moses. “* The gifts of God are without repentance ;” and, having given the covenant promise of a Redeemer to Adam as the first father of mankind, and renewed the grant to Noah, as the second common father, God never withdrew the promise, although men neglected, and probably would have lost it, if they had been left to themselves. God, therefore, now sovereignly inter- posed to secure a regard to it by the call of Abraham. In the family of that illustrious patriarch it was con- veyed down from generation to generation, not only in Isaac’s chosen line, but by Keturah and her descendants. Nahor, also, and his family by Lot, and even his descendants, would hand down by tradition the promise, and the things appended to it. But, as just observed, both it and they would, probably, have been utterly lost, as to their true intent, if the Lord had not graciously and sovereignly interposed, and formed a sort of conservative enclosure by establishing a visible church in the posterity of Abraham. This then he did about the year of the world 2083, and before Christ 1921. Abraham was called from an idolatrous family, and the original covenant promise, together with such oracles of God as had been “spoken by the mouth of his holy prophets lev THE UNIVERSAL ASPECT. 24 since the world began,” were committed to him and to his family ; and then to the family of Isaac in the line of Jacob; and by them to his twelve sons the patriarchs. Yet, it should be considered, that, while thus committed to Jacob and his posterity as a sacred deposit, the original promise was not withdrawn from the rest of Abraham’s or Isaac’s family, or from mankind at large; for it was still available to all, whether they actually availed themselves of it or not.* How else shall we account for the religion of Job and his friends? It is said that God sent Joseph before into Egypt to “place for you a remnant in the earth.”+ Why? Lest the true religion should be lost in the world. But this design of preservation was not to operate as an exclusion. 4, From Moses to Christ. It is true that now an enclosure was made by severing the children of Israel from all other nations : but for preservation, not for exclusion. No; for even in the partition wall of that enclosure there were doors of admission for families and individuals of any nation. But the fact was, as Paul gives us to un- derstand, that the Gentiles “ believed not,” or as the word is, were ‘“unpersuadable,’t and so excluded themselves ; God, in righteousness, “ leaving them to walk in their own ways.” ‘ Nevertheless, he left not himself without witness, in that he did good, and gave * That Esau became “a cunning hunter,”—“ despised his birth- right,’—* took his wives of the daughters of Canaan,” — went from the face of his brother Jacob, ‘“‘ was his own doing, not God's.” + So the Hebrew. + Rom. xi. 30. (Greek.) 28 THE RECONCILER. them rain from heaven, and fruitful seasons, filling their hearts with food and gladness.” Nor are there wanting indications of the Divine philanthropy,* during the existence of the above enclosure. Tor, besides the promise that in Abra- ham’s seed “all the nations of the earth should be blessed,” which would be left on record for the use of Israel in the oracles of God committed to them, there are many declarations in those Scriptures, having a favourable aspect towards the heathen. ‘Thus proselytes from all nations were admitted, and their children ;+ and we find David calling to “ all people,— to all the inhabitants of the world, both low and high, rich and poor, together to give ear” to his instruc- tions. So, again, Solomon, in his prayer at the dedication of the temple, prays, ‘that all people of the earth might know God’s name, and fear him, as did his people Israel.” ‘To the same purpose Isaiah calls, “ All ye inhabitants of the world, and dwellers on the earth, see ye, when he lifteth up an ensign on the mountains; and when he bloweth a trumpet, hear ye.” Not to mention the numerous prophecies con- cerning the calling of the Gentiles in future. Idumea was called to repentance by Isaiah,t and so was Nineveh by Jonah. As to the nation of Israel itself, the aspect was universal, looking kindly on them all. Not only does God declare that he had “caused to cleave to him” as a girdle “the whole house of Israel; but, un- questionably, the daily sacrifice and the great annual prarvOpwria, Tit. ili. + Exod. xii. 48. Gf Oisa.txn. 12. THE UNIVERSAL ASPECT. 29 atonement was designed to be available for all; hence called ‘‘the burnt offering for all the people of the land.”* ‘The same with regard to the atonement money: every Israelite was to bring it, and therefore to enjoy the advantage of it. The extraordinary sacrifices offered by Hezekiah and Ezra were for ‘all Israel” without distinction, if they chose to avail them- selves of them. Hezekiah’s “ sin-offering” was “for the kingdom ;” doubtless, the whole kingdom.7; Nor should we, in concluding this section, overlook the knowledge of divine truth with which God favoured the heathen by their communication with Israel; for such communication there was,—some- times through the dispersions of Israel, and by their synagogue worship “in every city,’—and at other times by the travels of the wise men of the heathen into their land to search for knowledge. Justin Martyr, the celebrated christian apologist, says, that Plato borrowed his sayings from Moses, and “as to all their notions about the immortality of the soul and punishments after death, and their divine theories, and such like doctrines, the philosophers and poets plainly took their hints from the prophets, whom they consulted and built upon; and by this “ means,” adds he, “ the seeds of truth seem to be scattered about the world.” f Thus, even the Mosaic dispensation was not a system of exclusion; and the “ middle wall of partition” itself was rather for preservation of the true religion. * 2 Kines*xvip iS: te? Clivsexxixe 21. t In Reeves’s Apologies, p. 79; also Tertullian in the same, pp. 365, 366, 373. 30 THE RECONCILER. The people of Israel were indeed a peculiar people, — a peculiar treasure above all people; yet the “ all people,” were a treasure. A man’s jewels are a pecu- liar treasure; but still his gold and silver are a treasure also. And it was the unbelief, and idolatry, and abominations of the heathen alone, that rendered them obnoxious to God. None of the creatures of God are excluded from God's regard, but such as exclude themselves. 5. During the Christian Dispensation. Speaking of this dispensation, under the title of “the kingdom of heaven,” our Lord says—‘‘ The field is the world.” The gospel net was to be cast into the wide sea, and to gather of every kind. As many as were to be found, on its preachers going forth, were to be bid to the marriage feast. ‘The gospel was to be “a witness to all nations,” and the apostles were to “go out into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature ;” a commission founded, let it be observed, on the grant of authority (é£ovcia) to Christ over every creature in his gospel kingdom. Christ calls himself the light of the world; and John says of him, that “ he lighteth every man (de jure, or, as to right) that cometh into the world.” «¢ Behold the Lamb of God,” says John again, ‘ that taketh away the sins of the world.” “ God so loved the world as to give his only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” He was considered by the Samaritan converts as “the Saviour of the world.” He calls himself ‘‘ the bread of life,” and “ the bread of God, which giveth life to the world,” —“ the bread THE UNIVERSAL ASPECT. 31 that came down from heaven, that any one (ris) might eat thereof, and not die;” and this bread was his ‘flesh, which he would give for the life of the world.” Peter assures the whole multitude of Jews before him, believers and unbelievers, that God had ‘“ sent his Son to bless them, by turning away every one of them from their iniquities.” And his saying that he sent his Son thus to bless them ‘‘/irs¢,” implies, that Gentiles would afterwards be blessed with a gift alike universal in its application. ‘“‘ God hath commanded,’ says Paul to the Athenians, “‘all men every where to repent ;” which implies that he was reconcilable to all men every where. ‘As by the offence of one, judg- ment came wnéo all (eis) men to condemnation, so by the righteousness of one the free gift came wntgo (eis) all men to justification of life;” and so, “ the right- eousness of God by faith of Jesus Christ was unto (eis) all, but wpon (ert) all them that believe” only. Hence Christ is called not only ‘ Israel,” as repre- senting Jsrael, viz. the spiritual Israel, but the ‘second man,” and ‘ the last Adam,” as representing mankind. ‘If Christ died for all, then were all dead, and he died for all.’ ‘ God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself.” God “ willeth all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Who gave himself a ransom for all;” the testimony of which was to be given at fit seasons (xavpots idious.) After all the black catalogue of crimes recited by the Apostle Paul in his epistle to Titus,* the former says that the +e Tigi 3. a2 THE RECONCILER. kindness and philanthropy (giravOpwria) of God ap- peared. John, the Apostle, says, that Jesus was the ‘ propitiation for the sins of the whole world;” and he testifies that “the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world.” And, to conclude, the Apostle Jude designates the salvation of the gospel ‘the common salvation.” So much for the Scriptures that express or imply the universal aspect of the gospel grace. Section II. On the Particular Aspect. 1. From Adam to Noah. Seth was another seed instead of Abel; and his posterity, as worshippers of God, were called ‘‘ the sons of God,” by way of distinction from the sons and ‘‘ daughters of men.” 2. From Noah to Abraham. God would particularly be “the God of Shem,” though J apheth should ‘ dwell in his tents.” Abram was called out from the world, that a visible church might be established in his family, and “God did choose Abram’” 2 From Abraham to Moses. Ishmael was cast out “from being heir,” though highly blessed and honoured, while Isaac, “ the seed” of the church, was to ‘‘ be called Abraham’s seed.” The church privileges, or the enclosure of them, were farther restricted, as to their outward exhibition or visibility, in the line of Jacob and his posterity. 4. From Moses to Christ. THE PARTICULAR ASPECT. oo Out of the posterity of Jacob, or ‘ Israel after the flesh,” there was always “a seed,” even an Israel after the spirit,—an election of individuals out of an elect nation,—and in the worst of times, a “‘ remnant according to the election of grace;” God thus, ac- cording to his declared name to Moses, ‘ keeping mercy for thousands.” Otherwise they would have been ‘fas Sodom, and like unto Gomorrah.” So, in Elijah’s time, God ‘reserved to himself seven thou- sand men, who had not bowed the knee to the image of Baal.” In the predicted destruction of Jerusalem and captivity of the people, a “remnant should return unto the mighty God of Jacob.” We often read of ‘the remnant of Israel;” and God would “ pardon those whom he had reserved.” Outof Jacob and out of Judah God would “bring forth a seed and an in- heritor of his mountains ; and his elect should inherit it.” In accordance with which we find that Christ speaks of ‘elect, whom God hath chosen ;” for whose sake God would shorten the days of tribulation that were to come upon the chosen nation. 5. During the Christian Dispensation. In speaking of the kingdom of the Messiah, there is the same peculiarity observed. He was to have a seed to serve him who should “be accounted to the Lord for a generation ;’” his people were to be “willing in the day of his power ;” and in these, his seed, his people, ‘he should see of the travail of his soul, and be satisfied,” thinking it to be an ample recompense for his sufferings. And these would be gathered to him out of all kindreds, and tongues, and peoples. ‘These formed the “Israel” whom he D 34 THE RECONCILER. would represent; for these he would be given a covenant; in him should all this ‘seed of Israel be justified, and should glory ;” and for them should ‘salvation be placed in Zion.” To this head of peculiarity belong also the followmeg passages of Scripture :—“ For the transgression of my people was he stricken.” “ By his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many.” ‘And he bare the sin of many.” ‘‘I will remove the imiquity of that land in one day.” ‘‘ He shall save his people from their sins.” “He shall reign over the house of Jacob.” ‘This is my blood of the New Testament, shed for many.” ‘The Son of Man came to give his life aransom for many.” ‘ The good Shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.” His intercession too, as well as his death, Christ speaks of as having a particular design. “I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me;” ‘them also who shall believe on me through their word.” His apostles speak and write in the same strain. ‘God hath visited the Gentiles to take out of them a people for his name.” “Feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.” ‘ By the obedi- ence of one shall many be made righteous.” ‘‘He takes hold of (éiAapBaverau,) the seed of Abraham.” “The children whom God hath given me.” “To make reconciliation for the sins of his people.” He is the Mediator and Surety of the new covenant, made only with “the house of Israel and the house of Judah,” spiritually considered. He hath by his one sacrifice “‘ perfected for ever them that are sanctified.” He hath “sanctified the people with his own blood.” THE PARTICULAR ASPECT. 35 ‘‘Christ loved the church, and gave himself for it, that he might sanctify and cleanse it.” ‘*Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people.” ‘“* Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you, who by him do believe in God.” ‘ Who himself bare our sins.” “ Ye were as sheep going astray, but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls.” ‘* Ye are a chosen generation, a peculiar people.” It is the church of the redeemed that sing, ‘Unto him that Joved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, and hath made us kings and priests unto God,” and “‘ Thou art worthy—for thou hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every nation,” &c. ‘* Whose names are in the book of life.” “ And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him ” (the beast) “ whose names were not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.” * And all that dwell upon the earth shall wonder whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world.” To these passages add such as speak of an elect people. “For the elect’s sake, whom he hath chosen.” “The called according to his purpose.” “ For whom he did foreknow, them also he did predestinate to be con- formed to the image of his Son, that he might be the first-born among many brethren. Moreover, whom he did predestinate, them he also called,” &c. “ What if God, willing to show his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much long-suffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction; and that he Dy 36 THE RECONCILER. might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy whom he had afore prepared to glory : even us whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles.” <‘‘ According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy, and without blame before him inlove. Having predestinated us to the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will.” “ Knowing, brethren beloved, your election of God.” “ We are bound to give thanks always to God for you, brethren, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation, through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth.” “Elect, according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit unto obedience, and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ,” and many other passages. So much for the Scriptures that either express or imply the particular aspect of the Gospel grace. CHAPTER II. ON THE HUMAN WILL——-THE PASSAGES OF SCRIPTURE THAT ARE AD- DRESSED TO IT—~AND THEN, ON THE DIVINE WILL—-THE PASSAGES THAT INFER ITS PREVALENCE AND SOVEREIGNTY. Section I. Passages addressed to the Human Will, as though our Salvation or Life were Conditional on tts Determination. Ir must not be expected that we should cite the whole of these passages of Scripture ; if so, we should quote the greater part of Moses and the prophets, THE HUMAN WILL. oT of Christ and the apostles. The following, therefore, may suffice, both to illustrate our meaning and to prove the fact. 1. As to the Abrahamic covenant. “Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore.” ‘The mercy of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting to them that fear him, and his righteousness unto children’s children, to them that keep his covenant,” &c. This Abrahamic covenant is the “good olive tree” into which the Gentiles were grafted, and in which they shall abide, ‘‘if they continue in his good- ness.” 2. The Sinai covenant. Passages innumerable are there under this covenant to show that it was a conditional covenant, and as such, addressed to the human will. ‘“ If ye will obey my voice, then ye shall be,” &c. ‘Obey my voice, and do them [my words], according to all which I command you; so shall ye be my people, and I will be your God.” ‘Behold, I set before you this day a blessing and a curse; a blessing if ye obey the commandments of the Lord your God, which I command you this day ; and a curse if ye will not obey the commandments of the Lord your God.” ‘I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing ; therefore, choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live.” ‘ Now, therefore, fear the Lord, and serve him in sincerity and in truth; and if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord, choose you this day whom you will serve.” The crime of those addressed by “ Wisdom ” was, that “they did not choose the fear of the Lord ; and how 38 THE RECONCILER. clearly is this speech or call of Wisdom addressed to the will of man. 3. The covenant of priesthood and the covenant of royalty with David, as to their temporal or worldly aspect, were both of them to be continued conditionally on good behaviour, and of course, addressed to the will of the parties concerned. The covenant of prest- hood, at least as to keeping it in a particular family ;— for thus said the Lord to Eli: “1 said indeed, that thy house, and the house of thy father, should walk before me for ever: but now, the Lord saith, be it far from me; for them that honour me I will honour, and they that despise me shall be lightly esteemed.” The covenant of royalty ;—‘‘ Moreover I will establish his kingdom for ever, if he be constant to do my com- mandments and my judgments.” “If thy children will keep my covenant, and my testimony, that I shall teach them, their children also shall sit upon thy throne for evermore.” The very existence of Israel as a people under that covenant is spoken of as dependent on their good be- haviour. “For as the girdle cleaveth to the loins of a man, so have I caused to cleave unto me the whole house of Israel, and the whole house of Judah, saith the Lord ; that they might be unto me for a people, and for a name, and for a praise, and for a glory; but they would not hear.” And hence their rejection. Miscellaneous passages.—“‘ And he went out to meet Asa, and said unto him, Hear ye me, Asa, and all Judah and Benjamin. The Lords with you while ye be with him ; and if ye seek him, he will be found of you;” but “if ye forsake him, he will forsake THE HUMAN WILL. ou you.” “And thou, Solomon, my son, know thou the God of thy father, and serve him with a perfect heart, and with a willing mind: for the Lord searcheth all hearts, and understandeth all the imaginations of the thoughts : if thou seek him he will be found of thee, but if thou forsake him, he will cast thee off for ever.” “If ye be willing and obedient, ye shall eat the good of the land; but if ye refuse and rebel, ye shall be devoured with the sword ; for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it.” “ Woe unto thee, O Jerusalem ! wilt thounot be madeclean ? whenshall it once be?” “Thou shalt speak my words unto them, whether they will hear, or whether they will forbear.” ‘“ Why will ye die, O house of Israel?” ‘* They will not frame their doings to turn unto their God.” ‘If thou wilt enter into life. keep the commandments.” O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killest the prophets, and stonest them that are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, as a hen gathereth her brood under her wings, and ye would not.” “ But ye will not come to me that ye might have life.” 3. Under the Christian dispensation. “Ye resist the Holy Ghost.” “But the un- persuadable Jews.” <“* But the Jews which were un- persuadable, moved with envy.” “ Unpersuadable to the Son.” ‘To whom swore he that they should not enter into his rest, but to them that were unpersuada- ble ?” “* Entered not in because of unpersuadableness. ” “Lest any fall through the same example of unper- suadableness.”* ‘If thou continue in his goodness : * All these passages signify not unbelief, but unpersuadableness, the cause of unbelief, for the word is not dmearéa, but amedela. 40 THE RECONCILER. otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.” ‘‘ Whosoever will, let him take of the water of life freely.” Thus, whether underthe Abrahamic covenant, or the Sinai covenant, or the Christian dispensation, we see that man is addressed asa free agent to take his choice, though with all motives to induce him to choose the good and the right way ; a method absolutely necessary to that probation which is requisite to fair testimony, the object which we shall hereafter see that the great Jehovah had in view in relation to himself and man. Section II. The Divine Will— The Passages that indicate tts Prevalence and Sovereignty. Here again, it must not be expected that all the passages should be cited, as they are innumerable. The following will suffice for our purpose, viz. to show the expressions of the divine will, as unconditional on human fidelity. Ist. Such was the promise of the Redeemer so often repeated. ‘I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed: it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.” ‘‘ In thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed.” «The Lord thy God will raise up unto thee a pro- phet.” These were of the divine will, unconditional on the human. So of his seed, and their number and continuance. « Unto thy seed will I give this land ;” which seed, the apostle says, was Christ. ‘“ A seed shall serve him.” ‘© He shall see his seed.’ ‘‘ As the host of heaven THE DIVINE WILL. 4] cannot be numbered, neither the sand of the sea measured: so will I multiply the seed of David my servant.” ‘Thou hast confirmed to thyself thy people Israel to be a people unto thee for ever.” “If those ordinances depart from before me, saith the Lord ” (the ordinances of heaven), ‘‘ then the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me for ever.” So that, though a complaint should be made, ‘‘Who hath believed our report?” yet the Messiah should ‘‘ see of the travail of his soul, and be satisfied.” 2. The great things promised to the people of the Redeemer, the Church, were unconditional. That this seed, this people, should have an ¢nheritance. “ Unto thy seed,” says God, in covenant to Abram, and applied in its spiritual aspect by Paul to Christ mystical, “will I give this land.” The covenant of the reign over this people, or the covenant of royalty, or of a kingdom to Christ, as ruling over this house of Jacob, was unconditional: so was also that of his priesthood for them. Likewise the promises concerning Christ’s being “a covenant of the people,” that is, Surety and Mediator of the new covenant. So the promises themselves of the new covenant, the promises of giving “a new heart and a new spirit,” &c. to his people, of ‘taking away the heart of stone, and giving an heart of flesh, and putting his Spirit within them,” &c. were the same. God would ‘‘blot out their transgressions for his own name’s sake.” ‘For his own name’s sake would he defer his anger to Israel, and for his praise would he refrain for him that he cut him not off; for his own sake, even for his own sake, would he do it.” The promise 49 THE RECONCILER. of the Word and Spirit with his Church, as ‘“‘ not to depart for ever and ever,” was suspended on no con- dition; and “the word that should go forth out of God’s mouth should not return void, but it should accomplish that which he pleased, and it should prosper in the thing whereto he sent it.” The future glory of the Church, as declared by Isaiah, and other prophets and apostles, is absolute. In short, the decree that ‘© Mercy should be built up for ever ;” and the building of mercy, that spiritual temple, its foundation, its superstructure, and its completion, are the products of the divine absolute will, and it is “ the zeal of the Lord of hosts” that does all. Thus we have seen that, although, for infinitely wise reasons, the appeal is made to the human will, yet seeing that it utterly fails of effecting the great object of our salvation, the Divine will interposes in a super- added and supernatural way for the purpose. Of this too hereafter. CHAPTER Iii. ON HUMAN AGENCY OR ENDEAVOUR—THE PASSAGES OF SCRIPTURE ADDRESSED TO IT—-AND ON DIVINE AGENCY, AND THE PASSAGES THAT IMPLY OUR DEPENDENCE ON IT. Section I. On Human Agency—the Passages of Scripture addressed to tt. Taxes the following for a sample :—‘ Wash you, make you clean, put away the evil of your doings ; cease to do evil, learn to do well.” “ Circumcise your heart to the Lord, and take away the foreskin of your heart, ye men of Judah, and inhabitants of Jerusalem : DIVINE AGENCY. 43 lest my fury come forth like fire, and burn that none ean quench it, because of the evil of your doings.” “©Q Jerusalem, wash thine heart from wickedness, that thou mayest be saved ; how long shall thy vain thoughts lodge within thee?” ‘* Return ye now every one from his evil way, and make your ways and your doings good.” ‘Repent and turn from all your transgres- sions.” “Cast away from you all your transgressions whereby ye have transgressed, and make you a new heart and a new spirit; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?” ‘For L have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, saith the Lord God: wherefore turn, and live ye.” So, in the New Testament, “ Repent ye, and believe the gospel.” ‘‘ Labour not for the meat that perisheth, but for that which endureth to everlasting life.” <‘ Striveto enter in at the strait gate.” ‘“‘ Re- pent and be converted.” ‘‘ God hath commanded all men everywhere to repent.” Thus does God stir up sinners to act or endeavour. Section II. On Divine Agency—the Passages of Scripture that imply Man’s Dependence on God’s Agency upon us. «¢ And the Lord thy God will circumcise thine heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live.” ‘ And I will give them an heart to know me, that I am the Lord; and they shall be my people, and I will be their God: for they shall return unto me with their whole heart.” “I will put my law in their 44 THE RECONCILER. inward parts, and write it in their hearts.” “ And I will give them one heart, and one way, that they may fear me for ever, for the good of them and of their children after them. And I will make an everlasting covenant with them, that I will not turn away from them to do them good; but I will put my fear in their hearts, that they shall not depart from me.” “ And I will give them one heart, and I will put a new spirit within you; and I will take away the stony heart out of their flesh, and I will give them an heart of flesh that they may walk in my statutes, and keep my ordinances and do them : and they shall be my people, and I will be their God.” “A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you ; and I will take away the heart of stone* out of your flesh, and I will give youan heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.” Such are the passages which Nicodemus, as a Master of Israel, ought to have recognised as expressive of the new birth in the Old Testament Scriptures, with which Scriptures those of the New Testament concur. Hence John’s record of the doctrine of our Lord in conversation withthe above Master of Israel,—*‘ Verily, verily, I say unto thee, except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God:” “Verily, verily, I say unto thee, except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God,” —compared with ‘‘ According to his mercy he saved us by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the * «Stony heart.” DIVINE AGENCY. 45 Holy Ghost, which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour.” And, while the Old Testa- ment teaches us that a new heart, and a new spirit, are requisite to repentance, and represents them as the gift of God, the New Testament does the same in the following passages :—‘‘ Him hath God exalted—to be a Prince anda Saviour; to give repentance unto Israel, and the remission of sins.” “Then hath God given to the Gentiles repentance unto life.” Thesame as to faith. ‘‘ Faith is the gift of God.” “ Hath given you to be- lieve.” ‘* Who by him do believe in God.” ‘‘ No one can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost ;”’ —similar tothe saying of our Lord, “No man can come to me except the Father which hath sent me draw him ;” that is, by being “taught of God.” ‘‘ Noone can come to me except it were given to him of my Father.” The above two sections being compared, it thus ap- pears, that God both addresses himself to our human agency, and promises his own Divine agency ; and in the sequel it will be seen that, not only is the latter de- signed as a relief under the failure of the former, but that both are consistent and wise, inasmuch as, while the former, by proving man, serves for a testimony as to God and man, the latter shows that, if man be saved, it is of sovereign grace. 46 CHAPTER IV. THE FOREGOING SCRIPTURAL STATEMENT OF THE UNIVERSAL AND PARTICULAR ASPECT CONSIDERED. On reverting to the passages cited on both sides of the question, we find—that God loved the world, or that there was in God a love to our race, a philan- thropy,*—while Christ is said to love the Church in par- ticular—that Christ “gave himself a ransom for ail,” while he “ gave his life a ransom for many’”—that he “ pave his flesh for the life of the world,” and “ died for all,” while he “laid down his life for the sheep” —that «¢«God was in Christ reconciling the awor/d unto him- self,” and that Christ was the “ propitiation for the sins of the whole world ;” and yet those only who “receive the reconciliation”t have ‘‘ peace with God”—that the righteousness of one, even Christ, as the last Adam, is “the free gift that comes unto (eis) all unto justifica- tion of life, while by his obedience many are made right- eous’—that Christ on his cross cast out the Prince of this world, while in this act he executed ‘‘ vengeance” on him for the “ redeemed’ —that “the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world ;” and yet that he was sent to “save his people from their sins,” or that he was sent to bless every one by turning them from their iniquities,” while he was to “turn away ungodliness from Jacob” —that “the gospel is to be preached + DiiavOpwria—TIt. in. 4. + So the word carakkay7j—Rom. v. ii. STATEMENT CONSIDERED. 47 to every creature, while the effectual call is to some— and finally, that while Christ is “ Mediator between God and man, giving himself a ransom for all,” he is Mediator and Surety of the New Covenant to “ the house of Israel and of Judah,” spiritually considered. Now how do these things consist, and how are they to be explained? In general then we remark— That the “ Universal Aspect” must be considered as intimating that provision is made for all, conditionally ; that thereby, whether men ‘hear or forbear,” receive or reject, at least a witness may be borne for God of his righteousness and of his love. And the “ Particular Aspect” must be considered as an expression of God's peculiar grace in providing for the foreseen failure of the “ universal” dispensation by a SUPERADDED AND SPE- CIAL provision that shall be effectual ; and that for ‘“‘the praise of the glory of God’s grace,” even of his sove- reign grace. Apply this general remark then, thus,— 1. Tothe Love of God. To the world, God declares his love of benevolence—to the Church, his love of choice and complacence. 2. To the Light of Christ. Christ “ lighteth every man that cometh into the world,” potentially, and con- ditionally, that is, 7f they “ follow” him ; but those only who do follow him, he actually enlightens. 3. To the Propitiatory Sacrifice. Itis available for the whole world, but to those only who plead it, or have “faith in his blood” is it effectual. It was shed for all—it is sprinkled on some. Thus, the burnt-offering and sin-offering extraordinarily offered in Hezekiah’s time were “to make an atonement for all Israel,” and so were available for all Israel, conditionally ; yet to 48 THE RECONCILER. such only as came at Hezekiah’s proclamation, was it effectual.* The sin-offering in the time of Ezra was also designed for “all Israel ;” yet they who cared nothing about it would not reap the benefit of it.t So is it with the propitiatory offering of the Saviour of the world. It was designed for the sins of the whole world, yet those only of the world were in fact to be benefited by it, who by faith should plead it. The reconciliation was provided for on God's part for all; the reconcilia- tion is received only by some. 4. To the Righteousness of Christ. As the second Adam, “the one righteousness” comes wnto (eis) all to justification of life ; asthe Surety of the New Covenant, it is upon all. The righteousness indeed is fo all as to provision and grant, but it is «pon all those who by faith put it on. 5. To the Salvation of Christ. Christ is the Saviour of the world ; or he is “sent to bless every one by turning them from their iniquities” as conditional on their calling on him for their salvation ; but he was sent “to save his people from their sins,” certainly. When too, Christ ‘cast out” Satan on the cross as ‘¢the Prince of this world,” ad/ obtained a right of dis- charge; but only those are discharged or delivered, in fact, who call upon the name of the Lord “ for the de- liverance.” So, salvation was obtained from Babylon for all the Jews, and proclamation of it was made to all ; but only those “‘ whose spirits were stirred up to go to Jerusalem,” or to avail themselves of it, were actually delivered. * 2 Chr. xxix. 24. + Ezra vi. 17; viii. 35- STATEMENT CONSIDERED. 49 6. To the Life in Christ Jesus. Christ ‘gave his flesh for the life of the world,” if they would come to him for it, but some only of the world, even such as are drawn by the Holy Spirit, come and actually pos- sess the life. 7. To the Resurrection of the body. The privilege of a resurrection is universal ; the privilege of the re- surrection ‘2m glory” is particular. 8. To the Gospel. It is to be preached as to its blessings and obligations to every creature, as being for every creature; but only those who are taught by the Spirit of God to “ know its joyful sound,” coming in at such proclamation, will enjoy its blessings, and fulfil its obligations. So the proclamation of Hezekiah to re- turn to God and his service was made to all Israel ; but to those only who “ humbled themselves” and came, was it actually available. ‘The proclamation of Cyrus to the captive Jews was universal, so that all might have returned to their own land if they would; but to those only “whose spirit the Lord stirred up” was the pro- clamation effectual. Thus the proclamation of the gospel is commanded to be made to every creature ; yet, only those whose spirit God stirs up come in at the call. Such is God’s bounty, that the ‘come and wel- come’ is to all; such is man’s folly, that they refuse to come. ‘That all do not come, is not God’s fault but theirs. And, though hereby a testimony is borne against them, yet is a glorious testimony borne for God of his love and righteousness in providing for, and inviting them to come. 50 THE RECONCILER. CONCLUDING REMARK. As ‘the serpent lifted up in the wilderness” was available for all Israel, yet actually availed only those who looked to it, so Christ “ lifted up” is available to all sinners, but actually avails only those who look to him as crucified. And, as God ‘caused to cleave to him the whole house of Israel after the flesh,” and “the daily sacrifice” and annual atonement were designed for them all; yet, only “Israel” after the Spirit were ‘saved with an everlasting salvation”—so, the whole world are the objects of the Divine philanthropy, and are entitled to the great “propitiation,” yet only the elect will plead it, and be actually benefited by it. OBJECTIONS TO THIS COMPREHENSIVE SCHEME CONSIDERED. As objections often arise from misconception, we remark, besides the explanation already made— It is not maintained— 1. That “the New Covenant,” properly so called— (not the Gospel Dispensation at large, but ‘ the New Covenant’ with the spiritual Israel)—has respect to any but the elect Israel, to and with whom that covenant is made; or, that Christ, in shedding his blood to ratify that covenant, had respect to any but the elect Israel ; or that he is “ Surety” and “ Mediator” to any but them. 9. That as to the Gospel covenant of life upon faith, that Christ is “‘ Mediator between God and men” any otherwise than as he is provided on God’s part; or, that Christ made reconciliation for all effectively, seeing OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 51 many do not “ receive” the reconciliation ; or, that he is effectively the propitiation for the sins of the whole world, seeing that many do not “sprinkle the blood ;” or, that, by his vicarious sin-offering he made actual atonement for all, or actually became a substitute for all therein, seeing many do not by faith lay their hands on the victim, or having ‘afflicted their souls,” confess their sins over him; or that, though Christ gave himself a ransom price for all, even to ransom all from the award of justice, and that God might be just in delivering all, yet that all are really delivered, seeing many will not sue out their discharge ; or, that all were actually redeemed from Satan’s power and service by Christ’s victorious death, seeing many choose to remain subjects of his kingdom ; or, in a word, that he died for all, effectively, seeing that many will not concur in the purposes of his death. But it ¢s maintained— 1. That God had a love of benevolence towards mankind, not only as his creatures, but even though transgressors of his law; being willing to receive them on repentance, not “‘ desiring their death, but that they might turn and live.” 2. That Christ was appointed Mediator between God and men on God’s part, so to perform all the purposes of mediation, as that no obstacle might lay in the way of the salvation of any, but their own obstinacy ; so that whosoever “received the abound- ing grace and the gift of righteousness, such should reign in life, through Jesus Christ our Lord.” 3. That Christ, by the same appointment, offered a mediatory sacrifice of reconciliation or propitiation, or E2 52 THE RECONCILER. atonement, which, being all-sufficient in its value for all, should be available for all, if they should actually avail themselves of it, or did not perversely refuse or neglect it. 4. That the provision that is made for man’s salvation and eternal life, is not only sufficient for all, but that it is provided for all, and that a hearty welcome is given to all: moreover, that it would be enjoyed by all if all would come and partake of it. And thus, that none should be excluded, but such as should exclude themselves. Also, that this universal grace is intended, whether men will hear or forbear, not so much to render men inexcusable in their disobedience, and to justify God in the showing of his power and wrath on such unbelief and perverseness, as to prove a testumony for God of his love, his righteousness, of his truth and faithfulness ; and, ultimately, to give occasion for the further manifestation of his glory in a superadded dispensation of sovereign goodness. The above statement having been well considered, perhaps most of those objections that have been or may be urged, will appear to have been obviated. However, for the sake of satisfaction, we will notice them distinctly. Objection 1. How can this universal love of good- will accord with “ hardening,” “‘ appointing to stumble at the word,” “ appointing to wrath ?” This “hardening,” &c. must be considered as con- sequent upon the rejection of such good-will. It is after being endured with much long-suffering, that persons are made “vessels of wrath.” Prior to such OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 53 rejection and stubbornness, the gospel was to them as a message of good-will. Nor does it alter the case, if we refer the appointment to eternity, for God foresaw before as well as knew after, the rejection, seeing that time past, present, and to come, are as one eternal now to him. But of this more hereafter. O27. 2. How can God “ will all men to be saved,” while in fact he does not save them, for ‘‘ nothing is impossible with God ?” He wills all men to be saved as a Benefactor, though, under certain existing circumstances, he does not will it as a wise and just Judge. His will of in- clination, a priort, is for their salvation, though for wise reasons his will of purpose, a posteriori, is other- wise. Irrespective of their unpersuadableness he wills it: in view of their unpersuadableness, he does not will it. But that is their fault. It does not impugn his benevolence. Amongst men the will of inclination and the will of purpose sometimes clash. It is judged right and wise to abstain from many things, acting according to the will of purpose, to which the mind is inclined, as well as todo many things from which the mind is averse. ‘Thus, David’s “ soul, as a father, longed to go forth unto Absalom,” when in a state of banishment for crime; yet, as a king, and therefore the guardian of law and order, he durst not doit. Why? The reasons taken from the claims of law and justice, were still more weighty than those drawn from personal feeling; and so, though his will of inclination was for bringing him home, yet his will of purpose, at least before Joab’s device, was for con- tinuing him in exile. Thus, too, a judge condemns a 54 THE RECONCILER. criminal to death, though his merciful nature would incline him to acquit him. And why condemn ? Because the public benefit is a reason of greater weight than that arising from the personal suffering of the criminal. And why should it not be so with the great “ Lord of heaven and earth,” the King and Judge of men? He may, for some more weighty reasons, deter- mine with a will of purpose on many things contrary to that will of inclination which—other considerations apart—his benevolent nature would excite. And such determination may be not only right, but wise and good. ‘Thus, as to the “house of Israel and the house of Judah,” he had formed them to be “to him for a people, and for a name, and for a praise, and for a glory,” and doubtless his will of inclination was, that they should be so; yet his will of purpose was to * let them pollute his name,” although he had power to prevent it, as he, after their probation, in some future time has declared he will do.* _—_So also, though he declares that he had no pleasure in the death of the sinners the Jews, while he should have pleasure in their life—nay, though he even swears that it was so—nay, moreover, while he represents himself as lamenting over their conduct, as “ fretted,’ as “ broken with their whorish heart ;” yet, after all, his will of purpose was to suffer this their death to take place. And, farther still,- speaking after the manner of men, he declares himself “comforted” when his holy “ fury had rested upon them.” But, why all this? Because, though the God of love, yet, as “ the Holy One” and “ the * Ezek. xxxix.7. ‘And I will not let them pollute my holy name any more.’ OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 5d Just,” the holiness of his nature would be cleared, and the claims of his law and justice would be answered, and his truth preserved inviolate by their punishment ; which were reasons with him of greater weight, as the “ great King,” than those which his benevolent heart would suggest as a benefactor. And is all this any reflection on the character of the Almighty Ruler? No; it onlyshows that good as he is, yet that his benevolence is tempered with “ wisdom and prudence ;” that though he is “ Love,” yet is he “ Light” also, and that this love has for its appropriate object, not evil but good on the whole; in a-word, that his “‘love” being a love to good, it can kindle up into a flame at the sight of evil, so that he can become “a consuming fire.” That God does not actually save all, does not then infer that he willed not the salvation of all, or that he made not provision for the salvation of all; but that man’s perverseness has made it wise and prudent for him to purpose differently. And we hope in the sequel of this work, to show, why he has not thought fit to interfere to prevent the folly and sin of man, any more than he did to prevent the pollution of his name, as above noticed, by Israel. Obj. 3. Christ is said to have been “ manifested for them who by him do believe,” as though he had been manifested for no others. And many are the places where his mission and death are represented as having a particular design. Christ’s death indeed had a special or particular design, and he was manifested for them who by him do believe only, effectively: nor would he have been 56 THE RECONCILER. manifested at all, if there had not been an elect Israel; yet it cannot be inferred from thence that his sacri- ficial death might not be designed for all, as a provision of moral government to answer a great and important end. Being sufficient for all, and available for all, none could say that they were not provided for; none could charge God with a want of good- will; and yet a great and important end would be answered ; a testimony would be borne for God, even for the doing him justice and promoting his glory. Obj. 4. If a ransom price was paid for all, why are not all redeemed or delivered ? The ransom price, whether paid for all or only some, would, we conceive, be of the same value ; and that all are not actually redeemed is the fault of man, not of God. Nor even though it could be proved that the price to be paid must be greater for all than for some, yet was not the increased price paid for nought, for it turns to God for a testimony ; which is a consideration of no small importance, as will be seen hereafter. At first sight, we might be induced to say that Moses’ law was in vain—that Moses’ song was in vain; because, Israel neither obeyed the one, or profited by the other; yet God did not think them to be so, because they both proved for “a witness against Israel and for God.” So, in this case, we might say, at first sight, that Christ died for all, or aid a ransom price for all, in vain as to those that are not actually delivered; but no, it was not in vain, for hereby God bore a testimony, on his part, of his love to a guilty world, and of the righteousness of his government over them. He manifested that love, OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 57 whether they requited such love or not; whether they glorified such righteousness or not; and these are not vain things. Besides, if he should hereupon display his sovereign goodness—in other words, should take occasion from men’s perverseness to glorify his goodness by a superadded dispensation of sovereign grace, it would leave such perverse sinners without excuse, inasmuch as deliverance had been provided for them, but of their own will they had refused it. Obj. 5. Of what use was it for Christ to be a sub- stitute for all, if all are not discharged ? We do not maintain that Christ was a substitute for all de facto, or in point of fact, but only de jure, or in point of legal right ; that is, that his sacrifice was a substitutionary or vicarious sacrifice, as the sin-offering of the Jews was, suspended on the con- dition that the transgressor confessed his sins and laid them upon the head of the victim. The sinner must accept of the substitute, and plead the sacrifice, if he would enjoy the benefit of the substitution. And then, though the sinner, not having thus ac- cepted the substitute, or pleaded the sacrifice, has not, in fact, a substitute; yet having a right to the vicarious sacrifice, a testimony is borne for God of his goodness, and of is righteousness notwithstanding. The universal aspect or design therefore does not appear useless, but the contrary. Let God have his glory, though it turn to man’s shame. The same reply might be made, were the same objection urged as to Christ’s suretyship. But we find no passage in Scripture where Christ is repre- sented as a “surety” for any others than those 58 THE RECONCILER. interested in the new covenant, and these are the spiritual Israel, the “ peculiar people.” Oly. 6. If Christ’s righteousness is “ unto all” for ** justification of life,” how is it that all do ot live? Because they do not receive the ‘gift of right- eousness.” Not believing, the righteousness is not upon (ert) them, though it is unto (eis) them. A testimony, however, is meanwhile borne for God. He is justified and glorified too, though they perversely refuse the ‘‘ abounding grace, and the gift of right- eousness.” Obj. 7. If the righteousness and life of the last Adam are commensurate with the sin and death of the first Adam, why, seeing Adam’s transgression fetters the will of all, do not all find their will set at liberty ? Distinguish between the physical faculty of willing, or the willing that belongs to our nature as such, and that abuse of it, which fetters the will to good; in other words, between physical and moral liberty. If Adam’s sin took away our freedom of will or our in- clination to good, it did not deprive us of our physical faculty of choosing as we like. They ‘ did unto John whatsoever they listed.” We still have the blessing and the cursing, the life and the death, the good and the evil, left to our choice, as is plain from the appeals to Israel made both by Moses and Joshua, as well as afterward by Jeremiah, and we do still choose, and that free of all compulsion. Physical liberty only is necessary to accountability ; to have produced moral liberty, or to have influenced the will, would have been no longer leaving man in the hand of his own OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 59 counsel. If God had renewed the will, infallibly inclining it to good, as he does in regeneration, the whole scheme of probation for a testimony to God, as well as the final scheme of sovereign mercy, must have fallen to the ground. Man musé be left in the hand of his own counsel, after all proper means and motives have been used with him, if he is to shew himself. And all that is necessary to accountability in the case of fallen man, is, that he have such means and such motives as would counteract his will to evil, and occa- sion a will to good, if he did not put forth new and personal acts of violence against such: motives—if he did not hold the truth in unrighteousness—if he were not “contentious” against the truth. And his conduct in this matter forms his trial or probation since the fall. Nor could it be otherwise, if God’s great end be answered. Obj. 8. If Christ paid a ransom price for all, how is it that both formerly, and since the Christian era, many have not even heard of it ? God having in view a probationary system for the purpose of testimony, as will be largely declared here- after, all that was to be done on his part was to provide the means of recovery for all, and to urge attention to such means by suitable motives. Now, as to the time from Adam to Moses, the world had both the promise of a Redeemer and prophets to enforce attention to it. And thus from Moses to Christ, be it observed, that neither from the world at large, or from the individual, was that promise ever withdrawn. And, as to the posterity of Abra- ham, though a special dispensation was granted to = 60 THE RECONCILER. them, yet it was not in exclusion of others; and while it was an additional favour to them, it had a bearing upon the future salvation of the world. That all, then, did not possess and enjoy ‘‘the promise of life in Christ Jesus” was not of God, but of man. Provoked as he was with the world, by their forsaking and forgetting him who gave them “their life and breath and all things,” and who never “left himself without witness” of his goodness, ‘‘in that he did good and gave them rain from heaven and fruitful seasons, filling their hearts with food and gladness,’”— provoked as he was too by their ‘“‘ abominable idola- tries” and wickedness, still he cannot be said to have withdrawn the original promise. No; their priests, their altars, their sacrifices, their purifications, which originally were designed to prefigure gospel blessings, all prove the contrary. If they were “ wnpersuad- able,”* as St. Paul says they were, and chose to walk in wicked “ways,” yet they were their ‘ own” ways, and all that God did was to ‘‘ suffer all nations” to take this their choice. ‘This was no withdrawment on the part of God; so far from it, Peter tells us that, “in every nation he that feared God”—doubtless as con- nected with faith in. God and in his promises—“ and wrought righteousness, was accepted with him.” And then, as to the time since the commencement of the Christian era, that all have not heard of this ‘‘ransom for all” is not of God—or of Christ. No. Man received a commission to ‘‘ preach the gospel to every creature.” That it has not been done is of man. * Rom. xi. 80, y7zeOnoare. OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 61 Man has disobeyed the command of his Lord to pub- lish to all what was provided for all. ‘That all have not, 7m fact, heard and possessed, and enjoyed tao, does not therefore prove that all might not have heard, and possessed, and enjoyed, by right of God's gracious grant. And, before we conclude this topic, we must also remark, that not only has God not withdrawn the original grant, but he has often sovereignly interposed, both in ancient and later times, to remind men of it, and to recall attention to it. Let God be justified, therefore, and man condemned. Obj. 9. How can God be sincere in calling all to mercy and to life, when he withholds from them that grace which is necessary to their acceptance of that mercy and that life ? In answering this objection it may be premised, that the same difficulty lies in the way of those who deny the universal aspect, for even they approve of the universal call. And having thus premised, we answer thus: As to mercy, God was sincere when he swore, “As I live, saith the Lord, I desire not,” &c., and in his call to ‘turn; and yet we find he gave over these persons to death, nor did he give them that “new heart,’ nor ‘take away the stony heart,” all which were necessary to their acceptance and their turning. Such, it cannot be denied, was the fact. But, be it remembered, as was observed before, that the perverseness of the sinner may occasion that will of inclination for the good of the sinner to be turned into a will of purpose for the contrary. Again, as to the call of all to come to Christ for 62 THE RECONCILER. life. God promised and called all Israel to the rest of Canaan, and doubtless he was sincere in it; but notwithstanding this, we find that he “sware in his wrath” that “many of them should not enter into his rest ;” nor did he give them that ‘heart to perceive, and eyes to see, and ears to hear,’’ which were requisite to their fidelity to God, and their consequent enjoy- ment of the promise. Such, in this case too, was the fact. But it was their unpersuadableness (amevbeia) that interfered; and, for wise and weighty reasons, the will of purpose to destroy took place of the will of inclination to bless. So with sinners now. ‘The gospel comes with an assurance of ‘the kindness and love of God toward man,” the race of man, and is to be preached to every creature; yet men having been « endured with much long-suffering,” become, where God sees fit to let justice take its course, “‘ vessels of wrath” notwithstanding. In neither case, then, does the universal aspect impugn the divine sincerity. Nor does it impugn his wisdom; for his wise ends are accomplished hereby. He hereby proves man— he hereby bears a testimony to himself of his love and righteousness ; and, in fact, gives to himself his due, —does justice to himself ; and he also gives occasion for the display of his sovereign “‘ goodness,” in a new and superadded dispensation of grace, as we shall here- after see. Having thus answered all the objections that occur to us on the subject, either directly or by fair infer- ence, we will now in our turn propose a few questions to those who may still confine the Redeemer’s under- OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 63 taking to an elect number, as though for all others nothing was provided. 1. Would God call to the ‘‘ Great Supper ” those for whom he had not provided such supper ? Would Christ say that “‘ he was the bread of life that came down from heaven, that any one (71s) might eat of it and not die,” if he had not been bread for every one? 2. Would God be angry with the persons invited to the Great Supper for not coming, and declare in anger that they should not taste of it, when, behold, in fact, there had not been any supper p7o- vided for them? 38. How could “the Son” of God —the King in Sion—be “angry,” and men “perish in the way when his wrath is kindled but a little,” if he were not, conditionally on their “ trusting in him,” commissioned and ready to be their deliverer from the kingdom of Satan, and to receive them into his own kingdom? So, again, how could he say at the last day, “‘ As for those mine enemies who would not that I should reign over them, bring them hither and slay them before me,” if they might not have availed themselves of his propitiatory death, of his victory over Satan on the cross, and of his mightiness to save, if they would? 4. How could the man who came in to the supper, not having on the wedding garment, be blamed and punished for it, if there had been none provided for him; and why should he be “speechless,” when he might so readily have answered in excuse, “‘ There was no wedding garment provided for me to put on?” 5. Could the apostle Peter have said to the unbelieving multitude of the Jews, that “ God had sent his Son Jesus to bless them by turning away every one of them from their iniquities,” (that is, 64 THE RECONCILER. if they would call upon him,) if there were no con- ditional design in God thus to bless them, and no commission given to his Son to save them thus con- ditionally? 6. Would God condemn and damn eternally sinners for not believing for pardon, justifi- cation, salvation and eternal life, if no provision was made of the kind; but, on the contrary, they were previously reprobated to eternal death? 7. Coulda general proclaim pardon to a whole rebel army, when, if he told them the truth, he must say, that his majesty designed to pardon only an elect number? So, also, would “ God command all men _ every where to repent,” if there were not a way opened for the pardon of all, and a readiness to pardon all ? 8. Would not the restricted view of the subject furnish a plea to the sinner to continue in his re- bellion, and tend to harden him? ‘Two persons are sitting in a congregation hearing the proclamation of the “ gospel of the kingdom,” inviting them to submit. One of them believes that God neither loves, nor has commissioned Christ to save and bless the greater part of them, but hates, has eternally reprobated, and will certainly damn them; the other believes that God has a love of benevolence to all, and has commissioned Christ to bless every one by turning them away from their “ iniquities.” Now, would not the latter be more likely to be drawn, or, if con- victed, to be «ncouraged than the other ? nay, would not the other be likely to be hardened ? Having thus considered the scriptural statement of the universal and particular aspect of the gospel revelation, and shown their consistency with each ;— ADVANTAGES OF THE UNIVERSAL ASPECT. 65 having also considered the objections that might be made to the universal and comprehensive scheme, we proceed next to show the advantages of this scheme, as well as of the scriptural statements concerning the human will and the human agency, as in consistency with the Divine will and the Divine agency; con- cluding with a view of the advantages of the whole scheme altogether. CHAPTER V. ADVANTAGES OF THE UNIVERSAL AND PARTICULAR ASPECT, AS WELL AS OF THE SCRIPTURAL STATEMENT OF THE HUMAN WILL AND HUMAN AGENCY, AS ALSO OF THE DIVINE WILL AND THE DIVINE AGENCY, TOGETHER WITH THE ADVANTAGES OF THE METHOD ALTOGETHER. ‘Section I. The Advantages of the Universal Aspect. 1. Tue grace of God abounding in the righteous- ness and life brought in by the second Adam, when viewed as of the same extent with the sin and death brought in by the first Adam, glorifies God’s love more than the partial and exclusive view of it does. Moreover, while ‘the kindness and philanthropy of God,” attracts and encourages, the exclusive view of the subject repels and discourages. | 2. Provision for all furnishes a reasonable ground for a call to all; and a gospel for every creature authorizes the preaching of the Gospel ¢o every crea- ture. And, since it shows that God desires not the F 66 THE RECONCILER. death of any sinner, but that every one turn from his wickedness and live, it gives occasion and accounts for those repeated and earnest exhortations and expostu- lations which he addresses to sinners promiscuously ; as also for the “‘ reasonings” and persuasions used by his servants at his command. 3. Men, being assured that there is no want of mercy in God the Father—no want of merit in his Son's atonement or righteousness—no want of power to save in the Holy Spirit — indeed, that there is no obstacle to their salvation that has not been removed, and no facility that is not or will not be granted, on God’s part ; and that, in fact, he ex- horts and persuades and beseeches men to be recon- ciled—we say, this being the case, not only does all the failure appear to lie with man, but it most strik- ingly discovers his perverseness, in his rejection of the gospel invitation. It also accounts for the solemn facts, that the ‘‘ Master of the house” is “ angry” at the refusal of men to come to the feast,—that his Son is angry when sinners refuse to receive the blessings, and submit to the obligations of his kingdom,—and finally that, while God declares that such as “believe” shall ‘ enter into his rest,” he “ swears in his wrath,” that those who, through unpersuadableness, do not believe, ‘shall zo¢ enter into it.” Moreover, a point particu- larly to be noticed is— 4. That, whereas ‘‘ the Gospel of the Kingdom’’ was to be preached in all the world for a witNgss to all nations, it gives occasion, by its universal overtures and by its conditional form, for proving all to whom it is preached; and thus—as the Mosaic Law was ADVANTAGES OF THE PARTICULAR ASPECT, 67 between God and Israel—it becomes a witness for God against man. And then— 5. Man, having done as he willed, it gives an op- portunity, so to speak, for God, “the Lord of heaven and earth,” to do as he will, in a way of sovereign mercy and favour, by another and even a special and effectual dispensation. After man, the subject of the “Great King,” has been proved,—first by a “law of works,” which promised life upon obedience, and has failed; and then afterward by a “law of faith,” which promised life upon believing “ obedience” too, and in that also has failed or been unpersuadable,— it gives occasion for God, by a further dealing with man, to come forward as a gracious Sovereign, with a new Covenant that shall not fail, “keeping mercy for thousands,” and “ having mercy on whom he will have mercy, and compassion on whom he will have com- passion.” Section II, | Advantages of the Particular Aspect. 1. While the universal aspect shows God’s good will to all, and that the great Householder will do no one wrong, the particular aspect shows that he wil/ do “ what he will with his own,’—that, while, having done unto some “ after their way, and according to their doing judged them,” he may show mercy on and call whom he will, yet if men obstinately refuse his benefits, even that shall not prevent the “glorifying of his mercy.” 2. While, under the universal dispensation, men, as left in the hands of their own counsel, refuse to F 2 68 THE RECONCILER. return; the particular dispensation provides, by the ministration of the Spirit of effectual grace, that there shall be a remnant that “ shall return”—a seed “ that shall serve the Lord’—‘‘a people for his name,” so that “‘ mercy shall be built up for ever”—‘“ Christ shall see of the travail of his soul and be satisfied,” and that ‘‘a great multitude which.no man can number, of all nations and kindred and people and tongues,” should be saved. 3. While the failure of the universal design throws all the blame upon man’s unpersuadableness or disobe- dience, the success of the particular design gives all the glory to God’s grace.* Section III. Advantages of our Scriptural Statement of the Human Will and Human Agency, as in-consistence with the Divine Will and the Divine Agency. We have seen from the passages of Scripture quoted, that a considerable part of Scripture is addressed to man’s will and to man’s agency, as though the posses- sion and enjoyment of the blessings promised, and vice versd, were dependent on the proper use of his will and power; while these blessings in many other parts of Scripture are attributed to God’s will and power :—now why so, and how do these things consist ? These addresses to man, while they show unto him his obligations to God his Creator and King, and what is necessary in man to maintain the relations between him and his Maker, as well as an amicable intercourse between them, serve also to give him a fair trial, * Rom? xi. 82: ADVANTAGES OF THE SCRIPTURAL STATEMENT. 