‘RACER : , : I 
 ae ae BY THE ay 
 REV. EDWARD SMITH: | 
 
SISLm mLrerren 
 | EXPLAINED, &cs 
 
 “Even so then, at this present time also, there is a rents 
 
 @ant according to the election of grace”—-Romans xi, 5. 
 
 THat God has ever had in the world, a peculiar people, is @ 
 truth too obvious to be denied by any that have paid attention to the 
 divineeconomy. After Abel, the righteous. seed was slain by that. 
 wicked one Cain, Seth was raised up as the peculiar faverite of 
 
 _ Heaven, and blessed with privileges which were denied Cain and 
 
 his posterity. This peculiarity was manifested to the descendants: 
 
 _ of Seth, until their intermarriages: with the posterity of Cain pro- 
 
 _ duced that great wickedness, which brought on the flood and tere 
 -minated the antediluvian age. 7 
 
 _ Seth died, A. M. 1042, In this year Lamech was £68 yeare 
 old ; it being 55 years after Enoch’s translation. Lamech was 
 cotemporary with Shem 93years ; and Shem was cotemporary 
 with Abraham 150, and Isaac 50 years. Thus the knowledge’ of 
 the true God, and the nature of his worship, were revealed to, and 
 preserved among the patriarchs until the covenant of promise was 
 made with Abraham: Gen. 17 ch. With Isaac, the heir of the 
 promise, the Lord confirmed the Covenant, and with the Jewish 
 nation continued his peculiar blessings, until the time in which our 
 text was written. That God chose those illustrious characters and 
 their descendants, together with the Jewish nation, and blessed 
 them with favours. which he withheld from the rest of mankind, 
 cannot be denied without rejecting the clearest evidence. Seeing 
 then that the doctrine of election or peculiarity is a doctrine of rev~ 
 elation ; and_as this doctrine has been variously understood, and 
 
 differently set forth by divines, we shall proceed to consider this 
 
 lotricate and highly important subject by shewing, Ist. ‘That the 
 doctrine of unconditional election, and reprobation is true ; being 
 clearly taught in the Scriptures. 2. That election to eternal life is 
 conditional in the case of everyman. 3. Shew in whatsense the 
 doctrine ef unconditional election and reprobation is true; by proving 
 that those Scriptures which speak of unconditional election, have 
 no relation to eternal glory, but to time privileges, which may be 
 So abused as to incur the divine displeasure, and bring down eter- 
 
 nal destruction om those blessed with them. And that those which 
 
 peak of unconditional reprobation have no reference to eternal 
 teath, and that the reprobate may come at last unto life eternal: 
 
 ae - 
 
4 
 & 
 
 I. The doctrine of unconditional election and reprobation is 
 what we propose to prove first. This will appear irrefragable from 
 the following Scriptures: ‘*And Joshua said unto. all the people, 
 Thus saith the Lord God of Israe}, your fathers dwelt on the oth- 
 er side of the flood, in old time, even Terah the father of Abra- 
 ham, and the father of Nachor : and they serve other Gods. And 
 1 took your father Abraham from the other side of the flood, and 
 led him throughout all the land of Canaan, and multiplied his seed, 
 and gave him, fsaac’”——Josh. 24, 2, 3. We can see nothing in Abra- 
 ham to recommend him to God, that we do not see in Nachor—" 
 They were both Idolators ; yet the Lord chose Abraham, and 
 passed‘ by or rejected Nachor. Abraham’s faithfulness was not 
 the cause or Condition of his being chosen, for he was chosen before 
 he was faithful. The same prerogative is used in the choice of Jacob 
 and the rejection of Esau—“For the children being not yet born,’ 
 neithernaving done any good or evil, that the purpose of God accor=_ 
 ding to election might stand; not of works, but of him that calleth; 
 It was said unto her” [Rebecca] “the elder shall serve the youn 
 ger. As it is written Jaceb have I loved ; but Esau have [ hated.” 
 Rom. ix, 11,13. This text puts the point under consiaera- 
 tion, beyond successful contradiction ; for as the children were not 
 yet born, they could not have done any thing t# induce the Al- 
 mighty to choose the one, and reject the other—to love the one, and 
 to hate the other. And lest these facts should not be conclusive 
 it is declared, that the design of God was to manifest his electing 
 purpose, and not to reward works. ee i 
 _© lt is farther proven by the choice, or election of the Jewish na~ 
 tion; for they were chosen before they were a nation, even at the 
 ’ time the Covenant was made with Abraham—-Gen. 17 and 7. “I 
 will establish ay covenant between me and thee, and thy seed af- 
 ter thee, in their generations, for an everlasting covenant, ‘to be a 
 God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee.” Nor wasall the pos- 
 terity of Abraham chosen 3 but first Isaac, ‘then Jacob and his 
 ‘children — while Ishmael the son of Hagar, and Zimran, 
 Jokshan, Medan, Median,’ Ishbak, and Shuah, sons which’ 
 Keturah bore to Abraham after the death of Sarah, and Esau were 
 rejected. By the chsice of the Jewish nation, the descendants of 
 Jacob were blessed with the privileges of revealed religion, by birth. 
 (see Roi. ili, 1) while the other descendants of Abraham, and 
 ihe rest of the world were denied them for the space of 1500 years. 
 _JNeither were they chosen on account of any foreseen faithfulness 
 
 in them 3 for if the hfe of Esau be compared with that of Jacob, 
 ‘ie -will not suffer by ihe comparison 5 indeed we may say,and say 
 jusly too, that Esau’s- virtues are far more conspicuous’ than Ja~- 
 cob’s. While subtlety and intrigue are Gistinguishmg traits in the 
 _gharacter of Jacob, & magnanimous Ingenuousness adorns that of 
 
 igor 
 D: 
 
- 
 
 5 
 
 E’sau’s——in the case of his brother he nobly forgives. And we 
 find that the Jews, in every. period of their history, were a rebelli- 
 ous and stiffnecked people, in consequence of which they were 
 
 yisited with hot displeasure and finally overthrown. See Deut. ix, 
 
 4, 6, and Rom. xi, 20Q. 
 