69 ‘proving him whether he will keep God’s command- ments or no.” 2. Being brought forward with such ample evidence, and enforced by such powerful motives, the blame, if ineffectual, attaches to man alone; and man is led to see that his condemnation is of himself, even of his own stubbornness. ‘Ye will not come to me that ye might have life.” ‘‘ How often would I have gathered you together! but ye would not.” As if he had said,. “‘ Having given you such evidence of my Messiahship, and used such powerful arguments for your belief. in me, the fault is your own ;—you have no cloak for this your sin of unbelief.” 3. Hereby, while witness is borne against man for his disobedience and perverseness, witness is borne ultimately for God, of ‘the riches of his goodness and forbearance and long-suffering ;” and he seems to say, after using such means and urging such motives, as he said to the Jews by Isaiah, ‘‘ What could have been done more, that I have not done?” 4, In the view of the subject we have taken it is seen, that if God does according to his will in a way of sovereign distinction, yet it is not in the way of infringement on man’s will, for the man has exercised his will, though, alas! a perverse one. And, thus it is seen, that the Scripture appeal to man’s will and agency may be reconciled with salvation by God’s will and agency.. 5. Thus it appears also, how man’s free agency and accountableness may consist with “the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God;” for, since “known unto God are” not only his own wills and 70 THE RECONCILER. works, but also man’s wills and works from “ the begin- ning of the world,” it is very easy to conceive how Jehovah, with whom all duration is present and but one eternal now, foreseeing the abuse of man’s free will and agency, might interpose, and of his own “ deter- minate counsel” provide a remedy against it in his effectual grace. Hence— 6. As the Scripture addresses and appeals to the human will and choice, in consequence of man’s abuse of his freedom of will by unpersuadableness to the gospel call, throw the dlame on man, so the exercise of God’s will and choice in the dispensation of effectual grace gives all the glory of his salvation to God. SecTion IV. Advantages of the above Scriptural Method, as well as of the View given of its Design, by way of Conclusion on this Part of the Subject. I. This view of things silences that objection of the Arminian which supposes that the Calvinistic theory isa system of exclusion ; for it involves in it or ad- mits a provision for all, so that none are excluded but such as exclude themselves. It silences also that other objection which supposes that the Calvin- istic theory infringes on the liberty of the human will ; for it leaves man at liberty to chose the “life” or the ‘‘death” to the same extent as the Arminian maintains that liberty. At the same time, when taken in con- nexion with the plan of sovereign mercy, hereafter to be stated, it establishes the hypothesis of the Calvinist, as to the Divine sovereignty. II. While it serves to explain all those passages of ADVANTAGES OF THE SCRIPTURAL METHOD. 71 Scripture that appear to favour exclusively the Arminian; it serves to explain also all those which seem to favour exclusively the Calvinist. Wherefore, on these two grounds, the plan may be considered as a plan of union. III. Whereas it is objected that the exercise of the Divine sovereignty in election pleaded for by the Cal- vinist, appears to be at variance with the universal benevolence of God, while the scheme of the Arminian is in perfect harmony with it,—the plan here submitted removes that objection, inasmuch as it exhibits such benevolence to as great an extent as the Arminian scheme does. It stretches out its arms to all equally the same, making the same provision, giving the same facilities for its enjoyment. Just so many are eventually saved according to the one hypothesis as the other ; and the result in every case, whether it be salvation or dam- nation, is equally in accordance with the human will, every one in this case, as well as in that, having his own willand his own way. Moreover, it has this supe- rior advantage, that, whereas on the Arminian plan the salvation of those who are saved is considered as contingent on the human will, this secures their salva- tion, and at the same time brings out to view another glory in the Divine character, that of his sovereign ‘“‘ goodness.”* Hence— IV. Not only does the scheme here proposed admit all that the Arminian admits in his representations of the extent and richness of Divine grace, but it exhibits an additional dispensation of it; for, whereas the Ar- minian leaves men, as unpersuadable, to their fate, * Exod. xxxiii. 18, 19. 72 THE RECONCILER. without any further relief, we here bring forward a scheme which opens a door of hope even in regard to multitudes of these. Hence, does the discouraged sinner say, ‘I have sinned away my privileges, and for- feited the life by my unpersuadableness,’—there is relief in sovereign mercy. Does he say again, “I have no will to rouse or power to rise,’—there is relief in sovereign Almighty power. Hence— V. It is relieving to the Minister of the Word. Making the universal call, does he complain “ Who hath believed our report ?”—the particular aspect assures him, that the Redeemer ‘“shall-see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied.” Has he reason to com- plain, in giving the universal call, “‘ Ye will not come to Christ, that ye may have life,’—he encourages himself that, according to the special aspect, “* All that the Father giveth him shall come to him.” Does he preach the word. of the Gospel to every creature in accordance with its universal aspect, and men receive it not ?—reflecting on the particular aspect, he is consoled under the assurance, that God’s word shall not return unto him void, but that it shall accomplish whatsoever he please.” VI. Whereas, confining the Gospel to its universal aspect with the Arminians, and attributing the event of believing to the wise and good use of our own free will, we minister to vain glory, inasmuch as such a one is wisely persuadable, while the unbeliever is foolishly unpersuadable :—in bringing forward the particular aspect, which attributes such believing to the sovereign will of God, we promote humility, and utterly exclude all occasion of self-glorying. Why? Because God ON PROBATIONARY GOVERNMENT. Ts alone is hereby acknowledged as making to differ. Especially is this the case, seeing we maintain, in the spirit of this hypothesis, that God sometimes makes willing those who of all men had been most unwilling. Moreover, while the Arminian, content with the uni- versal conditional aspect, only depends on his own determination for steadfastness ; adopting also this par- ticular aspect, we are led to renounce ourselves, and to depend only on the Lord for such steadfastness. VII. The Arminian, who acknowledges only the universal conditional bearing of the subject, trusting to his own power of will, is in danger of falling: the Calvinist embracing also the particular bearing of it, knowing that his will and power are of the Lord, and so waiting upon him for that will and power, becomes secure of standing. Which reminds us— VIII. That this scheme, as to its conditional bear- ing, being taken in connexion with the sovereign grace hereafter to be declared, removes one of the strongest objections to the doctrine of the perseverance of the Saints, as arising from those conditional forms of expression that so often occur in Scripture, such as— ‘“‘ If ye continue in the faith,’ &c.; imasmuch as it accounts for such expressions, indicating that such perseverance does not imply the setting aside those conditions, but brings forward to our relief that effectual grace whereby such conditions are to be performed. 74 CHAPTER VI. ON THE NATURE OF A PROBATIONARY GOVERNMENT. By ‘probationary’ here we mean, that God, in his dealings with man, sees fit to prove or try them. That such és the case may be seen by attention to Chap. iii. Part I. And by “ probationary government,” we mean a method of government under which, whatever favours are imparted, or duties required, or motives offered, man is left to his own will or choice, or “ in the hand of his owncounsel, whether he will hear or forbear,—whe- ther he will obey or disobey,”—and so is proved. Per- haps it will be best understood if we state our mean- ing in the following propositions :— 1. A system of probation requires that man be left in the hand of his own counsel. Whatever means are imparted, or motives presented, whether under a cove- nant of life upon works, or a covenant of life upon faith, man must be left to the free exercise of his own will; and on the determination of that, must depend both the moral quality and the judicial award of his actions. Hence— 2. ‘The revealed form, as well as the real nature of such a constitution, must be conditional. Thus, if a man make a good choice, he is constituted righteous therein, and is rewardable; if he make a bad choice, he is constituted a sinner, and is punishable.* * Weare not here treating of the “‘ secret’’ unconditional operation of the Spirit on the nature in the objects of sovereign favour ;—that belongs to the system of sovereign goodness, hereafter to be consi- dered in Part IT. ON PROBATIONARY GOVERNMENT. 19 3. Asa moral system, established with a rational creature for probation, its general law must be that the will be determined by motives, such as are suited to a rational nature. Hence— 4, instructions and commands, promises and threat- enings, entreaties and expostulations, warnings and lamentations,—whatever indeed, by exhibiting the na- tural or appointed connexion of things, is calculated to operate upon the mind in the way of moving it,— must be considered as the suitable and proper motvves in such a system. There is a necessary connexion of cause and effect subsisting both in the physical and moral world. Thus, in the physical world, if iron be thrown into water, it will sink ; if a man fall into the fire, he will be burnt: and in the moral world, if a man sin, he will suffer ; if his thoughts accuse him, he will be uneasy. Now, since man is naturally moved by fear of suffering, or hope of enjoyment, to do this or avoid that, this neces- sary connexion must be set before him accordingly, and therefore a probationary government must be con- ditional—“ If you do this, you will suffer so and so— if you do so and so, you will have such and such en- joyment.” Hence the conditional form that runs throughout Scripture in urging to choose the good, and avoid the evil, as suited to a system of trial. Thus the Almighty Ruler dealt with our first parents. “If ye eat of the forbidden fruit ye shall die,” while the tree of life seemed to say, “If ye do not eat, ye shall live for ever.” And between Cain and his Maker after the fall, the matter stood thus, “If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou 76 THE RECONCILER. doest not well, sin lieth at the door.” The blessing of the Covenant to Abraham was on condition of keep- ing the covenant. As to the children of Israel at Marah, no sooner is it said, ‘‘ There he made for them a statute and an ordinance, and there he proved them,” than there follows a condition, “ If thou wilt diligently hearken to the voice of the Lord thy God, and wilt do that which is right in his sight, and wilt give ear to his commandments, and keep all his statutes, I will put none of those diseases upon thee, which I have brought upon the Egyptians; for Iam the Lord that healeth thee.” Thus, he meant to prove them by setting be- fore them, in a conditional form, the connexion between obedience and reward. The Sinai Covenant, also de- signed to prove Israel, was conditional. ‘“ If ye will obey my voice, then ye shall be” so andso. So David to Solomon:—*“ And thou Solomon, my son, know thou the God of thy father, and serve him with a per- fect heart and a willing mind, for the Lord searcheth all hearts, and understandeth the imaginations of the thoughts: if thou seek him he will be found of thee ; but, if thou forsake him, he will cast thee off for ever.” So Azariah to king Asa:—‘‘ Hear ye me, Asa, and all Judah, and Benjamin! the Lord is with you, while ye be with him; and if ye seek him he will be found of you; but if ye forsake him, he will forsake you.” And innu- merable other places. So in the New Testament, the conditionality is expressed or implied in the following places :—‘‘ He that believeth on the Son hath life, but he that believeth not the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth upon him.” “ He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved; but he that believeth ON PROBATIONARY GOVERNMENT. ray not, shall be damned.” « Repent and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out,” &. And many other places. Thus, God will have witness borne :—to have this witness borne, there must be probation; and in order to this probation, the connexion of “the life and the death, the good and the evil,’ must be stated condi- tionally, and thus the free choice of the one or the other will determine the character.* The Divine wisdom and advantages of the proba- tionary government above insisted on, will appear from the following considerations :— 1. Admitting of all sorts of means and motives to induce to obedience, on the failure of them it makes man to know what was in his heart, and so tends to humble him, and prepare him for something better. We no longer wonder that the Scriptures should exhort men to reading, hearing, praying, &c., as means of reli- gion,—or that it employs promises and threatenings, exhortations and expostulations, as motives to religion ; for they are not only suited to our rational nature, but to our accountable condition ; and they serve to prove man’s temper or disposition towards God. And, since God has afforded such an abundance of means, and urged such a variety of motives for obedience, * The necessary connexion of things occasions that the promises &e., belonging to God’s spiritual Israel under the dispensation of special grace, hereafter to be considered, are given in a conditional form: such as ‘‘ If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love” —* Tf ye continue in the faith,” &c.—“ If ye [believers at Rome] live after the flesh, ye shall die.” But then grace is given to fulfil such condition. Not belonging, however, to the probationary government here treated of, such promises are not inserted here. 78 THE RECONCILER. both to the * law of works” and to the “law of faith,” as well under the Jewish as Christian dispensation ; and in both cases they have proved ineffectual, when man has been left in the hand of his own counsel; we see a character of infamy stamped upon man that has a tendency to Humble us as in the dust. ‘This, in fact, seems to have been Jehovah’s design in regard to Israel, even to “humble them and to prove them, and to do them good in their latter end.” And, indeed, when we consider that, knowing in himself that he had used such an abundance of means and motives, he could turn round upon them.and appeal to all beholders, and say, ‘Judge, I pray you, betwixt me and my vineyard, what could have been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done in it ?” they must needs be humbled, and ashamed that, instead of ‘ bringing forth good grapes, they had brought forth wild grapes!” Thus this system, admitting so of means and motives, and proving so fully man’s evil temper towards his Creator and King, tends to humble ; which, all that are taught of God know to be wisdom,—know to be an advantage in the case of man. 2. The design of God to bear testimony to himself by the probation of man, supposed in this proba- tionary system of government, accounts for the uni- versal aspect of the gospel revelation. Whether men hear or forbear, the gospel of the kingdom was to be preached in all the world, and to every creature, and that for a testimony (ets wapripiov.) And being so uni- versally preached, it would prove man, and it would be a testimony for God. 3. This probationary manner accounts for the ad- ON PROBATIONARY GOVERNMENT. 79 dresses made to the human will and to human agency in Scripture. It accounts for the exhortations, for the promises and threatenings, for the expostulations and entreaties, that so much abound therein, and for all the other moral motives that are presented to the mind there. Thus considered, there appears to be wisdom and propriety in such addresses, although God fore- knew that they would not be successful. They would prove what was in man, and though they would be a witness against him as to the perverseness of his temper and disposition, yet they would be a witness for God that he had not been wanting, not only as an equitable but as a benevolent Governor, on his part. 4, And finally, it would prepare for the superadded dispensation of sovereign grace, yet to be eXercised, as we shall see in the Second Part of this work. Having now completed those preliminary disserta- tions that bear upon the system, as tending to explain and confirm its several parts, we now proceed to the consideration of the system itself. PAR Td. ON THE EQUITABLE AND BENEFICENT, BUT PROBATIONARY GOVERNMENT OF GOD; OR, A VIEW OF THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT OF MAN, AS DESIGNED FOR A TESTIMONY BETWEEN GOD AND MAN, AND THERE- FORE NECESSARILY PROBATIONARY AND CONDITIONAL IN ITS ADMI- NISTRATION. [Zé is earnestly requested that the foregoing Dissertations be read, prior to the consideration of the scheme proposed in the following pages, since they not only throw a light upon the subject, but it cannot be rightly understood with- out them.] Ir may throw light on the subject to state, first, the BASIS and BEARINGS of such a view of the Divine government. BASIS. It rests upon three propositions. 1. That it was fit and proper that the great Jehovah, since of Him and ¢hrough Him are all things, should ‘“‘make all things for himself,” for his own glory. 2. That it is but equity, doing justice to himself, giving himself the glory due unto his name, that he should manifest to his intelligent creation, angels and men, the following things, viz.: the infinite disparity that subsists between Him and the creature—the crea- ture’s absolute dependence upon the Creator for his being and well-being —that, while the former is neces- sarily mutable and corruptible, the latter alone is necessarily immutable, He being “ the incorruptible God’—and that there is “but, one good, that is, God.” ON PROBATIONARY GOVERNMENT. 8] 3. That this restrmony would not have been borne to Himself without suffering His creatures, though under all possible advantages, to show themseives ; which could be done in no other way than by a system of PROBATION ; which also necessarily required that the creature should be dealt with conditionally, and be left “ in the hand of his own counsel.” These three considerations being admitted, it is deduced — That the government of God over man, whether without or with a written revelation, whether by a “‘ law of works” or a “law of faith,’ was designed for a Testimony ; that, in order that it might be for a testimony, tt was made probationary; and that it might be probationary, it was conditional. EXPLANATION. 1. When we say—-that God designed his govern- ment of man for a ¢estimony, we mean, that, whether man regard or disregard, ‘‘ hear or forbear,” God intended to bear witness to himself of the equity and benevolence of that government; so that at least he might have his due, “‘the glory due to his name;” as when it is said, in reference to Israel’s unbelief and unfaithfulness, ‘“‘ Let God be true, but every man a liar ;” and with regard to their unrighteousness, “That thow mightest be justified in thy sayings, and condemn when thou art judged.” As also when he appeals thus, “‘ What could have been done to my vine- yard that I havenot done in it ?” as if he hadsaid, ** What could have been done in a way of means and motives suited to a probationary system, and designed to bear G 82 THE RECONCILER. testimony between us, more than I have done ?” By which mode of procedure, God shows that the failure was not in him, but in them; and that “to him belonged righteousness, but to them confusion of face ;” and that, if mercy should hereafter be shown, it must be, not for the sake of man, but “ for his own name’s sake,” as ‘‘ merciful,” and as “ keeping mercy for thousands.” 2. By a system of probation, we mean, a system by which, whatever favours are granted, or duties re- quired, or motives presented, man, as on trial, should be left to his own will, or “in the hand of his own counsel ;” whether he will obey or disobey, receive or reject ; and that thus he becomes proved. 3. By the system being conditional, we mean, that the reward and punishment, the “ good and evil,” the “‘ blessing and cursing,” the “ life and death,” are suspended upon obedience or disobedience, whether as to the “law of works,” or the “ law of faith ;” in other words, the law or the gospel. And it is supposed that the man is left free as to his choice, since if the act of obedience or disobedience were not his own, it would not become his trial, or he would not be proved thereby ; and so the desired testimony would not ‘be borne for God. And, though the divine goodness superinduce, exhortations and com- mands, promises and threatnings, expostulations and warnings, entreaties and lamentations, to operate upon him by way of motives, which, as well suited to an intellectual and sensitive nature, are very properly admissible in such a system; yet still, the mind must be left free ; since, if God, in a-system merely proba- ON PROBATIONARY GOVERNMENT. 83 tionary, were to influence the will in the least degree, he would so far infringe the liberty of the creature in such a system of probation. Besides, if he influence one, he must influence all, and all in an equal degree. And, then, where would be the trial or probation ? So much for the basis of our subject—now for its bearings, which we shall see are of the advantageous kind. BEARINGS. 1. It bears on the character, both of God and man, gwing to each their due, as stated in the foregoing propositions; and thus may be called a system of equity. For, witness is hereby fairly borne as to both God and man. 2. While the plan shows that God is not chargeable with man’s fall im Adam, or his subsequent trans- gression and disobedience ; 7 yustifies him in his non- enterference to prevent the one or the other ; masmuch as it shows that had he interfered, there would have been no probation, and consequently, there could have been no festimony: the consequence of which again would have been, that God would not have done justice to himself, but would have withheld from himself “ the glory due to his name.” The same remark will apply to the fall of the angels. , 3. In this view of the subject, not only do we see the great Creator and Ruler at liberty to superadd another dispensation of sovereign and effectual grace ; but it gives occasion for the most illustrious display of the glory of that grace. Is the gospel kingdom repre- sented as a marriage feast? Contemned as it is by G2 84 THE RECONCILER. those invited, God will have his guests though from the highways. Is it compared to a “ great supper ?” Slighted as it is by the “ bidden,” yet he will have his house filled, though from “ the lanes of the city,” and “ the highways and hedges.” 4. Admitting, as this probationary government does, of those exhortations and expostulations, warn- ings and beseechings, which occur in Scripture to move and persuade the sinner, it makes awfully manifest his perverseness and unpersuadableness in his resistance of all; and shows, that since it is not from want of sufficient information, or want of evi- dence of the truth of such information, or indeed from any want of just motive that he disbelieves, such unbelief arises decisively from unpersuadableness ; and that therefore, while, if he be left for condem- nation, he has his own stubbornness alone to blame for it; on the other hand, if he be made a partaker of salvation, he must ascribe it alone to sovereign mercy. o. Seeing that there is a superadded scheme of sovereign and effectual grace, which, like a current, runs through all the dispensations of God’s equitable and benevolent probationary government; this plan has the farther advantage of making Scripture con- sistent with itself, and particularly the conditional declarations and promises, with the absolute or un- conditional ones: those that relate to the government of God, as the great King, Lawgiver, and Judge, with those that relate to him asa Gracious Sovereign— those that show that ‘‘his ways are equal,” with those that are designed for “the praise of the glory of his grace.” 85 CHAPTER I. ON GOD, THE ‘‘ GREAT KING;” HIS CHARACTER, AND THE CHARACTER OF HIS GOVERNMENT. Section I. On the Character of the King, and of His Government. How important first to be well established on this part of our subject! Let us take a view of it. «Tam a great King, saith the Lord of hosts.” He is “the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords.” With reverence and godly fear, therefore, should this subject be approached. But it is important and necessary for the proper discussion of the subject before us, that it should be approached. And how encouraged are we to attempt the acquisition of this knowledge, by that interesting passage in Jeremiah, “ Thus saith the Lord, Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, neither let the mighty man glory in his might; but let him that glorieth, glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth me that I am the Lord, which exercise loving-kindness, judgment, and righteousness in the earth: for in these things I delight, saith the Lord.” However, it should not be forgotten that no one can know God truly and effec- tively, but as the Son of God shall be pleased to reveal him. For thus he says—‘‘ All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son but the Father: neither knoweth any man the Father save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.” Son of God, therefore, reveal the 86 THE RECONCILER. Father tous! In thy light may we see light on this great subject ! As to the nature or essence of God, that is declared most decisively by himself in the following striking expressions :—‘* God is a spirit ;” “ God is light ;” ‘God is love ;” “ the blessed ;” “ the life ;” “* God is a consuming fire.” Nor can any mode of expression more fully indicate the nature of Him “ with whom we have to do,’ or his most perfect excellence. Let us therefore never lose sight of such a representation of him, in the investigation before us. And, while we think of this most excellent nature, let us not fail to attach to it that this great Being is existence itself, eternally existent, infinitely so, unchangeably so, and indeed sovereignly and independently so. And this leads us to the consideration of that great name by which he is designated “ Jehovah ;” and its kindred names “ Jah” and “ Ehjeh.” “ Jehovah” and Jah,” we apprehend signify his existence as eternal, as though it had been said, “he will be,’—being the future of the word ™ “he was.” And its meaning seems to be thus declared, when God is designated as ‘* He who is, who was, and is to come.” “ Khjeh,” “I will be,” appears to signify his sovereign and in- dependent existence. And although 8 YY TR is rendered in our version, ‘I am that I am ;” yet, being in the future tense, its more exact rendering is, “‘T will be that I will be.’ Thus then that great Being, whose nature is as above declared, is ever existent, and independently and sovereignly so! And immensity is ascribed to him—for he “ fills heaven and earth” with his presence. ‘‘ Whither shall I go ON THE CHARACTER OF GOD. 87 from thy spirit? Whither shall I flee from thy pre- sence ?”’ This “Jehovah” is “ Gop.” As the former is a name of nature, this latter is a name of relateon— of relation to his creatures, of the charge he has over them, and his disposal of them. And this view of the term is in perfect accordance with Scripture. ‘Who is God, save Jehovah?” “ Jehovah he is the God ;” in reply to Elijah’s appeal,—“ If Jehovah be God, follow him.” The Syrians said, ‘‘ Jehovah 1s God of the hills, but he is not God of the valleys.” Thus here, as well as in many other places, there is a marked distinction between “‘ Jehovah” and ‘ God ;” a distinction too, which agrees with the explanation made of their respective meanings. This Jehovah God then, being he “‘ of whom, and through whom, and to whom are all things”—being also, “ the possessor of the heavens and the earth,” must have an absolute right to be Lord of heaven and earth,” and to be the great King, and Lawgiver, and Judge of man, And, being absolutely independent of all his creatures, and as absolutely self-sufficient, in his government of his rational creatures, not only may and will “do right,” but can have no reason for doing otherwise. Our way is now prepared for a consideration of those attributes in God which particularly belong to him as Governor of the world of rational and ac- countable creatures, called his morad attributes. “How holy is the Lord”—‘‘ Thou only art holy.” The Seraphim exclaim “ Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts, the whole earth is full of his glory.” And the S88 THE RECONCILER. four living creatures rest not day and night, saying, “ Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come.” Holiness is a love of right- eousness and a hatred of wickedness or iniquity ; and this is the rule of all his laws, and all his judicial pro- ceedings. Wherefore, in the hands of such a holy being all is secure,—all must be right. Having made his holy laws, “ his righteousness” in the administration of them is like the great mountains “immovable.” ‘Js there unrighteousness with God ? God forbid.” “Judgment and justice are the habita- tion” or basis “of his throne.” Then the administra- tion of the affairs of his glorious government is secure also, and all must be right. He will “give to every man according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings.” Nor, however ‘ unequal” man’s “ ways” may be, will his “ ways” be otherwise than “ equal.” Does he promise reward, or threaten to inflict punishment? He isa God of truth. He “ cannot lie.” ‘God is not a man that he should lie, nor the son of man that he should repent : hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?” Then every subject of his government might expect that his obedience would be rewarded, and his disobedience punished ; and thus a law, with its solemn sanctions, must be regarded. Infinite wisdom is his. Nay, he isdenominated “ the only wise God.” He needs no counsellor, for he ‘‘knoweth all things,” and “his understanding is inf- nite.” No laws that proceed from him can be founded on mistake; nor can he err in the administration of them, or in any of the measures of his government. ON THE CHARACTER OF GOD. S39 He is ‘‘abundant in goodness.” He is good unto all, and his tender mercies are over all his works— - “he is kind even to the unthankful and evil:” and re- bellious as the heathen world were, yet “‘he left not himself without witness” of this his goodness in giving them ‘‘rain from heaven and fruitful seasons, filling their hearts with food and gladness.” ‘The happy con- dition of man before his apostasy is a standing monu- ment of it. ** All power belongeth unto God.” ‘“‘Is there any- thing too hard for the Lord?” ‘ With God all things are possible.” Behold the vast creation! He made— he upholds—and can and will “subdue all things unto himself.” And to him belongeth sovereignty. ‘ Whatsoever the Lord pleased, that did he mm the heavens, and in the earth, and in all deep places.” He does what he will with his own, and ‘‘ doeth whatsoever he pleaseth among the armies of heaven and the inhabitants of the earth.” He “giveth the earth to whomsoever he will.” Yet, he exercises his sovereignty in perfect accordance with justice, and always according to the wése counsel of his own mind: of which, however, he alone is the proper judge. And, therefore, unless he chooses it, ‘‘ he giveth not account of his matters.” Another obvious remark is, that he is the [mcompre- hensible. ‘‘Canst thou by searching find out God? Canst thou find out the Almighty to perfection? It is as high as heaven, what canst thou do? deeper than hell, what canst thou know? the measure thereof is longer than the earth, and broader than the sea.” ‘‘O the depth both of the wisdom and knowledge of God: 90 THE RECONCILER. how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!” Hence, it is said, “ He holdeth back the face of his throne, and spreadeth a cloud upon it.” And again, ‘Clouds and darkness are round about him,” though “ justice and judgment are the habitation” of it. “ Verily he isa God that hideth himself.” And, though it be so, yet ought we to be satisfied, since he has revealed enough for our salvation and happiness ; and, if he “ conceal” a matter, it is his “ glory” to do so. And behold the greatness of God. ‘* Who hath mea- sured the waters in the hollow of his hand? and meted out heaven with a span, and.comprehended the dust of the earth in a measure, and weighed the mountains in scales, and the hills ina balance?” Look at the ocean—Jehovah is he, the hollow of whose hand will hold all these waters—lift up your eyes to the heavens, to him the whole expansion is but a span-breadth— survey the immense sands of Arabia, they occupy but a “measure” with him—view the lofty and extended mountains and hills, they are to him but as things that we weigh in scales or in a balance. And then as to his wisdom, and understanding, and knowledge, “ Who hath directed the Spirit of the Lord, or, being his counsellor, hath taught him? With whom took he counsel, and who instructed him, and taught him in the path of judgment, and taught him knowledge, and showed to him the way of understanding?” The kings of the earth, however exalted and absolute, need their counsellors, advise with them, and form their judg- ments by their information ; but the “ understanding” of Jehovah is “ infinite,” and can receive no addition from others. “Great is the Lord,” then, “ and of great ON THE CHARACTER OF GOD. Gi power, his understanding is infinite.” “ Behold the nations” too— they are as the drop of a bucket, and are counted as the small dust of the balance: behold, he taketh up. the isles asa very little thing.” “ And Le- banon,’”—the “forest of Lebanon”— with all its immense trees, “is not sufficient to burn for a sacrifice for him ; nor the beasts thereof,” numerous as they are, ‘‘ for a burnt.offering to him.” Itis he that ‘‘sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants therecf are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them outas a tent to dwell in.” And, ‘lift up your eyes on high, and behold who hath created these things” —those stars ; ‘‘ that bringeth out their host by number: he calleth them ail by names, by the greatness of his might, for that he is strong in power, not one faileth.” And think of the manifestations of his greatness in the facts of history—see it m the flood that he brought upon the world of the ungodly, when the win- dows of heaven were opened, and the foundations of the great deep broken up, and every mountain and hill covered with the waters! Behold how he showed his glory and his greatness on Mount Sinai, when the mount burnt with fire in the midst of black- ness, and darkness, and tempests! See it in connexion with the suffering Saviour, when the heavens were clothed with blackness, and the earth quaked, and the rocks rent! Nor are we now without its displays. While creation around continually discovers his wis- dom, and power, and goodness, he sometimes shows that ‘with him is terrible majesty’—in the volcanic mountain—in the sudden earthquake—in the wide- 92 . THE RECONCILER. wasting hurricane—and in the terrific storm of thun- der and lightning. Nor, perhaps, does his greatness appear less in that, while the world of nature seems convulsed, its whole frame and fabric remains entire, and this great globe of earth, suspended as it is, and revolving as it does in empty space, preserves its equi- librium. Would the waves of the ocean, while they toss themselves and roar, destroy it? No; for he not only “ measureth the waters in the hollow of his hand,” but he “weigheth the waters by measure.” Would the winds, in their tempestuous violence, disturb it? No— he it is that not only ‘“bringeth the wind out of his treasures,” and “ holdeth them in his fist,” but also “maketh the weight for the winds.” But we notice, also, the INDEPENDENCE of God asa security against his injustice. The Scriptural repre- sentation is, that so far from “ needing anything, he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things.” “ Who hath first given to the Lord ?” for “ of him and through him are all things.” ‘‘ Can aman be profitable unto God, as he that is wise may be profitable unto himself? Is it any pleasure to the Almighty that thou art right- eous? or is it gain to him that thou makest thy ways perfect?” <‘ Look into the heavens and see; and be- hold the clouds which are higher than thou. If thou sinnest, what doest thou against him ? or if thy trans- gressions be multiplied, what doest thou unto him ? If thou be righteous, what givest thou him? or what receiveth he of thine hand? Nor has he less the disposal of all, or the control of all. “If he cut off, and shut up, or gather together, then who can hinder him?” “ He doeth according to his will in the army of ON THE CHARACTER OF GOD. 93 heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou 2? And he who, at the first creation, said, ‘‘ Let there be light, and there was light”—-who “spake, and it was done, who commanded, and it stood fast ;” can net- ther want, or be dependent on any for strength. ‘Thus, then, if we should hereafter consider God as the great King, and Lawgiver, and Judge, we may rest assured that he would not act unjustly because he felt himself unable to maintain the right—that he would not be unequitable because he had anything to hope for as a bribe, or to fear as the consequence of his judg- ment: and hence, that that ‘‘love of righteousness and hatred of iniquity,” which is essential to his cha- racter, would, in connexion with his nature, as “ light” and as “love,” have its full operation in all his pur- poses, and plans, and judgements. Lastly, we rejoice to find, that he actually is ‘* the INcoRRUPTIBLE God.” So he is termed by the Apostle Paul. The heathen “changed the glory of the incor- ruptible God into an image made like unto corruptible man.” Not only is he “immortal,” and so cannot die, but he is immutable and incorruptible, and so cannot change or corrupt. What greater satisfaction could his subjects have? Well might he be called “ the Rock,” and “ the rock of ages.” Nor are all these things said of God as though they were accidental or adventitious, but they are ESSENTIAL to his nature—he is thus perfect and incorruptible by a necessity of nature. Hence it is said—He cannot do iniquity. —“ He cannot lie.”—He cannot deny him- self. Froma necessity of nature he loves righteousness 94 THE RECONCILER. and hates iniquity—from the same necessity, he loves truth and cannot lie. And sucha necessarily perfect, immortal, and incorruptible being as this, when standing in the relation of the “Great King” must necessarily be a holy, just, and good “ Lawgiver’—must neces- sarily ordain << holy, just, and good” laws, and, acting as “ Judge of all the earth,” must necessarily do right. And before we enter upon this great subject, it may assist our inquiry, and minister to that devotional spirit with which it should be conducted, if we, besides the character of the King himself, meditate also a little upon that of his Government. In no language can that character be described, as to its principles, better than in the words of Scripture, wherein it is declared to be “holy, just, and good.” For what is the meaning of such a description? ‘That it is an equitable and beneficent government. It is “holy ;” that is, it is founded on a love of right and a hatred of wrong—it is “just ;” that is, it is equitable in its administration, giving to every one his due—it is “ good ;” that is, it is beneficial in its operation and tendency. And what more satisfactory can be said of the principles of any government? And what a sublime and glorious idea of the government itself is given us by Bildad in the Book of Job!* “ Dominion and fear are with him, he maketh peace in his high places. Is there any number of his armies? and upon whom doth not his light arise ?” Conceive of an earthly king—say Ahasuerus, who was over one hundred and twenty- seven provinces ; “dominion” he had, and very exten- sive— suppose for a moment, that such was his character, that every one stood in awe of his word, that in his * Job xxv. ON THE CHARACTER OF GOD. 95 presence no one could trifle, that no one could do a dis- honourable action, no one utter an idle word, such was the “fear” that his character inspired—conceive again, that, amidst all the provinces of his vast domi- nion, such awe is felt, such equity and wisdom of admi- nistration are observed, and such satisfaction is given, that he “maketh peace” to pervade the whole of his dominion—conceive moreover, that so numerous and powerful are his armies, that no enemy dare disturb that peace—and finally, suppose, that of all the innu- merable multitude of his subjects, there is no one that is not cheered with the beneficence, the ‘ light” of his government—what a government would this be! Well, though, alas! no such government as this is found among men, yet such is the government of God: perfectly so in heaven, and would be so on earth were it not for the sin of man! And such are its principles, such is its tendency, abstractedly considered. Yes, “dominion” is with him, not derivatively, but absolutely and independently ; and “ everlasting” dominion too. ‘‘ Fear” is with him, for there is every thing in him to inspire a delightful “reverence and godly fear.” He ““maketh peace in his high places,” complete satisfaction with him and with each other, arising from the wisdom, and equity, and loving-kindness of his administration there—no fear of disturbance there, for ‘ thousand thousands stand before him” ready to execute his plea- sure; and where is there one that is not cheered, that is not “full of joy from his countenance?” Such is the character of the government of God, whether in heaven or on earth; although the sin of man has changed its operation. 96 THE RECONCILER. All rightly-disposed beings must therefore rejoice that God “reigneth ;” that he “ whose name alone is Jehovah, zs the Most High over all the earth.” Section II. God's Ultimate End—his Glory ; which indeed is also the Happi- ness of ali that submit to his Government. Man, when he forms a thing, does it to subserve his own purpose: and why should not the great Creator form for himself? What end besides could he have? Should he set himself aside for his creature? “‘ Where wast thou,” said the Almighty to Job, “ when I laid the foundation of the earth 2” Posing, humbling question, quite sufficient to set aside the selfish pre- tensions of man! Moreover, it would appear that the glory of God involves the happiness of man ; and that since ‘‘ the knowledge of God is eternal life, the more his glory appears, and the knowledge of that glory is possessed, the more abundant will be that eternal life. But what saith the Scripture? ‘To the law and to the testimony.’ What saith it in regard to creation work? Not only does it say, “ Of him and through him are all things, but fo him.” Again, “ For whom are all things,” as well as, “ by whom are all things.” And again, “The Lord hath made all things for him- self.” Hence the redeemed sing, ‘‘ Thou art worthy,” thou who “ sittest upon the throne, to receive glory and honour and power, for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.” The redemption of Israel out of Egypt, the same. ‘ And GOD'S ULTIMATE END. 97 ’ what one nation,” says David, ‘in the earth is like thy people, even like Israel, whom God went to redeem for a people to himself, and to make him a name?” So the formation of Israel as a people: “For as the girdle cleaveth to the loins of a man, so have I caused to cleave unto me the whole house of Israel, and the whole house of Judah, saith the Lord ; that they might be unto me for a people, and for a name, and for a praise, and for a glory.” Why, again, his judgments on stubborn transgressors? Such as Pharaoh, for instance: ‘“ And in very deed, for this cause have I raised thee up, for to show in thee my power, and that my name may be declared throughout all the earth.’ So also upon stiff-necked Israel, when about to be visited for their rebellion: ‘ As truly as I live, saith the Lord, all the earth shall be filled witl, the glory of the Lord.” The redemption of Israel Jrom Babylon was also to show forth God's glory, and particularly his mercy and power. His mercy, “I have chosen thee in the furnace of affliction. For mine own sake, even for mine own sake, will I do it, for how should my name be polluted? and I will not give my glory to another.” And again: “ Thus saith the Lord God, I do not this for your sakes, O house of Israel, but for mine holy name’s sake, which ye have polluted among the heathen, whither ye went. And I will sanctify my great name.” More striking still: “» is used for the race, as well as for Adam the person; and also for Adam and Eve, as one by marriage, though distinct persons of the race. The Hebrew word too has no plural. Hence in Prov. viii. 4, it is sons of man, ox, not “sons of men,” row: That the fate of Adam’s posterity was involved in his, is another argument in favour of the proposition insisted on. Of this no one can reasonably doubt, who attentively reads what the apostle Paul says about it in his epistles to the Romans, and to the Corin- PROBATION AS RESPECTS ADAM. 137 thians.* Nor is it less clear that Adam and his posterity were alike included in the blessing,—in the command to ‘be fruitful and replenish the earth,” and also to “‘subdue it,’—in the grant of dominion, and also of food,—and in the institution of the sabbath, and of marriage. If mvolved then in a common /fa¢e, they must be under a common daw. But in stating the nature of this administration, we have called Adam a covenant head. Why? Because not only did ‘the Lord God command the man,” but we conceive, that a covenant promise was virtually made to him, that, on condition of his obedience, he should “live for ever.” In proof of this, we shall not insist on the argument drawn from that passage in Hosea,t as some have done, ‘‘ They like Adam have transgressed the covenant,” though we by no means feel disposed altogether to concede it. But we would observe, that the very threatening of death, in con- nexion with the existence of ‘“ the tree of life” implies it, When God would exclude man from Paradise, he assigns as a reason for it, ‘‘ Lest he put forth his hand and eat of the tree of life, and live for ever :” from whence is it not most natural to suppose that, whereas the “tree of knowledge” was placed in the midst of the garden, as the test of obedience,—and a warning, lest they should cause themselves to know evil as well as good, or suffer death in case of disobedience,— the “ tree of life” was placed by its side, as a pledge of life in case of obedience ? Indeed, what else could it be placed there for? It is evident, that it was not one of “ the trees of the garden” of which our first * Rom. v.; 1 Cor. xv. + Hos. vi. 9. 138 THE RECONCILER. parents might “ freely eat ;” but, it ts probable, that it was placed by the side of the “ tree of knowledge” as a sign, or token of something, in the same manner as that was. Moreover, its counterpart the “ tree of life,” in the heavenly Paradise, is represented in much the same light in the book of Revelations.* And, from the whole, we may gather that the “ tree of life” was a virtual covenant promise of life on condition of obedience ; and that, therefore, Adam was not only a head, but a covenant head to his posterity, considered as comprehended in him, being ‘‘ in his loins ;” as afterwards, in another case, Levi was said to be “ in the loins of Abraham.” The obvious result of the constitution above in- sisted on would be, that if Adam stood, his posterity would stand; and that if Adam fell, they would fall, on the ground that the conduct of the representative would be considered as the conduct of those whom he represented. That such a constitution was not only a just, but a wise and good one, will appear from the following considerations. The whole human nature was then in Adam, as the oak in the acorn, and the branches of a tree in the root ; and so had in him its firmest standing. Thus, a tree with its root has a firmer standing against the wind, than any single branch of that tree. The motives, or the considerations that move to obedience, were stronger in him than they could be in any one of his posterity ; indeed, were in the greatest possible strength, for all the links of the long chain of his posterity, as to their welfare, were suspended upon * Rev. iil. and xxil. PROBATION AS RESPECTS ADAM. 139 him ; which could not be said of them, or of any one of them: and when we consider that all depended on his holding fast to his Creator, or not, we must see that such was the case. To speak in plain and popular language, so as that no one can misunderstand—we say, that the nature of man, and the condition of man- kind, had its best possible chance in Adam. No one individual of man, in successive generations, could possibly have so many, and so great interests involved in his conduct as he had ; and therefore, if any one of the human race was likely to maintain his integrity, he was that individual, because he must have a greater inducement to it than any other possibly could. Be- sides, Adam and Eve, though one by marriage, were two persons, and had two separate minds, and wills; therefore, in a sense, mankind were held to their Creator according to this constitution, by a two-fold link, which is not so easily broken as one. Thus then, the constitution whereby Adam and his posterity were one in law, or federal relation, was wise and good, yea, the best, as it appears to us, that could be established, and therefore with it we should be satisfied. We say satisfied, for had it been possible that all the human race could have been gathered together, to consult on the best method of securing the innocence of the human nature, it cannot be rea- sonably supposed, that, as long as their minds were uncorrupted, they would have objected to it, but on the contrary, must have approved of it. The benevolence of the Adamic constitution will be still more apparent, if we consider that God entered into a covenant of life with our first parents, promising 140 THE RECONCILER. them eternal life upon condition of obedience: for a creature, by the law of his creation, is bound to obedience, whether he have a reward promised or not; and all that he can expect, in mere equity, is creation goodness, or sustentation and ease, so long as he does exist. The next thing that demands our consideration is— 3. Man’s probation in Adam. Man, having ample means of information, for the knowledge of God and his will, as well as sufficient motives to obedience,—having also the power of con- sideration and freedom of choice, together with a resource in his Maker’s help, in case of need,—is now reminded of his subjection by a command from his Maker, prohibiting him to eat of a certain tree ; not however without an intimation by the tree of life, that; if he proved obedient, he might eat of that, and live for ever. His fidelity is afterwards put to the trial, by “the old serpent, the Devil and Satan,” emphatically called ‘ the tempter,” coming to tempt our mother Eve, and by her, our father Adam. It is not necessary for us here to enter into the details of that event; suffice it to say, that by engendering a spirit of discontent and disbelief, (as in the case of Adam’s posterity) the adversary succeeded, and thus occasioned that “ disobedience,” that ‘“ transgression,” that “offence,” which was punished with ‘“* condem- nation” and “death!” But why, Adam, didst thou thus fall? Hadst thou, under a sense of thy creaturely dependence, sought to thy Maker for help in this new exigence, doubtless he would have enabled thee to frustrate the murderous design of thy enemy, and to Se ee — ee eS PROBATION AS RESPECTS ADAM. 141 have vanquished him. But, we see no such appli- cation; and perhaps, therefore, to the want of an acknowledgment of man’s absolutely dependant con- dition, may be attributed the first sin of man, as well as the progress and operation of sin ever since! Certain it is, however, that the last Adam acted other- wise: Ae dwelt in the secret place of the Most High— he said of the Lord, ‘‘ He is my refuge and my fortress ; my God, in him will I trust :” therefore was he ‘* deli- vered from the snare of the fowler’—‘* he made the Most High his habitation: therefore no evil befel him.” Oh man, know now, at least, that God in Christ is all, and that thou art nothing; and seek to him as thy fortress, andthy habitation, and thou art safe. And what was the ‘‘ gdgment” that came on these our first parents “to condemnation ?” or what was “the death >” Revert to the history of the fall. See the eyes of their mind opening to know “evil,” or misery now, as well as “good,” or happiness. See them sinking under the conscious frown of their almighty Creator, into a state of shame and fear, such as prompted them to fly like guilty culprits from the pre- sence of their Maker! And, oh! who sees not in this also a darkened understanding, and an alienated heart ? And, since before this disobedience, “ they were both naked, and were not ashamed ;” who sees not in their anxiety now to cover their nakedness, a consciousness of irregular desire or feeling? To these natural consequences succeed the judicial. Behold them arraigned at the bar of God; hear sentence passed upon them respectively ; see them driven from their happy state in Paradise! And, as 142 THE RECONCILER. darkness came upon their “ spirit,” or understanding, and tribulation and anguish upon their “soul,” so a sentence was passed upon the “body,” though with a reprieve. They lost also that happy communion with their Maker, which they before enjoyed. And thus was fulfilled the threatening that ‘in the day they ate of the forbidden fruit, they should die;” lose their happy condition, and fall into a state of unhappiness. An inspired Apostle assures us, that “‘ by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin ;” that through the offence of one, many are dead: that ‘“‘ by one man’s offence, death reigned by one ;” that “ the judgment was by one to condemnation ;” and that “‘ by the offence of one, judgment came unto (ets) all men to condemnation.” Therefore, in this fatal affair, as proved before, we are all concerned. 4. The Testimony. In considering this part of the administration of the Divine government, we pro- ceed to the testimony, that God’s “ ways were equal and good,” but that man’s “ ways were unequal and evil.” First then, as to God. Besides creation good- ness, and besides that ‘“ God made man upright,” he placed him in the most delightful circumstances, only requiring of him due subjection to, and acknowledg- ment of his Maker and ruler. When he required these, he not only dealt with him on the foot of equity, | that is, as long as he should conduct himself well to continue him in his present happy state; but, by an additional act of sovereign goodness, exhibited to him the enjoyment of eternal life. And thus he might say, as he afterwards said to the Jews, ‘ What could have been done more that I have not done per PROBATION WITHOUT REVELATION. 143 Now let us look at man. In the face of all these advantages, ‘‘not deceived,” Adam became voluntarily and presumptuously disobedient. It is true, God might, by an act of sovereign gracious interposition, have prevented the temptation, or when tempted, might have sovereignly upheld ; but then, where would have been the probation ? Where would have been the mani- festation of the Creator and the creature? Where would have been the occasion for the display of the glories of redemption, or of subsequent sovereign goodness? And, be it observed, our first parents did not ask for such sovereign interposition. And, as to the posterity of Adam being included in the fall, it has been shown already, that to invest the responsibility of the human nature in the first of the race, was the safest and the best plan that could be devised, such a plan, indeed, as might be expected from a being of such infinite wisdom and benevolence. The testimony then borne, is, that God’s “ ways are equal” and good, and man’s ways unequal and evil. Section II. God's probationary Government in its Administration towards the World without a written Revelation. Man, although fallen, was yet a governable and an accountable creature, for he had yet a capacity of knowing God and his will so as to “glorify him and be thankful,” and the means of such knowledge—he yet had a power of consideration so as to know what would be for his happiness or misery; and he had still the natural faculty of willing freely or as he liked, choosing what might promote the former, or refusing what might 144 THE RECONCILER. occasion the latter—or, in other words, he knew how to ‘‘refuse the good, and choose the evil’—moreover, there was a resource for him in God in case of needed help. Let us, then, now take a view of man’s condition —of his probation—and then of the ¢estimony borne on the result of such probation under this administration. 1. Man’s condition without written revelation. It will be allowed us to premise here that the Christian world in general does not appear to be sufficiently aware, not only of the extent to which gospel blessings were exhibited and moral obligations inculcated in the heathen world, but of the extent to which the means of information were afforded them, in reference to the knowledge of Godand his will. Without the inclosure of the invisible church in the descendants of Abraham, all are usually considered as outcasts, and as indiscri- minately perishing; but, if the Apostle Peter had thought so, would he have remarked, that “‘in every nation he that feareth God and worketh righteousness is accepted with him?” Does not this remark imply, in the connexion of the words at least, that he sup- posed there were such characters in other nations, besides in that of the Jewish nation? It is true, that there might be few—it is true also, that they would not be accepted, but in the name of the originally pro- mised Redeemer—but who can say, that such charac- ters might not believe the original promise, and who can say, that it might not produce in them, as with us, a God-fearing life, though they knew not the identical person, or when or where he should come? We admit also, that the Apostle informs us that God “left all na- tions to walk in their own ways”’—but his saying so, in PROBATION WITHOUT REVELATION. 145 reference to later times—‘‘ times past,’—does not prove that he considered him as having thus left them ever since the fall. It was not so during that period of 1656 years before the Flood; for we read of God's ‘“‘ holy prophets since the world began,”—and not only so, but of his Spirit striving with them. Nor was it so during that subsequent period of near 1000 years after the Flood to Moses; for not only did the Lord “smell a sweet savour’ in Noah’s burnt-offering for the world, —not only did he promise not to drown it again, and give a token of mercy in the rainbow, and in the regu- lar succession of seasons for man’s good,—but God blessed Noah and his sons as the new progenitors of the human race, and “established his covenant with Noah and his sons, and their seed after them.” Nor, in any period, or in any respect, did he abandon the world till they abandoned him,—nor even then; for though Israel were separated as a peculiar people above all other nations, yet all the rest were peoples under his equita- ble and benevolent government still. It was not until the Heathen failed to “ glorify God as God” —“ became vain in their imaginations” —“ changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corrupt- ible man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things,” that ‘God gave them up to unclean- mess and vile affections :” it was not until “they did not like to retain God in their knowledge” that he “gave them over to a reprobate mind.” It was not, in fact, from any unwillingness in God to bless them; but it was because, as the same Apostle intimates, that they were disobedient or unpersuadable* to God,—first, as to * Rom. xi. 32. (drecbeic.) L 146 THE RECONCILER. the “work of the law written by him in their heart ;” and secondly, as to the knowledge they had of God from “the things that are seen;” and thirdly, as to faith in the promised Redeemer, handed down to them by tradition. 'Then—and as such—they were “left to walk in their own ways.” We observe, then,— (1.) As to the means of information in general, fallen man and the nations were not wholly abandoned. So far from it, God made the first overtures after the fall. Our first parents fled from him, but he called them; and though he judged them, yet he promised them a Saviour, and clothed them; thus presenting the antidote as soon as the poison was received. For the sake of giving the subject clearness. and interest, | will then suppose myself an Antediluvian, living during the 1656 years that elapsed before the Flood; a period in which, from the longevity of man, tradition would be certain. Thus circumstanced, I have a day of rest sanctified and blessed by my Maker, in which I am led to meditate on him and his works, with places of assembly where I have ‘the presence of the Lord ;”—I have a prophet or prophets, by whose mouth I hear truths and promises concerning the coming Redeemer—sacrifices are offered to prefigure him, and priests appointed to intercede for me ; and a distinction is made between clean and unclean animals, to instruct me in morals ;— and [ am moreover taught by a most expressive event, even that of the translation of Enoch, that there is another and a better world, and, together with it, that there will be a final day of judgment, when ‘‘the Lord will come with ten thousands of his saints” to judge the world. Moreover the Spirit of God by the word of PROBATION WITHOUT REVELATION. 147 the prophets, in connexion with his power upon my conscience and my thoughts, strives with me. Thus a fallen world was favoured. I will next suppose myself a Postdiluvian, or one living from the time of the Flood to that of Moses. And here I find things remaining as before—nothing withdrawn but the additional lesson of the flood; which, together with the disorders occasioned on the earth’s surface, furnish me with a constant demonstration of God’s abhorrence of sin, and his righteous vengeance on sinners. I find Noah’s burnt offering, and the still continued practice of sacrificing proves to me a perma- nent memorial of the original promise, and the division of time into weeks, at the end of which the Sabbath of the Lord I find so observed as to maintain the true re- ligion in the world. Hence, proceeding on to the time of Abraham, I see a Melchisedec priest of the Most High God,—and soon afterwards, a Job offering up sacrifices, as also his friends living in his days; I see the rite of purification for sin at the sight of the ‘* Levia- than,” or in times of alarm and danger at occurring events.* ‘There are those that “go by the way” for in- structing, and “the commandment of God's mouth,’’ and “ the law of God’s mouth” to be regarded. I hear Job speaking of a Redeemer living, and his resurrec- tion—of “day and night coming to an end”—of the ‘day of wrath’—of the resurrection of the dead and * Job xxi. 45, Frightened, and conscience reproving, they betook themselves to the rite of purification, which we believe obtained from the beginning, as well as that of sacrificing. See Gen. xxxv. 2. N.B.—The word there is the very same as that used after the Jewish ritual was instituted in the LXX. Eo 148 THE RECONCILER. of the annihilation of the heavens. These, then, are the means of religion that I have, even irrespective of those granted to the visible church in Abraham and his family and posterity. And, surely then, I cannot say that God had abandoned the world at this period, how- ever they might abandon him. Nor is that all: where have wea more striking illustration of the doctrine of mediation than thcse we have in the first and last chap- ters of the book of Job? Thus, then, we find that from the flood to the time of Moses, a period of eight or uine hundred years, the world was not destitute of means of information as to gospel truths ; and from the time of Moses until Christ they had their sacrifices, altars, priests, purifications, &c. Indeed, nothing was withdrawn from them; but they neglected, and perverted what had been given to them. And although, after the lapse of 2500 years, an inclosure was made, called by the Apostle, a ‘‘ mid- dle wall of partition,” yet, that was not an inclosure of EXCLUSION so much as an inclosure of preservation. For, why did God make that inclosure? in other words, why did he establish a visible church in the posterity of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob? Not that the true religion might be limited, but that it might not be wholly lost in the world. Hence, the door was open for proselytes from any quarter of the world. ‘The gospel promise was given first to Adam, then to Noah: it was not taken away, but secured in the line of Shem; then again, it was secured in the line of Abra- ham, afterwards of Isaac, and lastly, of Jacob ; as if God should say ‘Though men reject me, yet will I have a remnant—a church and people in the world.” Nor, PROBATION WITHOUT REVELATION. 149 (2) Were they destitute of the knowledge of their duty. The Apostle Paul in the 2d chapter of his Epistle to the Romans states the “judgment of God” thus: ~—* To them, who, by patient continuance in well- doing, seek for glory, and honour, and immortality ; eternal life: But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness ; indig- nation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that worketh evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile. But glory, honour and peace to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile.’ Now this judgment being applied to the Gen- tiles shows, that they knew the law upon which such judgment proceeded, which appears from the sequel of this discourse to have been the fact ; for, says the same Apostle, ‘The Gentiles which have not the law (writ- ten) do by nature the things contained in the law,” being ‘“‘a law unto themselves : which shew the work of the law written in their hearts.” Thus, from God they were instructed in their duty ; and they had the in- structions of men too. On this latter we may be al- lowed to enlarge a little. In the patriarchal age, although we have no record of the manner in which instruction was communicated, excepting that-in gene- ral it is said, that the Lord spake of the Messiah “ by his holy prophets,” yet we find that to Abraham God had communicated his ‘“‘charge, his commandments, his statutes, and his laws.” In the book of Job, who lived probably not long after Abraham, we have many notices of such instruction. Why else does Eliphaz exhort Job to “‘ receive the law from God’s mouth, and 150 THE RECONCILER. lay up his words in his heart,” if such law and sucli words were not in existence among them, and indeed familiar to them both 2? What does Job mean when he speaks of the “commandment of God’s lips,” and of the “word of his mouth which he esteemed more than his necessary food,” if there were no sort of revelation amongst them, or at least such tradition as answered its purpose? And, in after ages, whence the “ golden sayings” of Pythagoras that are come down to us ?— Whence the morals of the heathen philosophers, espe- cially those of Epictetus, and Marcus Antoninus, and of Seneca? It would be easy to collect a variety of passages from the heathen writers on the moral virtues, which are truly excellent, and perfectly accordant with Scripture. Indeed it has been done in a well-known work entitled “ Selectee e Profanis Scriptoribus His- tori.” And, as to their wise men, had they not their Zoroaster, their Plato, their Pythagoras, their Socrates, and their Seneca? Who knows not also that it was customary for their wise men to travel into Egypt, and that not unfrequently through the land of Israel, to get information from the priests and others? ‘These things prove, then, that the Gentiles had a knowledge to a certain extent of God’s will and their duty, although without the inclosure of the visible church of God. They, at the same time, account for the de- claration of the Apostle, that, though “ without law,” that is written law, they “perish,” when they ‘ obey not the truth, but obey unrighteousness.” We pass on to show, that, under conviction of sin, the Gentile world was not without— 3. Means of information as to the remedy,for sin. PROBATION WITHOUT REVELATION. 151 Doubtless Adam would deliver to his children, and they again to theirs, the awful event of his fall and the promise of a great Redeemer, who should afterwards descend from their common mother. ‘This common father of mankind would also instruct them as to the design of the sacrifices of ‘the firstlings of the flock.” And, seeing Adam and his grandson Enos lived long enough to communicate with Noah, how easy would be the tradition of these great truths of man’s ruin and recovery from Adam to Noah. And then, Noah, the second father of the world, we might naturally suppose would hold the faith of the same grand events as were believed before the flood; as subsequent facts prove to have been the case. Hence, we read of his sacrificing. After the flood we are told that ‘‘ Noah builded an altar unto the Lord, and took of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl, and offered burnt offerings on the altar.” And, as he himself sacrificed, so would he en- join it on his family. Thus, afterwards, Abram, de- scended from him in the line of Shem, is often noticed as “building an altar to the Lerd; and, that he parti- cularly offered lambs, as Abel had done, on these altars, may be gathered from the simple artless question of Isaac to Abraham his father, when Abraham was on his way to offer him up for a burnt offering—‘‘ My father, behold the fire and the wood: but where is the lamb for a burnt offering 2” From Abraham again to Moses, we have something of the history of that period in that most ancient of all books, the book of Job—and what do we find there? That, perhaps not less than three hundred years before the partition or security wall of the Mosaic dispensation was raised between God's 152 THE RECONCILER. Israel and the world,—that there was knowledge of a ‘ Redeemer” and a “ransom, —that it was customary to offer burnt offerings,—that purifications for sin ob- tained,—and that the doctrine of mediation was recog- nized. Before, too, “the middle wall of -partition” was placed, we find mention of ‘“ the priests of Egypt,” and “‘the priests of Midian,” which implies that these heathen people offered sacrifices and burnt incense, or made intercession for the people at that time ; as it appeared the surrounding nations contt- nued to do afterwards. From the most authentic hea- then historians and poets also, we find that the Gentile world, whether under the empire of the Egyptians, Assyrians, Medo- Persians, Grecians, or Romans, were accustomed to raise altars, to offer sacrifices, to conse- crate priests, and to use lustrations of water, and that they had their sanctuaries.* And, in their original signification, what were these ceremonies at all different from those instituted amongst the Israel of God? Originally, they taught the same things, and, how- ever, in process of time, the minds of the people of the nations became darkened, and so, probably, they knew no more of their original occasion and design than our villagers do of the popish and heathen origin of those customs that are still superstitiously observed amongst them; yet, it by no means follows, that there did not at first exist the means of information; and, to the neglect and fault of the people alone, may it be imputed that the knowledge of such occasion and design was lost among them. In conclusion, should any one ask, ‘‘ How could the * Exod, ii. 5—vii. 15. Isa xvi. 12. PROBATION WITHOUT REVELATION. P55 heathen possess such information, not having a written revelation ?”—we answer—originally by Prophets; for God raised up “holy prophets,” not only for Israel, but long before for the world, and that ‘since the world began’—by tradition, also ; for fathers taught their sons, and men would ‘ enquire of the former age, and prepare themselves to the search of their fathers” to teach them. So says Job; and if it were not so, how came the Philistines to know what God had done three hundred and fifty years before in Egypt? (Job viii. 8, 10.—1 Sam. iv. 8, vi. 6,)—and by the ¢ravels of their wise men; for Sclomon took it for granted that ‘‘the stranger which was not of God’s people Israel” would ‘come from a far country” to the land of Israel, to learn their laws, having “heard of his great name ;” —and then, fourthly, we may suppose that the frequent captivities of Israel among the heathen nations would occasion the communication of much useful knowledge from the Jew to the Gentile; and that thus, “the house of Judah and house of Israel,” as prophesied by Zechariah, would become a blessing ‘among the heathen.” To all which may be added, the testimonies that Nebuchadnezzar and Darius bore in their decrees and proclamations ‘to all people, and nations, and languages, that dwell in all the earth,” concerning the true God; as well as that in favour of the Jews, by Ahasuerus, throughout the one hundred and twenty- seven provinces of his dominion, by which many were induced to join themselves to the Jews. Such then was the condition of the Gentile world, as to their means and advantages, as to information in general, and particularly in reference to the knowledge 154 THE RECONCILER. of God’s will or their duty ; and in reference, also, to their way of relief or remedy, as “ under sin.” And it must not be forgotten, that ‘“‘ Moses, of old time, had in every city them that preached him, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath day ;” and that we often read of proselytes from among the Gentiles to the Jewish religion. 2. We pass on now to consider man’s PROBATION in the Gentile state, and the resz¢t of it. (1.) As to the old world, Moses assures us that they all had corrupted their way; and we are informed by the Apostle Peter, that they were disobedient, (dmevOeis) unpersuadable to the preaching of Noah. 2. As to the new world, or the Gentile world from Noah to Christ, we make our appeal to the three first chapters of the Epistle to the Romans, then inhabiting the most considerable city in the Gentile world ; and, of course, the most proper place to leave a testimony concerning it. And what do we find in these chapters? First, we have an enumeration of the charges brought against them—then, a statement of the law and light of nature—to this succeed rules of judgment thereon; and, lastly, the decision or sentence of judgment. And what is the sentence pronounced ? That ‘all were under sin’—that “every mouth may be stopped, and all the world become guilty before God.” To which we add the testimony of the same Apostle, that the Gentiles had not believed God; or, as the word is, had been unpersuadable to God, (Rom, xi. 32.) Nor is it unimportant to notice the steps that led to such a termination. 1. Having the knowledge of God shown him, man rebelled against PROBATION WITHOUT REVELATION. 155 the light of it, and refused to “glorify God and be thankful ;” and having the knowledge of his will, he refused to obey that will. And, in both cases, he was criminal, because he “held the truth in unright- eousness ;” for, although God had shown to him his “eternal power and Godhead” in the works that he had made, and had written the work of the law in his heart, yet he would not consider the one, or obey the other. 2. Asa natural and judicial effect, he ‘ became vain in his imaginations, and his foolish heart was darkened; losing the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in creation and providence too. 38. In this darkness he seeks fora God of sense, and falls into idolatry. 4. Men now, through the lusts of their own hearts, “‘ are drawn away to uncleanness, making their gods and goddesses patrons and examples of all abomination. 5. Given up to their own lusts, they indulge in unnatural and unseemly practices; and then, ‘‘ not liking to retain God in their knowledge,” God gives them up to a reprobate mind, from whence flows all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness, envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity, whispering, backbiting, &c. &c. Thus, by a voluntary subduction of himself from God, notwithstanding all the means and motives to the contrary, man—as he, by his first disobedience, fell under a first condemnation,—so now, disregar ding the promise or proposed remedy, and, in consequence, progressing in crime, fell under a second condem- nation. Nay, “knowing the judgment of God, that they which do such things are worthy of death; they not only did them, but had pleasure in them that did 156 THE RECONCiLER. them.” Such is the testimony of God concerning the Gentile world. 3. The testimony for God, that though man’s ways proved “unequal,” yet his ways were good and ‘‘ equal.” That the sin of man is chargeable upon man alone, the Holy Ghost teacheth us when he says, after a de- claration of his corruption before the flood, ‘ It repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.” Yes, the ways in which “all nations’ walked, were their own ways.” God had supplied them with means of information: they had light and law within—ceremonies, traditions, wise men, without; and together with these, God was continually “bearing witness of his goodness by giving them rain from heaven and fruitful seasons, and God’s Spirit striving with them.” Yet, they would “ walk in their own ways.” God’s “ ways” then were good and “equal;” but their’s were ungrateful and ‘ unequal.” They “held the truth in unrighteousness”,—sinned against light and knowledge,—and therefore, as the Apostle says, were “without excuse.” Moreover, though he might have sent his Son to condemn the world, yet he did not so; but sent him, that the world “ through him might be saved.” Section ITI. The Probationary Government in its Administration towards Tsrael, as under Written Law. 1. The conpiTron of Israel. The world at large having disregarded the original promise of a Redeemer, and having withdrawn them- PROBATION UNDER THE LAW. 157 selves from God—in order that such promise might, notwithstanding, be held in remembrance and fulfilled ; and also, that the true religion might be preserved in the world—God was pleased to “ choose Abraham and his seed, hereafter to raise up the horn of salvation” promised in their line, and to establish a visible church in their posterity. Thus, when Josephin Egypt would assign a reason for God’s conduct towards him in bringing him thither, and in exalting him as he had done, he tells his brethren that it was that he might “preserve a remnant in the earth.” And thus, for preservation, not for exclusion, he formed Israel into a peculiar people, and raised a wall of partition to secure them. This people were now the visible church, and with them he connected himself by covenant, and in- deed gave them assurance of his gracious designs towards them by repeated covenant transactions. Having promised to Abram that he would bless him, and that in him “all the families of the earth should be blessed,”—he gives soon after, by solemn engage- ment to his seed, the land of Canaan for an inherit- ance; including in it, to all who should be his seed spiritually, the grant of “an inheritance incorruptible, undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in the heavens” for them. And, at length, in the ‘* Covenant of Circumcision,” together with the renewal of former grants, engaged to be their God.* This “ Covenant of Circumcision” may be consi- dered as the great charter by which the visible church was to be incorporated—the “good olive tree” that * This great charter of their privileges they steadfastly retain to this very day, and in token of it continue to circumcise their children. ~ 158 THE RECONCILER. Jeremiah speaks of, and which the Apostle Paul so much celebrates. According to it, all blessings before promised were to be conferred on all such as kept ‘** God’s covenant and his testimonies.” ‘To such also God would be a God, as well as ‘‘ the God of their seed.” Nay, to such he would be a “father ;” and they should be his ‘‘ children.” But it was conditional on their keeping it—first, in its earthly aspect :-—if, as expressive of their faith and obedience, they ‘‘ circum- cised the flesh of their foreskin,” and outwardly obeyed his laws, they should possess the land of Canaan, and “eat the good” of it—and secondly, in its spiritual and heavenly aspect :—if they had a faith which was effective in the ‘circumcision of the heart,” called elsewhere “the circumcision of the heart to love God,” God would ‘‘ keep covenant and mercy” with them in being their God, and in giving to them the spiritual and eternal inheritance—indeed, all the blessings connected with their relation to him as their God and Father. Together with this covenant of circumcision, they had suitable laws for the regulation of their conduct. Hence we find Abraham commended because he had “kept God’s charge, his commandments, his statutes, and his laws!"* And, before the law was given from Mount Sinai, Moses made Israel ‘‘ know the statutes of God and his laws.”+ When the descendants of Abraham had become so numerous as to form a nation; having delivered them out of Egypt, God entered into a covenant with them as a people, or nation, or body politic, assuring them that “if they would obey his voice, and keep his cove- * Gen. xxvi. 5. + Exod. xviii. 16. PROBATION UNDER THE LAW. 159 nant,” they should be to him “an holy nation.” And the covenant was not only conditional, but mutual ; for both in the announcement and ratification of it, the people of Israel solemnly declared their consent, and made promise of obedience, saying, at each time, as with one voice, “‘ All that the Lord hath commanded will we do, and be obedient.” That such was the tenor of this covenant, no doubt can be entertained if we read the passages here referred to.* But this law did not set aside the Promise,— it did not supersede the Abra- hamic Covenant, as every Jew knew, and as was indi- cated by the preamble of the Sinai Covenant, “I am the Lord thy God;” whence it appears rather that the former covenant, by which God had already pro- mised to be their God, was to operate as an inducement to the observance of this latter,—as if God had said, **T Jehovah have taken thee into covenant to be thy God by the Covenant of Circumcision that I gave to thee in Abraham thy father ; now then let that be an induce- ment to thee to keep the law I give thee now, as formed into a people and a nation.” Much less could this “ law” be “against the promise ;” for its breaches would lead them to value the Saviour promised in the former, and thus prove a schoolmaster to bring to that Saviour. Such then was the moral condition of Israel as a peo- ple. They were in covenant with God by the ‘‘ Cove- nant of Circumcision” as individuals, and by the Covenant of Sinai as a people. According to the tenor of the former,—if the individual that had been circumcised believed, and sought for the blessings ex- hibited therein, he should possess them ; and, according * Exod. xix. xxiv. Jer. xi. 160 THE RECONCIiLER. to the tenor of the latter, if the people obeyed the voice of the Lord they should possess the land, and it should go well with them; while, on the other hand, if they would not obey the voice of the Lord their God, they should be driven from their land, and it should go ill with them. For thus says Moses to them, “See, I have set before thee this day, life and good, death and evil”—“I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing ; therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live.” And oh, what moteves were used to induce their obedience! Let the reader only read the book of Deuteronomy for information upon this subject. Indeed, it were to transcribe nearly the whole book to set forth this fully. The kindness their God had shown them—the wonders he had wrought for them—the “ glory, the greatness” that he had exhibited before them in giving the law—the ex- cellence of the laws themselves, and the consequences of obedience or disobedience—are all urged upon them with all the tenderness and force of which language is capable. Ner was this all. God, foreseeing their breach of covenant, aid their transgressions, gave the covenant to them “ in the hand of a mediator.” Such was Moses himself indeed; but particularly 4aron and the Priesthood. The High priest, throughout that dispensa- tion, we conceive, was, in particular, the Mediator in- tended in the passage just cited,* who with his sacrifice and intercession, was designed to ‘* stand in the breach” to turn away God's wrath, and to seek the continuance * Gal at sio: PROBATION UNDER THE LAW. 161 of the possession of the land, and of the blessings of the covenant. And, while this priesthood, and these Sacrifices were types and figures of the promised Messiah and _ his sacrifice, the <‘ divers baptisms,” (Siagopor Barticuol,) represented the purifying in- fluences of the Holy Spirit. There were also differences of “ meats and drinks,” to point out those dispositions and that conduct which were or would be acceptable in the sight of God. Indeed, a blessed relief was pro- vided for them as sinners, in their ceremonjal law ; which was, in fact, “the bringing in of a better hope,”* and “the shadow of good things to come.” More- over, while they were thus taught “faith in Jesus Christ’”’—“ repentance towards God” was most power- fully urged upon them; and they were instructed in the doctrine of the necessity of regeneration, another name for repentance, by being taught that “a new heart and a new spirit” were necessary for their return to God. And, wherever any of Israel felt his moral impotence, he was met with gracious promises of such ‘‘new heart and new spirit,” as the free and sovereign gift of God to sinners, however sinful, stubborn and unworthy before. Nay farther, shoutd any find that former covenants were, through their corrup- tion, insufficient to bind them to God, and to secure their obedience,—the promise of a new covenant, which provided for their obedience by “ putting his laws into their mind, and writing them upon their heart,” was declared to them for their encouragement ; with other “exceeding great and precious promises.” And they had the doctrine of atonement continually exhibited * So the Greek, M 162 THE RECONCILER. to them in their “ daily sacrifice” of a lamb, and in their annual offering on their “ day of atonement.” Thus they were favoured with both law and gospel. And our Lord plainly intimated to the Jews, that there was not only sufficient ground for faith in him, when he said that their Scriptures “ testified of him,” but that they were inexcusable in their unbelief, when he declared, that, ‘“‘if they heard not Moses or the prophets, neither would they be persuaded though one rose from the dead ;” as he did also, when he assured them that “if they believed not Moses’ writings,” neither would they “believe his word.” Finally, God, from generation to generation sent his prophets, “yising up early and sending them” to employ all sorts of motives to induce their obedience, and to dis- suade them from disobedience. Having thus considered the condition of Israel under the Mosaic dispensation, we pass on to con- sider — 2. Their PROBATION. When God entered into covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai, Moses assured the people that God was “come to prove them.” The same object he appears to have had in view, in the manner in which he con- ducted himself towards them in the wilderness ; the same also, in not altogether expelling the Canaanites out of their land, for “he left them to prove Israel— to know whether they would hearken unto the com- mandments of the Lord.” With these facts in view, +n connexion with what we have declared before, when treating of the subject of God's probationary govern- ment, it cannot be unreasonable to infer, that the PROBATION UNDER THE LAW. 163 administration of God's government over Israel was one of probation. Yes, they were proved. And since the probation of Israel was the probation of man, how humiliating the result! They were found to be “a disobedient and gainsaying people :” and this, although God had “all the day long stretched out his hand” toward them; in other words, although they had had _inces. santly urged upon them the most powerful inducements to obedience. What stronger motives could any people have? Besides all the goodness that God had showed to their fathers, and the deliyerances that he had wrought for them at the Red Sea and in the wil- derness, and in Canaan, “ he wrote to them the great things of his law ;” gave scribes to write out copies of it, and raised up priests and prophets to instruct them, “rising up early and sending them.” Nor was this all; commands and exhortations, promises and threat- enings, expostulations and entreaties, were unweariedly urged on their attention, to prompt them to obedience. And, to give these greater effect, they were visited alternately with judgments and mercies. But “ they hearkened not.” <‘ Reprobate silver,” says Jehovah, “shall men call them, because the Lord hath rejected them.” : We will now adduce the evidence, and that pretty much at large, seeing that it is so instructive and beneficial. In the affair of the golden calf, we see that, only a few weeks after they had entered into solemn covenant with God, they broke the covenant. And, when God says, “ Let me alone that I may con- sume them,” it implies that the defection was general. M 2 164 THE RECONCILER. And, again and again, he threatens to consume them as a ‘“stiff-necked people.” Nor could they, it seems, expect to be forgiven and restored, but upon the ground of sovereign favour; for, says Moses, “ If thou wilt forgive their sin, and take them for thine inheritance.” Again, in the affair of the spies, they rebelled, and the whole congregation were implicated, excepting Caleb and Joshua; and of those who were twenty years old and upwards, as all alike guilty, they all alike shared in the sentence, that their “‘ carcases should fall in the wilderness,” except Caleb and Joshua. So, in the matter of Korah and his company, there ap- pears to have been the same sort of spirit. ‘‘ All the congregation of Israel murmured against Moses and Aaron.” ‘* And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Get you up from amongst this congregation, that I may consume them in a moment.” Thus then, not only were they rebellious, but as in Jeremiah’s time, ‘©it was of the Lord’s mercies that they were not con- sumed.” And, passing by any more of their conduct in the wilderness, or indeed after their settlement in the land of promise, suffice it to quote the language of the prophet Daniel, when confessing for Israel before the Lord—“ Yea, all Israel have transgressed thy law, even by departing that they might not obey thy voice.” But were there not some who proved obedient? Not till after they had proved disobedient. It is true that there always was a “remnant of Israel ;” but then, they were so “according to the election of erace,”—God thus “ keeping mercy for thousands.” They were made so by God’s sovereign will and power. PROBATION UNDER THE LAW. 165 For even these, it appears, had been disobedient and stiff-necked. Let us appeal to the Divine testimony. See that by Isaiah concerning those who were the “redeemed” and the “ called.”* And what is it ? That they “would not walk in his ways, neither were they obedient unto his law.” Again, who were those whose “ transgressions” Jehovah would “ blot out 2” Such as had “ wearied him with their iniquities.” Well might he say, It was “* for his own name’s sake” that he was thus merciful to them. And to the same purpose, in the next chapter. Those “redeemed” and “forgiven” had been sottish idolaters. Look again at another chapter.} ‘I knew that thou wast ob- stinate, and thy neck is as an iron sinew, and thy brow brass.” Yea, observe, how he reminds them that they deserved to be “ cut off,” and that he refrained from thus cutting them off only “for his name’s sake,” as merciful and faithful. See also their own humble confession, after their “ heart of stone” was taken away. ‘* But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags, and we all do fade as a leaf, and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away. And there is none that calleth upon thy name, that stirreth up himself to take hold of thee: for thou hast hid thy face from us, and hast consumed us because of our iniquities.” See also how the Lord testifies concerning them by Jeremiah. From this testimony it appears, they all had been backsliding children ; and “ Ephraim,” repenting Eph- raim, had been “as a bullock unaccustomed to the yoke.” Ezekiel, the same. Those who had been * Tsa. xlii. xlili. and xliy. + Isa. xlviii. 166 THE RECONCILER. carried captive with Jehoiachim were indeed objects of Divine mercy—God would “set his eyes upon them for good ;” but, what does Ezekiel say of them ? That they were “ impudent children, and stiff-hearted 5” “most rebellious.” Concerning them says God to Ezekiel, “ They will not hearken unto thee, for they will not hearken unto me, for all the house of Israel are impudent and hard-hearted.” Nor were they subdued by all their calamities, until “ the desire of their eyes, and that whereon they had set their minds, their sons and daughters left in Jerusalem, had been taken away from them.” Again, in the sixth chapter, the remnant that were to “escape the sword amongst the nations,” are represented, as having a ‘ whorish heart,” and as having been guilty of ‘“ abominations.” So again in the twelfth chapter. More striking still, that church under the name of ‘“ Jerusalem,” in the sixteenth chapter, to whom God at its close makes such gracious promises, is represented, notwithstanding all the kindness shown her, not only as having become abominably wicked, but as worse than even Sodom and Samaria had been. See again at large con- cerning those who were to be taken from among the heathen, as mentioned in the thirty-sixth chapter ; but the passage is too long to quote.* The prophet Hosea may be adduced as another witness. From him it appears, that the saved remnant, under the simli- litude of an adulterous wife, had “ followed after her lovers,” most determinately; and only as divinely prevented did she relinquish her pursuit. ‘* She said, I will go after my lovers,” &c. But see the passage. T * Ezek. xxxvi. 21, to the end. +) Hosdivs-—71- PROBATION UNDER THE LAW. 167 On the whole then, we see, that not only the body of the people—those who suffered ‘ the consumption decreed in righteousness,’ were disobedient and stub- born, but that the saved “‘ remnant” had been so. The witness upon probation, then, is decisively against Israel, favoured as they were. And thus it stands, as the prophet Jeremiah records it from the mouth of the Lord himself:—‘ As the girdle cleaveth to the loins of a man, so have I caused to cleave unto me the whole house of Israel, and the whole house of Judah, saith the Lord; that they might be unto me for a people, and for a name, and for a praise, and for a glory: but they would not hear.”* We now come— 3. To the Testimony for God. Says an inspired apostle, ‘“ Let God be true, but every man a liar.” He alludes to Israel’s conduct, and particularly to their breach of covenant with their God; as if he had said—“ Let God be true to his word and covenant, though Israel—though man like him be proved false and fickle.” Nay more, saying as he does immediately upon it, “ If our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say ?” he seems to add, ‘ Let the unrighteousness of Israel commend the righteousness of God.” So shade sets off the light in a picture; so darkness enhances the value of light. Whatever “ witness” we are con- strained to bring forward against Israel, or against man, — we must—we can—bear witness for God that he is true and righteous; that he is, as Moses declares of him, even “the Rock; his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgments: a God of truth, and without Seer xpi Ls 168 THE RECONCILER. iniquity, just and right is he.” And, comparing the conduct of God with that of Israel, we now see with what propriety God commanded Moses to teach Israel that remarkable song we have in Deuteronomy,* composed a little before his death, that it “ might be a witness for him against Israel ;” and also, that a copy of the book of the law might be “ put in the side of the ark of the covenant, that it might be there for a witness against them.” How often does God appeal to Israel that he was not in fault! Hear him—‘ What iniquity have my people found in me that they are gone far from me ?” * Have I been a wilderness unto Israel?” ‘* Wherein have I wearied thee, O Israel ? testify against me.” In such condescending language does the great Jehovah make his appeal. Sometimes indeed, we find him, after the manner of men, venting his impassioned feel- ings over them, to show them how far he was from desiring their ruin. ‘O that there were such a heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep all my commandments always, that it might be well with them, and with their children for ever!” <“‘O that they were wise, that they understood this, that they would con- sider their latter end!” ‘O that my people had hearkened unto me, and Israel had walked in my ways!” “‘O that thou hadst hearkened to my commandments! then had thy peace been as a river, and thy righteous- ness as the waves of thesea!’ And, at length, because he could swear by no greater, he swears by himself, ‘* As I live, saith the Lord, I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, but that he turn from his * Deut. xxxil. PROBATION UNDER THE GOSPEL. 169 wickedness and live.” And, had he been a man like ourselves, he could not have shown himself more soli- citous to evince that his ways were equal, however “unequal” theirs were, than he does by his prophet Ezekiel. “Yet ye say, The way of the Lord is not equal. Hear now, O house of Israel, is not my way equal? are not your ways unequal?” And again a little lower down, “ Yet saith the house of Israel, The way of the Lord is not equal. O house of Israel, are not my ways equal? are not your ways unequal?” And they were not only equal, but good. For superadded to the abundance of means he provided, all sorts of motives were used to induce them to choose life that they might live. Hence, comparing Israel to a vine- yard, he appeals concerning them—*“ What could have been done more to my vineyard that I have not done init?” As if he had said, what means could | have given—what measures could I have taken—what mo- tives could I haye urged, more than I have done in my probationary government of Israel ?’—they have been favoured with every advantage—and now see what is the result? N.B.—The Eighty-first Psalm finely illustrates this Chapter. SECTIon IV. The Administration of the Divine Probationary Government under the CHRISTIAN Dispensation. 1. Man’s conpitron under jt. The peculiarity and superiority of the Christian dis- pensation, consist in this —that those under it, besides the light and law of nature, together with the written 170 THE RECONCILER. “law” of the Jews or the “ Scriptures of the Prophets,” have, superadded, the dispensation of the gospel king- dom, called by way of distinction, “the kingdom of God,” and “the kingdom of heaven.” ‘The “ gospel” of this kingdom is its proclamation, called otherwise the “glad tidings of the kingdom,” and very appro- priately, because it brings tidings of ‘* redemption through the blood of Christ, even the forgiveness of sins’ —of “justification of life’—of ‘ deliverance from the power of darkness, and a translation into the king- dom of God’s dear Son,” which isa ‘kingdom of right- eousness, peace, and joy.” It points out to us also the way of obtaining this deliverance and these blessings, even by the mediatorial appointment and interposition of the only-begotten Son of God; and by the effectual working of the Holy Spirit—as also the method by which we come into the possession of them—even by believing the report ; calling upon the Lord ; commit- ting ourselves to him, and confessing him. And thus the benefits themselves, and the method of our becom- ing partakers of them, may well be called ‘‘ gospel” or ‘“olad tidings,” especially as they are bestowed freely as the air we breathe, and of purely undeserved favour. All things having been given into the hands of Christ the Saviour and mediatorial King, and all autho- rity having been given to him, not only in heaven but upon earth, he has commissioned his servants to preach this “ gospel of the kingdom to a/ nations,’ yea, to “every creature,” with a promise on its reception and a threatening on its rejection ; “‘ He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved, and he that believeth not, shall be damned :” and lest any should think themselves excluded PROBATION UNDER THE GOSPEL. wal from its benefit, the proclamation is couched in the most general language of which it is capable—* Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved”’— ‘¢ Whosoever believeth on him shall not be confounded.” In the mean time, as his creation goodness and authority are not to be disregarded, so neither are his redemption goodness and authority. Hence, as on the former was founded a “ law of works,” so on the latter is founded a “law of faith,” and consequently the “‘ obedience of faith” is demanded, as well as the “ obe- dience of works ;” in other words, the gospel is to be obeyed as well as the law. And a guard is set against disobedience or unpersuadableness to the gospel by the most solemn sanctions. For, thus it is written, “The Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven, with his mighty angels in flaming fire, taking vengeance on them that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ ; who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and the glory of his power.” “The time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall be the end of them that obey not the gospel of God?” And why such awful sanctions to guard against disobe- dience to “the law of faith,” and such punishment for this disobedience? Because it arises from a stubborn unpersuadable temper. There is no want of the means of information, or of evidence of the truth of it ; neither is there of motive to induce attention thereunto; but the temper is bad—it is stubborn and will not come to or admit the light. Hence, it is worthy of remark, that when the wrath of God is said to “abide upon” the gospel hearer, it is because he is unpersuadable to 172 THE RECONCILER. the Son, for so is the word in the Greek—so also, that when God swears in his wrath that the unbeliever “shall not enter into his rest,” it is because he is unpersuadable, for such is the original word in repeated instances.* For preaching the gospel of the kingdom, or for making proclamation of it, men are qualified, and sent forth by the Holy Spirit of the King. First, Apostles were sent with immediate commission from himself— to these were added “ Evangelists,” whose very name imports preaching glad tidings. And these, having collected ‘ disciples” or Christians, over them were appointed ‘‘ Pastors and Teachers” “ for the edifying of the body of Christ.” Nor are the preachers of the gospel to content themselves with a bare proclamation : their Master and Lord requires of them to compel men to come in at the proclamation—they are to urge them to it by every reasonable and scriptural motive. Thus did the Apostle Paul with his countrymen the Jews— he “reasoned with them, and persuaded them out of the Scriptures’—nay, he ‘“‘ warned every man, and taught every man, that he might present every man perfect in Christ Jesus.” Yes, the heralds and ser- vants of the kingdom are to press the commands and exhortations of their Sovereign Lord, his promises and threatenings, and to use their expostulations and en- treaties; and all with a view to urge men to flee from the wrath to come to Jesus the great Deliverer, and to ‘nduce them to renounce the dominion of sin and Satan, “the prince of this world ;” so that, being “ delivered from this power of darkness, they may be translated into the kingdom of God's dear son.” * *AmweiOeca. 1 0 Sa ae adi PROBATION UNDER THE GOSPEL. eis: But, while under the administration of this kingdom faith is exhibited as the great requirement, repentance also is required as its great concomitant; for, since “every man has gone back” from God and his duty, it is requisite that he return; for which the gospel mes- sage is indeed his great inducement, and the believing of it his great incitement. Hence, both John the har- binger of Christ, and Christ himself began their minis- try, or made proclamation of the gospel kingdom, with a call to *‘ repent,” to “repent, and believe the gospel.” So preached also, by their Master’s command, the twelve Apostles and the seventy disciples. To the same pur- pose was our Lord's commission to the Apostles after his resurrection, even that ‘‘ repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all na- tions, beginning at Jerusalem.” Nor were these Apo- stles unfaithful to their commission: for Peter, when first he used “the keys of the kingdom of heaven” to “open the door of faith” to the Jews, or first preached the gospel of the kingdom to them, thus exhorted to “repent.” And the great Apostle of the Gentiles did the same; he “ testified both to the Jews and to the Greeks, repentance towards God, and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ ;” and declared to the people of Athens that “God now commandeth all men every where to “repent,” urging it by the solemn considera- tion that “he hath appointed a day wherein he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained.” And all the ministers of the gospel kingdom, if they faithfully discharge their duty to their Lord and Master, will do the same. In thus far speaking of the condition in which we 174 THE RECONCILER. are under the administration of the gospel kingdom, or “kingdom of heaven,” we have considered ourselves as favoured with a variety of gospel blessings most freely given—we have seen that they were to bepreached to all nations—that they come demanding our atten- tion under the form of a ‘“law’—that apostles, evan- gelists, and ministers in common, have been charged with the proclamation of the glad tidings, and that they are to be urged upon our consideration and acceptance by every reasonable and scriptural motive —we have seen also, that, encouraged and excited by such good- ness, we are called upon to return to God and our duty. But this is not all that we have presented to us under the Christian dispensation—recognising and declaring our moral though criminal impotence, it declares to us the work of the Holy Spirit to relieve us under such impotence. Hence, in the initiatory rite of admission into this kingdom, we are baptized not only “into the name of the Father, and of the Son,” but “ of the Holy Ghost,” as the great efficient in that “great salvation,” which the Father's love has purposed, and which the Son’s mediation has procured. In this great affair, according to our Lord's own state- ment, he is to convince of sin—to show the righteous- ness that delivereth from death and entitleth to life ; and also that “the prince of this world” being judged and “cast out,” there is redemption for all that call upon the name of the Lord for it, ‘‘ whosoever” they be. Nor is this all ; besides that this Holy Spirit is ready to confer the grace of repentance and of faith, there is exhibited a new covenant for us to take hold of, according to which the laws of God are written upon PROBATION UNDER THE GOSPEL. 175 the fleshy tables of the heart by this Spirit of the living God, so that a willing and obedient people being formed, God becomes their God in this “ everlasting covenant, —a covenant sealed by the blood of his only- begotten Son. How gracious, and great, and glorious are these things ! Such then is our fayoured condition under the Christian dispensation, as forming part of that equita- able and benevolent but probationary government of which we are treating. We pass on now— 2. To the PrRoBaTION. Here then we have to appeal to facts. And how then stands the case under the dispensation of the gos- pel of the kingdom? Is a free pardon and indemnity proclaimed, and are sinners informed that “God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself 2” They will not receive the reconciliation, or make peace with God in his appointed way. Does the grace of God abound through the righteousness of the “ second man,” or the “ last Adam,” unto “ justification of life 2” Men will not “receive the abounding grace and the gift of righteousness,” nor will they come to Christ that they might have life. Has the prince of this world been judged and cast out, as a pledge that all those who sue out their discharge by calling upon the name of the Lord for deliverance, shall be delivered from this “power of darkness?” The service of sin, which is the service of this prince, is too pleasant to them. Is Christ the Saviour sent to «bless us by turning away every one of us from our iniquities ?” We do not wish to be thus blessed. Is Christ “ the light of the world?” “Men love darkness rather than 176 THE RECONCILER. light, because their deeds are evil.” Is he ‘the bread which came down from heaven, that any one (ris) may eat thereof and not die?’ We have no appetite for this bread, but are averse from the ‘life of God” in the soul. Thus, man proved, is found to be disobedient to the gospel, as well as to the law. And, with experience and observation, does not Scripture accord in this matter? ‘ Wherefore, when I came,” says Christ by his prophet Isaiah, ‘was there not a man ?* when I called, was there not one to an- swer 2?” John, speaking of the testimony which Christ witnessed as the “ Witness to the people,” declares, that ‘“‘no man received his testimony.” Jesus himself, when, in the parable of the marriage of a king’s son, or in that of a great supper, he represents the blessings of “the kingdom of God,” says in the first parable, that “they who were bidden would not come ;” and in the second that, “all who were bidden, with one con- sent, made excuse.” And, of those who afterwards came, it seems that, they were either “the poor, and the maimed, and the halt and the blind,” and therefore felt their needy condition, and the value of such an entertainment; or they are said to be such as had been « compelled to come in ;” by which he seems to intimate that none come but such as are made to feel the worth of the blessings exhibited, or, are in a sense necessitated to come, as the word imports. When, in a discourse of himself, as the bread that came down from heaven, the Jews murmured ; as if to show that their murmur- ings did not surprise him who so well “ knew what was in man,” he declares that, ‘‘no man could come to * So the Hebrew of Isaiah, chap. |. 2. PROBATION UNDER THE GOSPEL. yi him,” that is, could find it in his heart to come to him, ‘unless the Father which had sent him drew him’— that is, by teaching, as he afterwards explains himself: and this remark he afterwards applies to murmuring “* disciples,” that had followed him for some time, and, of course, had seen his miracles, and heard his attractive discourses, as well as witnessed the perfect excellence of his character. He also intimates, that, whereas to know his Father and himself was eternal life, yet that ‘‘no one knew the Father but he to whom the Son would reveal him :” and as to the knowledge of him- self, the Son ; if Peter knew him, it was not that “flesh and blood” had revealed such knowledge to him, but “his Father which was in heaven.” And, finally, he declares in the strongest terms, in reference to that very gospel kingdom of which we have been speaking, that *“ except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God,” and of course, not “ enter WACOPIt. As the master taught, so did the servant. From the apostle Paul we find that in order that men become “ obedient in word and deed” to the gospel, they must be “made” so;—that in order to the bringing them to “the knowledge of God,” and “ the obedience of Christ,” the “ strongholds” must be ‘pulled down ;” and “imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God” be “ cast down.” And why all this, if men were of themselves willing to surrender at the gospel summons? Moreover, why are men represented as ‘dead in sin and in the uncircumcision of their flesh,’—as needing a resurrection, or a new creation N 178 THE RECONCILER. and formation,—if they did not lie in a hopeless state in themselves considered? In fine, Paul says, as his | Divine Master had before intimated, that ‘“‘ No one can say that Jesus is the Lord but by the Holy Ghost ;” by which he evidently means, that no one can make that confession which is unto salvation—in other words, no one can sincerely and cordially avow his trust in “ Jesus” Christ as his saviour, and his submission to him as his Lord, but by the Holy Ghost. And he says, that ‘‘ God hath shut up all in unpersuadableness.”* From all which we may conclude, that man, left to himself and proved, will not be obedient even to the gospel. Our next thing is— 3. The testimony for God upon such a result. “ This gospel of the kingdom,” says our Lord, “shall be preached as a witness to all nations.” Though it proves a witness against man, it is a witness for God. ‘¢ He is the rock, his work is perfect; for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth, and without iniquity, just and right is he.” Such ts the solemn declaration of Moses concerning Jehovah God. He immediately adds, ‘They have corrupted them- selves.”t And so spake God concerning Israel, “* O Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself!” <‘* Let God be * Rom. xi. 32. + How do a people corrupt? Besides original corruption, and by parents “ suffering them to walk after the imagination of their evil heart,” by the individuals themselves not “ making their prayer to the Lord their God, that they might turn from their iniquities,”’ and by indulging in deeds that are evil. PROBATION UNDER THE GOSPEL. 179 true, but every man a liar.” “ If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful.” ‘ Thus are God’s ways < equal,’ but man’s are ‘unequal.’” Yet, so itis: ‘“‘ The fool- ishness of man perverteth his way, and then his heart fretteth against the Lord.” Nay, he presumes to sit in judgment upon him: but God will be “justified in his sayings, and overcome when he is judged.” And, although in many respects “he giveth not account of his matters,” and “it is his glory to conceal a thing ;” yet, in adorable condescension, he is pleased to vindi- cate his ways to man, and even, so to speak, take pains todo so. Witness his appeals by Moses: “I call heaven and earth to witness against you this day.” ‘ft call heaven and earth to record this day that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing.” “‘ Give ear, O ye heavens, and I will speak ; and hear, O earth, the words of my mouth;” that is, while I deliver my witness for myself against Israel in the fol- lowing song. ‘The same sort of appeal he makes also by Isaiah, by Jeremiah, and by Micah.* And when, in Ezekiel’s time, the “impudent and hard-hearted” Jews said, “ The way of the Lord is not equal,” how strikingly does he expostulate with them concerning it. “Yet ye say, the way of the Lord is not equal. Hear now, O house of Israel! is not my way equal ? are not your ways unequal?” And again, a little lower down, he uses the same words. ‘To the same purpose the apostle Paul, when writing to the Romans.t If God, then, condescends to make it appear that his ways are equal, there can be no impropriety in his servants also making them appear so. *%Jsa. i 2+ Jer. ii, 12, 13: Mic.'vi. 15. + Rom. iii. 3—S8. wn 2 180 THE RECONCILER. Our general proposition then is this—that God has given us every thing that we could claim on the foot of. equity, or expect on the ground of benevolence, in a government designed for testimony, and as such pro- bationary. Which proposition is in accordance with the spirit of the question he addressed to the Jews: ‘* What could have been done more to my vineyard that I have not done ?” 1. Man has the requisite information, sufficient evidence of its truth, and ‘ eyes to see and ears to hear” that evidence. Moreover his attention is called to it by the strongest motives :—life and death, blessing and cursing, good and evil, are set before him; and he is kindly and persuasively urged to choose the life, that both he and his seed may live. And, in case of felt deficiency or apparent obstacle, he is directed to an Almighty power which can supply that deficiency, or remove that obstacle. 2. In case of transgression, and even rebellion, a door of hope is opened to him in the revealed mercy of God; who not only declares again and again, ‘“‘ When a wicked man turneth away from his wickedness that he hath committed, and doeth that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul alive,” but even swears by himself, “ As I live, saith the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live.” Moreover, as in the display of mercy, it was requisite that the law should be vindicated and established, and the claims of justice answered, God has provided an all-sufficient sacrifice in his only- begotten Son for the purpose, by which he has given the greatest possible proof of his mercy and goodwill ; PROBATION UNDER THE GOSPEL. 181 and he has made this sacrifice available for all who will come and avail themselves of it. And, to crown the whole, he has provided an almighty power to ‘bless us by turning away every one of us from our iniquities.” Nor is that all—so ample are the means, and so urgent are the motives used, that he, after the manner of men, expresses himself as wondering at their inefficacy : “ He marvelled at their unbelief.” 3. This gracious and ample provision is urged upon our acceptance, not only by invitations, but by promises and threatenings without number, by repeated exhortations, by affectionate expostulations ; nay, even by kind en- treaty. ‘Turn ye, turn ye’—‘ Why will ye die ?” ** What iniquity have your fathers found in me, that they are gone from me?” ‘ Come now and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow ; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.” “ As though God did beseech (men) by us, we pray (men) be ye reconciled to God.” Such is the sort of language by which the Almighty urges upon us the acceptance of his overtures of mercy. 4. Farther still—he shows all long-suffering. He gives space to repent, and to enforce the repentance, he interposes his authority as God, “ commanding all men every where to repent.” All the day long he stretches out his hands to embrace the returning sinner ; and if he visit with punishment, he repents of it, till at length he is obliged to say, ‘“« | am weary with repenting.” Nor is even this all. 5. He represents himself as inwardly troubled at the wicked conduct and stubborn temper of sinners. When, in the old world, all flesh had corrupted its 182 THE RECONCILER. way, he expresses himself as “ grieved at his heart,” and as repenting that he had made man upon the earth. “ ‘Thou hast wearied me with thine iniquities,” says he to the Jews. And again; “I am _ pressed under you,” says he to Israel, “ as a cart is pressed that is full of sheaves.” And the eternal Jehovah is represented as breaking out into such pathetic excla- mations as these. ‘‘O that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear me and keep my com- mandments always!” And why? ‘That he might be profited by them? No: but “ that it might be well with them, and with their children for ever.” And again: ‘* O that they were wise, that they understood this, that they would consider their latter end!” ‘O that my people had hearkened unto me, and Israel had walked in my ways!” And, out of kindness to them again, as appears from what follows: “ O that thou hadst hearkened to my commandments!” Why? “ Then had thy peace been like a river, and thy righteousness as the waves of the sea.” In the same strain does our Lord address himself to Jerusalem: “*O Jeru- salem, Jerusalem, how often would I have gathered thee, asa hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, but ye would not!” Nay, at another time, beholding the city, now devoted to destruction, he wept over it, saying, ‘‘ If thou hadst known in this thy day the things belonging to thy peace: but now they are hid from thy eyes.” And the ministers of God are more or less endued with the same feeling. Jeremiah was a weeping prophet; Paul had ‘“ continual heaviness and sorrow of heart” on account of the stubbornness of the Jews; and he warned Gentiles every night and PROBATION UNDER THE GOSPEL. 183 day with tears. Nor is this kind concern for the sinner’s welfare inconsistent with God’s will of purpose or eventual determination as to their destruction; for although such language expresses the propensity of the nature, so to speak, of him who “ is love,” yet it must not be supposed that such benevolent propensity of his nature, in itself considered, is to set aside the wise and holy counsel of his will; which, taking into account the natural bearing and ultimate end of all events, prompts him to suffer this, or effect that, “ according to his good pleasure,” or as ‘‘ it seemeth him good.” So, even amongst men, it is judged right and wise to do many things contrary to our natural will, or will of inclination, for reasons suggested by wisdom and prudence. Such a one is a kind- hearted creditor. He lends a sum of money to a fellow-creature inneed. Seeing his debtor wasting the property on his sinful appetites,—not only on his own account, but for the debtor’s welfare, he advises, and beseeches, and urges him to discontinue such conduct. But the spendthrift stubbornly refuses to hearken, and stops his ear to all his arguments and entreaties. Now, if the injured creditor think it proper to punish this debtor for his gratitude and contumacy, is it any reflection on the creditor’s character as bene- volent ? Certainly not. Indeed, if he does not animadyvert on such conduct by punishing it, will it not appear that he is deficient in his respect for public justice, and in regard to the claims of public order and comfort? Again, here is a judge of a humane and benevolent character. A prisoner is brought before him charged with a crime that affects his life. 184 THE RECONCILER. He feels compassion for such prisoner, and earnestly desires his acquittal. Yet, when he finds that there is indubitable evidence of his guilt, and considers that he has been contemning the authority of the law, and outraging the rights and welfare of civil society, he will think it both just and wise to leave him to the award and execution of the laws. If he did not so, who would consider such judge as possessing an adequate sense of the importance of the claims of law and justice, or as having a sufficient regard to public order? Apply these things to God the great creditor—to God the great King and Judge,— and no longer charge the Scriptures with inconsis- tency, or the great King himself with folly! No, rather always consider that while man is, as he is emphatically called, “ corruptible man,” so God is, as he also is emphatically called, “ the incorruptible God.” Thus, we have proved, as declared in the propo- sition, that God has given to man every thing that he could claim on the footing of equity, or expect on the ground of benevolence, in an equitable probationary system of government, designed as a testimony con- cerning himself and man. Hence, as he said to Israel, so he may say to us, ‘“* What could have been done more to my vineyard that I have not done in it ? wherefore judge you betweeu me and my vineyard.” Will it be said, “ He might have renewed the will of all men, or by his overpowering grace have subdued and gained over their will ;” we reply—that this would have been utterly inconsistent with, and indeed would have annihilated, a probationary system, whose design a ae ae | oe RESULTS OF PROBATION. 185 was to prove man, and by proving, become a witness for God. Such a system, as has been before shown, must needs be conditional; must be addressed to the human will, and after attempting to influence it by suitable means and motives, must leave it to its liberty. Otherwise man would never show himself at all ; God would not have his due as distinguished from man ; and then, how could equity, which consists in ad- judging to each party what properly and distinctively belongs to him, be displayed? If, after such pro- bation and testimony, the great Creator and King should think proper, in his wisdom and gracious sovereignty, to interpose in favour of man, by such special and effectual grace, as would thus renew his will and overpower his bad temper, that must be under another dispensation. At present, in this part of our subject, we have to do only with God’s equi- table and benevolent government of mankind, as the great King, holy, just, and good; if he pleases to manifest the glory of his sovereign goodness on such stubborn and rebellious rejectors of his law and gospel, as a gracious sovereign, that is another thing. And that he has done so, we shall see hereafter, and in what way. SECTION V. Reflections on the Result of this pr obationary, but equitable and bene- volent Government, as considered in the foregoing Chapter. From the foregoing chapter we may learn, 1. That disbelief of God, and dependence upon self, is the cause of disobedience to God. i186 THE RECONCILER. 2. That disobedience to God is an “ offence” of the greatest magnitude, and that law entered afterwards . that the offence might abound. 3. That God, from the beginning, has placed be- fore man the antidote to the poison; and that thus, ‘where sin abounded, grace did much more abound ; that as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.” 4. That God has taken care to give means of in- formation concerning this fact, and motives to enforce attention unto it, until man has neglected the one, and refused to be influenced by the other. 5. We see that God has done all that he could have done, consistent with his great and wise design in establishing an equitable probationary government, both under the Jewish and Christian dispensations. 6. Man has been proved, both under the “law of works,” and the “law of faith,’—whether under the Mosaic or Christian economy, notwithstanding all the means and motives to induce obedience with which he has been favoured, to be a DISOBEDIENT AND UNPER- SUADABLE CREATURE AND SUBJECT. ON THE PART OF GOD. 7. We see that thus a testimony is borne for God, as “the incorruptible God,” in contrast with “ cor- ruptible man,” as the one who alone is essentially “Goon,” in contrast with man, who is “vile” and ‘savas? 8. A testimony is borne for him also, as the right- eous King, in contrast with man as an unrighteous Te ee ee ee ee i] MANS CONDUCT CONDEMNABLE. 187 subject—that his ways have ever been “‘ equal,” though our ways have been ‘“‘ unequal,” as he declared to the Jews repeatedly by his prophet Ezekiel. Thus, too, “the unrighteousness of man commends the right- eousness of God,” as Paul expresses the idea.* 9. Thus, too, a testimony is borne for God, as “the ¢rue one” in covenant, keeping covenant; while man has proved false, by breaking covenant. And, says Paul, adverting to the differing conduct of God and Israel, ‘‘ Let God be true, but every man a liar.”t CHAPTER IV. MAN'S CONDUCT A PROVOCATION OF GOD’S ANGER AND CONDEMNABLE. Yuar man should not only disobey God’s “holy, just, and good” law, but disobey his gracious Gospel —that he should not only set up his own will and take his own way, in opposition to God’s, and then neglect and refuse his great salvation—may well be considered as a provocation of his holy anger, for where is authority like his—where is goodness like his—where wisdom like his? And such is the case, as appears by undoubted testimony from Scripture. In the parable of the “ Great Supper,” we find that the master of the house is represented as “ angry,” and as declaring in anger, that ‘“‘none of those who were bidden,” and had excused themselves from coming, ‘should taste of his supper!” And, as Israel * Rom. iii. 5. + Rom. iii, 4. 188 THE RECONCILER. by their unpersuadableness provoked God to swear in his wrath, that they should not enter into his rest, so Paul warns the Christian Hebrews to whom he writes, to take heed lest they should provoke him in the same way, to swear that they should not enter into the Christian’s rest. Nor is the Son of God less angry at the slight put upon his love as Saviour, and the rejection of his authority as King on God’s holy hill of Zion. ‘* Kiss the Son,” it is said, ‘lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little.” And, in another place, he is re- presented as saying: ‘‘ Those mine enemies that would not that I should reign over them, bring them hither and slay them before me.” And how awful, as well as convincing, is that passage: “‘ The Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels in flaming fire, taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.” And, as God’s holy nature kindles with anger at such a perverse contempt or disregard of authority, such dishonour done to his name, and ingratitude for his love; so his law, the “law of faith,” condemns such unbelieving disobedient characters; for thus says the faithful and true witness: “ He that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed on the name of the only begotten Son of God.” So, when he sends out his servants to preach the gospel of his kingdom, he commissions them to say, “ He that believeth not shall be damned.” And how solemnly does the Apostle Paul warn his countrymen the Jews of the consequences of their unbelief, saying, MAN’S CONDUCT CONDEMNAELE. 18G ‘* Beware, ye despisers, and wonder and perish!” and also of their being “cast away,” as “a disobedient and gainsaying people,” and made ‘‘ vessels of wrath!” What a solemn appeal, too, does he make to their own judgment in his Epistle to the “ Hebrews:” * If,” says he, speaking of their law, “every transgression and disobedience received a just recompense of re- ward, how shall we escape if we neglect so great sal- vation?’ And to the same purpose again: “ If they escaped not who refused him that spake on earth, much more shall not we escape if we turn away from him that speaketh from heaven.” And when, on his address. ing the Jews at Corinth, urging them to believe “ that Jesus was Christ,” they ‘‘ opposed and blasphemed,” how solemnly did he exclaim, “ Your blood be upon your own head!” In accordance with all this, we find, that when our Lord sent out his disciples to preach the gospel of the kingdom in the cities of Israel, he commissioned them to say, on their refusal, these alarming words, ‘ Notwithstanding, be ye sure of this, that the kingdom of God 7s come nigh unto you;” intimating that it was at their peril that they had refused it! These things show that condemnation is attached to unbelief: and other passages of Scripture show also, that the degree of condemnation will be accord- ing to the degree of stubbornness in the unbeliever, as evinced by the degree of light resisted. Hence, some are to receive “greater damnation.” Thus, Chorazin, and Bethsaida, and Capernaum, were parti- cularly distinguished as deserving and being doomed to severer punishment than cities not so privileged : 190 THE RECONCILER. ** Wo unto thee, Chorazin! wo unto thee, Bethsaida ! it shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the day of judgment, than for thee.” ‘ And thou, Caper- naum, which art exalted unto heaven, shalt be brought down to hell; for,” &c. Who, impressed duly with such considerations, can trifle with the gospel ? And what is the reason of this condemnation? The legal reason is unbelief ;* the criminal cause is unper- suadableness ; because that is the evil temper from which it springs, and hence the expression, “the evil heart of unbelief.” The unbelief is not for want of evidence of the truth of the testimony which the Scriptures bear, or from ignorance of the way of obtaining an understanding of it; but from a perverse refusal to examine the testimony, and to ask for the understanding. It is from an “evil heart,” that will not be persuaded. And, since a just conception of this matter is of great importance, we shall dwell a little upon it. Thus then it is. Though the sinner has eyes to see, he will not see; and ears to hear, he will not hear. So was it with the Jews in Babylon. “Son of man,” says the Lord to Ezekiel, ‘thou dwellest in the midst of a rebellious house, which have eyes to see and see not; they have ears to hear and hear not; for they are a rebellious house.” ‘To the same purpose our Lord speaks, when addressing the same people in his time, ‘Their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed.” Nor does he stop there: as a further proof of their wilfulness, he states, that they thus closed their eyes, &c. ‘dest at any time * drvoria. ~ ameiBea. MAN'S CONDUCT CONDEMNABLE. 191i they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and he should heal them.” The apostle Paul, moreover, quotes the same passage, and in the same manner, when addressing the Jews at Rome. See then, from hence, why men are not converted and healed. It is not because there is a deficiency of means or of motives: it is because they close their eyes, and stop their ears, or refuse to apply for help, or to ‘frame their doings to turn unto God.’ That which makes unbelief so criminal is, that it arises from unpersuadableness. So Dr. Watts :— ** He shall be damned that wont believe.” In accordance with this sentiment it is, that in the original Greek of the New Testament, drictiéa, “‘ unbe- lief,” and aeéOeva, “ unpersuadableness,” are so fre- quently connected ; though, it is to be regretted, that our translators have so often overlooked the difference, rendering the latter, as well as the former, “ unbelief.” The fact is, however, that the unbelief, the drucria, is occasioned by the unpersuadableness, the dzed@eua. Let us advert to a few passages. In John iii. 36, that which is rendered, “ He that believeth not the Son,” in the Greek is, ‘‘ He that is unpersuadable’—or disobedi- ent, if you will—‘to the Son,” dre{Qov 76 vid. In Acts xiv. 2, “the unbelieving Jews,” is ‘‘ the unper- suadable Jews, dre/Oovvres. In Acts xvii. 5, “the Jews which believed not,” is “ the Jews which were un- persuadable.” In Acts xix. 9, ‘ But when divers were hardened, and believed not,” it is, “But when divers were hardened, and were unpersuadable.” So in 192 THE RECONCILER. Rom. xi. 30—-32, the difference is overlooked in several instances. The exact meaning of this last passage is this: ‘“ For as ye Gentiles in times past have been unpersuadable or disobedient to God, yet have obtained mercy through their (the Jews’) unpersuad- ableness. Even so have these Jews been unper- suadable to your mercy that they also may obtain mercy. For God hath concluded all (all the Israel) in unpersuadableness, that he might have mercy upon all.” And strikingly to our purpose is the passage in Heb. iil. 18, compared with the 19th verse, as also with Cor. iv. 6, 11. The exact rendering in the place first quoted is this :—“ Unto whom sware He that they should not enter into his rest, but unto them that were unpersuadable?” And we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief. Unbelief was the legal and imme- diate cause ; unpersuadableness the efficient cause— the criminal temper that occasioned it. The latter citation reads thus,—‘“‘ Since then it remaineth that some enter into it, and they who first had the good tidings entered not in on account of unpersuadableness.” And, in verse 11, “ Let us therefore labour to enter into that rest, lest any one fall by the same example of unpersuadableness.” ‘To confirm our criticism, we add that the word azecOeva is by our translators them- selves rendered disobedience in many other places; so many indeed as nine.* From the whole then, nothing can be plainer than that the Sacred Writings attribute unbelief to unpersuadableness or perverseness—the point which we intended to establish—according to * Rom. ii. 8, x. 21. Ephy ii, 2.; v0 Ge Calvi 6: L Pet. 117, tit. ds ane 20; week MAN’S CONDUCT CONDEMNABLE. 193 that complain of our Lord, “ Ye will not come to me that ye might have life;” and, “O Jerusalem, Jeru- salem, how often would I have gathered thy children together, as a hen doth gather her brood under her wings, and ye would not !” And what is the cause of this unpersuadableness ? Our Lord intimates that it is the “love of darkness rather than light, because the deeds are evil.” Ob- serve the connexion. A man encourages himself in the practice of evil deeds, and then, as light makes manifest, he loves to remain in darkness, lest these his deeds should be made manifest, and he thus find him- self reproved. The indulgence in evil deeds, wherein lies the first culpability, because he has the power of not doing so, is the primary cause of unbelief, and the awful condemnation connected with it; and its se- condary cause is the love of darkness—in other words, wilful cherished ignorance. Oh, what an awful truth does this then teach! first, men are the workers of iniquity ; and, secondly, they become contented to live in ignorance. Hence their condemnation. Well might Solomon call them “ fools” “who make a mock at sin ;” seeing that, by every indulgence of it, they not only commit that which, “when finished, bringeth forth death ;” but, by the aversion from the light of know- ledge that it creates, they harden themselves against that belief which might save them from it. Nor is that all; provoking God to harden them—that is, to leave them under the temptations of Satan, and the power of that “deceitfulness of sin” which hardens the heart—they are in danger of becoming “vessels of wrath,” “fitted,” by such conduct, to destruction.” 9) 194 _ THE RECONCILER. Having shown that the conduct of man is a proyo- cation of God’s anger, and condemnable, we now. proceed to show, as proposed, that it is INEXCUSABLE. CHAPTER V. THE INEXCUSABLENESS OF MAN, WHETHER HEATHEN, JEW, OR CHRISTIAN. SCRIPTURE, as well as experience and observation, abundantly evince that man is disposed to open his mouth in vindication of himself, though against God ; and such being his disposition, the Holy Spirit has thought proper to take up the subject. And, as God would that * every mouth may be stopped,” so he has taken measures for the purpose. ‘Thus, in the case of Israel, he determined to bring conviction home to their minds, so that they might “be confounded, and never open their mouth any more, because of their shame.” So, in the parable of the marriage of the king’s son, the man not having on the wedding garment, when inter- rogated about it, was “speechless.” Hence, it becomes the duty of public teachers to use methods for stopping the mouths of sinners, by showing how inexcusable they are. For this purpose let the considerations which follow be seriously and deliberately weighed. We will begin with, 1. The Gentiles, or Heathens. And, first, as to the knowledge of God, setting aside the knowledge the Gentiles might acquire from tradition and their wise men, it seems that God hath “shewed it to them;” and, therefore, it is said to be “‘ manifest in them.” INEXCUSABLENESS OF MAN. 195 “For the invisible things of God from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and God- head.” And what is the inference that the apostle draws from thence? ‘That “ they are without excuse,” in not “glorifying God, and being thankful ;” for, while the truth is in them, “ they hold it in unrighteousness.” And, as to the knowledge of God’s will, ‘‘ They are a law unto themselves, which shew the work of the law written in their hearts ;” and, “ The spirit of man is the candle of the Lord.” Now, if they are ‘“con- tentious and obey not the truth;” or, in other words, if they strive against the natural dictates of their minds, which are “truth ;”—if they voluntarily or wilfully put an extinguisher upon their candle;—and if they wilfully deface the tablet of the law in them, and while they will not “obey the truth,” they will “obey unrighteousness ;”—no wonder that they provoke God’s “indignation and wrath,” and render themselves liable to the ‘tribulation and anguish” awarded by the “‘ Judge of all the earth” to “every soul of man that worketh evil.” The apostle, however, not only de- clares, as above, that the heathen are “without ex- cuse,” but that they are “worthy of death,” and that “the judgment of God is according to truth” against them which do such things as he had been mentioning. 2. We pass on to the Jews. With a design that ‘every mouth might be stopped, and the whole world’ of Jew and Gentile might cease to vindicate themselves, having first declared that the Gentiles were “ without excuse,” the apostle says to the Jew also, “ There- fore, thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou 02 196 THE RECONCILER. art that judgest.” And why? Because he, the Jew, as well as the Gentile, had sinned against light and - knowledge. - Besides the light and law of nature as to the knowledge of God and his will, the Jews had the light and law of revelation; and they not only were bound from their relation to God to obey them, but they themselves consented to do so. Three times was it put to them, whether they would accede to the covenant proposed between them and their God:— first, when the covenant was proposed; secondly, when it was ratified; and, thirdly, after they had taken possession of the land promised them: and they unhesitatingly consented. The life and the death, the blessing and the cursing, the good and the evil, were set before them, not only by Moses and Joshua, but by all their prophets, and they were urged to choose the life, that they and their seed might live. And as to believing the word declared to them by their prophets, whether of law or gospel, when our Lord said, “If they believe not Moses and the prophets, neither would they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead,” he intimated that ample evidence had been given them of those truths which bore upon their salvation. Moreover, every sort of motive was urged upon them by way of warning and encouragement. And they had eyes if they would not see, and ears if they would not hear, as the Lord told them by his prophet Ezekiel. They might also, and they ought also, to have “made their prayer before the Lord their God, that they might turn from their iniquities, and understand his truth.” But they failed of belief and of obedience— they refused to believe and obey. And this failure INEXCUSABLENESS OF MAN. 197 and this refusal was their own. Hear the language of the Lord by his prophets. Besides that he often charges them with “walking after the imagination of their evil heart,” which implies a deliberate purpose ; he charges them thus—‘* They obeyed not, neither in- clined their ear, but made their neck stiff, that they might not hear, nor receive instruction.” And again, “They refused to hearken, and pulled away the shoulder, and stopped their ears, that they should not hear. Yea, they made their hearts as an adamant stone, lest they should hear the law, and the words which the Lord of hosts had sent in his Spirit by the former prophets :”’—language this that implies that it was their own doing, and that they must blame them- selves alone for the “ great wrath” that in consequence ‘came upon them from the Lord of hosts.” Indeed, so sensible were the converted Jews of this, that they were always ready to acknowledge that God had “punished them less than their iniquities deserved ;” and that “it was of the Lord’s mercies that they were not consumed.” But we pass on, 3. To the Christians, to show that they are inexcus- able. By ‘Christian,’ we mean the man who is so “outwardly,” as “baptized unto Christ,” as the Israelites were “‘ baptized unto Moses;” and who is living under the Christian dispensation, but yet is im- penitent and unbelieving. He excuses himself in his unbelief, impenitence, and want of obedience, saying, “TI cannot believe—I cannot repent—! cannot do any- thing good without grace, and I cannot give myself grace;” and thus he rebuts the charges brought against him by the word and his own conscience, and 198 THE RECONCILER. endeavours to compose himself to sleep. Ah, fatal sleep! if Divine grace prevent not—the sleep of - eternal death ! Before we reply to these excuses directly, it may be useful to notice how our Lord seems to anticipate them, as well as to expose them, when he represents the man without the wedding garment as ** speechless ;” and When he tells the Jews that they had “no cloke for their sin” of unbelief as to him, thereby representing such excuses as futile and useless. But, not dwelling on these cases, we will proceed now more directly to expose the fallacy of such evasions. “I cannot do so and so,” you say. Admitted: God alone can give this grace. Nor is that all—he is not obliged to give this grace—all that he has to do in equity is, to give the means of grace, and in goodness to urge to the use of those by suitable motives. And this he does, and the means and motives would be amply sufficient, in con- nexiou with the promised cooperation of the Spirit of grace, were it not for the perverse temper of the man, for which he himself, and not God, is to blame. Ac- cording to universal experience and observation, there are hindrances to the reception of this grace, and there are helps to its reception. Now, the man who opens his mouth in defence of his conduct should be able to prove, that he has avoided all those hindrances, and used all those helps as much as lay in his power. If he has done so, then his defence is good; if not, it is frivolous. We then remark that man, as a ‘ natural man,” may avoid or practise many things which he wilfully refuses to avoid, or which he wilfully chooses to do or practise; and ‘this alone,” says a ey en INEXCUSABLENESS OF MAN. 199 the great Dr. Owen, ‘“‘is sufficient to bear the charge of man’s eternal ruin ;” for, as in common life, a man, by considerations suggested to his mind, has power over his own will of inclination to avoid doing what he is inclined to, on account of the evil or misery that would follow it; so, in religion, though his will of incli- nation be for the indulgence of some sin, yet, knowing the misery that must follow, he may avoid such in- dulgence. And then, again, as in common life, a man has power over his own will of inclination to do that to which he is disinclined, on account of the good or happiness that would result from doing it; so it 1s in religion; though a man’s will of inclination be against reading the word, thinking upon it, attending divine ordinances, and so on, yet, knowing that good or happiness is likely to result therefrom, he has power over such will so as to do so notwithstanding. And all this from natural reason, and that self-love, and those passions of hope and fear that belong to him as a “natural man.” Of course then, if the unbelieving sinner hardens his heart; if he, as Israel, ‘“‘ refuses to hearken to receive instruction,” ‘‘ makes his neck stiff that he might not hear nor receive instruction ;”’ more so if he “makes his heart as an adamant stone, lest he should hear ;” and will not thus avoid that which produces the misery, or do that which promotes the happiness ; he justly falls under the charge and con- demnation of unbelief, because, of wilfulness, of his own stubborn acting, he thus would not avoid the hindrances to unbelief, or use the helps to belief. Nor dare he, at the bar of God, be otherwise than ** speechless.” 200 THE RECONCILER. Perhaps, however, he may excuse himself on the ground of his receiving a corrupt nature from Adam, - disinclining him to good, and rendering him prone to evil. But this will not avail him, inasmuch as the fall has not deprived man of his power of consideration, of his capacity of knowing what would be for his hap- pimess or his misery, of his « knowing how to refuse the evil and choose the good”—nor, though “the imagination of man’s heart be evil from his youth,” is he necessitated to walk after it, but, after all the consi- derations that God has suggested to him by reason, by education, and by revelation, attended with the Spirit’s moral power upon the conscience and the thoughts, he may and ought to walk contrary toit. * Deceitful sin” solicits him ; but he is not necessitated to commit that sin, for he has means of knowing that it is deceitful— he has an “evil heart ; but he is not necessitated to harden that heart, and he is solemnly warned against it—he cannot “turn himself from his iniquities ;” yet he may “make his prayer before the Lord his God, that he might turn from his iniquities”’—his mind is darkened by sin, so that he cannot understand God’s truth ; yet he might << pray to understand that truth?— he cannot give himself grace to turn unto God ; yet he may use the means of grace for that purpose ; or, as the Lord says by his prophet Hosea, he may “frame his doings to turn unto God”—he has not “the eyes to see” of the “spiritual man” to see the spiritual things of the word, so as to be spiritually affected by them ; but he has the eyes of “the natural man,” to see the natural things of the word, so as to be naturally affected by them—he has not “ the ears to hear” of the ae Oe ee ee INEXCUSABLENESS OF MAN. 201 “ spiritual man ;” but he has the ears to hear of the “natural man”—if, when Christ “‘tells of heavenly things,” he cannot understand them; he can under- stand when he “ tells of earthly things’—if he cannot understand those “things of the Spirit,” regeneration, sanctification, union with Christ, and all spiritual bless- ings in him, so as to be moved by them; yet he can understand the histories of Scripture, the parables and sayings of Christ that are drawn from natural things, and are addressed to the natural understanding. Thus he can understand the folly of neglecting the soul for worldly riches and luxury from the parable of the rich fool, and of the rich voluptuary—he can understand that the punishment of hell-fire must form a miserable end for him if he be wicked, and will not cut off the right hand sin; and that a new Jerusalem, where there is no sorrow, or crying, or death, but all is most glorious and blessed, must form a happy end for him, if he be righteous. And what is it that prevents his being moved by these things? Nothing but the hardening of his own heart, by his own positive wilful- ness. hey have removed their heart from God— pulled away the shoulder—stopped their ears—made their heart as adamant stone, and if they become “vessels of wrath” in consequence, it is after having been “endured with much long-suffering.” — Dis- tinguished as he is from the brute creation, by the power of knowing and understanding, at least, the “earthly things” of the word, he will not reason or reflect on them: endowed as he is with physical liberty of will,-with power over his own inclination so as to refuse, from self-interested motives, to do what his will 202 THE RECONCILER. is inclined to do, and to choose to do what his will is opposed to,—yet he will not consider that he might exercise that power; but, as the Jews of old “loved strangers, and after them they would go,” so he has loved his sins and the world so much by indulgence, that after them he will go. Moreover, while the Lord Jesus says to sinners now, as he said to sinners in his day, “ Hearken, every one of you, and understand ;” yet they will not hearken, at least so as to understand : —while Jesus says to the same description of persons, as he then said to a “ multitude” of them, ‘ Labour for the meat that endureth to everlasting life ;” they will not labour :—while he says to unbelievers, as he also said then, “Strive to enter” into the way of life “by the strait gate” of faith; they will not strive to acquire that knowledge of the object of faith, and the evidences of truth that are requisite to such believing. And is not this criminal? Is not their unbelief in consequence inex- cusable, while they have, thus, not only the appropriate means and motives, but also the physical abilities of doing so? Saith not the Scripture the same? Were a sinner excusable in refusing to “ kiss the Son” at God’s command, he would not make that Son “ angry,” so as to be in danger of perishing by the way, when his wrath was kindled but a little; were a sinner ex- cusable in God’s account for not coming to the “great supper’ which he has prepared, he, as “ the master of the house, would not be angry,” so as to be provoked to declare, that he who thus refused “should not taste of his supper ;” were those who do not believe, and so do not enter into the gospel rest, excusable, the Lord would not “ swear in his wrath INEXCUSABLENESS OF MAN. 2a that they should not enter into his rest ;” were those ‘“¢ who obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ” excusable, he would not threaten to ‘‘ punish them with eyerlasting destruction.” Nor will it avail to say—‘ Provision is made only for some; and I may not be amongst that number :” for, we maintain, that provision is made for all, concluding that, if the gospel was to be preached ¢o every creature, there is a gospel for every creature. The atonement is available for all, as the ‘ daily sacrifice’ in Israel was available for all Israel; the righteousness of the last Adam is available for all ; the casting out of the Prince of this world is available for all; the Spirit is offered to all; and it is a divine truth that “ God so loved the world as to give his only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him, should not perish, but have everlasting life.” In other words, as to this provision, there is no want of mercy in the “ Father,” of merit i the “ Son,” or of power in the “ Holy Ghost,” for the sinner’s help. On the contrary, where ‘sin has abounded, grace has much more abounded ;” all are invited to Christ, that they might have life; and “ the Holy Spirit,” as well as “wisdom,” is freely given to every one that ‘“‘asketh.” Concerning the salvation too, there are sufficient means of information; attention to them is urged by every possible motive ; moreover, a throne of grace is accessible to every one for the supply of any deficiency, or the removal of any obstacle, in the way of salvation. Nor, again, will it avail to urge those Scriptures that declare that, ““ No man can come to Christ, 204 THE RECONCILER. except” he be “ drawn,” or, “ it be given ;” that the carnal mind is not subject to the law of God, neither. indeed can be: for, as we shall by and by prove, this “cannot” is a moral, wilful incapability, only ex- pressive of that extreme reluctance which renders it culpably impossible for a man to be persuaded to come to Christ, owing to his pride and prejudice, his love of sin and of the world, and his pursuit of them; but this does not excuse the, unbeliever and sinner any more than the ‘could not” of Joseph’s brethren, when they ‘could not speak peaceably unto him ;” the “ cannot” of the adulterer and of the drunkard, when they ‘‘ cannot cease from sin.” Does common sense excuse a man, when he has such a wicked heart that he cannot love an object most worthy of his love, in that he cannot love but hates him; or, when he cannot do good, or cannot cease to do evil? What should we think of a court of justice who should acquit a man on such a principle? No, the unwil- lingness of the sinner is bad enough—the unper- suadableness is worse—and to say that he cannot be persuaded, or that his reluctance is unconquerable, is worse than all; and is so far from being excusable, that it is the very height of the criminality. Thus we have seen, that not only the heathen in his heathenish state, and the Jew in his Jewish state, but that the Christian in his Christian state, is inex- cusable. And thus we account for the situation of the man who was without the wedding garment as “< speechless.” Before we conclude this subject, we will add the remarks of the great Dr. Owen, than whom there has INEXCUSABLENESS OF MAN. 205 not appeared perhaps, since the apostle’s days, a more able or zealous champion of Calvinism. They are on Heb. ii. 1]. “* Every one to whom the word is duly revealed, who is not converted unto God, doth volun- tarily oppose his own obstinacy as to its efficiency and operation. Here lies the stop to the progress of the word in its work upon the souls of men.* It stays not unless it meets with an actual obstinacy in the will, refusing, rejecting, and resisting it. And God in sending it, doth accompany his word with that power, which is meet to help and save them in the state and condition wherein it find them. If they will add new obstinacy to their minds and hearts; if they will fortify themselves against the word with prejudices and dislike; if they will resist its work through a love to their lusts and corrupt affections ; God may justly leave them to perish, and to be filled with the fruit of their own ways.” Tt Again, on the 18th verse of the same chapter: ‘* Consider the manner * A candle will give light, if an extinguisher be not put upon it: and it will give light to ws, if we do not shut our eyes. + Hence Scripture speaks of different degrees of this voluntary culpable hardening, so that a power sufficient for others would not be sufficient for them: but that more Divine strength must be put forth to subdue and convert. The Jews in Babylon had so hardened their heart, that God’s message proved ineffectual to them, while had it been delivered to the heathen, such as Nineveh for instance, it would have been received. What else mean those words in Ezek. iii. 4—7? So in our Lord’s time, the cities of Chorazin and Bethsaida, notwithstanding his preaching and mighty works, re- pented not, whilst Tyre and Sidon would have repented in sackcloth and ashes. Why? Because the former had, by their own positive acts, rebelled against the light, and hardened their heart more than the latter. 206 THE RECONCILER. how the gospel proposeth unto us the objects of faith, or the things which it requires us to believe. It doth not do this by a mere naked revelation or declaration of them to us, attended with a severe command. It adds entreaties, exhortations, reasonings, encourage- ments, promises, threatenings; every way it proceedeth that is meet and suited to prevail on the minds of rational creatures. All the things of our own eternal concernment, are proposed unto us with that gentle- ness, tenderness, condescension; that love, that earnestness, that evidence of a high concern in us and our good; that patheticalness and compassionate aifection, as will assuredly aggravate the guilt of rejecting the tender which it makes. All these things the gospel proposeth, urgeth, presseth upon us by the authority of God. It requireth, exacteth, and com- mandeth faith in men in a way of obedience unto the supreme authority of God. Now if these things, and sundry others of the like consideration, do concur in the proposals and commands of the gospel, it is evident that the unbelief of sinners, must have dis- obedience, contumacy, and rebellion, accompanying it. For, can a man refuse that which is proposed unto him upon such reasons and considerations, in the way and manner intimated, all enforced with the authority of God, without contracting the guilt of the highest rebellion against him? And, hence it is that the Scripture everywhere layeth the cause of men’s unbelief on their wills, their love of sin, their obsti- nacy and hardness of heart.” Once more says the Doctor: “ Men have power in sundry things relating to obedience and salvation, to comply with his mind REASONS OF MAN'S UNPERSUADABLENESS. 207 and will, which they voluntarily neglect: and this alone is sufficient to bear the charge of their eternal ruin.” Thus, to stop the mouth of the unbeliever,—to ‘¢ justify God in his sayings,” when he pronounces the unbeliever condemned,—and to rouse this unbeliever from his supine indifference, and dangerous security, — we have entered somewhat minutely into this part of our subject, and trust that its importance will form a satisfactory apology for its length. We now pass on to another branch of our subject, somewhat indeed connected with, and confirmatory of this, while it further exposes to view the deceitfulness of the human heart, and its many devices to counteract the salutary effects of the gospel ministry. CHAPTER VI. A GUARD SET AGAINST EVASIONS ALSO, BY A DISTINCT STATEMENT OF WHAT ARE NOT, AND WHAT ARE THE REASONS OF MANS UNPER- SUADABLENESS AND CONSEQUENT UNBELIEF. Man, under the influence of his own froward and deceitful heart, and the blinding power of “ the God of this world,” will not only form excuses, but will have recourse to evasions ; it is, therefore, of great importance to God’s honour and man’s salvation, that these eyasions should be exposed. For this purpose, we will endeavour to point out distinctly and ex- plicitly, first, what are not the reasons of that unper- 208 THE RECONCILER. suadableness which prevents belief ; and then, secondly, what are the reasons of such unpersuadableness or disobedience. We propose then— Section I. 1. To show what are not the Reasons. 1. It is not on account of any decree of reprobation. The Scripture speaks of no reprobation, but of such as ‘“ have eyes to see,” and wont see, and “ have ears to hear,” and wont hear; or of such as have been “endured with much long-suffering ;” as will be seen, when we treat of that subject. Nor is it, 2dly, to be imputed to Adam, or to ‘‘ man’s evil imagination, which he has from his youth ;” because men are not under a necessity to walk after that evil imagination, or, though they have an inclination to evil deeds, to indulge such inclination ; since God presents to the mind so many considerations from the light and law of nature, from his written word, from parents and teachers, as, connected with the power of consider- ation and reasoning, would subserve the purpose of counteraction.* Nor, 3dly, is it because Satan, ‘the god of this world,” hath blinded their minds in the first instance ; for Satan blinds only those who yield to be blinded, or have first blinded themselves. 4thly, it 1s not for want of sufficient help being laid on Christ by God the Father for them ; for who will set limits to the value of the blood of the Son of God for atone- ment, or to the merit of his righteousness for “ justi- * The “ imagination”—the inclination or “ lust,” is from Adam ; to walk after the one, and to indulge the other, is our own. REASONS OF MAN’S UNPERSUADABLENESS. 209 fication of life?” or, who will limit the power of God’s Almighty Spirit for man’s salvation? Moreover, after Christ has declared that ‘‘God so loved the world as to give his only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have ever- lasting life ;” after an apostle has told us of the Divine philanthropy,* or “ love of God our Saviour toward man ;” after indeed, God has sworn by himself that he “ desires not the death of the sinner, but that he turn from his wickedness and live;” who will set bounds to the Divine mercy, so as to say, that there is no help for him in God, if he seek it aright? No; as God said to Israel, “‘ O Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself, but in me is thy help ;” so he seems to say to mankind at large. And hence he has commissioned his apostles and ministers to ‘“ preach the gospel,” not merely before every creature, but “ ¢o every creature ;” which obviously implies, that there is a gospel for every creature. Why else too is it said, that “ God sent his Son Jesus to bless us in turning away every one of us from our iniguities?” Nor, othly, is it because of a want of willingness in Jesus himself to bless the sinner thus; for he expressly cried, “If any man thirst, let him come to me and drink ;” and indeed he complains of the sinners of his time, that they “‘ would not come to him that they might have life ;” nay, more, he laments over them: ‘ O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, how often would I have gathered thy children together, as a hen gathereth her brood under her wings, but ye would not!” Nor, 6thly, is it for want of the means of information, or of sufficient * OirarOpwzia. E 210 THE RECONCILER. evidence for believing in this Saviour ; for the mfor- mation given ,concerning him, and the witness borne to its truth, is amply sufficient to satisfy any sincere and honest inquirer. Nor, Tthly, is it for want of ** eyes to see and ears to hear” this evidence, or of a power of consideration whether it be for our happi- ness to receive such Saviour, or for our misery to reject him. Nor again, Sthly, is it for want of sufi- cient encouragement fo ask for understanding, or for any thing else that might be deemed requisite to believing unto salvation. Nor, Sthly, is there a want of motives, such as commands and exhortations, pro-- mises and threatenings, or even of expostulations ; for all these we have in abundance : and as Moses and the Prophets, Christ and the Apostles did, so do God's ministers urge them. Nor, 10thly, and lastly, is it that man has not the physical liberty of his own will, to choose what he likes best without foreign com- pulsion ; nor, from want of ability to use the helps, or to avoid the hindrances to his faith and salvation. Although, indeed, man is destitute of will to spiritual good, yet if there were not in him this physical, or, as ‘the Westminster Confession of Faith” terms it, “‘ na- tural liberty of the will,” we can see no use of all the addresses of God to man. Why should he, for in- stance, by his servant Moses to Israel, after setting before them the “good” and the “ evil,” urge them to “ choose life, that they and their seed might live ?” Why should he again say by his servant Joshua on another occasion, “Choose ye whom ye will serve.” Indeed, there are a thousand things in common life of a moral nature, wherein we show a “ power over REASONS OF MAN'S UNPERSUADABLENESS. 211 our own will” of inclination by the considerations that suggest themselves to us, as has been before shown: and, with regard to soul concerns, though spiritual considerations will not move us freely to will spiritual things, yet, self-interested and earthly considerations may move us to seck to avoid self- destruction. Section [I. Lo show what aru the Reasons of Men's Unpersuadableness, or Disobedience to the Gospel. Having stated what are not the reasons why men believe not, we proceed to state what are the reasons of this unpersuadableness and unbelief ; and, by the light of Scripture, as well as from observation and experience, we find that they are these. 1. The practice of evil deeds. Men, by their own positive acts of will indulge in evil deeds, and walk after their evil imagination, which, as before observed, they are by no sort of necessity obliged to do; at least, until they have hardened themselves through the deceitful- ness of sin; for, although, from a corrupted nature, they are inclined to these evil deeds, yet, such are the considerations brought to their mind from their own “spirit,” which Solomon calls “the candle of the Lord,”—from the word of God, and from the Spirit’s striving by their conscience and thoughts,—from parents and teachers, and from the manifest conse- quences of sin around them,—that it must bea positive wicked act of their own mind that must prompt them, instead of refusing the evil or misery, and choosing the good or happiness, as men from the very con- P2 212 THE RECONCILER. stitution of their nature are led to do, to take a direct contrary course, and so to walk after the imagination of their evil heart, and to indulge in evil deeds. Indeed, it is worthy of remark, that not only Scripture lays the blame on this circumstance, but even the common sense of mankind does so; for who can do an act against light and knowledge without inward upbraidings, or self-condemnation ? 2. Men’s deeds being evil, they ‘‘ love darkness rather than light,” and so they come not to the light, lest they should be reproved. They will not seek after evi- dence, or will not admit it. And if they hear the «word of the kingdom,” yet the word preached does not profit them, not being mixed. with faith. And why? He “before whom all things are naked and opened” sees that their object before they come is vanity—that their thoughts while there are vanity— that perhaps they are ‘ in all evil in the midst of the congregation”—and that their thoughts after hearing the word are also vanity ; and if so, how could they expect to believe ? and then they suffer, as our Lord expresses it, “‘ the devil to take away the seed of the word, lest they should believe and be saved ;” or, as expressed by the apostle, to ‘ blind their minds, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ should shine in unto them.” And hence, not seeing the glory of Christ to attract them, while they do see the glory of the world, no wonder that they choose to follow after the latter. Which leads me to remark, 3. That through the deceitfulness of sin thus indulged, their heart becomes hardened against Christ’s calls to come unto him, and they go after the world, being as Israel REASONS OF MAN'S UNPERSUADABLENESS. 213 was, “estranged from God, through their idols.” Hence another reason is, 4. The love of the world’s riches, or the ‘* minding of earthly things.” So our Saviour teaches us in the parable of the marriage of the king's son. They “ made light” of the gospel call. Why? Because they chose rather to go to “their farm and merchandise. Thus we see that our agriculturists, and our tradesmen, and manufacturers, and com- mercial men, set their hearts more on their worldly success than on the enjoyment of the blessings of the gospel. ‘The same our Lord teaches us in the para- ble of the “great supper.” One has bought a piece of land, and he must needs go and see it ; another has purchased five yoke of oxen, and he must go and prove them; a third has married a wife, and there- fore he cannot come: and thus they all beg to be excused from the “ feast of fat things” provided for them in the gospel kingdom. Here is no charge of immorality — here is civility, too — but, alas! there is a “neglect of the great salvation,” for the sake of earthly things, and things too, in themselves, lawful and good. KEsau-like, there is the “ despising the birth-right for a mess of pottage.” But who is he that overcometh the world, this love of the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God? 5. The love of the world’s praise, or “the honour that cometh from men” is assigned by our Lord as a reason of persons not believing. ‘ How can ye believe,’’ says he to the Pharisees that would not re- ceive him, “who receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only ?” And, on another occasion, we are told by the Evan- 214 THE RECONCILER. gelist John, that “among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but, because of the Pharisees, they did not confess him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue. Jor they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God.” A proof this, not only that their faith was not unto salvation, but that the want of such a saving faith was owing, not to the deficiency of evidence, but to their predominant love of the praise of men. 6. ‘* Vain man would be wise,” as Eliphaz in Job says, and self-concett therefore is another excuse of unbelief. Men say, “we see,” and therefore their sin remaineth, such being too wise to learn. ‘“‘Seest thou a man wise in his own conceit ? there is more hope of a fool than of him,” says Solomon. And a greater than Solomon has declared, that “ Except a man be- come as a little child, he cannot enter the gospel king- dom :” and his apostle to the same purpose says, that ‘‘a man must become a fool if he would be wise’ — ‘wise unto salvation.” 7. There is the vain hope of justifying themselves, or ‘establishing their own righteousness,” in consequence of which they will not ‘submit to the righteousness of God. ‘Thus the young ruler, mentioned by Luke, being ignorant of the spirituality of that law to which he appealed, is said to be ‘willing to justify himself.” And the Jews, in Paul’s days, aware that righteousness was necessary to eternal life, ‘‘ followed after the righteousness of works,” and “went about to establish” their own. And what was the consequence? ‘They did not submit to the righteousness of God, by faith in Jesus Christ, and the same reason operates still. 8. Another reason Is indolence. ‘ A little more sleep, a little more slumber,” REASONS OF MAN'S UNPERSUADABLENESS. Yio is the language of many, and therefore they will not ‘arise and be doing.’ Let no one be alarmed at the word “doing.” What has been just remarked might satisfy any one that we are not recommending doing the works of the law, that we might be justified and live. No—far be it fromustodoso. What wemean is, that a man should be up and doing, in seeking by his physical or natural powers, that fad/h which jus- tifies and saves. And fearing, as we do, that a mistake, or rather a want of discrimination here, lulls some to sleep, we will dwell a little upon the subject. Now, who will deny that a man must know and understand who and what the person is in whom he is to have faith, or place his dependence? So must the sinner know who and what Christ is, before he can intelligently and soundly believe inhim. That blind man of whom mention is made in the Gospel of John* acted ra- tionally, when, after Christ had asked him, ‘* Dost thou believe on the Son of God?” replied, “Who is he, Lord, that I might believe on him?” And so did the multitude addressed by our Lord in the same Gospel.t “What sign shewest thou, then, that we may see and believe thee?” Just so is it as to the matter in hand. We must know what are the evidences of Christ’s being the Son of man, before we can believe on him as the Son of man: we must know and understand the proofs of his being the Son of God and God, before we be- lieve on him as the Son of God and God. Moreover, to believe on him as the Saviour and the Lord, we must know concerning his coming in the flesh—what he has done-—what he has suffered—about his resur- * John ix. 36. + John vi. 30. 216 THE RECONCILER. rection— ascension — exaltation—and his possession of and his giving of the Holy Spirit: for, without some measure of knowledge of these topics, it will be a mere blind, and therefore a dead faith. Now, this being granted, will it not appear that there must be searching the Scriptures—that there must be hearing diligently —that there must be guarding against hindrances, and availing ourselves of helps,—in order to acquire this knowledge and understanding? Hear our Lord on this subject. A multitude of carnal worldly people came to him, ‘‘not,” as he says, ‘‘ because of his miracles, but because they had eaten of the loaves and were filled.” And what is his exhortation to them ? “ Labour not for the meat that perisheth, but for that meat which endureth to everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you.” And, when on their asking him, “ What shall we do that we might work the works of God? Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent ;” as if he had said—*“ This is the work about which you should be concerned, even that you set your mind to think and consider, and know and understand the proofs of my mission, that you may be- lieve on me; and that, particularly, you should search the Scriptures which testify of me, for this purpose.” Thus then, though we should not labour to establish a righteousness of our own—though we should not labour with a view to merit* faith, yet we should * A man is drowning, while a kind helper stands on the shore: the drowning man cries for help. Is there any merit in that? The same kind helper plunges into the water, and says— ‘Take hold of my hand.” He takes hold of it, and perhaps labours to take ho'd of it. Is there any merit in that? No, all is from natural self-love. REASONS OF MAN’S UNPERSUADABLENESS. pA labour in order that we might have faith, in the mean- time ‘‘ making our prayer before the Lord our God, that we might understand his truth.” And, to advert to another Scripture exhortation, we should ‘labour, lest a promise being left us of entering into his rest” by faith, <‘ we should come short of it.” Hear the Saviour again on this subject. When, on his journey towards Jerusalem, ‘ one said unto him, Lord, are there few that be saved ?—instead of directly answering his ques- tion, Jesus said unto “them” that were about him,— even to unbelievers, as from the sequel of the narra- tive appears,—“ Strive to enter in by the strait gate,” that is, of faith ; for what is the gate by which we enter into the “‘ way of life,” the way to be “saved,” but faith ? Now then, for this purpose, it seems, we are exhorted to “strive.” Precisely to the same purpose are the injunctions of Solomon: ‘“ My son, if thou apply thine heart to understanding: yea, if thou criest after know- ledge, and liftest up thy voice for understanding ; if thou seekest her as silver, and searchest for her as for hid treasures: then shalt thou understand the fear of the Lord, and find the knowledge of God.”* And again: ‘* Hear instruction and be wise, and refuse it not. Blessed is the man that heareth me, watching daily at my gates, waiting at the posts of my doors. For whoso findeth me, findeth life, and shall obtain favour of the Lord. But he that sinneth against me, wrongeth his own soul; all they that hate me, love death.t We conclude then, that in order to faith, the Lord exhorts not only to arise and be doing, but to be “labouring”’and “ striving ;” to “ ery” and to “lift up = Prov: i. 1 =5. + Prov. viii..33—36. 218 THE RECONCILER. the voice” by prayer ; to ‘seek as silver ;” to “ search as for hid treasure.” How different then is this from the disposition and language of the sluggard to which we adverted, when we were assigning sioth or indolence as another reason why people do not believe! Not that God may not, or does not, in some instances, work faith without these endeavours; for God, as a sovereign, will do as he pleases in this matter ; but we maintain that such is our duty, and that such is the way in which we are to expect God to work. Nor does it set aside the agency of God in the affair, for it may be proved that both the providence and the Spirit of God are the doers of the work, and that the gift is of God. We have somewhat laboured this point, because a mistake here has set asleep both ministers and their people; and thus souls have been perishing in great numbers under the mere exhibition of the gospel; exhibition we say, not: enforcement, as Paul enforced it, by “ reasoning and persuading ;” as Paul and Barnabas did, who ‘“ so spake, that a great multitude, both of the Jews and also of the Greeks, be- lieved.” 9. A similar reason to the last is, aversion from self-denial. Our Lord has said, “If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.” Hence, the unbeliever con- cludes, that should he come to Christ, he must, as the consequence, deny himself of his ease and self-interest, perhaps of his honour and reputation, perhaps even of his dearest comforts—nay, it may be, of even life itself ; and therefore, says he, “ I will even stay where Iam: aself-denying, mortified life will not suit me.” Thus he finds it for his ease and worldly interest, to REASONS OF MANS UNPERSUADABLENESS. 219 close his eyes to the light and evidence of Divine truth ; or, at least, to give up all pains-taking in order to acquire the knowledge of Christ: and so he settles down in unbelief! See then a ninth reason of the unpersuadableness and consequent unbelief of sinners. And let these suffice: nor, after we have well con- sidered the whole of these reasons, shall we be surprised at our Lord’s saying, * Blessed is he that shall not be offended in me.” And, on reflecting on this subject, how are we reminded of the deceitfulness of the human heart! Many a man considers himself as having believed in Christ ; but let him clearly understand, that evil deeds must be renounced, even the right hand deed ; that the world must be only a subordinate object ; that the praise of men must be given up for the praise God; that, instead of being “ proud in spirit,” he must be “ poor in spirit ;” in other words, that he must become a “ little child,” and a “ fool;” that he must renounce his own obedience to trust in the obedience of another for justification; that he must shake off his sloth, and seek God with his whole heart and his whole soul for the faith that saves; and finally, that if he would lead a christian life, he must make a sacrifice of every thing that comes in com- petition with the christian temper and conduct ;—and he will find that, so far from having received Christ, he will complain, like those disciples that ‘ went away and walked no more with him,” that these are hard words, saying, “ Who can bear them?” A man may indeed, as Herod “ feared John,” respect the ministers of the word,—like him he may ‘‘ hear them 220 THE RECONCILER. gladly,”—and like him “ do many things” required by Christ; yet still he may not find it in his heart to part with his darling sins, or to relinquish his worldly expectations, and sincerely to confess himself on the Lord’s side. Such then are the reasons of the un- belief of the sinner, or of his unpersuadableness as to coming to Christ. Before, however, we dismiss this subject, we may remark on that extreme unwillingness to come to Christ, which is indicated by the word “ cannot.”* “¢ No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me, draw him.” And again; ‘* No man cant come to me, except it were given by my Father.” And a similar expression of the apostle Paul; ‘* No man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.” In the two first of these passages, it evidently appears, that the will is concerned as well as the un- derstanding ; for they are said, in the first instance, to “ murmur,” and in the second to be “ offended,” and so offended, as to go back, and “‘ walk no more with” Jesus. What, then, are we to understand by this “cannot 2?” That the sinner cannot find tt in his heart to come to Christ, because he cannot give up his evil deeds ; or, because he sees a superior, or at least a * Now even in common language we use this word as expressive of extreme reluctance; thus in the case of the friend coming to another at midnight for three loaves, the latter says, I cannot rise and give thee. Why? Because he did not like to be so disturbed. It expressed his extreme reluctance: so as to Scripture language. + That Christ did not mean to excuse, appears from his saying elsewhere, “ He that believeth not is condemned already, because, &e. ;” and “If ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins ;” and his telling them that they “had no cloak for their sins.” REASONS OF MAN'S UNPERSUADABLENESS. 271 more attractive glory in the world than in Christ; or, because he cannot humble himself to be a little child, and as such, to learn of Christ; or, because he will not be at the pains of getting the requisite knowledge, or will not submit to walk in all Christ’s ordinances and commandments,—or, in other words, to take his yoke upon him. ‘This is the sort of “ cannot,” that prevents a sinner from coming to Christ! And it is the sort of “ cannot” that we often meet with in Scripture, such as, so far from excusing the sinner, aggravates his guilt in the strongest manner. It is such a “ cannot” as that attributed to Joseph's brethren, when, owing to their envy and deep-rooted malice, they “‘ could not speak peaceably unto him ;”—such as that attributed by the apostle Jude to some filthy apostates who had “eyes full of adultery, and so could not cease from sin ;”—and such as we apply to a confirmed drunkard, when we say, that ‘“ he cannot leave his cups ;” or speaking of him in reference to a house that he has been accustomed to frequent, “ he cannot pass that house!” Just so too is it that “ the carnal mind is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can it be; and just so is it, that a sinner cannot be subject to, or “ obey the gospel of God,” cannot come to Christ ! Dr. Owen represents this criminal impotence some- thing in this way. 1. There is, so to speak, an intellectual impotence ; the eyes of the “ understanding being evil,’* to allude to our Lord’s similitude, there is a want of receptive * Luke xi. 34. 292 THE RECONCILER. power of those discoveries of Christ, which would attract the heart to him. 2. There is a voluntary impotence, the heart being so averse on account of its pride, love of sin and the world, as well as indolence, that the man cannot find it in his heart to go to him to “ take his yoke and learn of him.” 3. The condemnation is grounded on the latter, in- asmuch as the sinner does not actually apply his mind to the things of Christ, to the utmost of his ability ; there is not a dueimprovement of his natural faculties in the use of means for the discharge of his duty towards God.” To conclude.—We see then, that, however man may attempt to evade the criminal charge of dis- obedience to the gospel, as well as of disobedience to the law, that the reasons of such disobedience lie with himself ; and since it is the positive act of his own mind, voluntary, and in stubborn opposition to all the means of information with which he is favoured, and to all the motives by which such means are urged upon his attention ; also that, after all, he will neither avoid the hindrances to, or use the helps for belief, we see that he zs awfully criminal, and as such con- demnable !* Wisdom has stood and cried—cried repeatedly— cried earnestly,—‘‘ How long, ye simple ones, will ye love simplicity? and the scorners delight in their scorning, and fools hate knowledge ? ‘Turn you at my * A man is drowning: a kind friend on the shore plunges into the water, and offers his help. Suppose he perversely refused help : would he not be chargeable with his own death? REFLECTIONS. AS: reproof: behold I will pour out my Spirit unto you, I will make known my words unto you.” In the case above described, then, can any one wonder at the language that follows? ‘ Because I have called, and ye refused, I have stretched out my hand and no man regarded ; but ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof: I also will laugh at your calamity, I will mock when your fear cometh ; when your fear cometh as desolation, and your de- struction cometh as a whirlwind; when distress and anguish come upon you.—Then shall they call upon me, but I will not answer ; they shall seek me early, but they shall not find me.” And why all this? The reason is given a second time : “ For that they hated knowledge, and did not choose the fear of the Lord, they would none of my counsel: they despised all my reproof.” And what shall be their punishment ? “That they shall eat of the fruit of their own way, and be filled with their own devices.” And can they find fault with that? Ah! the only relief for a sinner, convicted in his own conscience that such is his deserved fate, and who yet lives crying for mercy, is in that sovereign goodness which in our Second Part we shall declare. But the above is the language of government—of a government equitable—of a govern- ment benevolent too—of a government “ holy, just, and good.” REFLECTIONS ON THE LAST TWO CHAPTERS. On reviewing the last two chapters, what must we say? 1. Let God be justified, although man be thus 224 THE RECONCILER. condemned. In addition to the Testimony that has been borne for God under the several administrations of his government, heathen, Jew, and Christian, as in a preceding chapter, we would remark as follows :-— “ God is love.” Yet it is love of that which is in itself lovely, or worthy of love, in the view of a perfect being; but, if we are wnlovely, that is our fault, not his: ‘ God is love” still. ‘* God ts light ;” but if we, like owls and bats, withdraw from the light, it is our fault: Godis light still. ‘* God ts a sun,” and he cheers and renders fruitful the heart that receives his rays ; but if we turn away from those rays, the fault is ours, that we are in a state of gloom and sterility: God is asun still. The same sun that renders the seed on the good ground fruitful, scorches and withers that on the rocky ground: but who finds fault with the sun for these results? The sun may be a sun, without a spot too, still. All that can be expected of God as an equitable and beneficent King, under a government that is probationary, is, to do all that he can do by way of means and motives to pre- serve order, and promote happiness in his kingdom. And then, if this fail, blame must attach to the subjects, not to the King. And, “ what more could have been done, that he has not done?” If any thing more be done, it must be done, not on the footing of equity, but of sovereign goodness. 2. Let man be condemned, or rather, let him con- demn himself. Judged in the court of works by the «law of works,” he is found guilty of disobedience. Judged in the court of faith, by the “ law of faith” he is found guilty of disobedience there also. Let him REFLECTIONS. 225 then clear his Creator and King, and condemn him- self. Having been proved to humble him, and to make him know himself, let him be humbled and know himself. And since an additional dispensation of sovereign “ goodness” is revealed in the Bible, let him seek relief in that sovereign “ goodness.” 3. God, as * possessor” and “ Lord of heaven and earth” has a right, under such circumstances of man’s failure and stubborn disobedience, to shew mercy, or to leave in the hands of justice or equity, “ as it seemeth him good,” or, “ according to the good pleasure of his will.” After having been dishonoured as an equitable and beneficent King, he has a right to show his power as @ gracious Sovereign. After having “ endured” his subjects with “ much long-suffering,” he has a right to ‘show his wrath, and make known his power” on “the vessels of wrath fitted to destruc- tion ;” or, ‘to make known the riches of his glory” on “the vessels of mercy which he hath afore pre- pared unto glory.” While he says to all in equity, ‘‘ Friend, I do thee no wrong,” he may say in sove- reignty, “ May I not do what I will with my own ? Is thine eye evil, because I am good ?” 4. Man’s wisdom is—that Is, it is right and good under his humiliating circumstances—to acknowledge that ‘it is of the Lord’s mercies that he is not con- sumed ;” and, instead of vindicating himself, to “nut his mouth in the dust, if so be there may be hope ;” hope in another system of efficacious grace and sove- reign goodness. 226 THE RECONCILER. CHAPTER VII. CONCERNING GOD'S FORESIGHT OF MAN’S FAILURE AND DISOBEDIENCE 3 AND SHOWING HOW GOD MAKES SUCH FAILURE, &c. WHETHER IN ADAM, OR IN HIS POSTERITY AS UNDER a “‘ LAW OF WORKS” OR A “LAW OF FAITH,” T0 REDOUND TO HIS OWN GLORY, AND TO THE ULTIMATE HAPPINESS OF HIS PEOPLE, OR OF ALL WHO YIELD TO HIS WISDOM AND WILL. SEcTIon [. On God's Foreknowledge of the Volitions or Willings of Men, and, of course, of the Result of the Probationary System. WE have seen that, although the gospel proclama- tion is made to all men, inviting them to come, they ** all with one consent make excuse,” choosing rather to remain in their present condition. Now, that such a temper of mind, and that such inclination of the will, was foreseen by God, even from eternity, cannot reasonably be called in question, if we reflect on the following considerations :— 1. That to maintain otherwise, would be to limit Him whose “ understanding” is said to be unlimited, or “infinite.” Moreover, it is said, that “ he sees the end from the beginning ;” and that ‘‘ known unto God are all his works, from the foundation of the world.” But since his works proceed so much in connexion with man’s willings, he must, of course, have known them also. } 2. To maintain otherwise would set aside the schemes both of providence and prophecy. Now, it so happens that the very word providence signifies fore- sight; and if God had not foreseen men’s volitions GODS FOREKNOWLEDGE. 221 and actions, how could he have provided accordingly ? Moral good and evil consist in the disposition and will: if God foresaw not such disposition and will, how could he determine on reward or punishment ; and if not determine, how could he declare before- hand? And, when the great scheme of providence shall have had its consummation in the day of judg- ment, how could he then be said to “judge the secrets of the heart,” “the counsels of the heart,” if he had not seen all their volitions? But, see the pro- phecy of Daniel concerning “the things noted in the Scripture of truth ;” there we find the all-seeing God, foreseeing how the king of the south would be “ moved with choler”—how another would “ forecast devices” —and how it should be in “both the king’s hearts” spoken of, to ‘‘do mischief, as well as to speak lies at one table ;” and all this is foretold hundreds of years before. But it is not necessary to enlarge; this one instance is sufficient both to illustrate and prove the doctrine of God’s foreknowledge from those of provi- dence and prophecy. The same may be proved from a variety of Scrip- ture facts. When a demand was to be made on Pharaoh, king of Egypt, to let the children of Israel go out of his land, “I am sure,” says God, ‘that the king of Egypt will not let you go.” And again, “ As for thee and thy servants, I know that ye will not fear the Lord God.” Seo he foreknew that Israel would “break his covenant;” and says he concerning them, ‘I know their imagination which they go about even before I have brought them into the land which I sware.” Concerning the men of Ai, in the war Q 2 228 THE RECONCILER; between them and Israel, “‘ They will come out after us,’ says Joshua, from the Lord. So again, as to the men of Keilah, when David inquired, ‘‘ Will the men of Keilah deliver me and my men into the hand of Saul?” the Lord said, “‘ They will deliver thee up.” And how directly to the point is that passage in Isaiah, concerning Israel, ‘* Because I knew that thou art obstinate, and thy neck is an iron sinew, and thy brow brass.”,—“‘ I knew that thou wouldst deal treache- rously, and wast called a transgressor from the womb.” Nay, he looks forward to the time when the gospel would be preached to them, confirmed by the mira- culous gift of tongues, and, foreseeing, foretold the result: ‘* With men of other tongues, and other lips, will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.” So, by Jeremiah vil. 27. * Thou shalt speak all these words unto them, but they will not hearken to thee; thou shalt also call unto them, but they will not answer thee.” Doth not all this indicate God’s foreknowledge of human volitions? And, referring to the passages last quoted concerning the Jews, if he had such a knowledge of the Jews’ dispositions and volitions under given circum- stances, why not also of the Gentiles’? Yes, he knew that the heart of the people of Sodom, and of Tyre and Sidon, would have yielded, rather than the heart of the Jews, to the evidence of his miracles; and also that such was the state of the heart, that “no one could come to him but as given of the Father.” In short, to Him, to whom “one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day, —past, present, and future time, is but one present Now: NON-PREVENTION OF MAN’S SIN, 229 and all things, whether earlier or later in the ages of this world, were, in eternity, “naked and open to the eyes’ of God. Hence the divine foreknowledge of the result of human probation, under whatever dispensations ; and hence, in reference to creatures, foreseen to have for- feited life under two successive covenants of life, (being unpersuadable or disobedient,) he might, with pro- priety, make his election of such as he thought proper to be the objects of his sovereign mercy and goodness, without infringing on the equity or benevolence of the probationary government, whether “ by the law of works,” or by ‘“‘ the law of faith,” as well as without disannulling, or in the least impairing, the universal grace of the gospel. Section II. | On the Manifestation of the Glory of God’s Name, Government, and Sovereignty, by the Sufferance or Non-prevention of Man’s Sin and Unpersuadableness. When Christ forbore to heal Lazarus, or to prevent his death, some of the Jews said, ‘‘ Could not this man, which opened the eyes of the blind, have caused that even this man should not have died?” And so we are ready to say, ‘ Could not this glorious God, who is the God of all grace, and to whom nothing is impossible, have prevented man’s fall and man’s conse- quent sin and unpersuadableness, with all its dreadful consequences ?” But in the former case, we now see that ‘the glory of God was manifested thereby ; and although we could not see this glory now, as in the former case the Jews did not at the time, yet we may 230 THE RECONCILER. very reasonably believe, as they would have done, tliat hereafter we shall see that glory, and the wisdom of God in the sufferance of sin and Satan’s power in the moral creation. We said, indeed, ‘although we could not ;” yet, even now, by the light of revelation, In connexion with sound reason, something may be seen of this glory. And if the rest God is pleased to *“ conceal, "—as we find from Solomon it is his ‘‘ glory to conceal a thing,”—our faith may patiently wait, until hereafter it shall be revealed to our complete satisfaction. Now, we imagine that a clew may be found to this inquiry in the suppositions advanced by the apostle Paul, in his entrance upon the subject of man’s guilt, in the third chapter of the Epistle to the Romans. Not only does he there represent it as necessary that God should be “ justified in his sayings,”—his sayings of vengeful threatening ; but, in putting the question, ‘‘If our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say ?” he intimates, that man’s unrighteousness really does commend the righteous- ness of God, and of course tends to his glory. Then, again, as to the ¢ruth of God. Reflecting upon God’s covenant with Israel, and God’s truth or faithfulness to that covenant on the one hand, and upon Israel’s “lie” or unfaithfulness to it on the other; and supposing the faithless Jew to be putting the question, “ If the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory, why yet am I also judged as a sinner ?” —the apostle intimates, that such was really the case, and he manifestly acquiesces in the result, saying, « Let God be true, but every man a liar.” Now here GLORY OF GOD’S NAME. 23 the Holy Spirit seems to have supplied us with a mode of reasoning that may with propriety be applied to the subject before us in all its bearings. Besides, as shade sets off light in a picture, so it evidently does appear that “ abounding sin,” is represented as setting off “‘ superabounding grace ;” and that the unpersuad- ableness of both the Gentile or heathen world was suffered that God might glorify his ‘ mercy,” in “showing mercy” to such unpersuadable people. Nor, in this inquiry, should it be overlooked, that, throughout Scripture, it appears to be the obvious design of God to glorify his wisdom in BrincInG GOOD OUT OF EviL, and causing light to spring up out of darkness. He who sees not this, must as- suredly have read the Scripture with very little atten- tion. Yes, man’s sin, as well as man’s “ wrath,” shall praise God in some way or other; and he will educe his glory from man’s shame. Furnished with this clew, and supplied with this light of revelation, we would propose it to consi- deration, whether the fall and sin of man might not redound to God’s glory as to his name, his govern- ment, and his sovereignty ; and we will state our views in the following remarks. AS TO THE GLORY OF HIS NAME. 1. Man, having been proved ‘‘ EvIL,” and univer- sally so, God is manifested to be, as the Scriptures say he is, the “onty coop” Being, and has that glory which is due to him in consequence. 