 It cannot be argued that Abraham’s faithfulness, was the cause 
 of Jacob and his posterity being chosen: For had the blessing 
 been inherited by birth, the elder and not the younger would have 
 been the heir, according to the patriarchal laws; or had it been 
 a common inheritance, all his descendants would have been equal 
 heirs—And in either case, Jacob & his children would have been 
 deprived of the blessings of the holy covenant.. We might ‘advert to 
 the case of Samuel and of Paul, the. parable of: the talents, and 
 others to prove the doctrine contended for under this head; but 
 
 we think what has been said sufficient to establish it beyond suc- 
 cessful contradiction—as these texts cannot be construed, or éven 
 “tortured into any other meaning. And here we will lay down 2 
 
 rule which has governed us in our researches after truth, & which 
 
 “may justly be termed:a theological axiom. Any doctrine, which is 
 clearly expressed by a number of plain texts of Scripture, taken in 
 
 ¢onnexion with their contexts, and which cannot be fairly constru- 
 ed into any ether design, is a doctrine of revelation, and therefore 
 must be true——That this rule applies to the foregoing proposition 
 and argument is evident, we think, to every reflecting mind. 
 
 ‘We proceed to shew— 
 
 2. ‘That election to eternal life is conditional in the case of eve- 
 yy man. 
 
 The doctrine of unconditional election to eternal: life, is insepa-_ 
 rably connected with the doctrine of unconditional reprobation to 
 eternal death ; they stand or falltogether. Someof the Calvin- 
 
 ists have denied this consequence, but others who are far more con- 
 
 sistent, affirm with Calvin, that they stand or fall together. The 
 Calvinists try to maintain the connexion between second causes and 
 effects; and to establish the doctrine of second causes; and I 
 have no doubt that many have been bewildered in this labyrinth, 
 
 _ and lost the way of truth. But in no sense can man, or any other 
 - being, be said to be the cause of a thing which they are necessitated 
 ‘todo. The power which acts, if it be free from necessity, is the 
 
 cause of the action performed ; if not, it is nothing more than the 
 
 Instrument by. which some prior cause operates ; and that opera- 
 
 tor who acts prior to, and free from any kind of necessity, is the 
 cause of the action, and all other operators,(for agents they are not 
 in any sense,) are nothing but instruments, and are no more ac- 
 countable for their actions than a fond mother would be, were she 
 
 taken by a monster and dashed with such violence on her sleeping 
 
 abe as to destroy its life. A jury could not be found; who, acting 
 
6 
 
 aceording to their convictions of right, would convict her of murder, 
 
 This is precisely tke kind of agency, which the Calvinist calle 
 the agency of second causes ; their words are, “God from all e= 
 ternity did by the most wise, and holy council of his own will, 
 ireely and unchangably ordain whatsoever comes to pass ; yet so 
 as thereby neither is God the author of sin ; nor. is violence offer- 
 ed tothe will of the creatures, nor is the liberty or contingency of 
 second causes taken away, but rather established.’? Con. of Faith, 
 page 15.—They represent these unchangable decrees as opera- 
 ting through the agency of second causes, but these second causes 
 are nothing but mere instruments, because they are compelled to 
 act in certain ways, and therefore can have no agency. This 
 willclearly appear, if we give the subject a farther consideration, 
 They say, Con. of Faith, p. 16. “Although God knows whatev- 
 ér may or can come to pass, upon all supposed conditions; yet 
 hath he not decreed any thing because he foresaw it as future, or 
 as that which would come to pass upon such conditions.” From 
 this declaration we see, that God in his decrees has no view ta 
 what man may or can do; but determines that certain things 
 shall be done independently of any foreseen condition arising out 
 of human agency. And on p. 17, it is said: “Those of mankind 
 that are predestinated unto life, God, before the foundation of the 
 world was laid,’”’—“hath chosen in Christ unto everlasting glory,” 
 “without any foresight of faith, or good works, or any other thing in 
 the creature as conditions or causes moving him thereunto.” Here 
 it is. roundly asserted, that the elect are chosen unto eternal glory, 
 regardless not enly of conditions, but of any cause arising out of 
 human agency. And farther, that those men and angels thus cho- 
 sen are uuchangably designed, and their number so certain and 
 definite, that it can neither be increased nor diminished—p. 27. 
 
 Thus we see that a certain number are to be saved, independently 
 
 ef what any man, orall men may or can do — consequently, 
 what they call second causes are nothing more than the instru- 
 
 ments by which the Almighty accomplishes his works; and what’ 
 
 they call the contingency of second causes, must be the Lord, de- 
 termined that certain things should be done, withoat determining 
 by what instrument they should be accomplished ; but the things 
 were determined and made certain, and it is a matter of no conse= 
 quence by what instrument they are effected. From this view of 
 the subject, the doctrine of unconditional reprobation to eternal 
 death must follow as an inevitable consequence. For, although 
 they do not fix the time in which these decrees of reprobation were 
 passed 5 yet they set forth the cause of the reprobates destruction, 
 viz: sta: “God was pleased” “to pass by, and ordain them [the re- 
 probates] to dishonor & wrath for their sins,” p. 19. Lf God, from 
 
 wl eternity unchangably ordained whatsoever comes to. pass—-Sin: 
 
re 
 
 ¥ 
 
 @omes te pass ; therefore God unchangably ordained sin—And 
 
 gin, which they make the cause of the reprobates destruction 5 
 
 but which in reality, according to their doctrine, is only the 
 instrument by which it is effected, is made unchangably certain, 
 and consequently the damnation of the reprobate as certain. 
 This will also appear from the number of the elect being so cers 
 tain and definite, that it cannot be either increased or diminished. 
 For if God determined that just so many should be saved and no 
 more, he must have determined that the rest’ should be damned, 
 and not one of those doomed to wrath and death eternal, can do 
 any thing by which to escape. And though it may be argued 
 that they are not compelled to sin, which cannot be done successe 
 fully unless man can change the unalterable decrees of God; yet 
 their damnation is made certain because the number of the elect 
 cannot be either increased or diminished ; and if their destruction 
 is unalterably certain, it isa matter of entire indifference whether 
 they sin or not-—-damned they must be, and there isno help. 
 That we are not mistaken as to the dectrine of the Calvinists will 
 further appear, from the Scriptures which they bring to support the 
 doctrine of election to eternal glory and reprobation to eternal 
 death. It will only be necessary to notice one text. ‘For the 
 children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, 
 that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of 
 works, but of him that calleth.” “As it is written, Jacob have I lov- 
 
 _ ed, but Esau have I hated.” . Thelove and hatred here spoken of, 
 
 existed before the children were yet born, and could not be the re- 
 sult of good or evil done by them ; and as this passage. is brought 
 expressly to prove eternal.eleetion and reprobation, we must un- 
 derstand them to mean that God loved Jacob with an everlasting 
 Jove, and hated Esau with an everlasting hatred, regardless of any 
 thing done by them, for they were not yet born. We are thus 
 driven to the conclusion that the doctrine of the Presbyterians, and 
 all those other Sects which subscribe to the Westminster Confes- 
 gion of Faith, is, that a certain number called the elect will be sa- 
 ved, do what they may ; and that all the rest called the repro- 
 bates, will be damned, do what they can. This conclusion we 
 think unaveidable from the premises, which we have endeavored 
 to examine carefully, and free from prejudice—notwithstanding it 
 has been said again. & again, that it is unfair, it is carricature, &c.* 
 
 This doctrine we conceive to be not only opposed to mercy, but 
 also irreconcilable to justice. We conceive that the plain common 
 
 . *The author of this discourse, has read carefully, Calvin’s Institutes 
 through, that he might understand the doctrine of Calvinism, and after 
 reading them, he is more convinced than he was before,that this is a fair 
 representation. He would not for any consideration, knowingly wisre-: 
 Present any denomination of Christians. 
 
8 
 
 ense meaning of justice is, rendering an equivalent for injurieg 
 done or benefits received. But we ask what do the poor repro+ 
 hates suffer in everlasting death, and what have they done, or what 
 ean they do to merit such pain? The answer to the first enquiry is? 
 “The wicked shall bé turned ‘into hell, and all the nations that 
 forget God”—Ps. ix, 17. This hell is called the bottomles pit— 
 Rev. ix, 1, & xx, 1—A lake of fire—Rev. xx, 14, 15. In this 
 dreadful hell the Saviour says: “Their worm dieth not, and the. 
 fire is not quenched.”—Mark ix, 48; and all this is to be eternal ac+ 
 cording to Christ’s own words, Mat. xxv, 46. ‘The wicked in thé 
 morning of the resurrection shall be raised up with unwasting bodi- 
 ly sensibilities to be cast into the lake of fire, where their worm 
 that dieth not, like a rapacious vulture, shall devour all their mental 
 enjoyments, and make their inward horror a match for their out- .. 
 ward burningsover them despair will hover, and by the flapping ~ 
 of her raven wings, foretel to them an endless eternity of woe! 
 Fancy to yovrelves that you are standing beside a pit that has 
 ho bottom, and that the laws of gravitation continue in the same 
 direction unchangably, and begin to drop balls into it, and con- 
 tinue dropping them, at the rate of one every minute for six thous- 
 and years, then calculate the distance travelled by the’ first, 
 and then the setond, and go on unto the last, and add their distane . 
 ces together—then drop in another; and the period will comie in no™ 
 very distant point of eternity, when the last ball will have penetra- 
 ted farther into the abyss, than the aggregate of all the rest. Views 
 ing the case of the wicked in the light of this supposed illustrae _ 
 tion, and estimating their quantum of misery by their moral dis- 
 tance from God, which is certainly the correct way ;' we see them 
 cast into the bottomless pit, (they as the balls) must continue to 
 progress in their journeying from God, and as they progress, their 
 misery must become more and more intense ; and the point will 
 come in eternity, when the last soul that may enter the abodes of 
 gorrow, shall have penetrated further into those regions of darkness, 
 than all the damned together had previous to its entrance; and itd 
 misery exceed the ageregate of theirs up to the time it entered: 
 This doctrine is farther supported by the fact, that all intelligent 
 creatures are related to the Deity by the laws of original obligation, 
 which require that the powers created, be constantly and perfectly 
 employed in obedience to the Creator; of the privileges of the 
 Covenant of Grace, which accepts of obedience through the 
 Redeemer, though man be an imperfect creature. At the Day of 
 Judgment the Saviour will give up the kingdom of his mediation, 
 to reign in his everlasting kingdom forever,— then the broad re 
 quirements of original obligation will fall upon man, and tho’ hesink 
 to hell they will rest upon him even there. —_ His inability to obey 
 cannot exonerate him, seeing that it arises from his willully per- 
 