2. Man, having been proved to be “ unrighteous,” 232 THE REGONCILER. and universally so, God is discovered to be the “ only righteous” one, the “ only holy :” and man’s “ ways” being found to be universally ‘ unequal,” and God’s “ways” discovered to be universally ‘ equal,” Jehovah has this glory also; and thus man’s unrighteousness ““ commends the righteousness of God.” 3. All men, bound to God by covenant, being found to be “ liars,” or failing in the discharge of their obligations, God is to be seen as he “ who only ts true ;” and then he has the glory due to his name on this account. 4, Man having proved to be « corruptible man,” and universally so, God is manifested to be, according to Scripture, “ ¢he incorruptible God,” by way of con- trast: and has the glory due to him accordingly. Thus, by man’s conduct, God, by contrast, is mani- fested to be the only « good” one—the only “ right- eous”—the “ only true” Being; a glory which would not have appeared, if man’s fall had been prevented by sovereign interposition. So as to THE GLORY OF HIS GOVERNMENT, 1. Man’s sin has discovered that God's reghteousness or justice, the first attribute in a king, is “ like the great mountains,” immovable; that the authority of his daw is firm as the pillars of heaven; and that his truth, whether he predict, or promise, or threaten, is, like his nature, immutable. 2. Man’s sin has led to the discovery, that while justice is the basis of the divine throne, yet that “mercy may go before his face ;” that while he is a GLORY OF GOD'S SOVEREIGNTY. Zoo “ just God,” he can yet be a “ Saviour ;” and that the most perfect holiness, righteousness, and truth, can harmonize with the most illustrious display of love, and mercy, and grace. 3d. here is a discovery made of all that wisdom, and power, and love, and faithfulness, and truth of God, which appears in the person of the Saviour, of which we should have had no manifestation, had it not been for the sin of man. 4. ‘There is likewise a disclosure of all that wisdom, and power, and love, and faithfulness, and truth, that are manifested in the salvation of the church of God, and in the work of the Spirit of God, of which man’s fall has been the occasion. To which we may add— 9. The wisdom displayed in the economy of the sacred Three, in the plan and method of redemption, as recognised in our baptism, hence appears. Of all these, none would have appeared either to angels or man, if man had not sinned. THE GLORY OF HIS SOVEREIGNTY. 1, The unpersuadableness of man has given occa- sion for the glory of God’s sovereign “ GoopnEss,” in that he “ keeps mercy for thousands,” who deserve to perish; having “mercy on whom he will have mercy, and having compassion on whom he will have compassion,” ‘ according to the good pleasure of his will,” and ‘‘ to the praise of the glory of his grace.” 2. This stubbornness of man, as an apostle teaches us, has also given occasion to “ show his wrath, and to make his power known,” on “ the vessels of wrath a 234 THE RECONCILER. such as having been ‘‘ endured with much long-suffer- ing,” have, by their obstinacy, been ‘“ fitted to destruction.” Concerning, however, these latter, the conjecture of some is not altogether unworthy of notice—that by reason of the future peaceful opera- tion of the gospel, in the ceasing of war throughout the whole earth, and the consequent replenishing of the earth with inhabitants, together with the immense multitude of the saved during the whole of the Millen- nium, the number of the “Jost” will ultimately prove to be no more in proportion to the number of ‘the saved,” than the victims of justice in a well-ordered state are to the inhabitants at large. Section III. The Knowledge of the Glory of God as our God here, and the Vision of it hereafter, the true Happiness of Man. That the knowledge of God's glory, as the glory of a God related to us as our God and our Father, might render a rational nature happy, is perfectly consistent even with reason; but when we find our Lord posi- tively saying, “‘ This is eternal life, to know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent,” we cannot any longer call it in question. Be- hold the glory of God in creation; to have “ a heart to perceive” that, how delightful! Think again of the glory of God in the preservation and government of the world; what an addition to our happiness to ‘“‘ perceive” that also, especially when. we conceive of the glory in each case, as the glory of one to whom we are personally related. Then, add to these, the THE GLORY OF GOD. 235 incomparably more interesting glories of redemption ; assuredly ** the knowledge of the glory of the Lord,” and that Lord as our God and our Father, with the love, and admiration, and joy, which it inspires, must atford to an intelligent, well-ordered mind, the truest happiness. And, if the “ Anowledge” here, much more the vision hereafter. Hence, has the happiness of heaven been denominated the ‘ beatific vision and fruition of God,” according to the language of the Messiah, ‘‘ Thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance.” Now, it is obvious, that just in proportion to the manifestation of that glory, will be the degree of the happiness of man;—the conclusion is therefore un- avoidable, that God, in seeking his own glory, seeks man’s happiness also ; and that these therefore, instead of being considered as opposed to each other, should be viewed as perfectly compatible. O man, consider— consider this—only yield thyself to God,” and concur with him, and thou art necessarily happy! But, stub- bornly resist, and thou art necessarily miserable! And if thou art, who is to blame but thyself ? 236 THE RECONCILER. CONNECTING LINK ON EFFICACIOUS GRACE. THE EFFICACIOUS GRACEe By the word “ grace,” as ascribed to God in Scrip- ture, we frequently understand favour or kindness ; but perhaps we are as frequently to understand it of that ¢tnward power of the Spirit of grace that is im- parted to the believer, or, as the apostle Paul calls it, * the power that worketh in us,” which, as the gift of God’s favour, is denominated “ grace.” And, in this latter sense, it is intended in the following dissertation. Moreover, we call it ‘‘ efficacious” grace to distinguish it from that which is termed “‘ common grace,” and which does not prove effectual. By this latter we can understand nothing more than that power which the gospel as a means, accompanied with the motives by which such gospel is enforced, must obviously have upon the mind, physically considered, even in its natural or unrenewed state ; for who not yet hardened can hear the gospel tidings pressed on their attention by such invitations and exhortations, such expostu- lations and entreaties, such promises and threatenings, without feeling a power working within; stirring them up in some degree to hearken to-it, nay, even to hear gladly? And perhaps it is this power, as it operates upon the conscience and mind of men, that 1s intended by the striving of the Spirit with men, in Gen. vi. 3. This power we may therefore call “ com- mon grace’—‘ grace,” because it is the fruit of his favour or kindness; and ‘ common,” because the SOVEREIGN INTERPOSITION. 234 feeling is common to the hearers of the gospel. Nor, in this sense, do we consider the grace otherwise than “* sufficeent” in itself; for it would be sufficient, and amply sufficient, were it not for the perverse resistance arising from the “evil heart” or temper of the man by whom it is felt. It is that which is efficacious, however, of which we are about to treat, even that which, in addition to means and motives, by new creating the soul, or regenerating it, causes means and motives to be effec- tual to salvation.— Having said this much, we proceed with what we intend; which is, first, to show the necessity of a sovereign interposition, and of a super- added dispensation of efficacious grace, which, by subduing and drawing, will bring to Christ to take his yoke and learn of him; then, to give a more par- ticular view of this efficacious grace of the Holy Spirit; and lastly, to bring forward the Scripture proof of this subduing and drawing. And, in the whole, we shall be led to mark the difference, as well as to see the importance of the distinction, between the will of determination and the will of inclination, as represented in our dissertation on that subject in a former chapter. SEcTION I. On the Necessity of a Sovereign Interposition, and of a Superadded Dispensation of Efficacious Grace. The result of man’s probation under the equitable and beneficent government of the “ great King,”— both under a “ law of works,” and under a “ law of faith,’—being as above represented, it appears, that, if any be saved, it must be by sovereign interposition, 238 THE RECONCILER. controlling and changing the human will; and that, for this purpose, besides the universal gospel, given for probation and testimony, there should be superadded a dispensation of effectual grace by the Holy Spirit. It must be sovereign, for two reasons. 1. Because the unpersuadable sinner, having for his sins and stubbornness deserved to perish, must lie at God's mercy. “If thow wilt, forgive their sin, and take them for thine inheritance,” said Moses, after Israel had broken the covenant, and deserved to be con- sumed. Hence, all the mercy and grace shown to “the remnant of Israel,” in their subsequent history, was not for their sake, but for his name’s sake. 2. Because the returning sinner having had no will to return of himself, if he now have such will, must have it from out of himself, and of axother’s will, even from God. ‘The sinner has done “ what he listed ;” and now it is for God to do what he “ listeth.” Ac- cordingly, we find innumerable passages of Scripture which imply God’s control over, and his influence upon, the human will, in order to effect salva- tion. As to control, that passage concerning the ‘‘ Israel” that God would hereafter save, as mentioned by Ezekiel,* is remarkable: “I will not let them pollute my holy name any more.” And, as to in- fluence, all those passages that speak of God’s work upon “ the heart” and “ the spirit,” in consequence of which the man is “ stirred up,” or “ made willing” to do so and so, are to our purpose. “I will give them a heart to know me, that I am the Lord, and they shall be my people, and I will be their God: for they * Ezek. xxxix. 7. SOVEREIGN INTERPOSITION. 239 shall return unto me with their whole heart.” He gives “ a heart to perceive, and eyes to see, and ears to hear ;” he “ circumcises the heart to love God,” and then they are willing. But of the nature and evidence of this sovereignty, we shall see more fully when we come to treat of that branch of our subject. There must also be a superadded dispensation of effectual grace. Now, as to this effectual grace of the Holy Spirit, in order to show its necessit , we shall prove, 1. That no one of himself has a will of incli- nation to take Christ’s yoke, and to learn of him. 2. That no one has either a will of determination, even to inquire for him, until subdued ;—and then, 3. We shall show how God, by subduing first, produces the will of determination, and then, by drawing, produces the will of inclination, thus to take Christ’s yoke, and to learn of him. In short, that no one yields, but as subdued ; and that no one comes, but as drawn. Proposition JI. _ “No one has, of himself, a will of inclination to take Christ’s yoke,” &c. 1. Because of the darkness of the understanding, on account of which the sinner cannot see that in Christ which might attract him. While he sees the glory of the world, he does not see the glory and desirableness of Christ, at least sufficiently so to allure him from the one to the other. He sees no such glory in the person or offices of Christ ; and for his spiritual benefits, he has no taste. Persuade him to forsake the friendship of the world, and live a life of 240 7 THE RECONCILER. faith in Christ, and of daily communion with God, he will not comply. And, as to the Spirit of Christ, “the Spirit of truth,” our Lord says, “‘ The world cannot receive him, for it seeth him not, neither knoweth him.” The same with regard to the “thangs of the Spirit.” Witness Nicodemus as to regeneration ; the woman of Samaria as to “ the living water ;” the Jews as to Christ, ‘‘ the bread of life ;” and both Jews and Greeks as to “ Christ crucified.” Nay, “ the natural man,” says the apostle Paul, not only does not “ know” or “ discern” spiritual things, but they are “ foolishness unto him.” How, then, can he feel a will of inclination to be Christ’s disciple or servant ? 9. Because he cannot submit to Christ’s /aws, or requirements. He is expected to be “ poor in spirit ;” to be as “a little child;” he must submit to the “ righteousness of God ;” must “ strive to enter in at the strait gate 3 must part with every sin, though dear as the right eye, that is, however gainful, pleasant, or reputable; must renounce the world’s friendship, and must go after Christ, taking up his cross and following him. And who, of himself, is thus inclined? Set before him ‘‘the life and the death,” ‘the blessing and the cursing,” even supposing that by persuasion he were brought to the will of determination, to inquzre after Christ, yet he has not the will of inclination to close in with him. Hence it was, that our Lord said, ‘‘ No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me, draw him ;” that is, can find it in his heart to do so: and his apostle, ‘“‘ No man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.” WILL OF DETERMINATION. 241 Proposition II. “No one has a will, even a will of determination, so much as to seek for Christ, until his mind is subdued.” No one forms such a determination until subdued by some means or other ; by the word convicting, or by providences ; and these only as affecting the na- tural principles of se/f-/ove and self-interest. It may be by conviction of sin, so that the sinner, pressed with a sense of danger, is constrained to seek for a way of deliverance. Such was the case with the three thousand awakened by Peter: such was the case, too, with the jailer. So sinners in common. They now see themselves in danger, and so naturally inquire, ““ What must I do to be saved 2” Affliction also, in connexion with the word, may help on conviction, and constrain them to seek. The remnant of Israel were ** chosen in affliction.” Ephraim, though before like “a bullock unaccustomed to the yoke,” yet, being “chastised,” began to cry, “ Turn thou me, and [ shall be turned.” Whorish Israel, as represented in Hosea, being stripped of her comforts, and having her way “ hedged up with thorns,” so that she could not find her paths “ and her lovers,” then Saldana. dl will go and return unto my first husband.” The captives of Judah in Babylon, who, when Ezekiel first prophesied to them, were “ impudent and_hard- hearted,” and “ most rebellious,” were subdued when they heard that the desire of their eyes, the temple, was destroyed, their sons and daughters slain, and their confidence in Egypt proved to be vain ;—but not before. Thus, by conviction, whether occasioned by R 242 THE RECONCILER. the word, or affliction, or both, the mind may be sub- dued so as to seek. That it is only as subdued, that men form a will of determination to return to God, appears again from the circumstance, that the Holy Spirit, im his word, represents them as conquered. Behold Christ, the king, riding forth “ conquering and to conquer ;” he “ girds his sword upon his thigh, and his arrows are sharp in the hearts of the king's enemies.” So on the day of Pentecost. Not until they feel the wound of the sword, or the piercings of the arrow, do they yield. “ The weapons of our warfare,” says Paul, “are mighty through God, to pull down strongholds, to cast down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the know- ledge of God, and to bring into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ.” All this shows that men must be subdued, before they will surrender. The word convicting the conscience, and coming with the announcements of death, judgment, heaven, hell, and eternity ; and a “ heart being given to perceive” the nature and importance of these things ; the soul, by the force of truth, sees the necessity of yielding, and is brought to inquire and seek. But all this does not suppose the will of ¢nclination. No, it only supposes the will of determination in the soul to seek its own safety by yielding. The stone yields not till it is broken by the “ hammer.” The dross separates not, but by the action of “ fire.” The filthiness disappears not, until the Lord ‘* consumes it out of m0s:% That it is only as subdued that men inquire after Christ, appears again from the circumstance, that the Holy Spirit represents the remnant of Israel who WILL GF INCLINATION. 243 were saved with an everlasting salvation, as “ stiff- necked,” until spiritually circumcised ; as having a “* heart of stone,” until that heart was taken away, and a heart of flesh given. ‘* Circumcise, therefore, the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiff-necked,” is the exhortation of God to Israel, by his prophet Moses; and, says Jeremiah, “‘ Circumcise yourself to the Lord, and take away the foreskin of your heart.” Now, until this circumcision takes place, this stiff- neckedness is considered as remaining. Hence it is by the spiritual “ circumcision of the heart to love God,” that the heart yields. Again, it is said, “I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.” Not till God interposes, then, is it that there is a yielding heart. And how strikingly is this illustrated in “ Ephraim,” and in whorish Israel, as mentioned by Jeremiah and Hosea. Proposition III. “That not only is it Gop, that, by subduing, produces the will of determination, but it is he that, by drawing, produces the will of inclination.” The subduing to seek is of God, and the drawing to take yoke and learn, is of God. The subduing is so ; for whether the determination be formed in con- Sequence of educational discipline, instruction and habits, or whether owing to affliction, or to contingent circumstances, in all these cases, God, who “ worketh all things according to the counsel of his own will,” is to be acknowledged. If education restrain and direct the “ wild ass’s colt ;” if the ministry of the word proves as a *‘ hammer to break the rock in pieces ;” if R2 DA4 THE RECONCILER. affliction build up a wall or make a hedge of pre- vention; if contingent circumstances bring or keep under the sound of the word ;—these things are not of the man’s devising; they are of God’s devising and ordering. ‘Therefore, the subduing is to be attributed to God. Indeed, who is there that considers the pro- cess of the work of conversion in himself, that will not be ready to say, not only ‘it is God’s work,” but, “*O Lord, thou art stronger than I, and hast prevailed.” And, as the subduing, so the drawing is of God. This latter is by teaching, as we find from our Lord's discourse in John vi. Having convinced the sinner of his sin, and its consequent misery, so as to subdue him to learn, the Holy Spirit enlightens his mind in the knowledge of Christ, renews his will, and persuades - him, and enables him to embrace Jesus Christ as he is freely offered in the gospel.”* And thus, at length, he comes to Christ, and becomes his follower, with his will of inclination. He “takes his yoke,” &c. and in so doing, finds rest to his soul. That the will and power are of God, may be further argued thus. When, as we have seen, God calls a sinner to himself, he subdues his mind, or brings him to a will of determination to seek salvation, by con- viction of sin and fear of hell. Then, by instruction and persuasion, he draws him, or brings him to the will of inclination. Now, the power that subdued in the first instance, must have been from God, and not from himself. Such is the unwillingness of the sinner to part with his darling sins, with the world, with his own wisdom, and with his own confidences ; or such * Assembly’s Catechism on “ Effectual Calling.” GRACE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. 245 is his indolence, that, when his conscience is alarmed, and his passions roused, he studiously endeavours to still the voice of the one, and to suppress the risings of the other ; lest he should at length be obliged to make the called-for sacrifice; and under such feelings of repugnance, the power that subdues cannot be said to be from himself. Nay, when God takes the sinner in hand, how often, upon his being visited with awakenings and alarms, is he like a wild bull in a net, or like the “‘ bullock unaccustomed to the yoke,” being, like Kphraim, joined to his idols,” and having “loved strangers,” determined to go after them! And not until chastened by God in his own way, 1s his spirit subdued—or not till he finds that God has hedged up his way, will he desist from his evil courses. And as to the drawing, that also is of God. It is he that, having now taken away the heart of stone, and given a heart of flesh, and thus inclined the heart to receive instruction, raises new thoughts in the mind, gives new views of things, and produces a new disposition and temper; so that the will is not only determined from fear, but it is inclined in love. And thus is produced the will of inclination, a free will to good, to spiritual good; and so the gospel call is become effectual, and the man is become the subject of the efficacious grace of which we speak. But of this we shall treat more fully in our next section. Section II. A more particular View of this Eficacious Grace of the Holy Spirit. In discoursing on this branch of the subject, it may be useful to show how this saving work is distinguished 246 THE RECONCILER. from that which is not saving; which, though presenting the appearance of it, yet does not prove effectual. 1. A man may be the subject of temporary and strong convictions, and yet not be the subject of this grace. Instance in the cases of Pharaoh, and Saul, and Ahab, and Judas, and Felix. We might enlarge upon each of these, but we forbear. ‘The reader may profitably advert to them. 9. So a man may “ receive the word with Joy,” as the stony-ground hearers in the parable of the sower ; or “hear the word gladly,” as Herod heard John gladly ; and the preacher’s voice may be as a “ very lovely song to him,” and yet he may not be a partaker of this grace. Thus there may be both convictions and comforts without it. 3. A man may “believe for a while,” without this efficacious grace, or without “ believing with the heart unto righteousness,» as the stony-ground hearers are represented to have done, and as many of the Jews, and as Simon Magus did. A man may have a “ dead” faith, not a living one. 4. A man may “know the way of righteousness,” and, as Herod did, “ do many things ;” he may also “escape the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the” (not his”) ‘ Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ,” and yet not be possessed of this effectual grace. But, in this saving work of the Holy Spirit, there is given “a heart to perceive, and eyes to see, and ears to hear ;”—the heart is “ circumcised to love God:” a “ heart is given to know the Lord;” “ there is given one heart and one way ;” “a new heart and a new spirit ;” the “ heart of stone being taken away scithe WORK OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. 245, heart of flesh given.” They are “ born;” “ born in Zion ;” “ created;” and ‘‘ God’s work.” Such is the account of the work given us in the Scriptures, even in those of the Old Testament. And, in the New Testa- ment, it is expressed most decisively by being “ born of the Spirit ;” “ born again ;” “ born of God ;” « created in Christ Jesus ;” « being God’s workmanship ;” by dying and rising again, &c. And the continuance of the work is ascribed particularly to the indwelling of the Spirit, or the “power that worketh in” the believer. This work of the Holy Spirit, perhaps, may be thus represented, or may be considered as discovering itself thus :— ]. In a fixed conviction of sin. We say a fixed conviction, as distinguished from a temporary, un- steady, and therefore, ineffectual conviction. “ Call men,” says Dr. Owen, “ to think of sin with fixedness of attention, and will they do so? But, in the con- viction here intended, as he remarks, God sets it before their eyes, and they say, ‘ My sin is ever before me.” The arrow sticks fast in the conscience, and a wound is made which is not healed, but by the blood of Christ applied by faith. There is a dread and fear produced, which cannot be removed but by an appre- hension of the mercy of God, in and through Christ. In persons previously instructed in the gospel way of salvation, this may not be so sensibly felt; yet the soul is not at rest, but in the knowledge and faith of Christ, and him crucified. 2. Not as yet having this knowledge and faith, under the influence of “the spirit of bondage” he 248 THE RECONCILER. seeks to “‘ establish his own righteousness,» and to “ work out his own salvation” by his deeds and duties, and dispositions, not considering that this latter ex- hortation is given to believers ; and that, though he is called upon to “ labour for the meat that endureth to everlasting life,” and to “ strive to enter im at the strait gate ;” yet that this “ labouring” and “striving” is not to merit, or to “ establish a righteousness,” but to acquire that faith which imtroduces us to the possession of such righteousness and hie. 3. At length, becoming acquainted with the spiritu- ality and extent of the law, with his own heart, and with God’s method of showing mercy, and of bestowing his favours, he renounces his deeds, his duties, and his dispositions, as the ground of his justification, and salvation, and eternal life. It is now seen that the deeds, when weighed in the balances, will be found wanting ; that new duties will not pay off old debts ; and the “old man” is found to be “corrupt.” He feels, therefore, that there is in himself neither right- eousness to justify, nor strength to save. 4. Being taught of God the knowledge of Christ, and the way of salvation by him, there arises in the soul a prevailing desire for Christ and his saving benefits ; so that Christ becomes in his estimation the “pearl of great price,” to possess which, he would part with all were it necessary, rather than not pos- sess it. 5. The soul actually receives Christ as God’s “ un- speakable gift” in all his offices,—as a prophet to be taught by him in whatsoever he shall be pleased to instruct him; as a priest, pleading his sacrifice, and EVIDENCE OF BEING SUBDUED. 249 seeking an interest in his intercession ; and he submits himself to him as his king, to restrain and rule hin, and that he may enjoy the blessings of his government. 6. He now habitually calls upon God in Christ for the blessings promised ; commits himself to him in the use of the appointed means of receiving those bless- ings; and confesses Christ before men as the “ Jesus ” in whom he trusts, and the “ Lord” to whom he now yields his service. 7. While thus he manifests his * faith,” he also exercises repentance: for, reflecting on his past dis- position and conduct towards his God and Saviour, he feels sorrow, shame, and self-loathing, which issues in a cordial return unto God and his duty. He * casts away ail his transgressions ;” he has “ respect unto all God’s commandments ;” and he “ does justly, loves mercy, and walks humbly with his God.” 8. The life that he now lives in the flesh, he lives by the faith of the Son of God, in and by whom he sets his faith and hope in God as his covenant God and Father, calling upon him in the spirit of adoption, walking in daily communion. with him, and “looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.” O how different from, and how superior to, the in- eifectual religion mentioned before! SEcTIon III. further Scripture Evidence of this Subduing and Drawing. 1. In reference to subduing. The word is compared to a two-edged sword,” piercing even to the Joints and marrow; and sinners 250 THE RECONCILER. are said to be “slain.” It is compared to arrows, making the enemies fall—to “ weapons of warfare,” “ pulling down strongholds,” &c.—to a ‘hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces.” And when the Holy Spirit was to come, he was to come “ convincing of sin,’ as the fact proved in reference to the three thousand converted on the day of Pentecost; for they are said to have been “ pricked to the heart.” So with the jailer. Moreover, in order to give effect to the word, hitherto known, perhaps, only in theory, and not effectually convincing, it seems that God has often visited with affliction ; and by their combined opera- tion, this subduing and subjugation have taken place. Thus it was with the remnant of the ten tribes of Israel. Says the Lord by Jeremiah, “I have surely heard Ephraim bemoaning himself thus, Thou hast chastised me, and I was chastised, as a bullock un- accustomed to the yoke.” And, afterwards, Ephraim speaks as one subdued. He cries, ‘“‘ Turn thou me, and I shall be turned.” His prayer, being heard, in that he was turned and instructed; he then repented, and smote upon his thigh.” In another place, under the similitude of a treacherous and adulterous wife, Israel is represented as saying, “I will go after my lovers, that give me my bread and my water, my wool and my flax, mine oil and my drink.” And what follows? God, as though determined to subdue her, says, ‘Therefore, behold, I will hedge up thy way with thorns, and make a wall that she shall not find ‘her paths. And she shall follow her lovers, but she shall not overtake them; and she shall seek them, but she shall not find them.” And now see the EVIDENCE OF BEING SUBDUED. 251 consequence. “* Then shall she say, I will go and return to my first husband, for then was it better with me than now.” Thus, she is subdued to seek, for her own self-interest. Not however till sub- dued, does she desist from her adulterous practices. And it was by affliction God would take away her corn, her wine, her wool, and her flax, and expose her to shame; he would cause all her mirth to cease ; her feast days, &c.; he would destroy her vines and her fig-trees; and would visit upon her the days of her adulterous wickedness, and thus make her feel the consequence of her shameful conduct. So, under a different similitude, he shows us how he employed afiliction to subdue this remnant of Israel. “I will be unto Ephraim as a lion ; I, even I, will tear and go away; I will take away, and none shall rescue him ;”—even by the king of Assyria, compared to a lion. And then it is added: «[ will go and return to my place, till they acknowledge their offence, and seek my face.” How much like this has the conduct of God been in bringing stubborn and rebellious sin- ners to himself in every age !* Much in the same manner he acted with regard to the captive children of Judah in Babylon, whom he had reserved. All the house of israel there are said to have been ‘impudent and hardhearted,” and “ most rebellious.” But the “ reserve” was subdued. Yet not until “their strength (even Egypt), and their temple, the joy of their glory, the desire of their eyes, and that whereon they set their minds, also their sons and their daughters, were taken from them.” And * Jer. xxxi, 18 ; Ezek. xi, 14—20 ; Hos. ii. 6; Isa. xlvili. 4—10, 252 THE RECONCILER. then Ezekiel’s mouth being opened to them, they were brought to know the Lord. So with regard to the remnant of Judah dispersed through the countries. ‘ As I live, saith the Lord God, surely with a mighty hand, and witha stretched- out arm, and with fury poured out, will I rule over you. And I will bring you out from the people, and will gather you out of the countries wherein ye are scattered, with a mighty hand, and witha stretched- out arm, and with fury poured out. And IJ will bring you into the wilderness of the people, and there will I plead with you face to face. Like as I pleaded with your fathers in the wilderness of the land of Egypt, so will I plead with you, saith the Lord God. And I will cause you to pass under the rod, and I will bring you into the bond of the covenant.”* Similar to this ;s another address by the same prophet, to the same people. “ Behold, therefore, I have smitten my hand at thy dishonest gain which thou hast made; and at thy blood which hath been in the midst of thee. Can thine heart endure, or can thine hands be strong, in the days that | shall deal with thee? I the Lord have spoken it, and will do it. And I will scatter thee among the heathen, and disperse thee in the countries, and will consume thy filthiness out of thee. And thou shalt take thine inheritance in thyself in the sight of the heathen, and thou shalt know that I am the Lord.”t Thus would the Lord subdue them. How ‘structive are these things both to ministers and people ! The case of the prodigal son furnishes another * Ezek. xx. 33—37. + Ibid. xxii. 13—16. EVIDENCE OF BEING DRAWN. 2S proof of this method of dealing. He was sub- dued by want and wretchedness, It was not till he was in a state of destitution and misery, that he “came to himself,” and thought of returning to his father’s house. And then he resolved to do so. So, in the parable of the marriage of the king’s son, the bidden would not come. The same in that of the great supper. While those who were at ease and supplied with the good things of this life, made each their excuse and forbore to come, those did come who were maimed, and halt, and lame, and blind. And even those that were in the highways and hedges did not come till urged unto compulsion. What less can we learn from these parables combined, but that men will not come to Christ until urged by a sense of need, or overcome by the force of truth ? And how striking in this view is that passage in 2 Cor. x. 4, 5, Men so “ err in heart,” that nothing but God’s truth, in the light and power of the Spirit, will prevail. We pass on, 2. To the drawing. God's drawing is by teaching. “ After that I was instructed,” says Ephraim, “I smote upon my thigh.” And our Lord, when he speaks of coming to him, as the effect of “ drawing,” quotes that passage in Isaiah, as explaining and confirming what he had said— ‘All thy children shall be taught of God ;” and then adds, < Every one that hath heard and learned of the Father cometh unto me.” Thus then they are drawn ; they are taught to “know the Lord ;” by which they learn the knowledge of themselves, and their need of a Saviour; and learning further who and what that 254 THE RECONCILER. Saviour is, they are inclined, or have now the will of inclination to come to him. ‘ No one can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost :” and being taught by this Holy Spirit, they are inclined to say, that is to confess, ‘* Jesus” as their ‘ Jesus,” and the “Lord” as their “ Lord;” and that, of course, sincerely and cordially, be the consequence what it may. Now then, they are both subdued and drawn ; and thus are they become the actual subjects of this effica- cious grace of which we are speaking. As subdued, they were brought to the «ill of determination, and now, as drawn, they are brought to the will of incii- nation. And, without these, to be reproved, is so mortifying ; to receive the gift of righteousness is so humbling ; to live a holy life is so contrary to our un- holy hearts ; to live a heavenly life is so contrary to our earthly minds ; to part with the honour that cometh from man, is So great a sacrifice ; and to live a life of self- denial is so hard to flesh and blood; that the human mind will not choose, will not have the will of incli- nation to take part with Christ. But, the soul being subdued, and the mind brought to hearken to receive instruction, no sooner is Christ and his saving benefits revealed by the Holy Spirit, in the need the soul has of them, and in his and their suitableness and glory, but these mountains of difficulty become a plain, and the soul goes forth to meet Jesus as her Saviour and her Lord. The history of God’s ancient people will supply us with illustration and proof on this branch of the subject also. Did we adduce the history of the _ EVIDENCE OF BEING DRAWN. 255 remnant of Israel in proof of God’s method of sub- duing, we may do the same in regard to his drawing. We learn this from Jeremiah, in the passage before cited. Hear the kind language which God used to- wards Ephraim when subdued : “Is Ephraim my dear son? is he a pleasant child? for since I spake against him, I do earnestly remember him still: therefore my bowels are troubled for him. I will surely have mercy upon him, saith the Lord.” How drawing is this! So concerning the same people in Hosea. See the superabounding of divine grace there. Having taught this treacherous adulteress her sin, and humbled her, he says concerning her, “ I will allure her, and bring her into the wilderness, and speak comfortably unto her.” “* And I will betroth thee unto me for ever ; yea, I will betroth thee unto me in righteousness, and in Judgment, and in loving-kindness, and in mercies.” And much more of the same sort. Is not this drawing ? Well might the Lord say, “ I am God and not man!” Did we advert to the “reserve” of Judah in Baby- lon? When subdued by their strength being taken away, the joy of their glory, and so on, the prophet’s mouth was to be opened to them—to declare to them not only what would become of their brethren in the land of Israel, the judgments that would overtake them, but the “ exceeding great and precious pro- mises” that we find in the subsequent part of the prophecy, whereby they might learn God’s designs of mercy towards them, and the change he would pro- duce in them and for them, that by these promises they might become “ partakers of a divine nature.” And thus were they also drawn. 256 THE RECONCILER. Then, there is the remnant of Judah that had been scattered throughout the countries. What gracious promises of return were made to them ! They should be forgiven—be washed from their filthiness—have “a new heart given them, and a new spirit; have the stony heart taken out of their flesh, and have given them a heart of flesh. God would “put his Spirit within them, that they might walk in his statutes, and keep his judgments, and do them, and they should be his people, and he would be their God.” Language admirably calculated to draw them! Indeed, with regard to the whole saved remnant of the whole house of Israel, such was the kindness of God towards them, that he took care that they should have these encou- ragements at hand in their time of need; for he directed Jeremiah to “ write ina book the good things that he intended for them.” ‘‘ Thus speaketh the Lord God of Israel, saying, Write thee all the words that I have spoken to thee m a book. For, lo, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will bring again the captivity of my people Israel and Judah, saith the Lord, and I will cause them to return to the land that I gave to their fathers, and they shall possess it. And these are the words that the Lord spake concerning Israel and concerning Judah.” And then follow the gracious declarations recorded in that and the two succeeding chapters. We shall now conclude this dissertation on effica- cious grace, designed to form the “ connecting link” of the two great “ parts” of our subject, with two or three reflections or remarks. REFLECTIONS. DSA REFLECTIONS. 1. It is by the knowledge of the law and of sin, together with the knowledge of the wrath and curse and damnation that follows the sin, especially as pro- moted by ¢rouble, that God suppuEs the mind, so as to induce it to seek for salvation. 2. It is by the knowledge of the plan and way of salvation, and particularly of Jesus Christ, and him crucified, as connected with the promises of the gospel, that God praws the mind to the Saviour. Therefore— 3. In order to subdue, such subjects should be preached as tend to produce a knowledge of the law and of sin, with the solemnities of death and judgment, and hell and eternity: and in order to draw, the love of God in the redemption of sinners, the love of Christ in his mediatory undertaking, and the almighty power of the Holy Spirit, should be exhibited, together with the provisions and promises of gospel grace. 4. That, since it is not only a method suited to our rational nature, but since it was the practice of Moses and the prophets, of Christ and the apostles, to reason with and persuade, and particularly as God is ex- pressly said to “ plead” with persons, such method should be adopted by all God’s ministers ; and that both with saints and sinners, praying for “the demon- stration of the Spirit and of power” to accompany it. 5. That while the damnation of the sinner is occa- sioned by his own stubbornness, the salvation of a sinner 1s of effectual grace ; and that, while the former is the award of equity, the latter is the gift of sovereign goodness. PART II. THE BOOK OF LIFE, OR THE SUPERADDED DISPENSATION OF SOVEREIGN GRACE TOWARDS A PECULIAR PEOPLE, GOD HEREIN ACTING AS A GRACIOUS SOVEREIGN. CHAPTER I. ON GOD'S SOVEREIGNTY IN GENERAL, AND OF ITS EXERCISE IN REFER-~ ENCE TO MAN'S FUTURE CONDITION IN PARTICULAR. SecTIoNn I. On God’s Sovereignty in GENERAL. In ascribing sovereignty to God, we mean that he does, and that he has right to do, what he will with his own, salva justitia, or not infringing on the claims of justice. It is thus expressed in Scripture: ‘‘ What his soul desireth that he doeth.”* ‘ Whatsoever the Lord pleased, that did he in heaven and in earth, in the seas, and in all deep places.”t ‘* He doeth according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the in- habitants of the earth.’ ‘ Who worketh all things according to the counsel of his own will.”+ It is exercised as to nations. ‘“ He hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation.”§ “ When *" Psalm exxxv. 6. + Dan. 1¥.°30- + Eph. i. 11. § Acts xvii. 26. GODS SOVEREIGNTY. 259 the Most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel.” “ I have made the earth, the man, and the beast that are upon the ground, by my great power, and by my outstretched arm, and have given it unto whom it seemed meet to me.” As to times: “ He hath de- termined the times before appointed.” ‘“ It is not for you to know the times and seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.” As to kings: “ He setteth up kings,” &c. ‘The king’s heart is in the hand of the Lord, and he turneth it whithersoever he will.” So, as to individuals in common: “* The Lord killeth, and maketh alive; he bringeth down to the grave, and bringeth up. The Lord maketh poor, and maketh rich ; he bringeth low, and raiseth up.” * This sovereignty is exercised also in reference to religious privileges. ‘Thus the seed of Isaac was pre- ferred to that of Ishmael; Jacob and his seed to Esau and his seed. Thus, it was according to the commandment of the everlasting God, that the gospel was at such a time to be “ made known to all nations for the obedience of faith.” And when Paul was en- gaged in executing his general commission to the Gen- tiles, to show this sovereignty, ‘the Spirit suffered him not,” at least at that time, “to go into Bithynia ;” while he is made to see a vision calling him into Macedonia. This sovereignty is founded on the consideration that Jehovah isthe great Creator and Proprietor of all things, and that thus all are absolutely dependent upon him, and he is dependent upon none; and that Steals a1 cOn is See 260 THE RECONCILER. “he made all things for himself.’ What more rea sonable than that he should be ‘“* Lord of heaven and earth,” seeing he has made them, and that they are absolutely Ais own? On this the apostle founds it in that memorable passage, ‘‘ O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out! for of him, and through him, and to him, are all things, to whom be glory for ever. Amen.”* But this sovereignty is not arbitrary will or caprice. It is always exercised consistently with righteousness. It never does wrong. Although it may mitigate or remit the punishment awarded by justice, yet it never ‘‘lays upon men more than is right.” Thus, while in the exercise of sovereign goodness, God says, ‘‘ May I not do what I will with my own ?’—with my own world—with my own spirit—he also says, “ Friend, I do thee no wrong.” It is always wise too; for ‘ he worketh all things according to the counsel of his will.” But we should do well to remember, that ‘he giveth not account of his matters,” at least at present ; and that “itis the glory of God to conceal a thing,’— an aphorism applicable to the Divine conduct in crea- tion, in providence, and in redemption. Section II. God’s Sovereignty as to Men’s Eternal Condition. The sovereignty of which we are about to treat, having respect to man’s eternal condition, it becomes us to treat it with peculiar and holy caution. We observe then— * Rom. xi. 33—86. GOD'S SOVEREIGNTY. 261 1. That we do not consider it as exercised on men as innocent, but as guilty. Concerning whom was it that God said, “ I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy ?”* Concerning Israel, a people who had broken his covenant, and who deserved to be ‘ con- sumed.” Indeed the very word “ mercy,” implies that they were liable to the sword of justice. As Mr. Henry observes, ‘‘ God does not damn by prerogative, though he saves by prerogative.” And again: “ All that are saved, are saved by prerogative of grace; but those that perish, are cut off by an act of Divine holiness and justice, not of absolute sovereignty.” 2. We consider it as exercised on persons who were foreseen as guilty not only of disobedience to the law of works, but of disobedience to the “‘law of faith ;” on persons considered as proved, or certainly foreknown, to be disobedient if proved ;—vessels new made out of vessels “ marred in the hand of the potter ;”} ‘‘ vessels of mercy ;” and ‘“ vessels of wrath” out of persons ‘“‘ endured with much long-suffering.” Nor does it alter the case, that this sovereignty takes its date ‘before the foundation of the world;” for not only ‘known unto God are all is works before the founda- tion of the world,” but to his infinite mind must have been known all our works, and our wills too, as has been proved in another place. To him, in whose view ‘fa thousand years are as one day, and one day as a thousand years,” the whole period of the world’s existence, and all the works and wills of its inhabitants, © Exod? xxxileoon Sexi Loe homes ix, 15-=24, Hy der. xviii, Ae xixe lf): 262 THE RECONCILER. must be one present Now. And, doubtless, when he formed his sovereign purposes, not one heart—not one act of will—could be hidden from him. We do not then view God’s sovereignty abstractedly from the consideration of guilt and stubbornness, but as formed on the foresight of what men actually would be, or would have proved in the existing circum- Stances. Remarkable it is, that in the winding up the dis- course in the Epistle to the Romans about sovereignty, the apostle, viewing the Gentiles as unpersuadable, and then the Jews as the same, says, ‘‘ God hath shut up all in unpersuadableness (eis aesGeiav,) that he might have mercy upon all;”* that is, upon all the Israelites (rovs wavras) spiritually considered; inti- mating thereby that his mercy was glorified upon them as unpersuadable.} Thus it is then—God had provided, and had bound himself to give ‘ life” to all, if they would come to Christ; yet, man being guilty of refusal, he forfeits the grace, and now God is no longer held to show favour to any one; and a way is opened, as in the case of Israel after the affair of the golden calf, for Jehovah to manifest his sovereign “ goodness,” by showing mercy on whom he will, both in forgiving their sin, and in bestowing the inheritance that had been con- ditionally promised. So that man has done as “ he * Rom. xi. 30—82. + What an unseemly thing it would be if some of the saints must ascribe their salvation to God’s mercy alone, and others to their own free will; some to God’s sovereignty, and others to their own! GOD’S ‘SOVEREIGNTY. 263 listed ;” and now the wind, the Spirit of God, ‘* bloweth” in regeneration as 7 listeth.”* 3. The sovereignty exercised is not on persons as all alike suing for mercy, God showing mercy to this, and refusing it to that; or, on persons all alike seeking for salvation, saving this person, and leaving that ; for, in’ fact, none would sue for mercy, or seek for salvation, if left to their own will; but it is a sove- reignty which, when exercised in a way of peculiar mercy on some, still leaves the rest to have ¢heer own will and their own way; and, therefore, may well at least leave them “speechless,” seeing that, if God has his will, they also have theirs. When Cyrus made a proclamation to all the Jews, allowing them to return home to Jerusalem, although God stirred up the heart of some only to go, yet could the rest com- plain, seeing it was their own choice to remain where they were? And, when all were invited to the great supper, and ‘all with one consent began to make excuse,” could these murmur that the Master of the house invited others, seeing they had, of themselves, refused to come? Not only is no one wronged, but all have their will, while God chooses for “ the praise of the glory of his grace,” to exercise his sovereign will. ‘Two covenants of life, that of the ‘law of works,’ and “ law of faith,” having proved ineffectual, what if God make a third, even the ‘‘ new covenant,” which shall, to what extent he pleases, prove effectual ? The following propositions will state fully and ex- plicitly our meaning on the subject. 1. God gave ‘life’ conditionally to all in Adam ; * Johnan. 8: 264 THE RECONCILER. but by his “‘ offence,” judgment came unto all to the condemnation of death.* 2. God, of his ‘* grace,” has given to all a ‘‘ second man ;” a ‘* last Adam ;” in whom @i/ may have the righteousness and life lost by the first man, and a ‘life more abundantly.” 3. The gospel of God's ‘‘abounding grace,” (abound- ing not only over original, but all actual sin,) and of “the gift of righteousness” for life, is to be ‘* preached to every creature.’ The “life” God exhorts all to choose : he swears by himself that he ‘‘ desireth not the death of a sinner, but that he turn from his wickedness, and live :” and he uses every argument to induce the sinner to turn. Christ, his Son, also commands his ser- vants to “compel” men to come in to his gospel feast. Moreover, no one ever went to Christ for life, and was cast out. Further, there is a sufficiency of merit in Christ, and power in his Holy Spirit, for all, and God wills with his will of inclination their salvation ; and that he has not willed it with a will of determina- tion too, is only because it is just and equitable that he should have that “‘ glory which is due to his name ;” which he would not have had, if he had interposed to prevent man’s having his own will, and taking his own way, by an act of sovereign power preventing that will. 4. That all have not life, is not because God does not will it, or that Christ's righteousness has not merited it, or that Christ’s Spirit cannot effect it ; but because men, through their stubborn continuance in the practice of * The equity, goodness, and wisdom of the constitution by which all are involved in Adam’s fate, is shown Part I. chap. 2. at ssi GOD’S SOVEREIGNTY. 265 evil deeds, harden themselves against Christ’s truths and ways, and so will not go to Christ for life. 5. It appears from Scripture and experience, as before proved, that al/ men left to the freedom of their own will, prove thus unpersuadable, and thus forfeit the grace of life, for ‘‘ God hath concluded all in a7iGeca, unpersuadableness,” even those on whom he “has mercy.” Even the remnant according to the “election of grace” in Israel had been so. Ephraim did not say, ‘“ Turn thou me,” until swbdued. Com- pare also Jer. xxiv. with Ezek. iii. and xu. 2, with regard to the captives of Judah. In the parable of the gospel feast, “ all with one consent began to make excuse.” And though afterwards numbers came, yet these are viewed as “‘ maimed, and halt, and blind,” or else as “ compelled.” ‘“* No man,” says Christ, ‘* can come to me,” can be persuaded to do so, “‘ except the Father which hath sent me draw him,” and it be “oiven to him of the Father.” And, finally, the argument in Rom. xi. 32, requires us to understand the apostle as intimating that the very exercising the mercy supposes unpersuadableness. ‘To the same conclusion we are led by experience. Men must be subdued by tear, and drawn by inward teaching, before they will become subjects of Christ’s kingdom. His kingdom is too spiritual, holy, and heavenly for their mind. They will not humble themselves, to ‘“ become as a little child,” or “a fool,” to enter into it. And too much self-denial is required. To whom of the sons of men does not this apply, in some respect or other ? 6. Such being the case, that all, left to themselves, 266 THE RECONCILER. prove unpersuadable, and thus forfeit the grace of “the life ;” God its no longer held to show favour to any one. He had bound himself to give life to him that should believe and repent ; but he had not bound himself to give to believe and repent, to those who would not hearken, that they might thus believe and repent. Hence, 7. Thevessels being marred in thehand of the potter, he makes it again another vessel, as it seems good to the potter to make it ; and thus out of the unpersuadable or disobedient ‘“ lump,” to use the apostle’s comparison, if the sovereign Lord of heaven and earth should choose to make some vessels to honour, and others vessels to dishonour, who shall find fault, or who shall say it is inconsistent with his universal goodness so to have been exercised, provided they had not been unper- suadable ? ‘‘ What if God, willing to show his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much long-suffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction : and that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory; even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?” Thus, if sovereign goodness had been exercised on the “ vessels of mercy,” forbearing goodness had been exercised on the “* vessels of wrath ;” and the former is shown on the consideration of the latter being slighted. This subject receives z/lustration, and, as the apostle refers to it, confirmation also, from the affair of Israel and the golden calf. ‘Thus, Ist. God willed their life, and gave them a covenant of life, as a good and righteous King. 2dly, They all broke the covenant, GODS SOVEREIGNTY. 267 and forfeited the life, and ‘‘ deserved to be con- sumed.” d3dly, On some he chose to “ have mercy,” and ‘* compassion ;” while others “ he gave up to their own hearts’ lusts,” and ‘ to worship the host of hea- ven.” Viewing the matter thus, did his consequent sovereign will in regard to Israel, as now proved un- persuadable, destroy his antecedent good will to Israel before thus proved? No—nor were they inconsistent with each other. In the former case, he expressed his will as a righteous king, having a good will to his subjects as such ; in the latter, he expresses his will as a gracious sovereign, having the right either of par- doning or of punishing them as convicted rebels. Hence, says Moses, “If thou wilt, forgive their sin, and take them for thine inheritance ;” plainly intimating. that they lay at his sovereign pleasure. Hence, 1. The soverergnty of mercy or grace here is not in making provision for this, and none for that; but in that, while all were foreseen as stubbornly refusing the provision made—by a further display of grace, one is made willing, and another is left to his own volun- tary obstinacy, or to have his own will and his own way. 2, That the Scripture election is not an election of exclusion, but of reservation for the preservation of a church, and for the glory of God’s “ goodness.” It is ‘keeping mercy for thousands,” when all might have been ‘ consumed,”—those ‘‘ thousands” as well as others. It is refraining from cutting off some, when he might have, in equity, cut off all—these “some” as well as others. for, 268 THE RECONCILER. 3. As the election of Israel after the flesh was on the world’s rejection of the universal gospel promise ; so the election of Israel after the spirit, is on the world’s foreseen and understood rejection of the unt- versal gospel provision. 4. The proper view of this election is, that such was the Divine goodness, that notwithstanding all the depravity and desert of man, the opposition from earth and hell, the hopelessness of man in himself, God determines that “mercy shall be built up for ever,” and that he will have a church and people in the world. Section III. This Sovereignty proved. e We prove this sovereignty from Scripture facts, from scriptural arguments, and from experience and observation. Adverting “to the law and to the testimony,” I. We appeal first to Scripture Facts. When God “ set his love” upon Israel, to form them into his visible church, now that the Gentile world had proved unpersuadable, it could not be, as indeed he says, because “of their righteousness or the up- rightness of their heart,” but of his own sovereign goodness. ‘‘ Because I knew that thou art obstinate, and thy neck is an iron sinew, and thy brow brass, I have even from the beginning declared it to thee.” Such was the character of this people as drawn in the prophecy of Isaiah by the Lord himself. He adds, “1 knew that thou wouldst deal treacherously, and wast called a transgressor from the womb.” And the GOD’S SOVEREIGNTY PROVED. 269 length to which they carried their transgression was such—which also, of course, the Lord foreknew—that they are said to have exceeded even Sodom, and to have more corrupted their way than her.* Such, then, being the foreseen conduct and character of Israel, his choice of them could not be from any claim they had to his regard. No, he set his love upon them, “‘ because he loved them,” and they got not their land in possession by their own sword, neither did their own arm save them; but God’s right hand and his arm, and the light of his countenance, because he had a favour unto them.” What was it but sovereign mercy that distinguished the remnant of Israel so often mentioned, and saved them, while others were left to perish in their sins? Of this Israel it is said, ‘they would not walk in his ways—would not be obedient to his laws—would not lay it to heart, though God had poured upon them the fury of his anger, and they had been thus set on fire round about.”t Yet, these were to be his “ re- deemed ;” these he would ‘call by name;” to these say, “ Thou art mine.”t Although they had wearied him with their iniquities, yet he would blot out their transgressions; he would pour out his Spirit upon them, and they should devote themselves to him. And why? For “his own sake.”§ See to the same purpose another passage by the same prophet, || “ For my name’s{ sake will [ defer mine anger, and for my * Ezek. xvi. 47, 48: elsas xine 245.25, fe) Dba cline 243 Silbe xl. 25; xliv. 22: {| Ib. xlvili, 9—11. {] See his name, Exod. xxxiv. 6. 270 THE RECONCILER. praise will I refrain for thee, that I cut thee not off. Behold I have refined thee, but not with silver; I have chosen thee in the furnace of affliction. For mine own sake, for mine own sake, will I do it.” Hence it seems that he might justly have cut them off; but he refrained for the praise of his grace and faith- fulness: and not only so, but chose them to himself.* To the same purport does the prophet Hosea write. Those that Jehovah would “sow to himself in the earth ;” who should “ obtain mercy ;” to whom God would say, ‘ Thou art my people ;” whom, too, he would “ betroth unto himself for ever,’—what had they been—what had they done? They had said, in the perverse adultery of their heart, to him who, accord- ing to the Sinai covenant, had promised to be a hus- band unto them, “I will go after my lovers that give me my bread and my water, my wool and my flax, mine oil and my drink.” And she followed after those lovers. But, says God, in sovereign love, “I will hedge up thy way with thorns, and make a wall that she shall not find her path; and she shall follow after her lovers, but she shall not overtake them: and she shall seek them, but shall not find them. Then shall she say, I will go and return to my first husband; for then was it better with me than now.” ‘Then, after the Lord had afflicted her, he would “ ailure her, and * How plain, too, from Ezekiel, that Israel deserved to be con- sumed, but were spared only for God’s name’s sake, when in Egypt —when in the wilderness—when in the land of Israel. See Ezek. xx. 8, 9, 13, 14—21, 22. Especially, as it appears from the same prophet, that they were worse than the heathens around them. See Ezek. ili. 6; v. 6; xvi. 47, 51. i) GOD'S SOVEREIGNTY PROVED. il bring her into the wilderness, and speak comfortably unto her ;” and in the end would “ betroth her unto himself for ever, in righteousness, and in judgment, and in loving-kindness, and in mercies.” Was not all this rich and sovereign mercy ? | The same sovereignty applies to the saved from among the Jews in Jerusalem, or out of “the fribes scattered abroad” in the days of the apostles. Dhey are denominated by our Lord, “the elect whom he hath chosen.” As to the Jews at Jerusalem, they not only had stubbornly rejected the Messiah, but it was not till they were ‘“‘pricked to the heart” that they received the word; it was not till the arrows of the Saviour King were sharp in the heart of these enemies, that they fell under him. And, with respect to the scattered of the twelve tribes who were called out of darkness into God’s marvellous light, “in the time past of their lives they had wrought the will of the Gentiles, walking in lasciviousness, lusts, excess of wine, revellings, banquetings, and abominable idola- tries.’ And the whole remnant saved, are called “a remnant according to the election of grace;” as the apostle intimates by his manner of expressing himself, that the saved remnant had been throughout that Jewish economy. ‘“ Hven so, then, at this present time a/so,” as well as in former times, “ there is” (hath been made, éyévy@n) “a remnant according to the election of grace.” Passing over the instances of sovereign mercy which occur in the Scriptures, in reference to the Gentiles, which will be noticed in a subsequent part of this work, we turn to, 21 THE RECONCILER. II. Scriptural arguments in favour of this doctrine. The blessing of forgiveness of sin; the distinguish- ing work of the Spirit expressed by effectual calling ; regeneration; illumination; working faith,—all these may be proved from Scripture to be sovereign. 1. Forgiveness. When Israel broke covenant with God at Sinai, the forgiveness that was shown was sovereign. Besides that, it is repeatedly intimated that they deserved to be “consumed.” ‘“‘ If thou wilt,” says Moses, ‘‘ forgive their sin.”* The chosen Israel, so frequently mentioned by Isaiah, were equally in- debted to sovereign mercy. Immediately after the Lord had declared, ‘“‘ Thou hast wearied me by thine iniquities,” he says, ‘I, even I, am he that blotteth out thy transgression for mine own sake.” And again ; “ For my name’s sake will I defer mine anger, that I cut thee not off.” So by Ezekiel, in reference to his scattered people, when the Lord promises to “ sprinkle clean water upon them,” to cleanse them from the enilt of their sins, this, as well as the mercies that follow, was ‘for his holy name,” and “ not for their sakes.” No, as he says by the same prophet, “ Ye shall remember your ways, and all your doings, wherein ye have been defiled, and ye shall loathe yourselves in your own sight, for all your evils that ye have com- mitted. And ye shall know that I am the Lord, when I have wrought with you for my name’s sake, not according to your wicked ways, nor according to your corrupt doings, O ye house of Israel, saith the Lord God.”t To this we add, what the Lord said by Moses, +E XOd: xxx: 32. + Ezek. xxxvi. 21; ver. 32. 1 Tbe meg 439 ee. 9 ony f GODS SOVEREIGNTY IN CALLING. 21S as also by Paul, “I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and will have compassion on whom f will have compassion.” And he is “keeping mercy for thou- sands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin.’ 2. Calling by grace. See this sovereignty as ex- emplified in the case of the Corinthians, who were “called to be saints,” as represented in the latter part of the first chapter of the epistle to them. Corinth was a city celebrated, amongst other things, for its worldly wisdom and philosophical pride. On _ the preaching of Paul, many were called by grace, anda Christian church was established amongst them. But, as in their heathenish state they had probably ranged. themselves as disciples under their respective favourite philosophers, so now, in their Christian state, they seem disposed to class themselves under their different favourite preachers. One was for Paul, another for Apollos, another for Cephas; and hence they were puffed up with pride on their account; and having received from Christ a more than ordinary degree of the gifts of knowledge and utterance, they were puffed up with that circumstance also. The apostle, therefore, here sets himself to oppose this glorying in man and in self, first, by showing that God called and saved man by a doc- trine that appeared foolishness and weakness to “the natural man,” however wise in this world—and then, by showing that the persons called and saved were generally of the poor, and illiterate, and despised among men, of which they themselves supplied the evidence.