wasting ta erime, and refusing pardon and regenetation, when they. 
 were freely offered him through the Saviour’s blood.. And even ia 
 the lake of woe, the obligations of obedience will be upon him 3 bee 
 ~ gause he is still a creature of God, and as such is bound to render 
 im perfect obedience. But all power to obey having been wasted 
 
  3n the rebellious course of sin, which brought him into that dreadful 
 
 place; the requirements of his Creator must remain uncom- 
 plied with, and consequently his guilt must increase forever, and 
 his punishment continue to augment for ever and ever. O how 
 ‘much will it weigh in never ending duration! Wretched, wretch 
 ed picture, whose brightest side is everlasting banishment from 
 God and the glory of his power! 
 
 Should any object that the bottomless pit is not the place where 
 the wicked are to spend eternity; it is only the place in which the 
 Old Serpent, and the souls of the damned, are kept under chains 
 ef darkness unto the Judgment of the Great Day; and that then, 
 with Death and Hell, they should be cast into a lake of fire. If 
 we admit this objection, it only tends to heighten the picture, as 
 the place in which capital offenders are confined, awaiting their 
 final trial, is less dreadful than the execution of the punishment 
 due to their crimes; and that the wicked are capital offenders in 
 the superlative degree is evident from the fact, their punishment 
 
 will be eternal. Having given a faint representation of what the 
 
 reprobates must suffer, we come to the second enquiry—-What 
 
 - have the reprobates done, or what can they do, to merit this feare 
 
 ful, this indiscribable torment? The answer, on Calvinistic prine 
 
  giples is very easy and direct. Their damnation was made unalr 
 _ terably certain from before the foundation of the world, and they 
 
 - gould no more help or prevent it than they could their being; aa 
 
 we have shewn in the foregoing part of our discourse. If this be 
 drue, and it is mest certainly, if Calvanigm be true, the damnation 
 of the reprobate does not arise from any thing he does or can do, 
 which he might leave undone, and therefore he is not the cause of 
 his destruetien in any sense; but on the sovereign will of God alone, 
 it depends, and man is no more to blame fer his destruction than he 
 ts for his existence. The specious pretext that the reprobates are 
 punished for their sins, is like drenching a man with ardent spirits, 
 and then burning him to death for being drunk. We think it abso- 
 lutely impossible to reconcile this doctrine with the common attri- 
 butes of humanity, much less the justice of an infinitely holy and 
 perfect God, which, in its association with the rest of the divine 
 perfections, receives from their commingled ‘effulzence the mild 
 and softening charms of glory. We need say nothing respecting 
 its hostility to mercy, which ever seeks to bind up the broken 
 heart—to dry up the tears of the mourner. 
 
 But it has been argued that all men are sinners by nature, and 
 
18 
 
 that it wonld be just in the Almighty to damn alls and if it be just | 
 to damn all it cannot be enjust to damn some. ‘To this we. an« 
 swer, that although all men have become depraved and sinful, 
 through the transgression of Adam, yet it would be the height of 
 injustice.to damn them for that depravity. For as they never had 
 it in their power to prevent it, they cannot be in fault for having it! 
 And was there no way provided to save man from this unavoida- 
 ble depravity, we hesitate not to say that justice, enabled by pre= 
 Science to see the fate of man, would have prevented the existence 
 of the buman family. 'T> punish man for his unavoidable depra~' 
 vity is precisely like banging a-man for being born blind. Bat it 
 has been further argued, that we-all sinned in Adam, and there-~ 
 fore are all guilty beiore God. We reply, we did not sin actively 
 or consciously, ahd it would be injustice to punish them actively 
 who sinned inactively— consciously, who sianed unconsciously; ads 
 mitting that such sin could exist.. But to come to the point, and 
 uncap the arcana at once; if God from all eternity unchangably 
 forecrdained whatsoever comes to pass—Adam’s sin came to pass$ 
 therefore, it was unchangably ordained, and he could no more 
 prevent it than he could his existence. jn 
 Would it be just to damn Adam, eternally, for his sin, seeing 
 he coald not prevent it; much less millions of his posterity who. 
 had no part in, nor control over it. Upon this rock, the great,” 
 the good, Mr. Whitefield foundered, by taking en board a Calva- - 
 nistic pilot, the Rev. Jonathan Edwards; and not being able to ex=_ 
 tricate hirnself, his matchless energies were paralyzed by the ano- ~ 
 ‘dyne of Calvinism. SS ae 
 Bat to put this point beyond the lingering of a doubt, we pro 
 ‘pose to shew that the original threatening, “in the day thou eatest: 
 thereof thou shalt surely die,” had no reference to Adam’s pos 
 terity, nor were they included in the threatened punishment. ‘The 
 time of the execution of this threatening was the very day of the 
 transgression; and the punishment was death. This threatening 
 was staid by the undertaking of the Saviour to die for man! and 
 when he fulfilled his undertaking, he did it by dying on the Cross 
 --fe shed his blood—-and to it we look for salvation from the 
 curse of a broken law—-ne died a temporal death; an inevitable 
 proof that temporal death was implied in the threatening; and if 
 so, Adam would have died temporally, as well as spiritually, the 
 very day he sinned, had not Christ interposed. ‘The body would 
 have fallen into the dust, and the soul into everlasting despair. 
 And as the union of the soul and body are indispensable to pro-cre- 
 ation; and as the body never could have had a resurrection if the 
 Saviour had not undertaken for mang for he is the resurrection as 
 well as the life, Adam could not have propogated his species ei- 
 ther ea earth er in hell, and there would have been an end to the 
 
> 
 
 % s il 
 
 Human race, Justice would have been satisfied in the eternal de- 
 _Struction of Adam and Kve; this was all she required, and ui she 
 
 Pa 
 
 had been left to flow in her own natural channel, would have ex- 
 tended no farther. And if her demand would have been satisfied 
 in their destruction, she never could have had any demand againsé. 
 their posterity—ihe punishment was confiued to them who sinned, 
 and tothemonlyw 4 Dili 
 
 Bat the scheme which the Calvanists call the “doctrines of 
 grace,” has a Saviour, who saved Adam from the penalty of the 
 
 law, to propogate his species, and bring into-existence niillions, 
 
 for whom this Saviour has made no provision threugh which they. 
 may be saved; for the transgression of Adam they must suffer 
 forever. ‘Fhe original transgression in the hand of justice, stern 
 mile oir ORFS le a 
 
 ustice, would have punished eternally but two, Adam and Eve 
 J 4 P y ’ g 
 
 for sin committed in their proper selves; but in the hand of Cale 
 
 vinistic mercy it is made todestroy millions who had no agency in 
 it, nor power to prevent, it; and this is called by way of eminence, 
 the doctrine of grace— grace a million times more severe thae 
 
 justice. 
 
 Having prepared the way by shewing that the doctrine of un- 
 conditional eternal reprobation, which is the inevitable consee - 
 quence of unconditional eternal election, cannot be reconciled 
 with the Divine perfeetions, we proceed to prove that every 
 
 _ Man has something to do in order to be saved in Heaven. 
 The Saviour said wato his disciples, “Go ye into all the 
 
 a 7 
 
 world, and preach the gospel toevery creature; He that believeth 
 
 and is baptized, shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be 
 
 damned.” “Mark xvr. 15,16. This is the burden of all the A- 
 postles of Christ, and their successors were to preach unto the end 
 of the world. And if the Saviour meant what he said, and to 
 say he did not, would be to charge the God of truth with dissimu- 
 jation, surely men are lost because they refuse to believe the record 
 which God hath given of his Son. The same doctrine is taught 
 
 “in the following texts: ‘And as Moses lifted up tie serpent in the 
 wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up; that who- 
 
 soever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.” 
 
 John mm. 14,15. And verse 18. “He that believeth on him is 
 not condemned; but he that believeth, not is condemned already, 
 because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten 
 Son of God.” In these texts it is plainly declared that eternal 
 
 life is obtained through faith in the Son of God. 
 
 And that condemnation is the conssquence of unbelief: In 
 verse 16, it is said: ‘God so loved the world that he gave his on- 
 ly begotten Son that whosoever believeth in him should not pe- 
 rish, but have everlasting life.” These texts prove clearly that 
 men are to be saved through faith, And in John, v. 24, “Verily, 
 
BZ oe 
 
 ‘verily, Tsay unto you, Te that heareth my word, and believeth on 
 him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come unte 
 condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.” And vi. 352 
 “And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life; he that cometh 
 to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall ne~ 
 ver thirst:” verse 40. “And this is the will of him that sent me, 
 dat every one which seeth the Son, and believe thon him, may have 
 everlasting life; and F will raise him up at the last day:” verse 47. 
 “Verily, verily, I say umo you, he that believeth on me-hath ever> 
 lasting life: chap. x1. 25,26. “Jesus said unto her, | am the re~ ° 
 surrection and the life; he that believeth in me though he were 
 dead, yet shall he live: And whesoever liveth and believeth in me, 
 shall never dieY’? Acts x.43« “To him gave all the Propbets wits, 
 pess, that through bis name, whosoever believeth in him shall re=. 
 ceive remission of sins.” In all these places it is clearly de- 
 clared that man must believe in Jesus Christ ia order to be saveds, 
 and thatif he believe he shall be saved; but if he believeth not he 
 shall be damned; and this is not only the doctrine of the Saviour, 
 but all the Prophets gave witness to the same truth: It is at once 
 the doctrine of the Old and New Testament. - ) 
 
 No temporal salvation is here meant, for eternal salvation is. 
 elearly expressed. That eternal salvation can only be obtained 
 through faith, will further appear, from the fact, that pardon and 
 regeneration are obtained through it. See Rom.v. 1. ‘*There- 
 fore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our 
 Lord Jesus Christ.” Here the justification which is followed by 
 peace and joy, and which enables its possessor to rejoice in hope 
 of the glory of God, is obtained through faith. And in Ephs. 1, 
 8, it is said: “For by grace are ye saved through faith.” This 
 galvation which is of grace through faith, is described in verse 10: 
 —‘“Created in Christ Jesus unto good works.” This text 
 proves that regeneration is obtained through faith; and it is saidy 
 Heb. xr. 6: “Without faith it zs impossible to please him; for he 
 that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a ree. 
 warder of them that diligently seek him.” This text authorizes 
 us te conclude that if any are saved without faith they are not 
 saved “according to the good pleasure of his will,” and saved with- 
 out coming to Christ, which is impossible. See John v. 40. 
 