* “Ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many So) Cor-atce ule. 7 274 THE RECONCILER. noble, are called. But God hath chosen (observe how he changes the word to show that it is of ham that calleth) the foolish things of the world to confound the wise, and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; and base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen; yea, and things that are not, to bring to nought things that are: that no flesh should glory in his presence.” Does not then this, while it was calcu- lated to humble them, also indicate that this calling was sovereign ? Oljection |. But is it effectual calling that he intends ? Yes, see the Inscription of the epistle, the “ called to be holy ;” see how he congratulates them in verse 9, as called to the fellowship of God’s Son ;” see also verse 18, where they are denominated “ the saved.” Besides, Paul had sat teaching at Corinth for “ one year and six months ;” and of course he would direct the gospel call to ad that heard him; but these to whom the epistle is directed, are evidently such as believed and received his doctrine; of the “much people that Christ had in that city.” Obj. 2. But does he not mean when he says, ‘ Ye see your calling, brethren,” &c. ‘ye see by what sort of preachers ye have been called?” No, at least not chiefly ; for, besides that such a confined sense is unnatural, it does not agree with fact. By whom, in fact, had they been called? By Paul, for he it was that had «“ begotten them through the gospel.” They had not “ many fathers,” for he it was that had thus begotten them. And who was he? A tent-maker. If Peter had been an instructor, he had been but a fisherman ; and GOD’s SOVEREIGNTY IN CALLING. 275 Apollos, who had “ watered,” is designated in the Acts only as a “certain man of Alexandria,” without any note of nobility. With what propriety, then, could the apostle appeal as he does,—“ Ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many mighty,” &c., were the instruments of their calling, when he and they must both “see” and know that there were none such?* The meaning obviously then must be—‘“‘Ye see then that of those who are called by divine grace, not many, &c., were called ;” for some there were, such as Crispus, a chief ruler of the synogogue; perhaps Sosthenes, per- haps several others, during the year and six months he was with them, as well as afterwards. Now then, taking the passage in this sense, we are necessarily led to remark the sovereignty ; for since all were called alike with the gospel call—the noble as well as the base—if their coming depended on them, how could he have ascribed it to choice on the part of God, and a choice with design too? Suppose a nobleman in the neighbourhood of a village were to call all the in- habitants, rich and poor, reputable and disreputable, to afeast ; on coming in to see the guests, could he with propriety address them thus,—“ Ye see your call- ing, neighbours, how that not many rich, not many noble are called, but I have chosen such as you, who are poor and base, that I might confound the rich and the noble 2?” Oh, no! there was no choice of his, much less a designing choice in the affair; for he had invited all, and left every one at his own option, * Indeed, taking up the subject as to the churches at large, where were the preachers of noble birth—where the wise men—where the mighty? Indeed, is there a single one among all the preachers ? Tt 2 276 THE RECONCILER. whether he would come or not. We are obliged then to take the calling as of the election of God, as well as to understand the apostle as speaking of effectual calling. The calling of God’s people then, is according to the purpose “ of him that calleth.” 3. We see this sovereignty in this work of the Spirit as denominated regeneration. Is it not implied in the thing itself; for who is begotten of his own will? And the birth of Isaac, with which this spiritual birth is, by the apostle Paul, represented as analogous, was it not supernatural and sovereign, ‘‘ by promise,” and “ after the Spirit,” by God’s “ coming?” Those that believe in Christ’s name, “are born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God;” the will and power of God, as appears most obviously the sense. And our Lord, comparing the work of the Spirit herein to the operation of “the wind,” does not content himself with saying, “* The wind bloweth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell,” &c.; which would have been quite sufficient if he intended to instruct in the mysteriousness of the work only; but he says, “ The wind bloweth where at listeth,’—without the direction or control of man; by which he seems to convey the idea of sovereignty also, or that the operation is not at man’s pleasure, but as God pleaseth. Surely our Lord would not use words unnecessarily, much less would he use words calculated to mislead. According to James, “‘ we are begotten by the word of truth.” But then it is of his own will, or Bov«nfes, as he thought proper. Most naturally this ‘‘ will” refers to the begetting, but if we GOD'S SOVEREIGNTY IN ILLUMINATION. 217% take it as referring to the means, “ the word of truth,” we should recollect that God’s word was to accomplish that which he pleased. Perhaps, however, the “* will” may have respect to both. Moreover, Peter blesses God that he had begotten him and his brethren again “of abundant mercy;” but then “he hath mercy on whom he will.” 4. That ahunination by which faith is produced, is represented as sovereign. ‘ No one knoweth the Father, save the Son, and he to whom the Son (@ov- Nerae) will,” or thinks proper to “reveal him.” ‘ Father, I thank thee that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes. Even so, Father, for so it seemed good in thy sight.” 5. Nor is faith itself less sovereign. The Gentiles, by Peter’s mouth, were chosen to hear the word of the gospel ; but not only so, they were as much chosen “to believe.” Peter congratulates those to whom he wrote, that they had obtained precious faith, as ¢f by lot, for so the word Aayovce imports; and at Antioch, “as many as were ordained, believed.” Nor should it be overlooked, that faith is called God’s ‘“ work ;” and *‘ he worketh all things after the counsel of his will.” To the above argument we add that, 6. It is impossible, in the nature of things, that persons who are both dark and dead, “ darkened in their understanding,” and “dead in trespasses and sins,’ can will to live to God with a will of znelina- tion. Admitting, however, that they may be brought to will it with a will of determination from inéerest, yet this will must be produced by a power foreign to their own, showing them that it zs for their interest. 278 THE RECONCILER. Nor, in any view of the subject, can it be supposed, that man, who is not only dead to God and spiritual good, but averse from both, would have any will at all to them, but as subdued and necessitated. Hence, then, it cannot be from himself, from his own will and power, but from some will and power out of himself, that man is brought to live to God ; and what will and power can that be, but of God? And “the whole house of Israel” are represented as dead ;* and, says Christ to the Jews, « Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have xo life in you.” A remark doubtless of universal application. 7. We infer the doctrine from the parable of the householder. Does not this parable intimate that the “few chosen,” were so chosen from sovereign good- ness, while the “ many called,” were dealt with on the footing of mere equity? <“ Friend, I do thee no wrong :°—* T have dealt with thee according to thine own will, and our mutual agreement ; but I am, more- over, good to this man, giving him more than he could expect, of my sovereign good pleasure.” So it will be in the gospel dispensation. « Many will be called and enter themselves as my servants, and I will give them their due; but there are others to whom I shall choose to show sovereign favour; and may I not do what I will with my own 2”—N.B. If this parable does not relate to the great question of the saved or the lost,—which, seeing all were servants, and all did their work, probably may not be the case,—yet the design of * Ezek. xxxvii. if we consider this prophecy as relating to the resurrection of the soul, which is not improbable. GOD’s SOVEREIGNTY IN ELECTION. 279 it evidently appears to be to assert God’s sovereign right to do as he will with his favours to his creatures, the rights of equity being secured. 8. How came it to pass that, of the twelve tribes mentioned as sealed in Rev. vii. there were exactly twelve thousand, and of each tribe too, if their salva- tion depended wholly on the determination of man ? A most wonderful coincidence indeed, if the sealing depended on the acknowledged uncertainty of human decision! We might almost as well believe that this world, with all its marks of sovereign design, was framed by a “ fortuitous concourse of atoms.” 9. We conclude this subject with the argument drawn from Rom. ix. where it is professedly handled. The design of the apostle in this chapter is evidently to show that the cailing to the adoption, is of God’s election, that is, at God’s will. Not of works, says he, “ but of him that calleth.” “ It is not of him that willeth, or of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.” If the apostle did not intend to prove that so it was, that the calling was according to God’s election, why notice that the younger Jacob was preferred before the elder Esau, before either had done good or evil? why speak of the distinction of one vessel from another out of the “ same lump,” and such a distinction as a potter makes ? If the apostle intends, as Mr. Wesley maintains, a calling of believers as such, and that the sovereignty relates to the terms of “ the adoption,” or to the sort of persons who are to be thus blessed ; then why does he not say at once, “not of works, but of faith ?” Why not, in quoting the passage in Exodus, “ I will 280 THE RECONCILER. have mercy on whom I will have mercy,” use an article descriptive of quality, or qualification, such as otov, or Ovrotov, Or TOLovTOY, OF TocovTov, instead of con- fining himself to the personal pronoun dv, as would un- doubtedly have been the correct method? Besides, can a believer, one who obeys the call of God to hearken and learn, and an unbeliever, one who wilfully dis- obeys it, be “ of the same lump ?” Moreover, what need of a laboured argument to prove “ the right- eousness” of making such a one as the former, one obedient to the gospel, a “ vessel of mercy ;” and such a one as the latter, one disobedient to it, a « vessel of wrath?” Revert also to that which originated the argument. ‘Thence it would appear, that the matter in question was not, whether believers shall be chosen rather than legal workers: that subject the apostle had discussed in the third, fourth, and fifth chapters, and had concluded it ; but, why one Israelite was preferred before another. It is not concerning gua- Lifications, but concerning persons. Neither is the question concerning the calling in of the Gentiles, as contradistinguished from the Jews, but concerning those whom God had called out of (e&) the Jews, and also out of (e&) the Gentiles; and, although he adverts in the end of the chapter to the Gentiles, yet that is only in order to display God’s sovereignty still more, in that Gentiles, at least Gentiles who followed noft after righteousness, should obtain “the righteousness of faith;” while Jews, favoured Jews, who did follow after righteousness, should not obtain it. And it is to be noticed, that the expression is €Ovy, only « Gentiles,” not ra 20vn, ** the Gentiles.” GOD’S SOVEREIGNTY IN ELECTION. 281 Indeed, the subject of the calling in of the Gentiles, nationally considered, is reserved for the eleventh chapter. However, as this portion of Scripture—the very seat of the doctrine—has been so mistaken by our opponents, it may not be improper, or out of place, to attempt a statement of the apostle’s whole argument respecting the “calling;” first introduced in Rom. vill. 28. See then from Rom. viii. 28. to chap. xi. inclusive. COMMENT ON ROM. IX. X. AND Xi. AS ARISING OUT OF ROM. vill. 28, &c. The question with the apostle in this ninth chapter was, whether in the present state of his brethren, the Jews, the word of God to Israel, and to Abraham’s seed, had failed? No, he maintains it had not; for as to the former, ‘‘the Israel intended” were not “ Israel after the flesh,” but Israel after the ‘ Spirit ;” and as to the latter, ‘* the seed of Abraham” were not his seed by natural descent, but only such as were born, as Isaac was, supernaturally, by the Spirit of God.* And then he proceeds to show, that not only the pro- mise to Israel, and to Abraham’s seed, was designed for them in this restricted sense, but that in thus favouring this Israel with a supernatural and spiritual birth, he acted in a way of sovereignty. To do this— lst. He adverts to the well-known circumstance of Jacob and Esau being born not only of one father, but of one conception, and yet, irrespective of good or evil in either of them, that God chose even the * See Gal. iv. ult. 282 THE RECONCILER. younger before the elder. 2dly, He plainly states that God’s design herein was to show his sovereignty,—that he purposes according to election, and calls of his own will. Then, ddly, lest any should have reason for charg- ing him with unrighteousness in this, he adverts to God’s ancient conduct towards disobedient Israel, to Israel that having so notoriously broken covenant with him, deserved to be blotted out, and to be consumed, and so lay at his mercy; as Moses plainly intimates when he says, “ If thou wilt, forgive their sin, and take them for thine inheritance ;’ and shows, that at that time, whilst he might have rejected them all, he would show his “ goodness” in « having mercy on whom he would have mercy ;” so, viewing the present Israel as the same “ disobedient people” as they, he would now show the same goodness, and in the same sovereign way. And then, 4thly, to prove that it was the same sovereign goodness, he disallows all claim of the creature, showing that if men were called to be his chosen people—his “ vessels of mercy, that it was not of their willing or running, as the first moving cause, but of God herein showing mercy. Nay, Sthly, not contenting himself with this, he declares that God showed his sovereignty in hardening whom he would of these his disobedient creatures: “ For whom he will, he hardeneth.” By this he means, that God suffers such disobedient persons as he pleases, to have their own way, and so to be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin, and the temptations of Satan; that they could not be persuaded to hearken so as to believe the gospel; which he illustrates in the case of Pharaoh, who being thus disobedient, or having so hardened GOD’S SOVEREIGNTY IN ELECTION. 283 his own heart, God left him to be hardened, so that he became a monument of God’s wrath and power, God determining to get himself ‘‘ honour upon” him, while he perversely followed his own will. Then, 6thly, to an objector, Paul shows, that of a body of people all disobedient, and lying at his mercy, he chose to act with the same sovereignty as a potter did over clay of the same lump. All Israel were guilty —all left to themselves were unpersuadable or dis- obedient, as their history would show ; and, as all lay at his mercy, and deserved to perish, and so, if called, must be called by “grace,” (chap. xi. 6,) he would dispose of them as he pleased,—appoint some to de- served wrath, and others to undeserved mercy. 7thly, He makes asolemn appeal as to the justice and pro- priety of all this, intimating that, while to make persons who had not only been invited, and to whom his arm had been “stretched out all the day long,” or had been ‘“ endured with much long-suffering, vessels of wrath,” could not be unjust; so, to make known the riches of his glorious goodness on others, and make them ‘“ vessels of mercy,” could not be improper ; for, though they, as needing ‘‘ mercy,” of course had no claim any more than Israel, who had broken cove- nant in the wilderness ; yet still, as the sovereign Lord of heaven and earth, having a right to do what he will with his own, he had a right to show mercy or not ; and if he did, on as many or as few, on this or on that, as he pleased. 8thly, He next shows that this sove- reignty was exercised on all that God “ called,” not only of the Jews, but also of those whom he called out from among the Gentiles ; which indeed he proves _ 284 THE RECONCILER. was no other than had been foretold as to the Gentiles by Hosea, and as to the Jews by Isaiah. And then, Ythly, as if he had said, “‘ Look at fact—you see even the outcast Gentiles (it is not ra €6vn, but simply €0vm) who, though not following after the righteous- ness of justification, yet have attained to it ; while the favoured Jews, though they did follow after right- cousness, yet have not attained to it.” But then, 10thly, that the Jews might blame themselves only, he shows, they had proudly and perversely opposed God's method of justification—of «“ Justifying the ungodly ;” ‘not submitting themselves to the righteousness of God ;” but would ‘““go about to establish their own righteousness.” And then, resuming the subject of faith, which he had dropped in the fifth chapter, he proves that the Jews had not obeyed the gospel, but though God had “stretched out his hands all the day long, they had proved a disobedient and gainsaying people ;” and by this conduct it was, that they were not saved, but had been fitted to destruction. I1thly, | But yet God had not hereby proved unfaithful to his ancient promises to his people Israel. No; the Israel intended—the people whom he foreknew—the remnant, would obtain this righteousness of justifica- tion. And then he shows, that this regard to a remnant was no new thing, for in Elijah’s time there was a remnant saved ; and, indeed, if they adverted to the whole history of Israel and Judah, they might see that God always reserved to himself a remnant ; in other words, that he always “ kept mercy for thou sands.” And then, 12thly and lastly, he finishes as he began, teaching that the distinction made, was, as GOD’S SOVEREIGNTY IN ELECTION. 285 God had purposed, according to election, his choice of course, and not ¢heirs: and, lest these chosen should glory as though he had set his love upon them, because they were worthy of it, or better than others, he calls it an ‘‘ election of grace.” From this he passes naturally into the subject of the rejection of the Jews as a nation, and the calling of the Gentiles, nationally considered, showing that ultimately the Jews being provoked to jealousy by God’s mercy to the Gentiles, they would come in nationally again ; and so all israel, the true Israel, would be saved from amongst both Jews and Gentiles. And then he in- timates, that all of them were so saved of “ mercy,” and that it was in order that they might glorify God for his mercy, “that God had concluded all in dzedOeca, or disobedience.”* Thus have we proved this sovereignty of Divine mercy by an appeal to Scripture facts, and to argu- ments drawn from Scripture; and now, that the primitive Christians so understood the Scriptures, appears from the following passages extracted from the writings of those who lived in the apostles’ days, and which yet remain. ‘ Elect, sanctified by the will of God.” t—_N.B. “ Elect,” a common appellation. ‘* ‘They were all therefore greatly glorified, not for their own sake, or for their own works, or for the righteousness that they themselves wrought, but through his will. And we also being called by the * The two following propositions being proved, the sovereignty pleaded for by Calvinists follows:—1. Damnation is of ourselves; salvation is of God. 2. Our good or yielding will is of God; our bad or stubborn will is of ourselves. + Clemens Romanus to the Corinthians. 286 THE RECONCILER. same will in Christ Jesus, are not justified by ourselves, neither by our own wisdom or knowledge, or piety, or the works which we have done in the holiness of our hearts; but by that faith by which God has justified all men from the beginning: to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.” “Knowing that by grace ye are saved: not by works, but by the will of God through Jesus Christ.”* “* Predestinated before the world began, that it should be always unto an enduring and unchange- able glory, being united and chosen through his true passion, according to the will of the Father and Jesus Christ our God.’} “‘ Beloved and illuminated through the will of him who willeth all things which are.”t ‘“¢ You must pray for them that i be the will of God they may repent.’’§ ** The people which he has purchased to his beloved Son were to believe in sincerity.” || ** God hath severed us from the rest that we should believe.” ¥ III. We now appeal to oBSERVATION AND EXPERI- ENCE. See yonder crowd flocking to a place of worship— what induces the unregenerate among them to go thither? Curiosity, education, connexions, custom, nay, in some cases, base and sinister motives, not a will to be saved from their sins. And when they hear, * Polycarp to the Philippians.* + Ignatius to the Ephesians. t Ignatius to the Romans. § Ignatius to the Smyrnians. || Barnabas’ Catholic Epistles. | Chrysostom on the Ephesians. (a2) Polycarp and Ignatius were fellow-disciples of John. PROOF FROM OBSERVATION. 237 who becomes willing to be thus saved, and who is per- suaded to embrace a holy, humbling, self-renouncing, self-denying religion, but as stirred up and subdued, and made willing by a power foreign from their own? Who will leave the paths of pleasurable sin until the Lord hedges up their way with thorns, and makes a wall that they may not find their paths? Who, but as divinely taught, prefers the unsearchable riches of Christ to the riches of this world—who, the honours that come from God to the honour that cometh from man—who, the pleasures of God and religion to the pleasures of sin? What will or desire have men to repent and believe until “ pricked to the heart,””—until the King’s arrows are sharp within them, as in the case of the three thousand convicted by Peter’s sermon, or unless they are alarmed, as the jailer? Who hearkens to the call of the gospel until in a sort necessitated, either by the severity of providential dispensations, or the piercings of the sword of the Spirit, or by the weight of the hammer of the word ?—See for illustra- tion the two mstances mentioned in Mr. Rogers’s Life, and many others. Besides, observe the different operations of pro- vidence, and the different results in regard to the hearers of the word. Here is a man who was just alarmed by a sermon, and not hearing another such a sermon, the alarm subsides, and through the cares of the world and the lusts of other things, he settles down in peace again; while there is another who has alarm after alarm, and, in spite of all his attempts, it keeps him awake, till at length the weapons of the Christian warfare, the artillery of heaven, playing 288 THE RECONCILER. upon the strongholds of his prejudices and passions, he surrenders at discretion, and “ every thought is brought into captivity to the obedience of Christ.” Some are hedged in by education and other relative circumstances, so that they cannot indulge the corrupt inclinations of their heart, but by continual excite- ment are drawn to seek the Lord; others, having had no such education, and having no such excitements, indulge their evil inclinations, “harden themselves through the deceitfulness of sin,” and so become stupid and never seek him. Here is, again, one who, by reason of his connexions in life, or from curiosity to hear a stranger, goes to the house of God, and is entangled and caught in the gospel net. ‘There is another, who, having no such connexions or curiosity, does not go and hear; and, consequently, is not entangled and caught. A sentence, either in the minister’s prayer or sermon, happening to suit the circumstances and to reveal the secrets of the heart of this man, fixes an arrow of conviction which he never can extract ; while no such appropriate sentence having dropped for his neighbour, he goes away unaffected, though perhaps sitting in the same seat. This man, being in trouble, yields to the word; that, being ‘in prosperity, will not hear.” How remark- ably, too, is the lot of some cast under the preaching of the gospel, while others are removed from it; nor is it less remarkable how the lot of some is to sit under an awakening gospel ministry, while the lot of others is to sit under a ministry the direct reverse. Many that have gone to the house of God to trifle, have re- turned home to pray; while others, less profane, have GOD’S SOVEREIGNTY ABSOLUTE. 289 returned careless: and, indeed, to add no more cases, sometimes the most obstinate are called, while others less obstinate remain still the willing slaves of sin and of the world. In fine, admitting that there is in some persons a greater readiness to receive the word than in others; yet, since that arose from natural birth or education, or other providential circumstances, not under their control, God, as the God of nature and of providence, must be acknowledged here also as the sovereign disposer. And thus we see that, by appeal- ing to observation and experience, as well as to Scrip- ture, God, in the new creation, as well as in the old creation, “worketh all things after the counsel of his own will.” If we were to add anything to the above, it would be, that to maintain that man’s faith and salvation depended solely on his own will, or self-determining power, would be promoting pharisaism: for, if I am so wise as to determine myself to hearken and use the means of faith, while my neighbour is so foolish as to determine otherwise, I may justly despise him for his folly. I may indeed say, “God, I thank thee for giving me grace to believe when thus willing,” and so may not glory before God; but since I, being left to the freedom of my own will, made a wise choice, while he, in the same situation, made a foolish one, I may very properly glory over Aim as wiser than HE, and say, “ STAND by, For I am wiser than thou !” {IT IS ABSOLUTE SOVEREIGNTY. To show that it is absolute sovereignty, that is, irre- spective of foresight of man’s volitions or conduct, U 290 | THE RECONCILER. besides all that has been said above, we may, by way of summary, remark as follows :—Zsrael were chosen, not because of their uprightness, but they were con- sidered as stiff-necked, nay, worse than the heathen. The remnant were chosen for his name’s sake, that his name might not be polluted. See this strikingly shown in Ezek. xx. and xxxvi. Our Saviour, as though he would impress the idea, speaks of the “elect” of Israel at the time of the destruc- tion of Jerusalem, as those « whom God had chosen.” The mysteries of the kingdom were revealed to babes, because it seemed good in the sight of God. In the parable of the householder, after the house- holder had done that which was right to the rest, he chooses sovereignly to do with some as he would, doing what he would with his own. Besides that the word “ election” conveys the idea in Rom. ix., the expressions, “that the purpose of God according to election,”—* of him that calleth,”— show it: as does also the fact, that, for the very pur- pose of showing that it was for his sovereign pleasure that he acted in this affair of calling to the adoption, he preferred (contrary to the course of things) the younger Jacob to the elder Esau. And, finally, the similitude employed, that of the potter and the clay, gives us to understand the same. Thus, “ he work- eth all things after the counsel of Azs will.” He doeth whatsoever he pleaseth amongst the armies of heaven and the inhabitants of the earth: and “what fis soul desireth that he doeth.” And as to indi- viduals, he hath “ mercy on whom he will have mercy, and compassion on whom he will have compassion ;” GOD'S SOVEREIGNTY ABSOLUTE. 29) that although he promises his blessings to those that will and run for them, yet “it is not of him that willeth, or of him that runneth,” as the first moving cause, but of God that showeth mercy ;” whose mercy is indeed the cause of their thus “ willing and running.” 292 THE RECONCILER. CHAPTER IL. ON REPROBATION. THE SCRIPTURE DOCTRINE OF REPROBATION, BY SOME CALLED PREDES- TINATION TO DEATH, SHOWING THAT THERE IS NO DESTINATION TO DEATH BUT ON DESERT, AND NO PREDESTINATION TO DEATH, BUT ON FORESIGHT OF SUCH DESERT. SEcTion I. The Subject explained. WHEN a general would possess himself of a country, he must first demolish the fortifications that obstruct: his entrance and progress :—when a man would build a house, he must first clear away the rubbish that lies in his way. So must it be, frequently, in our pursuit of theo- logical truth. To possess ourselves of any important truth, and to raise and fix it upon a solid basis, it seems quite necessary, first, to remove the obstacles out of the way: for whoever considers the constitution and operations of the human mind must be aware, that as long as, through misconception, apparently insur- mountable objections pre-occupy the mind, no propo- sition or truth can gain an entrance there, nor can the mind be firmly established in the conviction of such proposition or truth. Perhaps there is no subject in the whole course of theology to which these remarks will apply more fully than to those which we are now about to consider; and therefore, as the Doctrine of Reprobation, so called, has ever stood in the way of those of Election and Predestination, we shall first attempt to give a scriptural view of that subject. DOCTRINE OF REPROBATION. 293 But before we proceed to the doctrine itself, in order to show that the above prefatory remarks are well founded, we will give statements of the views of our mistaken opponents, when touching on the point in question. In the Methodist Magazine for October 1813, in a paper on ‘‘ Absolute Predestination,” we have the fol- lowing frightful caricature of Calvinism :—“ Accord- ing to the dogmas of Calvinism, God cannot act upon the legitimate principle of justice at all, in his conduct towards mankind. The whole scheme is repugnant to Divine justice on two grounds, as stated by Linborch. 1. Because God is supposed to reprobate men, consi- dered as innocent, even before he had created them ;— as the Supralapsarians maintain ; or those whom he, by his mere will and pleasure, would render guilty, when they deserved no such thing ;—which is the notion of the Sublapsarians.”—‘‘'To predestinate an innocent person to eternal destruction is beyond the bounds of Divine right.” —“ Nor is it less unjust to reprobate men who are rendered guilty, not voluntarily, but by the determination of God.” —(P. 785.) “2. Since, by this decree, God is supposed to require of the reprobate, under the awful penalty of eternal damnation, repent- ance, faith, love, &c. though hejhath taken away or de- creed not to give them the power absolutely necessary to enable them.”—“ This absolute decree of Reproba- tion dresses him up in the most hideous form, repre- sents him as a wilful, cruel, revengeful, and inexorable Being,—one who acts towards his rational creatures, the greatest part of them at least, with implacable rage and boundless hatred,—one who damns men by an 294 THE RECONCILER. absolute decree before they are created, or creates them on purpose to damn them,—one who destines men to sin and destruction, and precludes them from all hopes and means of bettering their condition, and then consigns them over to everlasting misery for what they could not avoid,—one who sports himself at our unhappiness, and triumphs at our fall,—in a word, one who wreaks his vengeance, and darts his thunder-bolts all around without distinction, sparing but a few, whom he fondly and for no reason, but out of a humour loves, while he casts the rest with a revengeful hand into everlasting fire, not only,—but (what is horrid to think on) even some of these helpless innocent babes, born both of pagan and christian parents, who die before they have known the difference betwixt good and evil.”— ‘“* Whether these be not some of the fatal consequences of the doctrine of Predestination, we leave the world, nay, themselves to judge.”—‘“ Say the Calvinists, he hath a secret will by which he hath determined that far the greatest part shall not repent.”—*‘ On the plan of Calvinism, if a reprobate hear the gospel, and ven- tures to believe that Christ died for his sins, behold he is deceived: vice versa if he do not believe that Christ died for his sins, he is damned for his unbelief!” What a horrid caricature is this! What dreadful— shall I say, misrepresentation? No: I would in the judgment of charity say, what dreadful mzsconception ! Sad perversion of the human intellect! Nor is Dr. Adam Clarke much better in his statement of Calvinistic opinions. In his note on Exod. iy. 21, he says, that they (the Calvinists) “‘ attribute to God a decree, the date of which is lost in eternity, by which he has deter- DOCTRINE OF REPROBATION. 295 mined to cut off from the possibility of salvation millions of millions of unborn souls, and leave them under a necessity of sinning, by actually hardening their hearts against the influence of his own grace and Spirit, that he may, on the pretext of justice, consign them to endless perdition.” And again on chap. ix. 16——‘* That they teach that God irritated, provoked, orstirred up Pharaoh against his people Israel to show in him his power.” And once more on chap. x. that Pharaoh was “ under a necessitating decree to sin and go to perdition.” Surely these writers know not what they say, nor whereof they affirm. Surely—though undesignedly —they bear false witness against their neighbour; for where from the pulpit or the press have such doctrines been promulgated, at least for the last two hundred years? ‘True, on the Supralapsarian scheme, there might be some ground for some of these representa- tions; but where are to be found Supralapsarians in the present day? ‘These statements, however, were made many years since ; we will indulge the hope, therefore, that the friendly intercourse that has been occasioned by our Bible and our Missionary Societies has ere now corrected these mistakes, and softened these asperities.* Assertion, indeed, is not proof; but we may be allowed to confront assertion with assertion, and there- fore we shall state at the outset our views on this subject, from whence it will appear how groundless are the shocking accusations above made against our Cal- vinistic brethren, or at least that, whatever apparent * The same sort of calumnies have, however, been repeated more recently by Southey in his Life of Wesley ; but let us neither see nor hear any more of them. 296 THE RECONCILER. ground there might be for some of them on the original scheme of Calvinism, yet upon the one maintained in this essay, they all become baseless as a night vision! But, before we proceed to treat of this reprobaton, it seems proper that we should present the reader with a statement of the views of the Supralapsarians, as given by the judicious Turretin, in his treatment of the order of the Divine decrees.* ‘¢ The first decree,” says he, “ according to them, is concerning the manifesta- tion of the glory of God in the exercise of mercy and justice by the salvation and damnation of man; the second, concerning creation ; the third, concerning the permission of the fall; the fourth, concerning the mission of Christ, for the salvation of those whom he had decreed to save.” Now, ascheme like this, which supposes predestination to death as well as to life, and that as irrespective of sin, might well furnish some such horrid construction as that which has been pre- sented above; but, as I said before, where are now the Supralapsarians? If they have disappeared, we may add, why bear false witness against a neighbour ? The following are the remarks we make on these subjects of Predestination and Reprobation, which will serve to confront the assertions above-mentioned, and also to give a general idea of our view of the Scripture doctrine on this subject. We observe then, 1. That the word “ Predestination” is never applied in Scripture but to believers :+ and that, although the rejected Jews are said by the Apostle Peter to have been “‘ appointed” to “ stumble at the word,” it was * Turret. Instit. Vol. I. Q. xviii. p. 460. + Predestination as applied to believers will be considered hereafter. DOCTRINE OF REPROBATION. 297 only as being before “ disobedient” or unpersuadable.* Moreover, that, although the Apostle Jude speaks of such as were of old “ fore-written”} to this condemna- tion, as they were indeed by Isaiah,t yet that this fore- writing was concerning such only as were foreseen to have “closed their eyes and their ears § against the truth.” 2. That Scriptural “reprobation” is like the repro- bation of silver by the refiner, as indeed the word is used by Jeremiah: ‘ Reprobate silver shall men call them, because the Lord hath rejected them.” But why rejected them? Because they had proved dross—be: cause they had rejected him. And the “ hardening,” the expression most commonly used in Scripture, is much of the same kind. It is the hardening of those who had provoked his “ wrath,” hence called “ vessels of wrath.” It is the hardening of such as were guilty in not ‘‘ obeying the truth” “ manifest in them,” either by unwritten or written law ; of such as would “ close their eyes that they might not see, and their ears that they might not hear ;” or, as it is elsewhere expressed, ‘had eyes to see, but saw not, and ears to hear, but heard not,” because of their “ rebellious” will. 3. That none will be damned but those who, in the view of Him who cannot do iniquity, deserve thus to be damned, and that as disobedient or unper- suadable to unwritten or written law; and that all shall be judged by the law that they are under, and punished according to the degree of their disobedience or of their opposition to the will of their Maker. 4. That, under the dispensation of the Gospel of * "AmeBetc. t+ Tpoyeypappevoc. * Isa. viii. 14. § Comp. Isa. vi. 10; Matt. xiii. 15; and Acts xxviii, 27. 298 THE RECONCILER. Salvation, none shall be damned but those who would not be saved.* N.B.—The salvation of the gospel is a salvation from sin—from the power of Satan; a deliverance from this present evil world, as well as a deliverance from the wrath to come. 5. That there is no destination to death but upon desert,—no pre-destination or fore-appointment to death, but upon foresight of such desert. And whether our opponents will believe it or not, we assert,— 6. That the scheme here maintained is as benign as theirs, inasmuch as it not only presents every facility and every motive for salvation that theirs does, but supposes that fully as many will ultimately be saved. We advance a step further, and say, 7. That it is more benign, inasmuch as while their scheme, which supposes the salvation of men to be dependent on the use of their own free will, leaves such salvation uncertain ; ours provides for the certain salvation of those who are saved, as dependent upon the will of God. We add, finally, 8. That, while the Arminian scheme, by ascribing salvation to the result of man’s free will, supplies a saved man with a cause of glorying over a lost man, for having made a wiser and better choice than he, this scheme strips him of all glorying of the kind, in- asmuch as it attributes his wiser choice to the sove- reign will and grace of God, and thus too causes all * For “all that are saved, are saved by a prerogative of grace ; but those that perish are cut off by an act of Divine holiness and justice, not of absolute sovereignty. ’—Henry on Isa. t. SCRIPTURAL REPROBATION. 299 the glory to redound to God,—to that God, “ of whom, and through whom, and to whom are all things, and to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.” Section II, Scriptural Reprobation or Hardening illustrated. The only places where the word “reprobate” or ‘“‘reprobates” occurs in Scripture are the following: “ Reprobate silver shall men call them, because the Lord hath rejected them.” ‘* God gave them over to a reprobate mind.” ‘* Men reprobate concerning the faith.” ‘“ And being to every good work reprobate.” “That Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates.” “JT trust ye shall know that we are not reprobates.” “Should do that which is honest, though we be as reprobates.” Now to which of these passages will not our view of reprobation apply ? Why were the Jews, as referred to by Jeremiah, “ reprobate” and “ re- jected?” Let Jeremiah himself answer. Because they ‘“‘rejected God's law,” or had “ rejected the word of the Lord.”* Why were the Gentiles “given over to a reprobate mind?” “ Because they did not like to retain God in their knowledge.” Who were the ‘‘men reprobate concerning the faith?” Such as “resisted the truth.” Who “unto every good work reprobate?” Such as were “ disobedient.” And the Corinthians, warned against an unsound profession, while the apostles were careful to vindicate their au- thority,—how were both one and the other to secure their character? By proving themselves by examina- * Jer. vi. 19; viii. 9. 300 THE RECONCILER. tion, as silver is tried by the fire, to be something better than useless dross. Scripture reprobation, therefore, cannot respect men as innocent, but as fit for rejection, and the very word signifies the rejection of a person or thing after trial.* In reference to hardening it is unnecessary to collect the passages where that word occurs: we shall meet with all that are requisite to our purpose as we pro- ceed: let it suffice for the purpose of illustration to remark as follows :— God cannot be the author of any sin, much less of actual positive hardening a man’s heart. So far from it that he commands not to harden the heart, and complains of it. Thus to Israel, “ Harden not your hearts.” Thus Christ was “grieved for the hardness of the hearts” of the Jews. And on the same ground does he “ upbraid the cities wherein most of his mighty works had been done.” But when it is said, he har- dened Pharaoh’s heart, or hardened the heart of the Jews, or “hardens whom he will,” it means that, in just judgment and for wise reasons, he wills to suffer such a result through the lusts of men’s own hearts and the temptations of Satan, after having “endured them with much long-suffering.” How God is said to do it may be illustrated by a comparison of 2 Sam. xxiy. 1, with 1 Chron. xxi. 1. Advert to these passages, and you will find that, while in the former God is said to move David, in the latter it is said that Satan did It ; and from both combined, it will be seen that it was suffered as a manifestation of God’s “anger against Israel for sin,” the lust of pride or vanity in David * *Adokimoc. Ht SCRIPTURAL REPROBATION. 301 being reproved thereby. In other words, God being angry with Israel, and thinking it proper to punish them, he left David to his lust of vanity, and suffered Satan to suggest a thought by which that vanity would be excited or gratified: and thus the numbering took place. Now, though God did not suggest or inject the thought, but Satan; yet, because God thought proper to leave David to his own lust in this matter, as on another occasion he did Hezekiah, and to suffer Satan to indulge his malignant will, by suggesting a thought that would excite that lust, it is therefore said that God did it.* Just so is it in regard to the hardening and blinding of men, so often mentioned in Scripture. Through the deceitfulness of sin men harden their hearts against God, so as to reject the counsel of God for their salvation; and continuing stubbornly to do so, God leaves them to their own lusts or chosen delusions, and to Satan’s temptations : and, because it is of his wise and righteous will that such event takes place, the Holy Spirit attributes it to God. You may have an exact conception of it from Psa. Ixxxi. 8—13. In appealing to Israel there, says the Lord, ‘* Hear, O my people, and I will testify unto thee, O Israel, if thou wilt hearken unto me; there shall no strange god be in thee; neither shalt thou worship any strange god. I am the Lord thy God which brought thee out of the land of Egypt: open thy mouth wide and I will fill it. But my * Very often in Scripture is God said to do a thing when it is manifest he only suffers it. Thus, though the Sabeans and Chaldeans violently seized upon Job’s property, yet he says, “the Lord hath taken away.” 302 THE RECONCILER. people would not hearken to my voice, and Israel would none of me. So I gave them up unto their own hearts’ lusts: and they walked in their own counsels.” And then, to show how contrary it was to his will of benevolence, or to the goodness of his nature, he adds, “O that my people had hearkened unto me, and Israel had walked in my ways!” God’s conduct towards the Genti/es, as in Rom.1i., may also be viewed in the same light. Were they left to ‘‘walk in their own ways?” it was because they were azevets, unpersuadable.* Were they given up to uncleanness? it was not only on account of their abominable idolatries, but “ through the lusts of their own hearts :”—to vile affections? because they changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, ‘“‘ who is blessed for ever :”—and at length “toa reprobate mind?” it was because “they did not like to retain God in their knowledge,” and because they were unpersuadable.} As to hating as opposed to loving, see page 312. To illustrate, as well as to establish, this view of the doctrine by facts, let us advert to Pharaoh, the first Scripture instance of the kind. And what do we seeinhim? That, unmindful of the great deliverance that God had wrought for his people in times past by Joseph, he not only had held the people in bondage, but had cruelly oppressed them. And, although God does indeed declare that he will harden his heart, and is said to have done so, yet repeatedly is Pharaoh said to have hardened his own heart. That which we are to understand the Lord as doing in this case, is this: * Rom. xi. 30. + Ibid. SCRIPTURAL REPROBATION. 303 that he left Pharaoh to his own lusts, and suffered him, by the voluntary acting of his own mind, to refuse to yield to the authority of the Almighty Ruler. Nor was this permission without reason ; for while Pharaoh, in just judgment, was left to follow the dictates of his own wicked heart, God designed “to get him honour upon Pharaoh.” How? He would show himself a just God and a Saviour: as a just God, he would vindicate the honour of his name in the most cele- brated spot in the world, against the abominable idolatries and crimes of which Egypt and the world were now guilty, as well as execute judgment on the oppressor; and as a Saviour, he would deliver his people from their cruel bondage. And it is worthy of remark, that however men may now “ charge God foolishly,” Pharaoh himself justified God. See Exod. ix, Jf, and x, 6, Look again at Israel in the affair of the golden calf. While the Lord declares he would “have mercy on whom he would have mercy,” he ‘‘ turned,” as to the rest of the people, and “ gave them up to worship the host of heaven.” But for what reason did he thus give them up? Not only had they so egregiously broken covenant in this instance, but they were a “ stiff-necked people ;” and, according to the threatening of God himself, had deserved to be “ blotted out of his book” — had deserved to be “‘ consumed.” With this account of them by Moses accords that given of them by Ezekiel, as to their sinful state, even before they were delivered from the land of Egypt.* Such also is Stephen’s representation of them, as to their conduct * Ezek. xx. 5—9. 304 THE RECONCILER. in the wilderness,* whence it appears that they were set upon idolatry, and God only gave them up to their own lusts, as the psalmist David observes, which they seemed determined to indulge, notwithstanding all his counsels.”}- See, again, the ‘ hardened,” men- tioned in Isa. vi., so often applied to the Jews in the New Testament. As explained by our Saviour, and his apostle Paul, that passage supposes that they had “closed their eyes and ears, lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and be converted and healed. The same as to the cases mentioned by Isaiah in two other places,t upon the last of which Mr. Henry makes this remark: ‘They said, Yet a little more sleep, a little more slumber; and God said, Sleep on now, and take your rest.” Look again at the places occurring in the Epistle to the Romans, § where is the very seat of the doctrine; and you will find that those who were made “vessels of wrath” had been “endured with much long-suffering,” and so had been “fitted to destruction ;” and that they had been “a disobedient and gainsaying people,” after God had “stretched out his hands all the day long” to them. And, finally, as to the Gentiles also, Paul, writing to the Thessalonians, while he speaks of such as had been “chosen to salvation,” he declares concerning those that perished, that they were persons who “ received not the love of the truth that they might be saved,” (which, by the way, implies that they might have been saved, if they had not stubbornly rejected it,) and that they “had pleasure in unrighteousness.” * Acts vii. 42, 43. + Psasixxei it Tsarxxvill. 13 xxix. 10: § Rom. ix. and xi. SCRIPTURAL REPROBATION. 305 Besides the cases of hardening above mentioned, there are others in Scripture, which, though they do not all bear upon men’s eternal condition,— we mean such as that of Hophni and Phinehas, of Amaziah, king of Judah, and of Ahab, king of Israel,—yet they serve to illustrate the doctrine. It is said of Hophni and Phinehas, ‘They hearkened not, because the Lord would slay them.” What means this, and why such a purpose? God left them to their own wicked temper, which habitually was indisposed to hearken to any other mind but their own; and he thus left them, because their past notorious wickedness had provoked him to it. Ahab, king of Israel, seduced by false prophets, was slain ; and it was of the Lord, who not only suffered a lying spirit in the mouth of these pro- phets, but welled to suffer it, as appears from the account given of it in Scripture,* in order to his destruction. But why this? Because he had “ sold himself to work evil,’ and was prompting Israel to do the same. As to Amaziah, king of Judah, it is said, when Joash, king of Israel, wisely warned him of the consequence of his vain boasting, that “ he would not hear, for it came of God, that he might deliver them into the hand of their enemies.” Moreover, said the prophet that came to him, “I know that God hath determined to destroy them.” But why was this? Because of his turning from that which was right, his becoming a provoking idolater, and not hearkening to God’s counsel. Hence the Latin adage, ‘ Quem Deus vult perdere, dementit.” May we not conceive of the moral process of sin * 1 Kings xxii. 19—23. xX 306 THE RECONCILER. in man, prior to this judicial “ hardening,” thus ? First, the man “walks after the imagination of his evil heart,” instead of resisting and making his prayer to the Lord his God to turn him from it, and so he practises evil deeds; then, his lusts and passions ac- quire strength, and ‘ taking pleasure in unrighteous- ness,” he becomes an easy prey to his own heart’s lusts, and to Satan’s temptations; his heart becomes har- dened against the counsels of God, and he “ closes his eyes that he might not see, and his ears that he might not hear,” till, at length, provoked at his stubbornness, the Lord gives him up to his own heart's lusts, to his own chosen delusions, and to the temptations of Satan. Perhaps it may relieve the reader if we sum up the substance of the above dissertation in the following statement :— 1. By this ‘‘ hardening,” we are to understand the suffering Satan to tempt, while the heart “ choses its own delusions, without any longer interfering by pre- venting goodness. It is leaving, in fact, Satan and the sinner to their own will. ‘The sinner, therefore, be- comes hardened. He has zndulged “ evil deeds,” and ‘“‘ walked after the imagination of his evil heart ;” he ‘ loves darkness rather than light,” because that light would make manifest his evil deeds; therefore, when called to the light, “‘ hardens his heart” against the call ; and then, in righteous judgment, after being “endured with much long-suffering,” he is left to his chosen blindness and hardness. 2. Whatever the Lord wills should take place, whether by the working of his own power, or by the working of Satan and the sinner, is said in Scripture SCRIPTURAL REPROBATION. 307 to be the Lord’s doing, as has been proved before. Hence, not only is Pharaoh said “to harden his heart” himself,—of which by the way he was conscious, and on account of it acknowledges himself guilty,—but the Lord is said to harden his heart. 3. This ‘ hardening the heart,” this ‘‘ appointing to stumble at the word,” is a judgment executed upon man as “disobedient” or unpersuadable, and means only that God wills that man should take occasion to do so. Thus, although, in fact, the preaching of the “ cross,” likewise of ‘‘ the righteousness of faith,” and God’s favour to the Gentiles, did prove a stumbling block to the Jews, yet, assuredly, this arose from their own “evil heart of unbelief;” nor could the stumbling be any farther of God’s appointment than as it was his will to suffer it to be so, in righteous judgment upon them as “ disobedient and gainsaying.” 4. The “hardened” not only are conscious that their present state is of their own choice, and their own doing, but, as in the case of Pharaoh before mentioned, are aware of their own guiltiness in it; nor would they have it otherwise. 5. Though the Lord acts herein according to his sovereign will, ‘‘ hardening whom he will,” yet he acts according to infinite wisdom. Nor does he act contrary to righteousness, for though he hardens in sovereignty, yet he punishes only according to justice. Section III. This Doctrine thus explained, proved to be a Scripture Doctrine. Although the passages of Scripture before cited, and the remarks made upon them, might seem to be 308 THE RECONCILER. confirm, as well as to illustrate, the doctrine in ques- tion, it may be requisite to adduce the testimonies in its favour, in a more orderly and decisive way. We therefore proceed to state the instances of such repro- bation or hardening, as they occur in Scripture. On some of them, however, the observations already made will render it unnecessary to enlarge. ie The hardening of individuals, considered as to their temporal or worldly condition. The first instance is that of Pharaoh, king of Keypt, and the Egyptians. That they were thus hardened, and that to their destruction, no one who reads the history can doubt. The reasons why they were so, have been already stated. Sihon, king of Heshbon, the same. Says Moses to Israel, ‘ The Lord thy God hardened his spirit, and made his heart obstinate, that he might deliver him into thy hand.” Probably, from facts like these, as mentioned before, originated that Latin adage, “ Quos Deus vult perdere, de- mentit.”. Those whom God wills to destroy, he in- fatuates. 2. ‘Those just mentioned were heathens ;—we pass on to notice the instances in his own professing people, the Israelites, in the affair of the golden calf. Of those who had forfeited their title to the inheritance of Canaan, and as such were to be blotted out of God’s book, some were “‘given up to worship the host of heaven.” And, during the sojourn of that people in the wilderness, many were “ given up to their own lusts,” because they “‘ would not hearken to the Lord their God, and would have none of his counsel !” This hardening is often denounced by the prophet SCRIPTURAL REPROBATION. 309 Isaiah : ‘‘ Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes ; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed :”* that is, suffer the heart of this people to wax gross, &c. ‘ But the word of the Lord was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept ; line upon line, line upon line; here a little and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken.”t ‘‘ Stay your- selves, and wonder; cry ye out, and cry: they are drunken, but not with wine; they stagger, but not with strong drink. For the Lorp hath poured out upon you'the spirit of deep sleep, and hath closed your eyes; the prophets and your rulers, the seers hath he covered. And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed, which men deliver to one that is learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I cannot ; for it is sealed. And the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I am not learned.”{ See again; ‘* They have not known nor understood: for he hath shut their eyes, that they cannot see; and their hearts, that they cannot understand.” § Jeremiah is also charged with a similar message to the people. While God would ‘ acknowledge” them that had been carried away captive with Jeremiah, and would set his eyes upon them for good, “ impudent, and hard-hearted, and rebellious,” as they were; he would ‘deliver Zedekiah, the king of Judah, and Se sas Vie O: + Ibid. xxviii. 13. ue Wink. po-ab eg Mola § Ibid. xliv. 18. oO THE RECONCILER. his princes, and the residue of Jerusalem, that re- mained in the land,” and “ deliver them to be removed into all the kingdoms of the earth—for their hurt.” In the New Testament we have also the same doctrine. Says Christ, “Thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes ; even so, Father, for so it seemed good in thy sight!” ‘To them it is not given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God, but to you it is given” And he quotes the prophecy of Isaiah, before cited, applying it to the Jews of his time. « For judgment,” says he, in another place, ‘‘I am come into this world, that they who see not might see, and that they which see might be made blind.” The Jews had ‘their day,” but ‘not knowing their day of visitation,” ‘the things that belonged to their peace were hid from their eyes.” They “could not believe, for God had blinded their eyes.” Paul quotes Isaiah in some of the fore-cited passages, particularly those in Isa. vi. and xxix., and applies them to the Jews in his days ; and in Rom. ix. and xi., speaks of them decisively, as hardened and blinded. And, says Peter, they “stum- bled atthe word, being disobedient; whereunto also they were appointed ;” meaning that they were appointed to stumble at the word, as appears from the passage that Peter had in view (Isa. viii. 14), being disobedient or unpersuadable. 3. We notice the same as to the Gentiles. While the Lord chose Israel for his peculiar people, he “suffered all nations to walk in their own ways, not, however, leaving them without witness of his goodness ‘‘in giving them rain from heaven, and fruitful sea- sons, filling their hearts with food and gladness.” SCRIPTURAL REPROBATION. oiler Yet, for the reasons before assigned, they were “given up to uncleanness,”—“ to vile affections,”—“ to a re- probate mind.” And it may be useful to notice the steps or process of sin to provoke this judgment. 1. Though they knew God, they glorified him not as God, &c. 2. They became vain in their imagina- tions, &c. 3. They became self-conceited, and for- sook God. 4. Then God gave them up to their own hearts’ lusts. 5. Then to vile affections; and 6. Be- cause they did not like to retain God in their know- ledge, he gave them up to a reprobate mind, the consequence of which was all sorts of wickedness. And when the gospel was preached to them, the apostle Paul delivers it as an axiom, ‘“* Whom he will he hardeneth.” Moreover, he speaks of some who would not only “ perish because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved, but on whom for this cause God would send strong delusion to believe a lie: that they all might be damned, who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unright- eousness. N.B. Perhaps it might have been expected by some that the case of Jacob and Esau would have been in- troduced as an instance in point, but we consider the sovereign choice of Jacob rather than Esau, as rather a pattern of the Divine sovereignty that should here- after be shown ; designed particularly to intimate that the calling of God, whether to worldly or to spiritual privileges, should be according to his own election. And thus, his conduct to Jacob and Esau severally, and to their posterity, might be considered, as in the case of Sarah and Hagar, “an allegory.” Certain it is, that the Edomites, the descendants of Esau, might al? THE RECONCILER. at any time have come into the visible church of their brethren the Israelites, as proselytes; and it is also true, that, prior to the Christian era, the Idumeans, another word for the Edomites, were actually incor- porated with them. And when it is said, ‘“‘ Jacob have I Joved, but Esau have I hated,” we are not to understand that God hated Esau or his posterity absolutely, or as creatures, but only comparatively ; for in this sense the word “ hated” is often intended in Scripture. ‘Thus Leah, Jacob’s wife, is said to be “hated,” but the whole story shows that this was only in comparison of Rachel. So in Moses’ law we read of a man having two wives, the one hated and the other loved; where we are not to understand ‘ hated” absolutely. So also the man that is supposed to cleave to Christ, notwithstanding the opposition of father or mother, though he is said to “ hate” them, surely it is to be taken comparatively only. But let us appeal to fact. As to this Esau and Jacob, God did not hate Esau absolutely, for, by the inspiration of God Isaac not only “ blessed” Jacob, but he ‘‘ blessed” Esau too, and God determined that “ his dwelling should be the fatness of the earth, and of the dew of heaven from above.” But yet, designing to have his visible church in the posterity of one of them, to show his sove- reignty, he chose Jacob, the younger. God hateth nothing that he has made as his creature, but is “ good to all, and his tender mercies are over all his works.” COROLLARIES. Having stated the Scripture doctrine of reprobation, or hardening, and having confirmed it by Scripture ELECTION AND PREDESTINATION. 313 testimony, we conclude this part of our subject with the following remarks :— 1. That predestination to death is not mentioned in Scripture at all, nor is appointment to death any where considered but as the award of justice for disobedience. 2. That reprobation, or hardening, is never applied but to cases of worthlessness, or unpersuadableness, or demerit ; and that the punishment of the reprobate will be no other than eating the fruit of his own doings, and reaping what he had chosen to sow. Moreover, that his own conscience will bear him tes- timony that he has been “ contentious” against his Maker, and “ did not obey the truth’ manifested in his own mind, “ while he obeyed unrighteousness.” 8. Since God as a Spirit is incapable of passion, and being absolutely independent of his creatures, and infinitely blessed in himself, can have no motive for doing wrong; there can be no imaginable reason assigned why as the Governor of the world he should act unjustly, or as the Sovereign of the universe he should punish unnecessarily ; and that, therefore, it becomes us, whatever difficulties may present them- selves to our shallow and limited capacities, to ac- quiesce in all his decisions, as perfectly holy, and just, and good. And, lastly, seeing the gospel is preached to every creature—seeing a feast is prepared for all, and all are invited to partake of it—it is our highest wisdom, without delay, to accept the invitation ; for then shall we not only be freed from the award of justice, but be blessed with all the blessings resulting from sove- reign goodness. 314 THE RECONCILER. CHAPTER III. ON ELECTION AND PREDESTINATION. THE SCRIPTURE DOCTRINE OF ELECTION AND PREDESTINATION, SHOWING THAT THE ELECTION OF SCRIPTURE IS NOT AN ELECTION OF EXCLU- SION, BUT OF RESERVATION AND OF RELIEF, AND THAT THE PRE- DESTINATION OF SCRIPTURE RELATES NOT TO THE PERSONS OF BE- LIEVERS, BUT TO THEIR STATE. SECTION I. The Misstatements and Misconceptions concerning the Doctrines corrected and prevented. ATHENAGORAS, one of our early Christian apologists, thus remarks: ‘As the farmer commits not his seed to the ground before he hath cleared it of such weeds as would hinder and stop the growth of the seed; nor the physician give the patient restoratives until he be cleansed of those ill-humours which occasioned the indisposition ; so neither can truth be established till prejudices and false notions be rooted out of the mind.” In accordance with this remark, we deem it expedient, before we enter upon the proof of the doctrine, to correct the misstatements and misconceptions re- specting them. And first, as to election. THE MISSTATEMENTS IN REGARD TO THE DOCTRINE OF ELECTION RECTIFIED. That the Scriptures often speak of election, no one will call in question ; but concerning the hind of elec- tion intended, there are different statements. Some DOCTRINE OF ELECTION. 315 think it is an election of nations or places to the enjoy- ment of external privileges, such as an election of the Gentiles, in contradistinction to the Jews. Others, who admit that it is an election of individuals, and that to salvation, yet consider it is founded on a foreseen good use of their free-will, and the talent entrusted to them ; and others, such as Mr. Wesley, and the numerous body of his adherents, consider it as an election of believers as such, “of those whom he foreknew as believing in Christ ;” and that the sovereignty exer- cised in this affair relates to the choice of terms on which he will accept sinners, and of persons only as qualified by believing. See Mr. Wesley’s New Test. on Rom. viil., ix, and Eph. i. 4. But how far the different views are correct let the reader judge. Is it then an election of nations, and of these to religious privileges? Of Gentiles, as some say, as well as Jews? If so, why does the apostle denominate the called ‘ vessels of mercy’—why say that they were called “ out of the Jews,” and also “ oué of” the Gentiles? Why is it said that God “ visited the Gentiles to take out of them a people for his name ?”’ Why are some Gentiles in the same place, as at Thessalonica, for instance, said to be chosen unto sal- vation, while others would perish in their own de- lusion? True, at the end of the discourse in Rom. ix. the apostle adverts to the Gentiles, yet, that is only to show how God's sovereignty had displayed itself in the fact that individual Gentiles, outcast Gentiles, should be called and justified, though they had not followed after righteousness, while individual Jews, favoured Jews, had not obtained it, though following ol6 THE RECONCILER. after it (perversely, indeed): and it is not till the eleventh chapter that he treats of the national calling of the Gentiles. And as to an election to mere external privileges how does this consist with the declared con- dition of these elect? They are said to be those “that love God”—the “ called” justified” —* glori- fied” vessels of mercy “to have obtained righteous- ness.” ‘They are such as “it is not possible to deceive,” such as are “blessed with all spiritual blessings,”—‘‘ chosen to salvation,”—‘ chosen to obe- dience,”—a “ chosen generation,” in opposition to those who are ‘disobedient and stumble at the word.” These things express more than outward privileges ; and doubtless it is the “ elect” persons whom God had chosen out from among both Jews and Gentiles that are intended. And to this the Old Testament bears witness as well as the New. See Isaiah Ixy. 8, 9: ‘* Thus saith the Lord, As the new wine is found in the cluster, and one saith, Destroy it not; for a bless- ing is in it: so will I do for my servants’ sakes, that I may not destroy them all. And I will bring forth a seed out of Jacob, and out of Judah an inheritor of my mountains: and mine elect shall inherit it, and my servants shall dwell there.” And who are we to understand by the “ Jacob”’—the “ Israel”—so often said to be “chosen” in this book of Isaiah, but the remnant whom the Lord had “ left,” had “ reserved 2” Again: Is it an election founded on a foresight of a good use of free-wiil? If so, why should the apostle Paul, in Rom. ix., be so solicitous to prove that the calling was “of him that calleth,” “ accord- ing to the election of God”—that it was like God’s DOCTRINE OF ELECTION. B07 choosing a younger Jacob before an elder Esau, irre- spective of good or evil in them—like a potter choosing vessels out of clay of the same lump—in fact, why say expressly, “ It is not of him that willeth, or of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy,” and quote that divine declaration from Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and compassion on whom I will have compassion?” Indeed, we might add, what becomes of all the proofs of divine sovereignty adduced in our preceding discourse on that subject ? But is this election an election of beltevers as such? This being the most plausible view of the subject, and being held by that large body of Christians, the Wesleyan Methodists, from the ancient Arminians and Remonstrants, we shall give it particular attention. Mr. Wesley, observing that ‘“‘God sees all things at one view—that he foresaw all who would believe— who would “ embrace Christianity,” says that he decreed to ‘accept believers,” and them only; and that these, whether Jews or Gentiles, according to his ancient manner of calling the Jews his “elect,” his ‘‘ chosen,” were to be now so denominated.* And, says he, has he not a right to “fix the terms on which he will show mercy?” And this is his notion of the sovereignty exercised herein—a sovereignty as to terms, not as to persons ; irrespective of qualifi- * Yes, but Christ says, they are ‘‘the elect whom he hath chosen,” so that there was a reason for the name now as well as before. And the ‘‘ remnant according to the election of grace,” must be a sovereign choice of persons. Moreover they were elect to be gathered, not after they were gathered. 318 THE RECONCILER. cation; for the choice, in his view, is dependent on their obedience to the call. And thus, all such as being called by the universal call of the gospel obey that call, are the elect. More briefly, these writers consider God's decree as twofold: 1. As general. That faith shall be the condition of salvation. 2. As particular. That all such persons as were foreseen to be believers should be the elect. See Mr. Wesley’s Notes on Rom. viii. and ix., Eph. i. 4, and 1 Pet. 1. We readily admit, that ‘‘ God sees all things at one view,” and that, of course, he foresaw all who should believe or obey the gospel call; but the question is, whether his election was dependent upon such view, or whether their “ belief of the truth” itself, and their obedience to the call of the gospel, were not conse- quent upon such election; nay, whether man would ever have believed or obeyed at all, if he had not been effectually wrought upon, according to such gracious election. We maintain, then, that the faith was con- sequent upon the election, or that the election was ¢o faith. For, 1st, election, as consequent upon faith, has no warrant in Scripture, and that, therefore, it is a base- less fabric.* In Rom.ix.,where the subject is professedly argued, neither in stating the question at ver. 10, nor at its conclusion, ver. 24, does the apostle say one word about faith at all, much less as the cause of this election.} No; the subject of faith, and justification by faith, had been dismissed at the end of the fifth chapter. Nor is * Tf the first ten arguments fail to convince, let the reader con- sider the last four. + Nor in chap. viii. How naturally “to them that believe,” in- stead of *‘ to them that love God,” if this were on his mind. DOCTRINE OF ELECTION. 319 there one word on the subject of faith from that place, and through the sixth, and seventh, and eighth chapters to the 10th verse of this ninth chapter. But how strange is this, if the whole design of the apostle was to show that God’s sovereignty in election consisted only in choosing believers as such, or believers rather than workers? And how could the choice of believers, as believers, consist with a choice that had no respect to “* good or evil,” since such believing is rendering “the obedience of faith,” and is a “ submitting to the righteousness of God,” while the contrary must be disobedience and a want of submission? How, again, could the choice of believers, and the rejection of un- believers be compared to choosing out of the same lump? Besides, if God’s choice were a choice of characters rather than of persons, why did not Moses —why did not Paul, in adverting to the sovereign language of Jehovah, “I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy,” use the descriptive pronouns, such aS oiov OF orolov, OF ToLvovToOv, OY Tocodrov? instead of the personal pronoun, such as “ dy” and “ roo 2?” Every Greek scholar knows that this pronoun signifies “ him whom,” not such whom. Mr. Wesley paraphrases it thus, ‘I will have mercy upon whom I will have mercy, —according to the terms I myself have fixed: “and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion ;” namely, on those only who submit to my terms, who accept of it in the way that I have appointed. But is there a word of this in the passage cited, or in its whole connexion? And was not faith Jrom the beginning a term of salvation? And was not this, in the case of Israel, an election out of those 320 THE RECONCILER. that had already proved unbelievers, and unper- suadable, and, as such, lay at his mercy, whether to forgive them or not? Moses thought so: “ If thou wilt forgive their sin.” Moreover, the thousands for whom God ‘kept mercy” among that people, commonly denominated ‘the remnant,” and by the apostle Paul, the “‘ remnant according to the election of grace,” are never said to be chosen on account of faith, but simply for God’s ‘‘ name’s sake.” And the election hereafter to be brought in out of the Jews, and who were then ‘‘beloved,” are said by the same apostle to be thus “ beloved for the fathers’ sakes,” as the national election were ‘‘ chosen” because ‘he loved their fathers ;” not on account of their foreseen faith, or any thing in them. 2. Faith is the cirr of God, and a eRacious gift. But the kindness to the person is prior to the bestow- ment of the gift; and if that giving be decisive of the condition of the person, it amounts to the same thing whether the person be considered as loved and elected before or after believing. Now, that faith is the gift of God appears thus: Christ, when speaking of coming to him, says, “ No man can come to me, except it were given to him of my Father,” * which giving was by teaching or revealing Christ to the mind.t And Paul says, “It is the gift of God.” That it is also a gracious gift is likewise evident. Tor, says the same inspired writer, when addressing the Philippians, ‘Unto you it is given to believe,” &c.; and the word signifies, ‘graciously given.” + But here, again, the * John vi. +-Vers. 44 and 45. + Phil. i. 29 (exapicAn). DOCTRINE OF ELECTION. Sut favour to the person is before that favour is showed by the actual giving. Moreover, Christ says, ‘ All that the Father giveth me shall come to me;” but surely he had fixed upon them, and they were his before. 7 Should it be said, Yes, we admit that faith was given, and that it was “by grace,” yet it was given because the individual was willing and sought for it,— we reply, that this is contrary to the doctrine of Paul, who, when speaking of God’s calling to the adoption of children, says, “It is not of him that willeth, or of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy.” 3. Faith is the work of God—but the person fixed on thus to work upon him is prior to the working. And if that working be an effectual and a decisive work, then, as before, we must say that it amounts to the same thing, whether the person be loved or elected before or after the believing. ‘That faith is God’s work is manifest. ‘My speech and my preaching,” says the apostle, ‘‘ was not with the persuasible words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, that your faith might not be by the wisdom of man, but by the power of God.” I translate precisely from the Greek. And what sort of “ work” or power this is, may be gathered from what Paul says to the Corinthians :* “‘ For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strongholds. Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the De Comex 4. »6 on THE RECONCILER. obedience of Christ.” Such effectual and decisive work as this being designed to bring éo faith, indicates election to it, and not after it ; and instead of a prior will and endeavour in the individual, it indicates a subdu- ing of his will to the obedience mentioned, as in the case of the three thousand converts by Peter’s ser- mon, and of the jailer. Moreover, such working of the word as this must be included in that which God foretold by Isaiah,* in speaking of its operation; and if it be considered as accomplishing that which God pleased, and that whereto he sent it, wherein does this differ from election of a person to be a subject of such work ? 4. Faith is the mean of salvation by which the salva- tion is accomplished, and determined to be so. In choosing, therefore, to salvation the end, seeing such mean is God’s gift and work, God must choose also to faith the mean. “ By grace are ye saved, through faith.” So, “ through” or by “ belief of the truth” was the salva- tion to be brought about to which the Thessalonians were ‘‘ chosen,” or selected.t Here the end is salvation —to this they were chosen or selected; but faith was the mean by which the gracious purpose was to be effected. In choosing to salvation, therefore, God must choose to give and work the faith. 5. Not only is faith the result of favour, but it is the result of inward revelation, and of a sovereign revelation, and therefore the sovereign favour must be prior to the faith ; and what is this but an election to faith? God it was that revealed Christ to Peter, and therefore he believed; and the “things” of the = \saviye A. + 2 Thess. ii. 13, etdero. DOCTRINE OF ELECTION. Bye kingdom God ‘revealed to babes,” as 2¢ seemed good to him to do so. While the veil remained on the minds of ‘“ the wise and prudent,” it seemed good to the sovereign “‘ Lord of heaven and earth” to take it off from the minds of the “babes.” Not only then must the revelation be before faith, which of itself is an act of grace, but that act of grace being “as it seemed to him good,” must be sovereign. And is not this tanta- mount to an election, seeing some are chosen for this, while others are not? And supposing, without grant- ing, that the choice were founded on something in them, yet the election is before faith, which is the point now under discussion. 6. The apostle Paul inferred the election of the Thessalonians, not because they had believed, but be- cause ‘‘ the word of God” had effectually wrought in them to believe. They were chosen to salvation, and therefore “ the work of faith with power,” whereby they might be thus saved, was wrought in them; and seeing the work was for the end, he concluded that they were chosen to such end.* He inferred their election from their calling, their effectual calling. “ Knowing, bre- thren beloved, your election of God, for (671, because) our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assur- ance, as ye know what manner of men we were among you for your sake.” ‘This in a subsequent part of the epistle+ he calls an ‘‘ effectual working ;” for when he says the word of God “ effectually worketh a/so in you that believe,” just after he had been speaking of their first believing, he must intend that it had so done at +1 Bhessi 1.74575. fee hap. di) ds: vg a4 THE RECONCILER. such first believing ; or else the word “also” would have been superfluous. Now if the apostle considered this ‘‘ effectual working” to be in order to faith, as a mean to an end, from having seen the mean in effectual operation, he might well infer the election to the end. ** By faith we are saved.” I found God was enabling you to ‘*‘ believe,” which is the mean; therefore I in- ferred your election to salvation, which is the end. Thus he knew their election from their calling. Here is, then, election of God Zo believe. And the argument will hold good in another Way. From an examination of the passages quoted, and others connected with them, it would appear that “ the excellency of power” which “of God” was “in” Paul and his companions the preachers, was the occasion of their thus believing; and since this was “ ror THEIR SAKES,’ it indicates that God had a prior regard for them, and a prior design of salvation for them, on which Paul might found his inference concerning their “election.” For no sooner had he observed that the word had “come to them in power,” &c., than he adds, ‘as ye know what manner of men we were among you for your sakes:”* and further on in this epistle, speaking of their “entrance” among them, he says, *‘ After that we had suffered before, and were shamefull y entreated, as ye know, at Philippi, we were Lo/d in our God to speak unto you the gospel of God with much contention,” intimating that they were so “ full of the Holy Ghost and of power,” that the word bore down upon them, and so “ cast down the strongholds” of ancient prejudices and customs, and so enlightened them * 1 Thess. i. 5. J a Fs: 5 DOCTRINE OF ELECTION. O20 in the knowledge of the preached doctrine, that they believed, and received the truth in the love of it :” something like what happened at Iconium,* when Paul and Barnabas “ so spake, that a great multitude, both of the Jews and also of the Greeks, believed.” Now this “ excellency of power” placed in these preach- ers, if seems, was for the sake of these Thessalonians : if so, then, the kindness intended them must have been prior not only to their faith, but to that power of God by which that faith was wrought. Paul, therefore, having found such an “‘excellency of power” in them who preached, and this bearing down in power upon these Thessalonians who heard, so as “effectually” to work faith in them, might well infer their “ election of God’—their election Zo faith. 7. Weare ‘chosen that we should be holy.” Now it is by faith that we are made holy. The choice of the end, as before argued, must then include a choice to the mean; and, of course, the choice must be to faith as a mean to the end, they being a holy people to God. That we are made holy by faith, appears from the fol- lowing passages of Scripture :—“‘Sanctified by faith that isin me.” ‘“ Purifying their hearts by faith.” ‘Seeing that ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth.” The meaning of which is—that it is by believing the testimony of the word concerning sin and the Sa- viour, we are induced to forsake the one, and cleave to the other; and thus purified, we become fit to be God’s holy people. But if we are chosen thus to be a holy people unto God, through the operation of faith, faith must be viewed as the mean by which the end is *® Acts xiv. 1. 326 THE RECONCILER. accomplished. The election to such an end must then be conceived of as including a choice to the belief. I intend to adopt a child—the child is filthy; but in order that he may be fit for my family, I chose him to be made clean. ‘There is a certain mean by which my object may be accomplished. I therefore chose him to the use of that mean for the purpose; but my choosing him to be clean must include my choosing him to the mean whereby I make him so. The elec- tion must then be to faith in order to holiness, and not to holiness because men have faith. Moreover, not only is the “ belief of the truth,” or “obeying the truth,” the mean by which we become ‘“‘ holy,” but the work of the Spirit is the agency whereby we thus become holy, called therefore “ the sanctification of the Spirit.” But, as in the case of the mean, so in this case of the agency, the choice to the end includes the choice to the mean. ‘The fact is this, we are chosen to be holy, and the “ obeying the truth,” or “belief of the truth,” is the mean, and the working of the Spirit the agency whereby the end is effected. Therefore, in choosing to be holy, God must have chosen to the agency whereby that holiness was to be effected, as well as to the mean employed for the purpose. ‘God hath chosen you to salvation by (év) sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth.” 8. Adverting to the passage just quoted, wherein we have both the agency and mean of holiness and of salvation, suppose we render the word év, in, as though Paul meant that God had selected (etrero) them to salvation 2m or 7m the act of thus working in DOCTRINE OF ELECTION. SOF them; yet as the election in the mind is prior to the agency or selection by the hand, the selection must have been Zo the sanctification of the Spirit and the belief of the truth, before such sanctification and belief actually took place. I enter a hospital—I choose persons for healing by a certain agency, and a certain mean. I choose the person to the healing ; but as I purpose using such certain agency, and such a certain mean, in choosing to the healing, I not only choose him to the end, healing, but I choose him to the agency and the mean. ‘The personal election, then, must be not only to the salvation, but also to faith, the mean of the salvation.” 9. Similar to this is an argument drawn from that passage in Peter,t ‘ Elect — through sanctification of the Spirit wnto obedience,” &c. Now if the ‘ obe- | dience” here be the ‘obedience of faith,” then the inference is undeniable, that we are elect Zo faith. But if we are to judge from the apostle’s own ex- pression farther on, we should suppose that he intends faith under the notion of “ obeying the truth,” espe- cially as this apostle seems to delight throughout the epistle in representing faith as obedience, and its con- trary as disobedience, like his “‘ brother Paul,” who so often uses the term, ‘‘ obedience of faith.” And if so, the election must be to faith. 10. It is by begetting faith that the new nature is * Yet the word év should rather be rendered “ by,” because of the phrase ‘‘ belief of the truth,” taking it as a mean; because selecting is God’s act, not ours. If the expression had been “in working faith,” it would have been appropriate, but it scarcely appears so now. + 1 Pet. i. 1—9. + Ib. ver. 23. 328 THE RECONCILER. produced in the soul; but the act of begetting, and the “abundant mercy” from whence it springs, are before the thing begotten, therefore the abundant mercy is before the faith. The evangelist John, in speaking of such as believed on Christ’s name, says, that they were, or had been begotten, (éyevvéOncar,) and so the same John in his first epistle says, ‘* Who- soever believeth that Jesus is the Christ, hath been begotten (éyevvyOn) of God.” In accordance with which Paul says, speaking of himself as an instru- ment, ‘I have begotten you through the gospel.” The begetting must then be before faith, and the abundant mercy which led to it; and why not the election of the person to be thus renewed by faith ? 11. God’s “ great love” to the Ephesian Christians was “even when they were dead in sin ;” then they must have been loved before they believed. ‘‘ He that believeth on the Son of God hath life.’ But here was love before life, and, of course, before be- lieving. And if we are “raised,” it is through the faith of the operation of God, not after it. _ Having loved and chosen to life, he says, “ Arise,”—‘“ Awake thou,” &c. ; but the voice which awakens the thoughts must be uttered, and the understanding given before we believe.* 12. Peter, in the council at Jerusalem, states, that God ‘chose that (&eAé£aro) the Gentiles, by his mouth,” not only “should hear the word of the * Chrysostom remarks on Eph. i. 19, that “to persuade men’s souls is much more marvellous than to raise the dead ;’’ and again, ‘It is much harder even in man’s reason to persuade the will, than to make nature.” DOCTRINE OF ELECTION. 329 gospel,” but that “they should believe.” Now the Greek words for “ to hear,” and ‘ to believe,” are in the same tense, which indicates that he chose them to believe as much as to hear. If so, God cannot, with propriety, be said to choose them as believing; ob- serve, it is not said God chose the Gentiles to hear, that they might believe, but that he chose them “ to believe.” And supposing, without granting, that they were chosen, because somewhat yielding, yet still the choice was before the believing. 13. Faith is represented by the apostle Peter, as if given by lot ; not only, therefore, must it be of sove- reign choice, but the choice of the person must be prior to the possession of the thing. Thus the passage runs, ‘Simon Peter to them that have obtained by lot (Aayovcr) like precious faith with us.” Now rAayxave, from which the word is derived, both in Scripture and in profane authors, signifies to ‘ obtain by lot.” Walton renders the word so in his Latin version; so does Arias Montanus. In the Septuagint or Greek version of the Old Testament, it occurs once, where, as taken in connexion with another passage, it must be so understood.* And so it is taken in the three only places in the New Testament where the word occurs.t If then those believers obtained their faith as if by lot, they must have been elected, as to their persons, before they possessed the faith as their allot- ment, and to their faith as thus elected. And so, indeed, the apostle imtimates afterwards; for, as though alluding to the election supposed in the first * 1 Sam. xiv. 47, compared with | Sam. x. 20, 24. + Eukez. 95 John xix. 24; Acts 1/17. 330 THE RECONCILER. verse, and the calling mentioned in the third, he exhorts them to “ give all diligence to make their calling and election sure.” 14. Speaking of the success of the gospel at An- tioch, the sacred historian remarks, that, ‘* As many as were ordained to eternal life, believed :” or, “ and believed as many as were ordained to eternal life.” This, therefore, supposes that ordaining is before be- lieving, and that believing is the result of the ordina- tion: but if so, how can election be upon or after believing ? Objection 1. Might it not be rendered, ‘As many as believed were ordained,” &c.? Answer —This would be wholly ungrammatical—_contrary to the construction of the language. The word occurs in some form or other no less than one hundred and sixteen times in the New Testament ; but in all these places the word, whether in the nominative or other- wise, is before the verb, or sentence ; and not after it, as this rendering would make it. Nor is there in Xenophon, one of our most celebrated Greek authors, a place where the word occurs after it. Obj. 2. Should it not be, “As many as were disposed to eternal life?” Amnswer—Not unless you consider the word disposed as passive; that is, signifying that the person, or thing, is disposed by another. Since the Greek expression “ joav teraypévor” is passive, signi- fying “had been ordained,” or “ were ordained.” Whether you render it ‘ ordained,” ‘* marshalled,” or ‘‘ disposed,” it comes to the same thing; for the or- daining, marshalling, disposing, must be in the passive sense, a thing done by another, and at his will; the same as in Rom. xii. 1. “ The powers that be are DOCTRINE OF ELECTION. jot ordained (tetaypwévar etowv) of God,” the same word as here. Of the eight places where the word is found in the New Testament, there is not one that favours the idea of a person acting upon himself, unless there be a personal pronoun affixed, as in | Cor. xvi. 15, étakav éavtovs, “ they addicted themselves.” In Xeno- phon, where the word very frequently occurs, it 1s constantly used in the passtve sense. The idea there 1s, ‘“‘ marshalled,” ‘* set in order of battle,” and, assuredly, this implies the appointment of another.* A body of soldiers, as marshalled according to the will and order of their commander, gives you the idea of the word in Xenophon. Nor can you preserve the precise meaning of the Greek word, without the idea of sovereign disposal. A captain’s disposal of his soldiers, or a printer’s disposing of the letters in printing, would give the preciseidea. ‘The conclusion, then, that there is an election prior to the faith, is unavoidable, for ordination presupposes election. N.B. See the quotations from the early writers of the Christian church in pages 285 and 286, where not only do they refer all to the will of God, but there are the following remarks concerning the parti- cular point in question. Barnabas, in his Catholic Epistle, says, “‘ In this, therefore, brethren, God has manifested his foreknowledge and mercy to us; _ be- cause the people which he has purchased to his beloved Son, were to believe in sincerity.” * The word racow, from whence the word is derived, must be allowed to signify properly, ordino, colloco, constituo, all which words suppose the agency of another upon the person so ordained, placed, or constituted. So in all the thirty-eight places of Scripture in which the word occurs. oon THE RECONCILER. Chrysostom has the following passage on Eph. i. 13 :—« It is an argument of great providence over us that we be sealed; not that we be severed from other,’ (that is, merely so,) “ neither that we be chosen by lot, but also that we be sealed. For, as if God should manifestly set forth those which are fallen to his lot ; so God hath severed us from the rest, that we should believe, and sealed us to inherit in the world to come.” CONCLUDING REMARKS ON THiS, GOD’s “* ELECTION OF GRACE.” I. Since faith is the gift of God, and the work of God, the effect of the “ word coming in peace, and in the Holy Ghost ;” moreover, since it is a gift and work that is DEcisive of the state, if matters not whether the election be considered as after faith or before faith ; for the result in all cases is the same, for while “he that believeth not is condemned already’—* no one can believe but as given” —no ‘one can say, “‘ that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.” Moreover, this faith is by the word, and that “in power,” “pulling down strongholds,” &c. and such word was to “accomplish that which God pleased,” it must be sovereign, and is not this tantamount to election ? 2. Since to believe is of grace, or “ through grace,” and that when begotten through the gospel “ to faith,” it is of “ abundant mercy ;” it supposes that there must be an election of the person to that opera- DOCTRINE OF ELECTION. 350 tion of the word, and to that grace and mercy before, and therefore to the faith, its consequent. Nay, farther— 3. Since the Ephesians, who were “ chosen before the foundation of the world,” were ‘ loved” with “a great love,’ before they were ‘‘ quickened,” ‘even when dead in sins;” of course, before God’s voice roused them to those thoughts and reasonings whereby a living faith would be engendered : their persons must be loved and elected before the faith ; and this also will amount to the same thing as election, after supposing it were admitted. But more directly still— 4. The Gentiles are actually said to be “ chosen to believe ;’ the Jews ‘scattered abroad,” are said to have obtained precious faith, as if by lot; and the Gentiles who believed to everlasting life at Antioch are said to have been ordained to believe ; in all these cases, then, there must have been love to, and election of the person prior to such belief; and the sovereignty which says, ‘‘ I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy,’ must have been exercised in the giving and working the faith. 5. Since, *‘ known unto God are all his works from the foundation of the world,” and time past, present, and to come, is but as one eternal Now with God, election in time includes or involves in it election *“ before the foundation of the world.” FINALLY. In the apostles’ days, there was, as to the Jews, “a remnant according to the election of grace ;” and as to the Gentiles, “God visited them to take out of God THE RECONCILER. them a people for his name.” Now, with regard to the remnant of the Jews, Peter, as a minister of the circumcision, addressing them in his first epistle, calls them “elect;” but no one in explaining the term would say they were elect as believers, because, in his second epistle to the same persons, he gives us to understand that they obtained their faith as if by (ot, which is as much as to say that they were chosen to believe. And then, as to Gentes, the “ taking out” could not be explained as though they were taken out as believers, for in the very speech of Peter, referred to by James, the Gentiles are said to have been “ chosen to believe.” And then, if you take Jewish and Gentile believers together, as the apostle Paul does in the expression, “‘ According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world,” no one, in explain- ing this, would be warranted to say that they were chosen as believers; for, in this same epistle, these very persons are said to have been “loved with a great love,” ‘even when they were dead in sins,” and, of course, not yet believers, so that they must have been loved and chosen before that occurred. But there are misconceptions of this subject, as well as misstatements or mistakes; and these also it is important to remove in order that the truth may be received and properly improved. We shall therefore notice these misconceptions, and endeavour to correct them; and afterwards we shall give what we conceive to be the true scriptural notion of both election and predestination. ON ELECTION. RELIGION consists in an absolute submission to the will of God, and not less so of our understanding to his revealed mind than of our will to his commanding and disposing will. But such religion as this is not in us, until “renewed in the spirit of our mind.” No, we are prone to “ lean to our own understanding,” as well as to be led by our own will. Hence it was that our blessed Lord assured his disciples, that, ‘‘ except they were converted and became as little children, that they could not enter into the kingdom of heaven :” hence, also, his apostle Paul used the following lan- guage, “‘ Let no man deceive himself: if any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool that he may be wise.” Without this child-like spirit and this sense of folly, men “ leaning to their own understanding, instead of trusting in the Lord with all their heart,” err in spirit, and murmur at the doctrines of God’s word: but once blessed with them, they delightfully fulfil the prophecy in Isaiah,* ‘‘ ‘They also that erred in spirit shall come to understanding, and they that murmured shall learn doctrine.” ‘They then repair “to the Jaw and to the testimony,” and sit at the feet of Jesus to learn his word. ‘Thus may it be with us—thus may we do in meditating upon the subject before us. * Tsa. xxix. 24. 336 THE RECONCILER. In discussing the subject we shall, first, notice the misconceptions concerning election; after which we will endeavour to give a general view of what we con- ceive to be the Scriptural doctrine of election and predestination ; we shall then show that it is a Scrip- tural doctrine; having thus proved that it zs a Scrip- tural doctrine, we shall then proceed to show that such Scripture election is not an election of ExcLU- SION, but of RESERVATION, and is therefore not liable to the discouragement and objections with which it has been chargeable; we shall afterwards guard it from abuse, and defend it against objections; and, finally, we shall show how it should be improved. CHAPTER I. GENERAL VIEW. Misconeeptions concerning the Ductrine of Election corrected and prevented. How common are misconceptions concerning this doctrine! and unless they are corrected, there will be no cordial reception of it. We remark then, that, 1. It is not an election out of men as creatures, for God loves every thing that he has made; or out of men as sudyjects of his natural kingdom, for herein he is “‘good to all;” nor is it an election out of men merely as sinners, whether original or actual, for “ where sin abounded, grace,” in the last Adam, “has much more abounded,” and that unto all; but it MISTAKES CONCERNING ELECTION. 3307 relates to him as foreseen by that God to whom all things, past, present, and future, are in perfect view, as unpersuadable, not only to law but to gospel. It relates to men as deserving to be consumed; for so are all the instances of election spoken of in the Scriptures, from the affair of the golden calf and onward. 2. It is not an election of judicial partiality, or of a judge having respect of persons in judgment, but an election to show mercy, where all are viewed as having passed the judgment, as being ‘ condemnable already” in the mind of God; for “he that believeth not is condemned already,” and deserves to perish. It is “‘ keeping mercy for thousands,” when all have for- feited covenant right, and deserve to be consumed, as in the case of Israel, concerning whom Nehemiah says, “‘ Nevertheless, for thy great mercies, thou didst not utterly consume them, nor forsake them, for thou art a gracious and merciful God.” 3. It is not an election out of criminals sueing for pardon, showing mercy to this, and not to that; nor is it an election out of persons desiring to be saved, saving this, and leaving that; but it is an election out of those that neither seek mercy nor salvation ; so that the non-elect ought not to murmur, for they have ‘still their own will and their own way. When pro- clamation was made by Cyrus to all Jews, giving them leave to return to their own land, and the Lord chose to stir up the heart of some; could the rest find fault with him that they were suffered to have their choice, choosing, as they did, to settle in Baby- lon. When “‘a certain man made a great supper, and Z 338 THE RECONCILER. bade many,” and “they all with one consent made excuse,” could those who thus refused, find fault with the master of the house, that he should take further measures to fill his house with guests, by calling in those who never could have expected it ? 4. It is not an election of exclusion, but of reserva- tion, of relief and security. None are excluded from the benefit of the covenant of life upon works: none are excluded from the benefit of the covenant of life upon faith; but these having spent their force, so to speak, and man, through the lust of his own heart, having wilfully and stubbornly refused the benefit, first of the one and then of the other, the scheme of sove- reign mercy, and election of its objects, comes in as a blessed relief. Appeal to fact: It was when the world rejected “‘ the promise,” God chose Abraham—Isaac— Jacob—as fathers of the visible church: it was when all Israel had broken covenant, that God declared that he would “ be gracious to whom he would be gracious, and would show mercy to whom he would show mercy’—that he would “keep mercy for thousands.” When the Lord “caused the whole house of Israel and the whole house of Judah to cleave to him, as a girdle cleaveth to the loins of a man, that they might be to him for a praise,” &c., and it proved ‘‘they would not hear,” then it was that he chose a remnant from time to time. Having spread forth his hands all the day long untothem, ‘‘a disobedientand gainsaying people,” with- out effect, he then took care to have an “ elect” people, a “seed which he would bring out of Jacob.” In the time of our Lord the gospel was preached to all, but — they refusing it, he had an “ elect whom he had chosen,” MISTAKES CONCERNING ELECTION. 339 —‘a remnant according to the election of grace.” Thus we see, then, that none were excluded but such as excluded themselves, and the election was on the consideration of such self-exclusion. By Christ, ample provision is made for all; the gospel is to be preached to every creature, and all are cordially invited to come. Moreover, by the general administration of the gospel, God has bound himself to give eternal life to as many as receive that gospel ; and all this without respect of persons: but, after they have all been viewed as disobedient and unper- suadable, “all, as with one consent, making excuse,” it can be no infringement of his justice or goodness in government, if, in adopting some further method of grace, he chooses who shall be the objects of that grace. 5. It is not an election of arbitrary caprice ; for it is according to the counsel of his will, and as in his view the best adapted to promote the best ends. 6. It is not an election to salvation whether the individual live holily or not, thus opening the flood- gates of licentiousness ; but the salvation itself to which they are chosen is a salvation from sin; it is an election, “‘ by or through sanctification of the Spirit,” “to be holy,’— an “election to obedience.” Such is the scriptural statement of it; and as all the elect people of God are sanctified by that Spirit, who is emphatically called the Holy Spirit, they therefore must necessarily ‘ follow after holiness,” as well from the dove of it, as from a sense of obligation to it. 7. It is not an election inconsistent with the free- dom of the human will ; for, as for the non-elect, they ADs 340 THE RECONCILER. have the will. They do as they please, and after they have done as they pleased, God does as he pleases. And as for God’s chosen people, they are made willing, and in a manner suited to their originally constituted rational nature; for their understanding is first en- lightened, and the will necessarily follows its dictate. They are first roused to consider; then taught of God; then they are drawn as with the cords of love and the bands of a man; and then coming to Christ as his disciples, they cheerfully learn of him as their teaching ‘‘ Master,” and take his yoke on them as their rightful “ Lord.” 8. Nor is it an election to salvation without re- spect to human endeavour, as though it occasioned sloth and negligence; for it is an election to life, which is itself a principle of activity—it is an elec- tion to service, a service not of a slave, but of a son, and a service that they love, and that is rewarded too according to the fidelity and diligence of the servant. It is an election to run a race for a prize, which prize they know will not be obtained without running. In fine, the elect are taught of God that it is an election to use the means, as well as to attain the end—that God having “joined these together,” they therefore must not “ put them asunder,”—and that, although “it is God that worketh” in his people “ to will and to do,” yet, that they must “work out their own salvation,” and that too “with fear and trembling.” 9. Nor, finally, can the non-elect, or the “ vessels of wrath,” complain of being hardly dealt with, because they are not comprehended in the election. For it is ae ; “KR ee SLO ee _ SCRIPTURE DOCTRINE OF ELECTION. 341 not an election to salvation out of a number of persons who were willing alike to be saved, but some were refused, while others were chosen; but an election of some to make willing, while others were left to their own perverse unwillingness and choice. ‘They were urged to return, with God’s assurance upon oath that he had no pleasure in the death of a sinner, but that he would turn from his wickedness and live; they were cordially invited to the feast, and nothing pre- vented but their own free refusal—they were “ con- tentious” against God’s counsel, both in the word, and in their own minds, and would not “ obey the truth,” while they would “obey unrighteousness,” ‘taking pleasure in it, and many of them had been ‘ endured with much long-suffering ;” and in fine, we may say, they are damned because they would not be saved. Nor may it be useless to add, that their ‘‘ damnation” will be “ greater” or lesser, according to their desert ; being made only to ‘eat the fruit of their own doings.” Having cleared the way, by correcting the mis- conceptions of this doctrine, we now proceed, after making some prefatory remarks, to state the doc- trine, as given us in Scripture. We have said, after some prefatory remarks, because these will serve to illustrate and facilitate the reception of the doctrines. Section II. The true Scripture Doctrine of Election and Predestination. PREFATORY REMARKS. 1. God, who ‘sees the end from the beginning,” before whom “all things are naked and opened,” who 342 THE RECONCILER. ‘“‘knoweth all the hearts of the children of men,” — foreknew all the free volitions of men, as well as their evil heart and unpersuadableness of temper, under whatever dispensation of religion they might live. He foreknew men therefore—‘ what would be in man” in this case—in short, that he would be dis- obedient and unpersuadable. This sentiment we gather from Scripture facts, as well as from the declarations above mentioned. He foreknew and foretold the volitions or will of Pharaoh, when Moses should command him from Jehovah to let the people of Israel go. He foreknew the wills of the men of Keilah in regard to the delivery of David into the hands of Saul. He foreknew that when the prophet Jeremiah should “ speak all the words” which God had commanded unto the Jews, yet that “ they would not hearken unto him,” and when he “ called unto them, that they would not answer.”* He fore- “knew the same would be the result when Ezekiel his ~ servant should speak unto them, as well as what would have been the result had he spoken to “ many people of a strange speech, and of an hard language.” And how plainly does he declare by Isaiah, that he ‘knew Israel would deal treacherously, and that they were obstinate, and their neck as an iron sinew, and their brow brass.” God, then, must have possessed the foreknowledge insisted on; but not only so, we see he acts upon it. Hence Scripture prophecy and its fulfilment. Indeed, to say no more, how, as bearing upon the subject, could Christ so positively say, “« No man can come to me, except the Father which * Fer. “vit: Sa. My atta es SCRIPTURE DOCTRINE OF ELECTION. 343 hath sent me draw him,” if he had not perfectly known the unpersuadableness of the human heart ? Hence, 2. Election presupposes a foreknowledge of man’s unpersuadableness ; for all the instances of it, that is, as far as relates to man’s eternal condition, appear to be consequent upon it. Thus, the election of the nation of Israel was consequent upon the unpersuada- bleness (dzretOeva) of the Gentile nations—the sove- reign mercy shown after the affair of the golden calf was after unpersuadableness. So the elections men- tioned by the prophets out of Israel and out of Judah. So the election of the Jews in the apostles’ time, as in Romans ix. and xi. So, finally, the elec- tion of the Gentiles, as mentioned in the Epistle to the Thessalonians. Election, then, is not irrespective of sin, nor is it, we conceive, merely on the foresight of the fall, or even on the foresight of guilt and disobedience under “the law of works,” but of guilt and disobedience under “the law of faith.” See Rom. ix. 22, x1. 3], 32; 1 Pet. ii. 8; 2 Thess. 1. 1O—12. 3. Had the great concern of man’s redemption rested with man, and on the result of his free will, in vain had ‘‘ God so loved the world,” with a love of kindness, so as to give his only-begotten Son for them ; in vain had the Son of God “ given his flesh for the life of the world;” in vain were the ministration of the Spirit ‘to bless men by turning away every man from his iniquities,” because men would not believe in Christ—‘“ would not come to him that they might have life’—would not be saved from their iniquities. 344 THE RECONCILER. Therefore, that God might “ glorify his mercy”—that his Son might “ see of the travail of his soul, and be satisfied,” and that the sovereign and almighty power: of his Holy Spirit might be evinced, he determined that * mercy should be built up for ever,” and so: elected an innumerable multitude out of all nations, &c., to be everlastingly saved ; gave them as a peculiar charge to his Son to be redeemed by his precious blood, and to be sanctified by his Holy Spirit. And thus, while it in no sense militates against the universal grace of the gospel dispensation, or infringes upon the freedom of the human will in regard to it, at the same time its success secures it against man’s con- tempt and abuse of it. 4. God, viewing, as he does, all men as guilty and unpersuadable, is determined that “no flesh shall glory in his presence ;” that all the saved shall be for the praise of his glorious grace; and that therefore he will choose, irrespective of human merit, and will have mercy on whom he will have mercy. The way is now clear to the statement of the true Scripture doctrine—a doctrine of comfort to awakened sinners, and not of discomfort, because not an election of exclusion, but of reservation, and of relief. In proof of the above statement, we would appeal to Scripture facts. We remark, then, 1. The acts of sovereignty in the election of one family rather than another, to become God’s visible ehurch from the time of Adam to Moses, were not acts of exclusion, but were designed as a gracious reserve for the preservation of a godly seed in the SCRIPTURE DOCTRINE OF ELECTION. 345 earth. The all-seeing God knew that the ‘ imagina- tion of man’s heart was evil from his youth,’—that “all flesh would corrupt its way,’—that they would ‘‘ believe not,” or, as the word is, would be ‘‘ unper- suadable, both as to the work of the law written in their hearts, and to ‘the promise of life” in the future Messiah or Redeemer; and, therefore, instead of suffering a// to walk in their own ways, and thus the whole world to become a wild moral waste, saw it good to make inclosure after inclosure for preservation. Not that hereby he excluded the rest. No, they still had the original promise, with its signs and seals of sacri- fice and purification, with its priests, and their parents to instruct in their signification; nay, we read of “God's holy prophets since the world began.” But God, in the full knowledge of the painful result, if all thus remained open, in superabounding goodness made the inclosure. Thus, he chose the family of Seth in distinction from that of Caim—Shem’s posterity in distinction from that of Ham’s or Japheth’s— Abra- ham’s from that of Nahor’s—Isaac’s from that of Ishmael’s——Jacob’s from that of Esau’s. ‘These he separated from the rest, making a hedge about them, and on these he bestowed superadded favours. But the rest were not excluded from the favour of their Maker, or from the hope of the promised redemption, if they believed and sought for it. No: look even at Cain. God indeed did doom him to be a fugitive and a vagabond; and, perhaps, he might say with truth, ‘< Thou hast driven me out from the face of the earth;” but he had no warrant for adding, “and from ¢hy face shall I be hid.” No! even he, had he sought God’s 346 THE RECONCILER. favour and redemption, would have found them. Then, as to Ham and Japheth, the other two sons of Noah, can we suppose that all the posterity of Ham, and particularly of Japheth, were excluded from the original promise, because God declared that he would particularly be “the God of Shem?” There is no mention of any withdrawment of original favour— “the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.” Besides, after the flood, God’s covenant mercy was “established between Noah and all flesh that was upon the earth,” as extensively, we should suppose, as the appearance of the rainbow, the token of that covenant. And then, in the distinction made between Abram’s and Nahor’s family—was Nahor excluded thereby? No. God is expressly said by Laban to have been the “ God of Nahor,” as well as of Abram, and of 'Terah “their father” too. Again, see in the case of Isaac and Ishmael—was Ishmael excluded from former benefits? Excluded he was from having his posterity formed into a visible church state, but not from the privileges of the invisible church, if he believed in and sought for them. Abraham would not have been encouraged to pray as he did, “O that Ishmael might live before thee,” if so. And as to his posterity, living as they did, not only under the influ- ence of traditionary knowledge, “ but in the presence of all their brethren,” can we suppose that they were excluded? Where is it said so? And even to this day, his posterity, the Arabs, not only acknowledge their father Abraham, but the God of Abraham. See, finally, Esau and his posterity. So far from being excluded from hope of salvation, if they received the SCRIPTURE DOCTRINE OF ELECTION. 347 original promise, and sought for its blessings, both he and his posterity were welcome to share them; for not only might they avail themselves of the tradi- tionary knowledge they had already received from their fathers, but there was a statute in Israel which expressly provided that any person of any nation that wished to join himself to Israel might do so, and their seed also, on the profession of the true religion; and, of course, an Edomite. Moreover, Solomon, in his prayer at the solemn dedication of the temple, prayed that ‘all people of the earth might know God's name, to fear him, as did his people Israel.” Besides all this, Abraham had a large family by Keturah ; and doubtless he would instruct them in the knowledge of the true God and of the promise: were they and their posterity excluded ? Moreover, how came Job and his friends to have an interest in God’s favour and redemption? None of them were of the privileged family of Isaac or Jacob. The exclusive idea, there- fore, cannot be admitted. If God, for wise and gracious ends, “separated” a family or “ severed” a people “ from all the people of the earth,” and showed peculiar favour to them, we are not to conclude from thence that he had no favour for the rest, much less that he withdrew what he had before’ granted. We conclude, then, that the election from Adam to Moses was not an election of exclusion, but to form a reserve for preservation. 2. We shall next advert to the election that took place after the affair of the golden calf. Now it was that God declared for the first time, ‘Twill be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and. 348 THE RECONCILER. will shew mercy on whom I will shew mercy.” But. what had taken place? AdZ had broken covenant— they had proved themselves « stiff-necked” —they had deserved to be « consumed ;”” it was at God’s “‘ will” whether he would forgive them or not. And then—after they had rendered themselves obnoxious to justice, and had forfeited their privileges, God de- clares himself as a God who would have mercy as above represented, who would be “ keeping mercy for thousands.” This was reservation, not exclusion ; if it were so, yet it was their own doing, and seeing God’s purpose in reference to these “ thousands” was. secret as to the individuals, it did not exclude any one of the people from hope, or from seeking God’s mercy and grace, nor ever was designed to do so. No; it was not an exclusion, but a reservation, and something superabounding over what, in justice, might have been expected. And, evidently, God represents it so, and Moses so considers it. Nay, since God had thus de- clared that he “kept mercy for thousands,” this proved an encouragement to any one to seek mercy, which, as viewing themselves obnoxious to Justice, they other- wise would not have had. Now, it should not be forgotten, that this is the very pattern of the election that the apostle treats of in his epistle to the Romans. 3. We notice, as next in course, ‘* the remnant ac- cording to the election of grace,” mentioned by the apostle as having all along subsisted during the Jewish economy. Whatever man was, however God’s pro- fessing people conducted themselves towards him (and their whole history shows that they did so most un- gratefully), he would have a church and people; he SCRIPTURE DOCTRINE OF ELECTION. 349 would be ‘‘ keeping mercy for thousands ;” he would be ** shewing loving-kindness unto thousands ;” “ never- theless for his great mercies’ sake, he would not utterly consume them, nor forsake them, for he was a gra- cious and merciful God;” he would ‘ pardon them whom he reserved ;” ‘‘ have a remnant to escape” by ‘* grace shown from the Lord their God,” as Ezra says. This was an election of reservation then, of merciful and gracious reservation. They had ex- cluded him from their regard, and they had ex- cluded themselves from his benefits; but that was their own exclusion, not his; and while he did indeed leave the rest to their own chosen delusion, and after ‘enduring them with much long-suffering,” made them ‘ vessels of wrath, fitted” by their own sin and perverseness “‘ to destruction,’ he chose to “keep mercy for thousands” of them, not utterly consuming the people, as in justice he might have done. ‘This is the scriptural view of the subject, and such is its representation. See again the remnant of Israel alluded to by the apostle Paulin his discourse on the subject, in the said days of Elijah. At that time there was so general a corruption of manners, that the prophet thought himself alone. ‘“ Yet,” says God, “have I deft to myself seven thousand men that have not bowed the knee to Baal ;” as if he had said, ‘“‘ The people wid/ for- sake me for Baal in spite of all that I say” to them by the prophets rising early and sending them, and thou, Elijah, lamentest it, and imaginest thyself to be alone ; but I have kept mercy for thousands; still, according to my originally revealed ‘‘ name,” I have taken care 350 THE RECONCILER. to have a reserve. So, in reference to Israel, the ten tribes so called—they were “ the preserved of Israel.” Whoever will be at the pains to read “the prophets,” particularly ‘ Hosea,” will see, that the people at large, so far from having been excluded from the blessings promised to their fathers, are charged both with neglecting them and with refusing to hearken to anything about them ; with having “stopped their ears that they might not hear,” and thus bringing destruction upon themselves. And then, if God chose to take a farther dealing with some, “ keeping mercy for thousands” of them, while madly following after their lovers, kindly ‘ hedging up their way with thorns, and making a wall that they could not find their paths ;” bringing them into “ the valley of Achor,” or trouble, and there opening to them “a door of hope ;” what reason had the rest to complain that they were excluded? No; they had only excluded themselves, and themselves only had they to blame. The same in reference to the remnant of Judah: “ Ex- cept the Lord of hosts had /ef¢ unto us a very small rem- nant, we should have been as Sodom, and we should have been like unto Gomorrah.” He says to the house of Israel, and men of Judah, his vineyard, “what could have been done more ?” But behold, when he “ looked for grapes, it brought forth wild grapes.” It shall therefore become a desolation! Yet look at the next chapter: ‘“ Yet in it shall be a tenth, and it shall return, and shall be eaten: as a teil-tree, and as an oak, whose substance is in them, when they cast their leaves, so the holy seed shall be the substance there- of.” See the reservation. So again: “‘ Yet will Ileave a SCRIPTURE DOCTRINE OF ELECTION. 351 remnant that ye may have some that shall escape the sword.” And who were these that escaped? God had been “ broken with their whorish hearts ;’—and surely we have no reason to suppose that those who had not escaped were better. ‘Thus we see the idea, not of original exclusion, but of subsequent reservation. “For,” says God, both concerning Israel and Judah, **T will pardon them whom I reserve.” After the de- served destruction of all for their stubbornness, God chose to have a reserve by pardoning and taking fur- ther methods with them, taking away the stony heart, and giving them a heart of flesh; yea, giving them a new heart and a new spirit. ‘‘ Thus saith the Lord, As the new wine is found in the cluster, and one saith, Destroy it not, for a blessing is in it: so will I do for my servants’ sake, that I may not destroy them all. And I will bring forth a seed out of Jacob, and out of Judah an inheritor of my mountains, and mine elect shall inherit it.” For my name’s sake will I defer mine anger, and for my praise will I refrain for thee, that I cut thee not off. Behold I have refined thee, but not with silver: I have chosen thee in the furnace of affliction.” All had heard of the mercy promised to Abraham—all had repeatedly been called to hearken to instruction; but they had been ‘ ob- stinate’—their neck had been as an “ iron sinew, and their brow brass :” (these ‘“‘ chosen” had been so too) therefore, how could they charge God with exclusion ? Yet, after Israel and Judah had excluded themselves, and all deserved, as it appears from the passages quoted, to have been destroyed,—to have been “ cut off,” God ‘“ shewed loving-kindness to thousands,’— 302 THE RECONCILER. “chad mercy on whom he would have mercy.” The rest had done what they listed in choosing the way of death, when life was set before them as well as others; and now God did what he listed in glorifying his mercy by making a “reserve” of some, and taking farther methods with them. ‘ The vessel was made good, but it was marred inthe hand of the potter, so he made it again another, as seemed good to the potter to make it.” Such is the representation of God’s election of the remnant both of Israel and of Judah; and when added to the original instance in the affair of the golden calf, shows that it is not an election of exclusion, pri- mary or antecedent, but of reservation, consequent upon or after they had been proved to be unpersuadable. And seeing the gospel was to be “preached to every creature,” considering all those passages of Scripture that have a universal gracious aspect, we may fairly infer that the election mentioned in the New 'Testa- ment is, as that in the Old, not an election of exclusion, but of reservation. On a perfect foresight of man’s disposition to reject his counsel, (as indeed had been abundantly proved by the whole of Israel’s history,) even after all the means and motives that might be used with them to the contrary, God was pleased to take a people out for himself, both amongst the Jews and amongst the Gentiles. And, as this foresight of man’s disposition, as wellas of his own works, was the same before the foundation of the world, as in time, therefore the election might, with propriety, have taken place ‘‘ before the foundation of the world.” But such an election as this is not an election of exclusion. No, provision is made for all; all are invited, and all SCRIPTURE DOCTRINE OF ELECTION. De are welcome; neither is there anything that prevents their actual enjoyment but their own stubborn disposi- tion. Now, if He to whom all time is present foresaw this result, and provided accordingly, —provided that his merciful nature should have its objects, that his Son should ‘see of the travail of his soul” in redemption, that his Spirit’s power should be effective, and so, of his superabounding grace, determined to take further measures with some, reserving them for life, none can complain of exclusion. If they do, they must acknow- ledge that they have excluded themselves. They are considered as having had their ‘‘ day of visitation, °— they have done “ what they listed,” and they ought not to “murmur” because God does what he list in a way of sovereign goodness. He can say to all, “ Friend, I do thee no wrong. Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? Is thine eye evil because I am good ?” But let us look at this election, as declared in the New Testament, and particularly in the Epistle to the Romans. Here, first, it isa case of “ showing mercy.” Then the parties concerned must have been considered as obnoxious to justice. And for what? For a dis- obedient disposition. Then it is manifest that the apostle considers them to be in a similar state with Israel in the affair of the golden calf, for he quotes the very same expression of Jehovah, “I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy ;” and in this way clears the “righteousness of God,” doubtless con- cluding, that wherever persons have forfeited covenant blessings, and have rendered themselves obnoxious to justice, that the Sovereign ‘‘ Lord of heaven and earth ” AA 354 THE RECONCILER. has a right to do so. And if we look to the latter end of the eleventh chapter, where the apostle shuts up this whole discourse of election, first of individuals, and then of nations, we shall find that the “showing mercy ” stands in close connexion with unpersuadable- ness in those called, both amongst Jews and Gentiles, and is viewed by the apostle as consequent upon it. “God,” says he, “hath concluded all (rovs mavras), all the Israelites (spiritually considered ),whether out of the Jews or Gentiles, in unpersuadableness (dzre‘Oeva), that he might have mercy upon all.” Now put the above- mentioned considerations together, and you will find that the election has respect to “mercy,” and that that “mercy” has respect to persons as in themselves of adis- position “ wnpersuadable.” Very different is this, then, from an election of exclusion. Indeed, how could the gospel be an exclusive message to these Jews, since, in the very first address Peter makes to the Jews he calls upon “ai the house of Israel” to consider it ; and in the next address, he tells them that “ God had sent his Son Jesus to bless them, by turning away every one of them from their iniquities.” How could the gospel be an exclusive message, since Christ’s dis- ciples were to “ go into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature ?” REFLECTIONS. 1. We see that no one has reason to find fault. There is provision for all, and all are welcome. God the Father has sworn by himself that he “has no plea- sure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live,”——his only-begotten Son SCRIPTURE DOCTRINE OF ELECTION. 355 has “ given his flesh for the life of the world, that any one (ris) may eat thereof and not die,”—the Holy Spirit has given commission that the gospel should be preached to every creature, and invites all to come and partake of its blessings; and indeed is willing to make wise to salvation any that asks earnestly and perseveringly for that wisdom, and therefore all is as open to the sinner as he can possibly desire. Nor is that all. Not only has he sufficient means of informa- tion, but attention to these means is urged by all sorts of motives: and no obstacle lies in the way of the sinner’s salvation, but his own stubbornness. 2. While none have any ground of discouragement by election, as above understood, every sinner con- cerned about his salvation may derive encouragement from it; inasmuch as he may conclude, that, although as not “having believed on the Son of God, he is condemned already” by the gospel as well as by the law; yet that, seeing God “ keeps mercy for thou- sands,” he may, for ought he knows, keep mercy for him: of which the very circumstance of his concern is no small evidence. And then he is farther en- couraged by the assurance of Christ, that ‘‘ every one that seeketh” and “ searcheth for the Lord with his whole heart,” ‘‘shall find.” Norneed the number and aggravations of his past sins, or the persevering obsti- nacy of his past conduct, prove a bar to hope, inasmuch as we find that God has oftentimes showed mercy even to such ; and the words are yet as applicable to him as to others—“ Him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out;” and ‘* whosoever will, let him come, and take of the water of life freely.” AA, 356 THE RECONCILER. 3. At the same time, the doctrine thus understood is not an encouragement to presumption ; for as long as a sinner is an unbeliever, he is in a state of con- demnation ; and as long as he hardens his heart, the doctrine of election can give him no comfort, for so far from having reason to conclude that he is an elect vessel, he has reason to fear the direct contrary, and that just in proportion to his hardness and presump- tion. 4. Since it is not an election of exclusion, but there is universal provision, and the benign aspect of the gospel is universal; the preacher of it may, unem- barrassed, preach it to every creature, and use every argument to enforce his message. Nay, more, when he may have cause to fear that his hearers are un- persuadable, and as such, in a truly alarming state, knowing that God, dealing in a way of equity, might say, ‘‘ Because I have called, and ye refused,” &c. yet he finds a relief in God’s sovereign mercy, for he has learned that God “ keeps mercy for thousands,” and he knows not but that the most obdurate among his hearers may form a part of them. Moreover, besides that he has a warrant to preach the Gospel to every creature, if he sees any that ‘“ labour and are heavy laden,” he has particular encouragement to invite them to Christ, because he has reason to believe that they are amongst the “ thousands.” 307 ELECTION AND PREDESTINATION STATED. —_————_ Section I. Of Election. 