 We might speak of Abraham’s being justified by faith, and of 
 many others who were saved by faith, but thinking that it would 
 be unnecessary to add any thing more on this point, we proceed 
 ro show hew this doctrine of faith stands connected with the deci- 
 sions of the day of judgment, and thereby sweep away the last 
 hiding place of finished salvation from before the foundation of 
 #he world. ii a 
 
 If it be objected that faith is net mentioned ia connexion with 
 
1s. 
 
 “he decisions of the Bay of Judgment, as forming any point om 
 which they turn, and therefore cannot stand connected with eter 
 nal salvation as a condition: We answer, that although faith is not 
 mentioned, yet works are; and those works too which flow from 
 @ living faith are rewarded with everlasting life: Viz. Feeding the 
 hungry, and ‘clothing the naked. See Matt. xxv. 34, 46.—- 
 ‘These are the works which James brings to prove the existence 
 or life of faith: James 11. 14, 26. If feeding the hungry, clothing 
 the naked, and doing other good works, acceptabdle to God, prove 
 a man a true believer in Christ, and they evidently do, for without 
 faith it is impossible to please God in any thing—“for whatsoever: 
 as not of faith is sin,” Rom. xiv. 23; they will prove in the 
 Day of Judgment, if they shall be found written in the Books, 
 that he had been a believer on Christ in the world, and give him 
 a right to claim the premise of eternal life, made to all who would 
 “believe on the only begotten Son of God. This is the light im 
 which works will be viewed in the Day of Judgment; proving that 
 moan is saved by grace through faith. ' ' 
 
 But it may be argued that though faith is evidently required of 
 all as the condition of salvation, yet faith is the gift of Ged, and 
 none can have faith but those to whom he gives it; and if God 
 should not please to give faith, none can be saved; and thus God 
 saves sinvers upon a condition which depends on the Creator, and 
 mot on the creature. ‘This makes faith a part of salvation, and 
 ‘not the condition of it; for if there be any condition it must de- 
 pend on man’s agency. Butas this argument is the only remain- 
 ing prop on which the doctrine of unconditional election to eternal 
 life leans, we shall proceed to a more careful examination of it. 
 And to put this point to rest, we propose to prove, that the faith 
 which is essential to, and effectual in, the salvation of the soul, 
 gannot be the gift of God in every sense. ‘here are two de-~ 
 Scriptions of faith spoken of in the Gospel, which we do not class 
 with that which is made the condition of salvation! The faith 
 which gives the cold assent of the mind to the truth of revealed 
 religion, but does not move the heart to embrace the Saviour, which 
 does not work by love, nor purify the heart. This kind of faith Si- 
 mon had when he believed Philip’s preaching the things concern~ 
 ing the kingdom of God, and was baptised on it; yet he remained 
 in the gall of bitterness, and in the bonds of iniquity. See Acts, 
 wit. 18, 24. {t will hardly be contended by any that this descrip~ 
 tion of faith is the gift of God. 2. That which enables its pos~ 
 gessor to work miracles. ‘This faith is spoken of, Acts 111. 16, 
 where the miracle of restoring the lame man to perfect sound~ 
 ness, is recorded. Peter informed the astonished multitude, that 
 through faith in the name of Jesus, the man was made whole. 
 ‘This faith is the gift ef God in every sense. See I. Cor. xu. 95 
 
 * 
 
my 
 
 de 
 
 where those miraculous gifts which were given te but few, ant 
 not many of them to the same individual, are spoken of; and as 
 faith is classed among them, and is said to.be given to some indi- 
 viduals as their peculiar gift, we think it conclusive, that the 
 faith to work miracles which was given to but few, even in those 
 apostolic days, is there spoken of; and not the faith which is requi- 
 red of all men in order to be saved. ) 
 
 That this is not the faith which is required unto salvation, is farther 
 evident, from the fact, that some have had it who were not truly 
 the children of God. See Mat. vir. 22, 23. “Many will say to me 
 in that day, [the Day of Judgment,] Lord, Lord, have we not 
 prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils’ — 
 and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will 
 I profess unto them I never knew you.” Here are some who 
 east out devils in the name of Jesus, consequently they must have 
 believed in him; and yet the Saviour will profess unto them in the 
 Day of Judgment, that he never knew them: A elear proof that 
 salvation does not depend on’ this faith. That this kind of faith 
 was. given for the establishment and edification of the Church, 
 and not for the salvation of those blessed with it, is clear from the 
 preceding testimonies. Having shewn, we hope, to the satisfac- 
 tion of all, that neither of these descriptions of faith stands essen-, 
 tially connected with our salvation, we proceed to that which does. 
 ‘The faith which is requisite to salvation, is defined: Heb. x1. 1.. 
 *‘Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of | 
 things not seen.” . By this faith the Elders obtained:a good report, 
 and without it we cannot please God: See verses 2 and 6. In 
 this definition two things are specified, the union of which consti- 
 tute faith. 
 
 1. The substance of things hoped for. The word, (says Dr. 
 A. Clark,) “which we translate substance, signifies snbsistence— 
 that which becomes a foundation for another thing to rest on.” 
 Mr. Wesley, and all the Commentators which I have examined, 
 render it subsistence; and there can be no doubt of this being the 
 true meaning. The things hoped for, of which faith is the sub- 
 sistence or foundation, are the peace and approbation of God, 
 and those blessings by which the soul is prepared for the king- 
 dom of Heaven: in a word, the salvation of God perfected in the 
 heart. And as the foundation is the beginning of every edifice, 
 so faith which is the subsistence. or foundation of salvation, must 
 be the beginning of it. ‘The many places ia the word of God, 
 where those blessed with salvation, are compared to temples and 
 edifices, simplify and support this view: And that faith in its first 
 degree, or part, is salvation begun in the heart, is clear, from the 
 many express declarations of the Saviour, which go to prove that 
 wan can do nothing good witkout the influence of the Spirit; such 
 
B 
 
 as, “Without me ye ean do nothing.” And if we eannot do any 
 thing pleasing to God without Divine influence, neither can we 
 without faith: And if we must receive Divine influence before 
 we can come to Christ, we must receive faith also. But this 
 grace or influence, which is the foundation or beginning of silva- 
 tion, is not the faith described by the Apostle; but only one part, 
 and this part we hesitate not to say, but we are ready to prove, 
 the gift of God. ayer ) ' 
 
 2. The evidence or eonviction of things not seen. This: part 
 of faith can in no sense be the gift ot God ; this is the part which 
 man as a rational being is called upon to perform. This convice 
 tion arises not from any sense either of body or mind 3 but from 
 evidence presented to the rational powers, going to prove that the 
 things exist. ‘The mind examines the evidences—-carefully 
 weighs them, and thus becomes acquainted with their force; the 
 rational powers perceive their weight, and receive the conviction 
 that the things exist. This is the only way that we can become 
 believers in any thing. But divine influence is necessary to evan- 
 gelical faith, because the mind of maa is naturally so blinded, that 
 he has no power to discern the things that are spiritual—See 1. 
 Cor. 1, 14. Aad as salvation isa spiritual science, he must have 
 spiritual discernment before he can comprehend its principles and 
 evidences, so as to become a belicver in it. But when he ree 
 ceives this influence or light, which isa part of faith as described 
 by the Apostle, he proceeds in the exercise of it as he does in the 
 exercise of those natural powers, by which he becemes a believer 
 in Astronomy or any natural science: man may be a believer in 
 natural sciences by the light of nature ; but he can not be a true 
 believer in Christ without the light of grace. 
 
 The conviction which is produced in the mind, which we call 
 faith in this sense, occupies the mean between doubt and sensation ‘ 
 of this kind is my conviction of London. The evidence which 
 has preduced this conviction is human testimony ; I have heard 
 many sav that they had been there—TI have read different accounts 
 
 of it—I have heard nothing contradictory, nor have I read any 
 
 thing ; | have therefore no doubt, and yet I could not swear that 
 there is such a place, because I have not seen it. But how 
 ‘did Larrive at this conviction? By examining the evidence ; had I 
 stopped my ears and refused to read, which I could have done, 
 this conviction would not have been produced. The strongest 
 degree of faith is to be free from doubt; to go farther than this is 
 intuitive perception; to stop short of it is iasome degree unbelief. 
 Faith in every case must be in proportion to the evidence perceiv- 
 ed by the miad, as the mind cannot reject that which it perceives. 
 ‘There may be many things which have a direct tendency to pre- 
 vent or hinder faith: But the way in which this is done, is by 
 
| ‘i. 
 
 greventing the mind from perceiving the force or weight of the evis 
 dences; for when they are perceived clearly by the mind, faith im 
 proportion will be the inevitable result. Butin order to this, the 
 evidences must be carefully examined and impartially weighed, 
 before the mind can perceive their force; and as a perception of 
 their force is indispensable to faith, he that refuses to divest him= 
 self of prejudices, and to give the subject a careful examination, 
 must die an unbeliever as sure as he lives. Faith in this respect 
 eannot be the gift of God; because it is the result of the rational, 
 powers weighing the evidences presented to the mind, and nething 
 alse ; and asthe evidence or conviction of things not seen, is 2. 
 part of faith, and as this conviction can only be produced in the 
 way just described ; and as this part is essential to the existence 
 ef the faith described by the Apostle, we say in conclusion, that 
 evangelical faith is part the gift of God, and part the act of the crea~ 
 gure, and that saving faith can no more exist without our part than 
 jt can without God’s. We might quote many authorities in support 
 #his view of faith, but its own rationality must recommend it. 
 Permit us to illustrate the subject by giving the case of two infi- 
 dels who agreed to write againstthe Bible; but in order to the 
 more successful completion of their tasks, they perceived it ne= 
 @essary to examine the evidence of its truth, that they might bring 
 what they had conceived to be the stronger evidence of its falsehood 
 against it with certain success. But the result was, when they had ex- 
 amined the evidence in favor of the Bible, & carefully weighed thena 
 & contrasted them with what they could collect against it—those im 
 favour far eutweighed those opposed, and they became believere 
 3m revealed religion, and wrote in its defence. These cases shew 
 precisely how the mind arrives at faith. We could add that faith 
 48 spoken of as our own act, and not as the giftof God. We are. 
 20 where commanded to pray for taith ; and if faith be altogether 
 the gift of God, of all gifts it would be the most important-—surely 
 mercy would have left some encouraging premise—surely some 
 ef the saints of old would have sought this gift by prayer; 
 but no such promise can be found—no such prayer can be seen. 
 ‘The disciples did pray, Lord increase our faith: a prayer going 
 farther than this cannotbe found. We fear that there are many 
 waiting for what they call the gift of faith, and sinning against God 
 by not improving the grace which they have received. The last 
 @bjection that can be brought against the doctrine contended for 
 ander this head of our discourse, is, that as part of faith is the gift 
 ef God; and as faith cannot exist without that part, none can have. 
 - faith except those to whom God gives that p2rt, and if God withholds 
 it, those from whom it is withheld cannot be saved. We will give 
 this objection a passing thought, in which we pledge ourselves to 
 grove that all that is neeessary on the part of God to give, to ena» 
 
. opti -» : {7% 
 
 bie man to believe to the salvation of his soul is given to every many. 
 