1. It is an election to salvation and everlasting life. Such as were foreknown and predestinated, were not only to be justified, but “ glorified.” They are “ chosen to salvation ;” “appointed to obtain salvation ;” they are “ ordained to everlasting life.” And it is the will of the Father, that all those whom he hath given to the Son, ‘* should have everlasting life.” 2. It is an “election to salvation” in or by (ev) the ‘* sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth.” So the apostle Paul informs us. So likewise Peter. And as it is~by the sanctification of the Spirit, of course it is— 3. An election to “ holiness and obedience.” Ac- cording “as he hath chosen us in him, that we should be holy.” Peter addresses Christians as ‘“ elect unto obedience.” Hence Christ is said to have given him- self for them, that they might be “‘ a peculiar people, zealous of good works.” And a matter worthy of | remark—they are predestinated to be conformed to the image of God’s Son. 4. It isa gracious election. “ Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.” ‘* Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began.” 358 THE RECONCILER. 9. It is a sovereign election. “TI will have mercy,” says Jehovah, the sovereign Lord of heaven and earth, ‘on whom I will have mercy.” “Tt is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy.” Accordingly, the “ vessels of mercy” are made out of the same lump, as it seemed good to the potter— of him that calleth”— “according to the election of God.” Yet, 6. It is an infinitely wise election, having for its object the display of that ‘“ goodness,” which he con- siders as his “ glory.” Thus he’ represented it to Moses. Said Moses, “I beseech thee show me thy glory.” And, in reply, Jehovah said, “I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and will proclaim the name of the Lord before thee, and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy ;” which mercy he “ keeps for thousands, for- giving their iniquity, transgression, and sin.” Thus, in ‘making known the riches of his glory,” he acts wisely; for his glory is the greatest possible end. Moreover, the exercise of this sovereignty is said to be “ that which seemeth to him good ;’—it is “ ac- cording to the good pleasure of his will;” and what- soever “‘ he worketh” in consequence, is “ according to the counsel of his will.” 7. Though there is an election in time, yet it is agreeable to an election in eternity. There is a choice in ¢éme. ‘I have chosen thee in the furnace of affliction.” ‘ He will yet choose Jerusalem.” ‘I will take you two of a family, and one of a city.” ‘‘ He hath visited the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.” “Elect according OF ELECTION. 359 to the foreknowledge of God the Father.” But then, as “known unto God are all his works, from the foundation of the world;” so, of course, his purpose to do these works. Hence, believers are “ blessed with all spiritual blessings,” according as God hath chosen them in Christ before the foundation of the world :” hence, they are said to be ‘ called according to his purpose, and grace given them in Christ Jesus before the world began :” hence, also, their names are said to have been written in the Lamb’s book of life before the foundation of the world ;” and the king- dom they are at the last day called upon to inherit, our Lord declares was ‘ prepared for them” at the same early date. But there is one more particular that must not be overlooked, and that is, that— 8. It is an election iz Christ—he hath “ chosen us in him,” &c-; and the adoption of children to which they are predestinated is “through Jesus Christ ;” so, the purpose and grace given them before the world began is “in Christ Jesus.” Christ is the first “ elect,” and all were given to him that he might “give to them eternal life,” and “ this life isin him.” He has procured, and he bestows it, and it is from him that they possess it, and all in his name and right. Hence God hath blessed his believing people with all spiritual blessings in Christ. Hence, as Christ is the first “ elect,” called ‘‘ God’s elect ;” so he is the represen- tative of elect Israel, and therefore is himself called God’s “ servant Israel, in whom he would be glorified.” He, too, is the “‘ covenant of the people,” the trustee of their inheritance, and minister thereof ; even indeed 360 THE RECONCILER. of all the good things God has designed for his elect Israel, as Joseph in Egypt was to ancient Israel. We may add, J. It is an election of persons that connects with it a glorious predestination to benefits, as will next beseen. SECTIon II. Of Predestination. There are not more than three passages of Scripture that mention the subject of predestination, and they are these which follow :—* For whom he did fore- know, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the first-born among many brethren. Moreover, whom he did pre- destinate, them he also called; and whom he called, them he also justified; and whom he justified, them he also glorified.” The other two are in the first chapter of the Epistle to the Ephesians. Adverting to election, the apostle adds, as in connexion with it, ‘‘ Having predestinated us unto the adoption of chil- dren by Jesus Christ to himself :” and then in verse 11, mentioning the inheritance to which as thus his children they are entitled, he says, “ We have ob- tained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things ac- cording to the counsel of his own will.” From a consideration of these passages, it will be found that, whereas election has respect to the person chosen, pre- destination has reference to the condition and end, or their relation and state. They are predestinated to the adoption of children—this is their relation ; they are predestinated to an inheritance—this is their state ; OF PREDESTINATION. 361 predestinated to be conformed to the image of his Son, as well in his “ glory” as in his “ sufferings.” ‘Thus, God having set his love upon such and such, he has chosen to manifest the riches of his love to them ; and hence has predestinated them to be his children, and to give them an inheritance accordingly. And, as they would not otherwise be fit either for the relation or for the state, he has predestinated them also to be conformed to the image of his own Son, who is here- after, at “the manifestation of the sons of God,” to appear in his human nature as the * first-born” of the family. Thus then predestination is, Ist, To the adop- tion of children. 2dly, To an znherttance as children. 3dly, To a fitness for such a condition, by conformity to the “ image of his dear Son.” A bare reference to passages before cited will suffice to prove the correct- ness of this statement. Oh, blessed predestination ! Predestination, being considered in the light repre- sented under the chapter on Reprobation, and as here, it is hoped that it will henceforward be divested of its frightful appearance! Perhaps we may scripturally conceive of election and predestination, and the gracious transactions con- nected with them, in the following order :—Ist, He set his love on the objects for reasons “in himself.” Most assuredly not for their works or worthiness, for often- times it has been proved that this love has been set on the most unworthy. 2dly, He chose to salvation and eternal life. N.B. This love and choosing is sometimes in Scripture called “ knowledge.” He “knew” Israel, as the word is, when in Egypt; and this in Ezekiel is called “choosing” them. ‘“ Whom he did foreknow ;” 362 THE RECONCILER. these the apostle lower down calls “ God’s elect :” “I did know thee in the wilderness,’—I regarded thee; as, “ You only have I known of all the families of the earth.” Much in the same sense as when David says, ‘‘ I will not know a wicked person ;” or as Christ, “‘T know you not,” to false professors at the last day. Then, 3dly, There is the predestination to the adop- tion, and to the inheritance, and the conformity. 4thly, The gift to Christ to undertake for them. Sthly, The calling in time to the adoption, and inhe- ritance, and conformity. 6thly, The justification. 7thly, The glorification, which includes all the work of the Holy Spirit on earth and in heaven, in time and in eternity. Or, to set it forth more fully still, and more im- pressively, we would remark as follows :—That there are several links in this golden chain, and some of them reach back into eternity. A close and accurate inspection of the scripture testimony will disclose to us the following order in the links of this chain. Ist, For “the praise of the glory of God’s grace,” there is the “ purpose* which he hath purposed in himself,” of “ bringing many sons unto glory,” in “the fellowship of his Son ;” and their being “ gathered together in him,” as their head, “that he might be the first-born among many brethren.” 2dly, There is the “ foreknowledge,” or “love of God in Christ Jesus,” towards the individuals that shall compose this * The word zpdQeorc, from zpo, before, and TtOnr, to place, signi- fies, to speak after the manner of men, the thing in general, the great object, having place in his own mind, as the fruit of his love and wisdom. OF PREDESTINATION. 363 family. 3dly, There is the actual election, or choosing them out from the rest, in his Son, to possess and enjoy the glory intended, and “ writing their names in the book of life.” 4thly, For the execution of the gracious purpose towards these elect, there is the pre- destination or pre-ordination of them to ‘ the adop- tion of children by Jesus Christ,” for which they are to be prepared by regeneration of the Holy Spirit ; likewise to an inheritance as thus ‘‘sons” or children ; and finally, ‘‘to be conformed to the image of God's Son,” the first-born of these many brethren, in holi- ness, in blessedness, and in the glory that is to be revealed. All these four take place in ETERNITY. Then, in TIME, and according to God’s “ purpose,” there is, 5thly, God’s calling of them to come to him, whom he in his purpose had from eternity constituted their head. And this calling, according to the statement of Christ himself, takes effect thus :—first, there is the Father’s call ; this call is ‘‘ heard”—the person called ‘‘ learns,” so as to *“* see the Son,” or to have him “ revealed” to him ; and then, in consequence, he believes and comes. Now, if this be the scriptural view of the subject, on what ground can it be asserted that there is no per- sonal election before believing, or as believing ? Here is the purposed end—the persons chosen to that end— a fore-appointment of things as subordinate to that end, and the actual calling of the person taking place, and bringing to the faith by a certain process. If the reader will examine and compare the passages of Scripture in the margin,* he will see that the above statement is precisely that view of the subject * Rom, viii 28—33, ix. 8—26; Eph. ii. 3—14. 364 THE RECONCILER. which the Holy Spirit has thought proper to give us. And there is an analogy between the Divine procedure in this affair, and that which might obtain among men. Here is a rich nobleman, we will suppose, who, ‘for the praise of the glory of his grace,” or goodness, purposes to form to himself a large family, whom he would invest with all the privileges of chil- dren. This is the purpose which he purposes in himself. But who shall be the objects of this favour ? He fixes on them: these are the election. But how shall they be prepared for the glorious end designed for them? They must be endued with a spirit, with principles adapted to this end. He appoints certain preparatory measures accordingly : this is his predes- tination. But, again, how is all this to be brought about? He must call the persons in view to the thing intended for them, and institute a process by which they shall feel and act like children, and be prepared for their high and happy situation, and then his pur- posed end will be effected. So much for the statement of this doctrine : we now pass on to prove it. CHAPTER II. THE DOCTRINE OF ELECTION PROVED TO BE A SCRIPTURE DOCTRINE. In adducing scripture testimony, we shall cite the passages that relate—to the election of ancient Israel ; to the election out of that election, as noticed by the ELECTION, A SCRIPTURE DOCTRINE. 365 prophets; the same in the days of Christ and the apostles; and, lastly, the election from among the Gentiles. 1. Those that relate to ancient Israel as a nation. “‘God sent Joseph before them into Egypt, to put for you a remnant in the earth.”* ‘ Because he loved their fathers, therefore he chose their seed after them.” ‘ For thou art an holy people unto the Lord thy God: the Lord thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth. ‘The Lord did not set his love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more in number than any people; for ye were the fewest of all people: but because the Lord loved you, and because he would keep the oath which he had sworn unto your fathers.” ‘‘ Only the Lord had a delight in thy fathers to love them, and he chose their seed after them, even you, above all people, as at this day.” ‘“¢' Ye children of Jacob, his chosen ones.” And as to this election, it is a remarkable fact, that not only did he foreknow them as ‘“ obstinate,” &c., but he must have foreknown them as a nation who would prove more obstinate than ‘‘ many people of a strange speech” —would ‘change God’s judgments into wickedness more than the nations,” and as “‘ corrupted more in all their ways than Samaria and Sodom.” See Ezek. 1 ONEIDA Ore evi (AAS. ol 3 O2: 2. The election owt of the national election of Israel, as occurring in the prophets. When God declared his name, saying, that he would ‘‘keep mercy for thousands ;” and Paul says, in his * So the Hebrew. 366 THE RECONCILER. days, ‘“‘ Even so then at this present time adso, there is a remnant according to the election of grace ;” we may naturally infer, that not only in Elijah’s days, (the period of which Paul had been speaking,) but through- out, there had been an elect “remnant.” And to this agree the prophets. Hence such passages as these, “‘ Except the Lord of hosts had left unto usa very small remnant,” &c. ‘In it shall be a tenth.” “The remnant of Israel, and such as are escaped of the house of Jacob, shall no more again stay upon him that smote them, but shall stay upon the Lord, the Holy One of Israel, in truth.” ‘ The remnant - shall return, even the remnant of Jacob, unto the mighty God.” “For though thy people Israel be as the sand of the sea, yet a remnant of them shall return: the consumption decreed shall overflow with righteous- ness.” Quoted by Paul, when treating on the subject of election: ‘ For the Lord will have mercy on Jacob, and will yet choose Israel,” viz. after their judgment by the Babylonians, and God’s judgment on Babylon; so that this passage may serve to explain those that follow in Isaiah, concerning “ Jacob” as his ‘‘ chosen” out of the elect nation. ‘ But now, thus saith the Lord that created thee, O Jacob, and he that formed thee, O Israel, Fear not, for I have redeemed thee ; L have called thee by thy name ; thou art mine. I will bring thy seed from the east, and gather thee from the west. I will say to the north, Give up; and to the south, Keep not back: bring my sons from far, and my daughters from the ends of the earth, even every one that is called by my name.” “1 will pour water upon him that is thirsty, and floods upon the ELECTION, A SCRIPTURE DOCTRINE. 367 dry ground: I will pour my Spirit upon thy seed, and my blessing upon thine offspring. One shall say, I am the Lord’s; and another shall call himself by the name of Jacob; and another shall subscribe with his hand unto the Lord, and surname himself by the name of Israel.” Hence the true Jacob and Israel, that are said to be chosen, are those on whom the Spirit of God has been poured out. And are not these then the chosen out of the chosen nation of Israel? though these, perhaps, may be Gentiles, as after the deliver- ance of Israel from Haman’s plot “ many of the people of the land became Jews.” “For Jacob my servant’s sake, and Israel mine elect, I have even called thee (Cyrus) by thy name,” to deliver them. And this Israel, too, “ shall be saved also with an ever- lasting salvation.” <‘ For my names sake will I defer mine anger, and for my praise will I refrain for thee, that I cut thee not off. Behold, I have refined thee, but not with silver; I have chosen thee in the furnace of affliction. For mine own sake, even for mine own sake, will I do it, for how should my name be polluted 2” ** Thus saith the Lord, As the new wine is found in the cluster, and one saith, Destroy it not, for a blessing is in it; so will I do for my servants’ sakes, that I might not destroy them all. And I will bring forth a seed out of Jacob, and out of Judah an inheritor of my mountains; and mne elect shall inherit it, and my servants shall dwell there. And Sharon shall be a fold of flocks, and the valley of Achor a place for the herds to lie down in, for my people that have sought me.” [will take you one of a city, and two of a family, and bring you to Zion.” I will pardon them 368 THE RECONCILER. whom I reserve.” ‘‘ Yet will I leave a remnant, that ye may have some that shall escape the sword among the nations, when ye shall be scattered through the countries. And they that escape of you shall re- member me among the nations whither they shall be carried captives, because I am broken with their whorish heart, which hath departed from me, and with their eyes, which go a whoring after their idols; and they shall lothe themselves for the evils they have committed in all their abominations. And they shall know that I am the Lord.” Great mercies are pro- mised to this remnant in many parts of this prophecy, as well as by the other prophets. Thus there was an elect people out of an elect nation, as there was an Israel after the spirit, as well as an “ Israel after the flesh.” 3. The election out of Israel, as noticed by Christ and his apostles. ‘«‘ If it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.” ‘‘ They shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.” ‘‘ But for the elect’s sake, whom he hath chosen, he hath shortened the days.” ‘Shall not God avenge his own elect, which cry to him day and night?” «‘ Even us whom he hath called out of (e&) the Jews.” To which Paul applies the passage in Isaiah before quoted, ‘ Though the number,” &c. ‘‘ Even so, then, at this present time also, there is a remnant according to the election of grace,” which election obtained ‘‘righteousness or justification, while the rest were blinded.” Omitting the places where the people of God among the Jews are addressed as ‘elect,’ in ELECTION AMONG THE GENTILES. 369 common with those taken out from amongst the Gentiles, we pass on to Peter, who, as a Jew, wrote only to the Jews. He then addresses them as “ elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ.” And he calls them ‘‘a chosen generation,” an epithet which a Jew well understood; and which, bringing to his re- collection the sovereign goodness manifested in their former election, would minister to him a cause for gratitude, but not for pride. ‘ The elder unto the elect lady.” 4. The election from among the Gentiles. ““ The Kingdom of Heaven” of course includes the Gentiles as well as the Jews. And, at the close of two parables concerning it, our Lord remarks, “ Many are the called, but few are the chosen.” ‘The king- dom prepared before the foundation of the world” was for those on the right-hand of the Judge, out of all nations. Christ had sheep of the Gentiles, whom he must bring. He was to give eternal life to as many as the Father had given him, and he prays that they might behold his glory. He had much people at Corinth before they were gathered. ‘God chose (e&erearo ) the Gentiles—to believe;” and, says James, adverting to this remark of Peter’s, “God hath visited the Gentiles to take out of them a people for his name.” ‘As many as were ordained to eternal life believed.” ‘* Whom he did foreknow.” «Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God’s elect?” “Even us whom he hath called,” as ‘vessels of mercy, —of the, or out of (e&) the Gentiles. “For ye see your BB 370 THE RECONCILER. calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many noble, are called. But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise ; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty ; and base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are: that no flesh should glory in his presence.” 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.” ** Put on, therefore, as the elect of God, holy and be- loved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, long-suffering.” “ Knowing, brethren be- loved, your election of God.” « But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren, beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation, through sanctification of the Spirit, and belief of the truth.” “ Who hath saved us and called us with an holy calling; not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace given us in Christ Jesus before the world began.” “According to the faith of God's elect.’ “And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.’* ‘They that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world.” ‘ And they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.” 3 After reading and considering these passages, who * So the Greek. ELECTION, OF SOVEREIGN GRACE. Wie can deny that the Scriptures teach us that there was an election of the seed of Jacob to be the peculiar people of God—that, afterwards, there was an election out of that people—that there was so in the first dis- pensation of the gospel—and that there is an election also out of the Gentiles ? THIS ELECTION AN ELECTION OF GRACE, AND OF SOVEREIGN GRACE. Ist. In reference to the nation of Israel. The choice of Jacob and his seed to church privi- leges, rather than Esau and his seed, though Jacob was the younger, was designed, according to the apostle Paul, to show that God chooses to act graci- ously and sovereignly. And what account does Moses give of this matter? ‘“‘ Because he loved their fathers, therefore he chose their seed after them.” ‘The Lord did not set his love upon you, nor choose you because ye were more in number than any people, for ye were the fewest of all people, but because the Lord loved you,” &c. Nota word of their merit or good- will. On the contrary, hear the Lord himself by Isaiah: “I knew that thou art obstinate, and thy neck an iron sinew, and thy brow brass.” ‘I knew that thou wouldest deal very treacherously, and wast called a transgressor from the womb.” Nay, by Ezekiel, he declares that they were worse than the nations, yea, worse than Sodom; and this also he must have foreknown. To what then must we attri- bute God’s choice of them, but to his sovereign grace? 2dly. In reference to the election owt of that nation. Those whom he would call by name, and would so BB 2 S72 THE RECONCILER. favour, as stated in Isaiah xlili., were such as would not walk in his ways, and such as when the fury of God’s anger was poured out upon them, laid it not to heart.” Those to whom he says, “I, even I, am he that blot- teth out thy transgressions,” &c., were such as had ‘“ wearied him with their iniquities.” No wonder,: then, he declares that he did it, * for his own name’s sake.” And it was “for his own name’s sake” that he ‘deferred his anger,’ —that he did not cut them off,” —that rather, he “chose them in the furnace of affliction.” Those of Israel whom God would “ sow to him in the earth,” and who should “ obtain mercy,” “ fol- lowed after their lovers,” until they were obliged to destst; and it was by his grace that he “ allured” them to himself, and then “ betrothed them unto him for ever.” And the captives in Babylon whom God declared he would “ acknowledge,” and whom he had sent thither for “ good,” were sent, as he represents by Ezekiel, as impudent and hard-hearted,” ‘ most rebellious,” and more stubbornly refusing to hearken to Ezekiel, than even people of a “strange language.” Moreover, of the remnant who should be scattered amongst the nations, as mentioned by the same Eze- kiel, and whom the Lord would “leave asa remnant,” he expresses himself as having been “ broken with their whorish heart, and their abominations.” It must then be for “ his own name’s sake that he wrought with them ;” “ for his holy name,” and “ not for their name's sake.” Yes, he “loved them freely.” ddly. In reference to the elect as noticed by Christ and his apostles. ELECTION, OF SOVEREIGN GRACE. 373 It is expressly denominated an “ election of grace,” and believers are called by Christ, ‘“‘ the elect whom he hath chosen ;” chosen, ‘‘not according to their works, but according to God’s own purpose and grace.” “ Of him that calleth,” was the privilege: it was of ‘“ the election of God.” It is “ not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy ;” and who says, ‘I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy.” And so it was as the potter making vessels out of ‘‘the same lump” as it pleases him, or as it “ seemeth him good.” 4thly. In regard to the election from among the Gentiles. The arguments, or rather the facts and passages of Scripture adduced above, apply to this part of the subject ; for what are Gentiles better than Jews? So, all-the arguments before advanced under the subject of “sovereign mercy :” for if sovereignty in showing mercy be granted in the acts of calling, regenerating, illuminating, giving faith, forgiving, and so on; there is no difficulty in supposing that the electing to such manifestations would be sovereign also: and then, if election be sovereign in ¢:me, it is easy to conclude that so it would be in eternity. ‘To complete the evi- dence, therefore, we have only to refer to the former character of the Corinthians, Ephesians, Colossians, &c. &c., and to those mentioned by Titus in his third chapter. 374 THE RECONCILER. CHAPTER III. THE DOCTRINE GUARDED FROM ABUSE, AND DEFENDED AGAINST OBJECTIONS. Section I. Guarded from Abuse. 1. Ir may be abused to licentiousness, or careless living. ‘Thus, an individual recollecting that at a certain period of his life he was the subject of certain convictions and comforts, without considering whether these impressions produced a sanctifying and saving effect, imagines himself to have been then converted, and of course to have been one of the elect. “ Well,” says he, “‘ those whom God hath chosen, he doth not cast away; therefore, whatever be my conduct, I am safe.” But such a man should be reminded that “the heart is deceitful above all things ;” his heart has de- ceived him in this case, otherwise he would not reason thus. Such a one should be told, that those whom God chooses, he chooses to salvation from sin ; and that “his people he saves from their sins;” that the elect are chosen “through sanctification of the Spirit unto obedience ;” that they are sanctified, that is, set apart for God, a holy God, in spirit, soul, and body. He should conclude that his spot is not the spot of God’s children; for his children are obedient children, ‘ not fashioning themselves according to the former lusts in their ignorance, but as he which has called them is holy, so are they to be holy in all manner of con- ELECTION GUARDED FROM ABUSE. TD yersation.” Moreover, he may be reminded, that the elect themselves may be chastened, though they will not be condemned ; and that Christ declares, that “ all the churches shall know that he will render to every one of them according to their works.” | 2. It may be abused to sloth. “1 am elected, there- fore I shall be saved, though I be not diligent.” But is this the language of one who is elected to “ life 2?” for life is activity: is it of one who loves God, as all the called according to God’s purpose do? The Lord’s people are called to “serve the Lord Christ 5” and is this the language of a servant who loves his Master, and his “ sayings,” and his work ? A. pro- fessor, a professed servant who reasons thus, should know that the “ unprofitable servant will be cast into outer darkness,” and thus will find that he was not one of the elect. Moreover, it should be remembered, that, while on the one hand, Christ is so good a master that ‘‘ whatsoever good any man doeth,” though it be giving only a “cup of cold water to a disciple in the name of a disciple,” ‘ that shall he receive of the Lord:” yet that on the other hand, he is so wise, and just, and firm a master, that if his servants neglect his work, they may be ‘‘ beaten with stripes,” yea, with “ many stripes ;” also, that “ while to him that hath,” that is, improveth what he hath, shall “ be given 3” so, * from him that hath not,” that is, improveth not what he hath, “shall be taken away that which he seemeth to have.” If therefore, any, in the absence of that inward witness of a loving obediential disposition, seek their refuge or comfort in their election and predestination, 376 THE RECONCILER. they are manifestly under a delusion as to their being Christians at all; at least, as long as there is this absence, the evidence is against them. 3. It may be abused to relax exertion Jor others. Thus in ministers for their congregations; in the christian church for the heathen ; and even in parents for their children. «It is God's work,” we cannot give grace; if they are elected, they will be called sometime or other, and in such way as God pleases, and therefore we must leave it with him.” To prevent such an alarming abuse, the following observations are submitted. The decree of election is not rendered effectual without, but in connexion with means. Nay, it is by the operation of the law of cause and effect, of means and end, which God has established in the moral world, as well as in the material world, that the decreed effect is produced. Hence, encouragement rather is given to exertion ; for; using the means, ac- cording to the Divine order and connexion, we may reasonably expect the end. God has decreed our sub- sistence ; but that subsistence is not to be expected without the use of food, and the means of procuring it. He has decreed that harvest shall not cease ; but that harvest is not to be expected without our sowing the seed. What then “God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.” To give a scripture illustration of the connexion between means and end: in the case of Paul’s dangerous voyage to Rome, God had decreed that all the ship’s company should be saved; yet it seems, by Paul’s remark, « Except these abide in the ship, ye cannot be saved;” meaning, that except they used the necessary precautions for that purpose. OS a a ELECTION GUARDED FROM ABUSE. Sut From the influence of the law of self-preservation, they did use these precautions, and they were saved as decreed: but in his decree as to the end, he had in view, doubtless, the means to that end. So, in the great affair of salvation, means and end are con- nected, and this should rather encourage exertion than relax it. ‘*Seest thou a man diligent” in the use of the means of salvation; there is hope of his salvation: so, seest thou a minister, a parent, the christian public, diligent in urging these means ; there is hope of salvation in the same way. Why? Because it is God’s appointed way of working, who “ worketh all things after the counsel of his own will,” and who has said, ‘‘ The secret things belong unto God, but the revealed things unto ws and to our children.” Hence, our business is set before us; and as good servants we are to doit; and that as enjoined, not inquiring into our Master’s designs. But, as we appealed to a fact in illustration and confirmation of the established order of means and end in regard to temporal things, let us appeal to the same, and with the same view, in reference to the matter of salvation. See then the apostle Paul. Who will pretend to be a more strenuous advocate for sove- reignty and election than he? But observe his dis- position and conduct as to the Jews. He knew and taught that only “a remnant would be saved,” and that this remnant was ‘“‘a remnant according to the election of grace ;” yet, not only had he a continual heaviness and sorrow of heart on their account—not only was it his “‘ heart’s desire and prayer for them that they might be saved ;” but, preaching to them in their 378 THE RECONCILER. synagogues, his manner was to “reason with them, and to persuade them out of the Seriptures.” And when he had called them together at Rome, he not only “expounded and testified the kingdom of God,” but “‘ persuaded them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses and out of the prophets, from morn- ing tll evening.” See also his disposition and conduct as to the Gentiles. At Thessalonica, he preached the gospel to them with much earnestness (aywu). At Ephesus, ‘“ by the space of three years, he ceased not to warn every one with tears.” And, in his general ministration, knowing the terror of the Lord, he persuaded men;” and he appeals to the Colossians, that he and his companions, in preaching Christ, were in the habit of “ warning every man, and teaching every man.” Nay, to conclude the evidence on this part of our subject, we remark, that Paul gives us to under- stand, that ‘* he became all things to all men,” whether Jew or Gentile, “that by all means he might gain some.” “And why all this? His Master had said, “‘Compel them to come in,” and his compassion for souls urged him forward to it. Let no one, then, abuse the doctrine of election, or, indeed, any of the doctrines of grace, to negligence in regard to the salvation of others, much less ministers as to their addresses to sinners, or parents as to the Jaithful instruction and warning of their children. 4. This doctrine, by abuse, may even minister to our natural pride. “Sucha one has not been taught this precious sublime doctrine of election, whereas God has taught it 10 me ;—he is but a babe, and can bear only milk; whereas I am a man, and must ELECTION GUARDED FROM ABUSE. 379 have strong meat.” And, then, he looks down upon his christian brethren as one that is head and shoulders below him! But who taught thee, my aspiring brother, that the doctrine of election was “the strong meat” intended by the Holy Spirit, or that the reception of it was a test of strength in grace? Perhaps thou receivest it upon a very slight examina- tion, upon a very superficial view of the subject; whereas thy brother has examined and viewed it in its various interpretations and bearings—is aware how susceptible it is, if not carefully stated, of abuse—how, amid the shocking misrepresentations that are made of it by a considerable part of the christian church, it may prove a stumbling block, rather than a stimulus to christian profession. If so, there does not appear so much cause for self-gratulation on account of this thy supposed superior attainment. Nor does it appear quite clear that the reception of this food, and feeding upon it, is an evidence of strong digestive powers. Who says that the doctrine of election is ‘strong meat ?” Not Paul, nor any other sacred writer ; and, if we advert to the passage where the term ‘‘ strong meat,” as opposed to “ milk,” occurs—in the sixth of the Hebrews, we shall not find the least reference to it, nor, in fact, is there the least word concerning election in all the epistle. No—the strong meat the apostle intended, as de- monstrably appears from the subsequent part of the epistle, was the doctrine of the high priesthood of Christ, the design of the sacrifices so long in use— the new covenant and its surety and mediator—and, in short, the revelation that the Levitical priesthood and law was but “a shadow of good things to come,” 380 THE RECONCILER. the “body of which was of Christ.” To these Hebrews in particular, such doctrines were « strong meat” indeed. And a spiritual discernment and digestion of these truths will afford far more nourishment to Christians xow, than the knowledge of the doctrine of election. Away, then, with this Pharisaism, the very essence of which consists in despising others! «Put on, therefore, as the elect of God, humbleness of mind.” This was Paul’s mind, and more than that, it was Christ’s mind. Nay, further, 5. There are professing Christians who discover el-humour and alienation of heart in reference to those who differ from them on this point. It may be they have the ‘knowledge that puffeth up,” but less of “the charity that edifieth 7 sand, consequently, they are displeased if a brother does not coincide with them in opinion ; or, if a minister does not dwell upon their favourite topic. Such would do well to re- member, that such brother may possess an equal degree of love to the Lord and to his truth as them- selves, though they do not see things in exactly the same light; and that such ministers may have as deep an insight into divine truth, and into this truth too in particular, as themselves, and far deeper, though, for the reasons before assigned, they may not feel that it js their Master’s will that they should exhibit it as they might desire. Such also may with propriety be in- formed, what perhaps they have never before consi- dered, that the apostles of our Lord themselves were not inspired to discourse of election in ql their epistles even to the churches; nay, that out of the one-and- twenty epistles left on record, there are ten of them that Le ere A ~ as eS) ee eee ELECTION GUARDED FROM ABUSE. 381 do not mention the doctrine of election at all. Why, then, such alienation of heart—why dissatisfaction— why ill-humour? Would it not be much better to say, with the meekness and gentleness of the apostle, ‘Tf in any thing ye be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you. Nevertheless, whereto we have already attained, let us walk by the same rule, let us mind the same thing.” See, again, how the same apostle uses the doctrine of election: ‘ Put on, therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercy, kindness, humbleness of mind, meek- ness, long-suffering ;’—the very reverse of the dis- positions above noticed. 6. But not only the christian professor, but szners of no profession, may abuse the doctrine, when mis- understood, to sin and sloth. “If T am elected, I shall be saved some time or other; I cannot save myself, and I must wait God’s time.” And thus he yields himself to obey his lusts, or folds his hands to sleep! Alas, for such a man! The very moment he begins to act upon this principle, and more especially continuing to act upon this prin- ciple, he seems to mark himself out as one of the un- persuadable reprobates. Why? Because by so doing he ‘“‘ rejects the counsel of God against himself ;” for what says that? ‘ How long, ye simple ones, will ye love simplicity? ‘Turn ye at my reproof, behold I will pour out my Spirit unto you, I will make known my words unto you.” What says it again? ‘ Labour for the meat that endureth to everlasting life.” *‘ Strive to enter in at the strait gate.” What again? *‘Search the Scriptures”—that “law which converts the 382 THE RECONCILER. soul, and gives understanding to the simple ;”—that _ word whereby men may know themselves, and who Jesus is, that they might believe on him and be saved ; —search earnestly for this heavenly ‘ wisdom ;” “wait daily at her gates, and watch at the posts of her doors.” Such is God’s counsel; but if men yield themselves to sin and sloth, do they not reject it? do they not thus “harden their heart” themselves, and then provoke God to harden them? More- over, how can such expect any decree of election to take effect, while they run counter to the method by which God has appointed his decrees to take effect ? As in nature, so in grace, God has connected our endeavours and his ends together. The reasoning of such a one, as at first stated, is, as though a man were to say, “If I am to be fed I shall be fed, though I do not work.” But who can approve of such reasoning ? What if Paul had said, on the dangerous voyage before noticed, ‘God has decreed that no life shall be lost, therefore we will take no precautions, but let the ship take its course?’ would you not have considered him as arguing very perversely ? Is it thus, O sinner! that you reply against God—thus, that you fly in the face of your Maker? Besides, know, O mistaken, O self-destroying sinner! that even if you should prove an elect vessel, you are in danger of possessing the iniquities of your unconverted state; while, if not, you will be “ heaping up wrath against the day of wrath.” Qh! my dear fellow-creature, suffer not yourself to be thus deluded! Having thus guarded the doctrine from abuse, it remains that it be defended. ELECTION DEFENDED AGAINST OBJECTIONS. 383 Section If. The Doeirine defended against Objections. Oj. 1. “< It is injustice in God thus to distinguish.” Ans. The distinction is made, as though justice had taken its course, nor is it any longer an affair of judgment at all. Moreover, how can a sinner think himself wronged, seeing he has received a hearty welcome to the feast, but he would not come. Had those bidden to the great supper in the parable, and refused to come, reason to consider themselves wronged when the master of the feast called others? But to illustrate the subject in its diferent bearings : suppose a rebellious regiment—the king proclaims a pardon on condition of their subjection, and uses every motive to induce it; but they, through pride and enmity, stubbornly refuse to submit. The king, how- ever, determines to have a farther dealing with some of them, makes them a personal application, and thus prevails on them to submit. Could the others complain of injustice? Again: a nobleman invites all the neighbourhood to a feast; but they refuse the invitation. He however chooses to send a particular personal invitation to some, and they come. Could the rest complain of being wronged ? Oij. It may be objected—“‘ If election be of God's will, why address the gospel of salvation to man’s will and choice; and on what ground could our Lord blame the Jews in that they would not come to him that they might have life?” Election on our hypothesis does not set aside the 384 THE RECONCILER. free operation and use of man’s will, but isa provision of grace, subsequent upon the abuse of it. Its lan- guage is to the person elected, “ You have had your will, now I will have mine ; you have ‘ chosen your own delusions’—have chosen death in the error of your ways, and I might justly leave you to your own choice, but for ‘ the praise of the glory of my grace,’ I will hedge up your way with thorns—will make a wall that you shall not find your paths, and bringing you into the wilderness of want and distress, will allure you, and make you willing to become mine.” Thus, with “the cords of a man,” with invitations, with reasonable considerations, and tender and urgent expostulations, together with the “ bands of love,” God draws them unto himself; and all this, by the free operation of the human will. And, as to the non-elect, God has borne a testimony of his righteous- ness and love to them also; he has prepared a feast for them; he has earnestly invited them to partake of it—but it has proved that, of their own will, owing to the love of the world, or some other consideration, they have refused to come. And then the founder of the feast chooses to have his will, and therefore says, “ Ye shall not taste of my supper.” Where is there any infringement of the freedom of the will in all this ? Where any inconsistency in addressing the human will ? O17. 3. After all, it may be said, How can this election agree with those numerous expressions in which God seems to will and to seek the salvation of all sinners; and, indeed, how does it accord with his solemn oath, “ As I live, saith the Lord, I have no pleasure in the death of a sinner; but that he turn ELECTION DEFENDED AGAINST OBJECTIONS. 385 from his wickedness and live?” This election does not set aside one word of promise or encouragement, under the gospel and law of faith. “hese remain as long as a man lives, but it is to be looked on as pro- viding for a reserve and a relief, after the unpersuada- bleness under the gospel has been foreseen. And God, as the great Creator, is “‘ good unto all, and his tender mercies are over all his works”—as the “ creat King,” he is not only holy and just, but also “good ;” and as the Saviour, he is “rich in mercy” to all that seek him, and saves all that trust in him ; nay, ‘‘ he delighteth in mercy,” and is abounding in grace to the chief of sinners, in the gospel and under the law of faith: but if this creature will not seek his Creator, but forsake him—if the subject well not submit to his King, but rebel against him—if the rebel will reject the merciful overtures of his Sovereign, he alone is to blame, and the Divine benignity remains unimpeached. The language thus addressed to the sinner, especially as confirmed by a solemn oath, 1s a sufficient indication that, as a benevolent King, God delights not in the punishment of his rebellious sub- jects, but in their recovery and happiness; but if they will not yield, as we said before, the blame is theirs. And then, if “the Lord of hosts be exalted in judgment, and God that is holy be sanctified in righteousness,” in rendering to some according to their ways, while he “ glorifies his mercy” in choosing others to salvation, who shall find fault? It was true that he ‘* willed not the death of the sinner”—it was true that he would have delighted in showing him mercy, had he surrendered, but he wou/d not ; and now 4 Ce 386 THE RECONCILER. the glory of his justice on the one hand, and of his sove- reign mercy on the other, require that he act as he does. Whatever we short-sighted creatures may think of it, we are sure not only that “ the judgment of God is according to truth,” but that all he does is in wisdom and knowledge. There is nothing then in the decree of election, in our view of it, contrary to, or inconsistent with, his gracious invitations, and the goodness of the Divine nature. If that decree were considered as irrespective of man’s foreseen unpersuadableness, there would be such apparent inconsistency ; but under the represen- tation made of it in this scheme, it is otherwise. The reply to the next objection will still farther illustrate this view of the subjece. Oly. 4. But why should “ the gospel be preached to every creature,” if some only were elected to enjoy its blessings ? The gospel is to be preached to every creature, and for every creature still, and to the end of the world; and as long as a man lives, he is welcome to its blessings, just the same as though there were no election: but when it is foreseen that the sinner will not come to Christ, that he may have the life, what is to be done then? Are all to be left in their un- persuadableness? No, says God, “I will pardon them whom I reserve,” I will still “ keep mercy for thousands ;” but then it shall be according to my elec- tion. ‘Thus we see, then, that the election of some of mankind was not designed as an exclusion of any in the first instance ; but was founded on the foresight that while al/ would be invited to the feast, none ae eee ee ee ELECTION DEFENDED AGAINST OBJECTIONS. 387 would come, but “all with one consent would make excuse.” It is a gracious procedure of Divine sove- reignty that does not at all interfere with the gospel dispensation; but, in the order of our conception, is a purpose of mercy taking effect after the gospel has had its free and full course. In that gospel is pro- claimed God’s readiness to show mercy to all; that Christ ‘died for all;” that his righteousness is “‘ unte all,” (ets wdvras); that the Holy Spirit “ blesses by turning every one from his iniquities ;” and under the parable of a feast, all, as many as are found, are to be bidden to it, and indeed it is to be “ preached to every creature ;” neither is there any thing that pre- vents, but man’s own will. But what if all excuse themselves, and refuse to come? Shall God’s love to the world in giving his only-begotten Son be in vain ? shall Christ give his life for the world in vain? shall the work of the Holy Spirit be of no avail? in fine, shall God make this great supper in vain? No; there shall be an “election of grace ;” ‘ mercy shall be built up for ever ;” the Redeemer shall “ see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied ;” the Holy Spirit shall “form a people” for the living God; and, at length, an innumerable multitude out of all nations, and kindreds, and tongues, and people, shall stand be- fore God as the redeemed from among men, and as the monuments of his rich, and free, and sovereign grace. Thus then we see how consistently, there being a gospel for every creature, the gospel may be preached fo every creature, and yet how, after all, there may be an “election of grace.” We see also how the cc2 388 THE RECONCILER. gospel being universal, no man need perish in despair ; and, as men are repeatedly assured, that ‘* whosoever will may come and take of the water of life freely ;” that none will be damned, but those who would not be saved. Olj. 5. It represents God as partial, whereas he is ‘no respecter of persons.” ““ Respect of persons” relates to the administration of justice, and so it is generally applied in Scripture; but this is not a matter of judgment, but it has re- ference to such as God has already judged to be “guilty,” not only of disobedience to “the law of works,” but also to “the law of faith? And when the Apostle Peter says, “I perceive that God is no respecter of persons,” he has in view persons as to their nation or condition ; as if he had said, I perceive that wherever God sees a man that fears him, he is pleased with him, whether he be a Gentile ora Jew, whether he be a bondman or freeman. In these respects, then, “‘ God is no respecter of persons.” Nor is there any partiality with God, according to the ob- noxious sense in which the word is sometimes taken, for he never does anything capriciously or unwisely. But that he exercises sovereign favour as he pleaseth, without ‘‘ giving account of his matters,” we maintain to be a Scripture doctrine. To show this, he chose the younger Jacob rather than the elder Esau, the younger Ephraim rather than the elder Manasseh; and what other design could our Lord have in the parable of the householder, than to establish this doctrine ? The man who had wrought only one hour received a day’s wages, as well as the man who had ELECTION DEFENDED AGAINST OBJECTIONS. 9389 wrought the whole day. ‘True, the latter murmured, as though an undue partiality had been shown. But what was the householder’s reply? ‘‘Triend, I do thee no wrong—didst thou not agree with me for a penny? Is it not lawful for me to do what £ will with mineown? Is thine eye evil because I am good ?” Thus God will do no wrong to any one, but will give to every one his due, or what he has covenanted to give, but he will also give to some more than they deserve—and this as it pleaseth him. Now, though the cases of Jacob and Esau, and Ephraim and Ma- nasseh, do not relate to man’s eternal condition, but are rather patierns of the Divine sovereignty ; yet the parable cited appears to relate to it, inasmuch as our Lord is speaking of the state of things under the ‘“‘kingdom of heaven,” or gospel dispensation; inas- much also as, in the application of the parable, he remarks, ‘“‘ Many are the called, but few are the chosen.” But admitting that this latter does not relate to man’s eternal condition, yet all three cases prove the sovereignty of Divine favour: and then, if we examine other passages, we shall find that even in this important sense this sovereignty is exercised. “ Thou hast hid these things from the wise and pru- dent, and hast revealed them unto babes.” ‘‘ Even so, Father, for so it seemed good in thy sight.” “ The elect’s sake, whom “e hath chosen.” “ That the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth.” “ It is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy.” ‘* Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto 390 THE RECONCILER. honour, and another unto dishonour ?” Assuredly, these passages, in connexion with the frequent re- currence of the declaration to the remnant of Israel, that it was not for their sake, but for his own name’s sake that he showed them mercy, prove that God is sovereign in his favour. But since it is all ac- cording to counsel, seeing he abounds herein “ in all wisdom and prudence,” it must not be called par- tiality. Oly. 6. The election of the few, and the rejection of the rest, is dishonourable to God, and discouraging to man. Speaking of number, the Scripture teaches us that the seed of the Messiah, that is, the regenerated people of God, shall be “as the host of heaven, which cannot be numbered, and as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured.” And as to the proportion of the saved to the lost, there are three passages which appear to have a bearing upon it, and these are, “ Enter ye in at the strait gate, for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat; because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it :” and two others, declaring that “* many are the called, but few are the chosen.” Now as to both the number and the proportion of those who shall be wltimately saved, there is no question between us and our opponents, for we both believe that although ““many are called” to the visible church, yet “ few are chosen” to the church invisible; but we are charged with maintaining a decree of exclusion of the “many,” by the election of the “ few.” But such 1s ELECTION DEFENDED AGAINST OBJECTIONS. 8391 not the case on the hypothesis advanced in these pages, for we suppose that the many are provided for—that they are called; and that the reason why they partake not of the blessings of the feast is, not because they are not elected, but because that when its Founder called, they refused—when he stretched out his hand, they did not regard. And what can our opponents say more? The goodness of God is as extensively shown on our hypothesis, as on theirs—sinners have equal encouragement as with them—we invite and urge with as much sincerity and earnestness as they— there are equal facilities for salvation on our view of the doctrine as on theirs; and we maintain as well as they, that none are excluded but such as exclude themselves; and that none, in fact, will be damned, but those who would not be saved. Then, why is our doctrine represented as more dishonouring to God, and more discouraging to man, than theirs? On the contrary, 1s it not more honourable to God, and more encouraging to man? Leaving the issue of things to man’s free-will, as they do, what certainty is there that any shall be saved? Whereas, we, while we give all the advantage to free-will that they do or can desire, also make a provision for its failure, and consider God, over and above, so to speak, as sovereignly and graciously providing for the salvation of “a multitude that no one can number,” and that infallibly. Thus, we neither dishonour God by supposing him to adopt a system of exclusion, nor do we discourage man by maintaining a decree of exclusion; but we honour God’s grace as much as they, and encourage sinners to receive it as much as they—nay, more ; by 392 THE RECONCILER. superinducing a purpose of mercy on the failure of the gospel call, we raise a monument to the honour of God's grace, which they do not, and open a source of encouragement to the sinner, of which their system does not admit. CHAPTER IV. THE DOCTRINE IMPROVED. SecrTion I. By Believers. 1. To the comfort and gratitude of the godly, amidst the universal prevalence of sin and disobedience. Though men will not be persuaded, if left to them- selves, to come to Christ for life, yet God has chosen some to come to him, by the regenerating influence of his Spirit. These too will form an innumerable mul- titude; for besides those that have been called in successive generations from the time of the Fall until now, there are the called during the time of the millennium, when Satan will be bound a thousand years. Moreover, it is calculated that one-half of the human race die in infancy, and why may not the ‘‘ abounding of the grace,” and the gift of righteous- ness, by the last Adam, spoken of in Rom. v., also avail for them? Hence, some have supposed that the number of the elect will ultimately be greatly supe- rior to that of the non-elect ; nay, that the number of THE DOCTRINE IMPROVED. 393 the lost will be no more in proportion to the multitude of those that are saved, than will be the number of the executed to those that die a natural death, in a kingdom or state. 2. It may be improved for the encowragement of ministers and of missionaries. Although no one will be persuaded to come to Christ of himself, yet, ‘“ All that the Father giveth will come ; and him that cometh Christ will in no wise cast out.” The word that goeth forth out of the mouth of God shall accomplish that which he pleaseth ; Christ “ shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied ;” and he shall have a “seed that shall be accounted to the Lord for a generation.” And con- cerning this seed, he has said, “ As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, nor the sand of the sea mea- sured, so will I multiply them.” Hence, mighty as man’s prejudices and passions are, yet the Spirit of God is mightier ; and the weapons of the ministerial warfare shall be ‘* mighty through God to the pulling down of strongholds, casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ.” It is evident, that during the ministry of Christ, the consideration that all that the Father gave him would come to him, was his encouragement ; and so it should encourage his ministers and missionaries. God will have a people— his word shall not return to him void—he will have a people out of all nations, and kindreds, and tongues, and people; therefore let them go forward, preaching the preaching that he bids them, both as to matter 394 THE RECONCILER. and manner, praying, and expecting that he will not fail to do his work. What though the people of a town, of a village, of a heathenish tribe or nation, be ignorant, and stupid, and wicked, yet God may have much people amongst them, as he had at Corinth; and if he be pleased to put “the excellency of power,” or the “ effectual working of his mighty power,” in the preacher, and cause the word to work effectually in the hearers ; they shall be “ called out of darkness into his marvellous light,” and be “ turned from idols to serve the living and true God.” By Believers, as to their T. emper and Conduct. 1. It should be improved by the believer to promote humility. We does indeed see a difference between himself and others ; but to what does he ascribe that difference? To rich and sovereign grace. “ * Not unto me,’ says he, ‘not unto me, but unto thy name be all the glory ;’ as it is not of my work, so neither is it of my will or wisdom. I was a < child of wrath, even as others,’ and a child too of disobedience ; but he out of the same lump has chosen me to be, and has made me a vessel of mercy, as it seemed good to him, the heavenly potter, to make it, and therefore what reason have I to glory? No, if I glory, my glorying shall be in the Lord; who of his own will and power has united me to Christ, who from him is made to me ‘wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, and redemp- tion.” ‘Thus does the doctrine produce humility ; and particularly so when there is a consciousness of greater obstinacy than in others, and of greater THE DOCTRINE IMPROVED. 395 obstructions in the way of his salvation than in the way of others. 2. Connected with this is gratitude. ‘* What was I, and what was my father’s house, that thou, O God, shouldst thus deal with me ? That the infinitely blessed God should choose me before the foundation of the world; should predestinate me to the adoption of children ; and should give me as a sacred deposit to his only-begotten Son, that I might in due time be ‘called, justified, and glorified ;? and that all this should be upon the most perfect foresight of my former sin and rebellion? ‘ What shall I render unto the Lord for all his benefits towards me? ‘O Lord, truly I am thy servant, I am thy servant ;’ ‘ Lord, what wilt thou have me do?’” Such is the proper improvement of the doctrine. ‘3. It may, and ought to be, improved to holiness and obedience. ‘‘1 am chosen to be holy, ‘ elect unto obedience ;’ then let me study to be holy and obedient. I am ‘ predestinated to the adoption of children;’ ‘to be conformed to the image of God’s Son;’ then let me ever seek to act as ‘an obedient child, not fashioning myself according to my former lusts, in my ignorance ; but as he which hath called me is holy, so let me be holy in all manner of conversation,’ and thus to become conformable to my high and_ holy destiny. Moreover, what evidence have I that I have been elected and predestinated, if I am not thus holy and obedient ?” 4. So may it be improved to promote the christian temper. ‘* Put on,” says the Apostle Paul, ‘as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, é 396 THE RECONCILER. kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, long-suffer- ing; forbearing one another, and forgiving one another, if any man have a quarrel against any.” ‘* Now,” says the elect Christian, ‘“ the Lord has had bowels of mercies toward me, has exercised loving-kindness toward me, has forgiven me; then let me herein be a follower of God; and as a child follows his parent, so herein, as I am required, Jet me, a child of God, follow my heavenly Parent. Those who demand my pity and forgiveness may indeed be undeserving; but was I not as undeserving of God's regard ?” d. It may well operate as an argument against a worldly spirit and conduct. ‘* Am I chosen out of the world, and to be one of God's peculiar people; and shall I be as one of the world, and live and act rather as a stranger amongst God’s people, than as one of them? Am I called with a high and heavenly calling ; and shall I be grovelling and earthly? Was I predestinated to an inheritance incorruptible, un- defiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for me; and shall I ‘ mind earthly things?’ God forbid! Lord, help me to walk worthy of my hea- venly calling and destiny !” Section II. By a convinced Sinner, or one under concern. 1. To encouragement. Thus he may reason.—‘‘God brings home his people by convincing them of sin—he has been convincing me of sin; may I not therefore hope that I am one oe THE DOCTRINE IMPROVED. 397 whom he has chosen, and whom therefore he will not leave until he has perfected his work in me? And what though I stand accused of a thousand crimes, and have been ‘the chief of sinners, yet, since ‘grace, and not merit, is the spring of election, and since others which have considered themselves the chief of sinners have been found amongst the elect, why may I not indulge a hope? Assuredly it will be ‘to the praise of the glory of his grace’ to save me. I will seek him therefore in his appointed ways, and that diligently ; and will not let him go, till I obtain the blessing: while Christ has said, ‘ All that the Father giveth me shall come to me,’ he has said also, ‘Him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.’” Most assuredly as soon as a man begins to be con- vinced about his state, he may derive encouragement from election. N.B. A congregation is composed of two sorts of persons—the careless and the concerned. As to the former, it is nothing to them ; as to the latter, their very concern is an encouragement. Moreover, the very carelessness of the others is their condemna- tion. 2. It may serve as a stimulus to care and diligence. ‘‘ If ‘many are the called, and few the chosen,’ then let me seek to be one of the latter. Oh, I would ‘make my calling and election sure; I can never be satisfied until I have. And God says, ‘If I cry after know- ledge, and lift up my voice for understanding ; if I seek her as silver, and search for her as hid treasure: then shail I understand the fear of the Lord, and find the knowledge of God! Thus then will I seek to find out my election.” ‘This is a just and scriptural % 398 THE RECONCILER. way of reasoning; for God, when he chose men to everlasting life, he chose them to be brought to this determined state of mind. Witness in Jacob. God’s ‘elect’ are a people distinguished as a people that “seek him with their whole heart ;” that “ search for him with all their heart;” for such is the tendency of the Holy Spirit's saving work upon their souls. Section ITI. By Sinners in general, 1. For awakening concern and rousing to action. The sinner rightly considering this doctrine, especially in connexion with the Scripture reprobation before in- sisted on, instead of folding his hands to sleep, saying, ** Well, I need not disturb myself, for I can set about reading and praying when I please, and God will give me repentance ;” will begin to be alarmed, and say, ‘“ What if I should not be one of the elect ; what if God, provoked by my long and stubborn resistance to his gracious calls, should swear in his wrath that I shall never enter into his rest—shall never taste of his supper? It is true if I repent I shall be forgiven; but what if he should refuse to give me that new heart, without which I shall never truly repent? It is true, according to the gospel call, ‘ whosoever will may come; but what, if slighting that call, and re- fusing to ‘make my prayer before him that I might understand his truth,’ he may leave me to my own chosen delusions, and so I never have a heart to come ? How awful would that be! Such was the case of the Jews; and such may be the case with me! By the ~ THE DOCTRINE IMPROVED. 399 help of God, therefore, I will no longer trifle with my precious soul—I will no longer trifle with God and Christ—I will no longer trifle with death and judgment, and heaven and hell, and eternity.” 2. May it not provoke to a salutary jealousy? ‘‘ What! is there a chosen number, and shall I not be concerned to be one of them? Iam invited as well as others: why should not I go to possess and enjoy the promised blessings? While others are running for the inestimable prize, shall not 1? Who knows but that I may obtain the prize?” Is there anything un- natural in this reasoning 2? When God gave a general call to the backsliders of Israel, ‘‘ Turn, O backsliding children ;” and yet says, “I will take you one of a city, and two of a family (tribe), and bring you to Zion :” was it not both designed and calculated to provoke to jealousy these backsliders?* Thus Paul attempted to “ provoke to jealousy them which were his flesh, and to save some of them,” when he declared to them the privileges of the Gentiles. The doctrine insisted on, then, may produce a salutary jealousy in the minds of sinners, and thus also be improved to arouse them from their stupidity and negligence. * May it not be improved also to provoke the wise, the noble, the mighty? What! is it said, ‘“‘ Not many wise, not many mighty, not many noble, are called?” Then shall not I seek to be one of the few ? THE END. 4 LONDON: wets R. CLAY, PRINTER, BREAD STREET HILL, _ * » . * DATE DUE hg i Ad) sid a - . q 7 PRINTEDINU.S,.A. GAYLORD — iii