 - and this sweeps away the last retreat of this deadly Antinomian er- 
 ror. ‘The reason why none can believe in Christ without divine 
 influence, we have already shewn, and also the nature of that in- 
 fluence. We now proceed to redeem our pledge, that this influ- 
 ence is given to every man, John viii, 12. “Iam the light ef the. 
 world.” We must understand the world here, to be the intellec- 
 tual world; and in Jobnr, 9, it is said that Christ is the true light 
 ‘which lighteth every man who cometh into the world: And in ‘Tj- 
 tus, li: “The grace of God that bringeth salvation hath ap- 
 ‘peared unto all men.” [flight is given.to every man, and the 
 grace which brings salvation hath appeared unto all men 3 and itis 
 is ven so if the Bible be true, and if it be not true, we will dis- 
 miss. the subject, andsay, let us eat drink and be merry, for to= 
 morrow we die—all mien are in a state in which they can take the 
 frst step; or im other words, believe the first necessary truth ; 
 and if this grace be improved and this truth believed, this exer- 
 cise of faith will be a means through which more grace will be re- 
 ceived 5 this grace will give ability to believe other truths through 
 which an increase of grace will be given, and this increase of grace 
 will prepare fora stronger exercise of faith, and this stronger ex- 
 ercise of faith will receive more grace, and thus we are raised high- 
 er and higher, if we improve the grace we receive, until we are 
 ‘enabled to lay: hold of all the fulness of Christ. From the prece~ 
 _ ding-premises, we think the conclusions fair and undeniable, that 
 every man in the world has something to do to be saved, and that 
 he can believe ail that God has made necessary to his salvation ; 
 and that election to eternal life is conditional in the case of every 
 man—depending on that faith which every man has power to ex- 
 ercise if he improve the grace whichis freely given him, but which 
 no man can be coerced into in any way, because it can only be ob- 
 tained by the voluntary consent of the mind, exercising itself in 
 
 es 
 
 - weighing the evidences in the case, and judging of them-with im- 
 
 partiality, as we have seen.in the preceding investigation of this sub- 
 CCE. + :4 Pe SY 
 tisecins then that men are not lost because the Lord has made 
 no way for their salvation, we present the reasons given by our 
 . Saviour why men are lost: “And ye will not cometo me that 
 ye might have life.’-—John v, 40. “Ye stiffnecked and uncir-. 
 cumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost; 
 as your fathers did se do ye.”—Acts vii, 51.. “QO Jerusalem, Je- 
 rusalem, thou that killest the Prophets and stonest them which were 
 _ sent unto thee, how offen would I have gathered thy children to- 
 
 _ gether, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and 
 ‘ye would not.”—Math. xxiii, 37.—* Say unto them, 4s I live 
 saith the Lord God, 1 have no pleasure in the death of the wicked 5 
 
 C 
 
 e 
 « 
 
‘ | mt yal a ¢ bv e : 2 
 Lo, ote pte. 
 ‘ ” ' ; *, Spee . 
 
 oe 
 
 ‘ , 4 * . ae on 
 but thc the wicked turn from a sway, and | ING 4. turn Vex turn 
 ye, from your evil ways 5 for why will ye dic, O house. of Israel?” 
 Ezek. xxxiii, 11. From these declarations of the Saviour it is ‘still 
 further evident that the reason why. man is not saved i is in the man, 
 and not in God ; and that 1 man anight remove it and submit to be 
 saved by grace. ‘ 
 
 ~Barit may be asked, if man abtains Bony by using ‘the means 
 ot erace, will not this make a discordant note in heavent, ‘Man be- 
 ing saved in part by what he had done? We reply,.man 1s nos 
 saved by what he does; nor, for what-he does; but by grace through 
 what he does—that the conditions required -haye mo legal nor ab- 
 
 stract Merit in them will appear evident from. the following. con- 
 a Heute’ : Man has nothing independent -of: his Maker :. man 
 ean set up no independent claim to any thing he has in pos- 
 session—l"or “the earth is the Lord’s and the fulness ihereof. Pee 
 Ps. xxiv, 1.—For every beast of the fores st 1s mine, and the cate 
 ona Heeadd hills,’—-Ps, L, 10.—-“The heavens. are thine, the 
 earth also is thine, as for the world and the fulness thereofy thou 
 hast founded them.”—Ps. uxxxix, 11, Hall things in heaven and 
 earth are the Lord’s, man can never bring his Maker under any © J 
 ligations by giving him any thing in the world; this. would be to” 
 give him that which is already his, and to bring lim in debt. there 
 by. From this. view we see that ‘the King has no more to giv 
 exchange for heaven than the poor peasant. 
 
 Nor can man merit any thing, by what he can do ;: for all the 
 powers of his body and soul, are created powers ; and. as all things 
 were created for the Gredion and not for the creature, (see C Cok. 
 1, 16.,) the body and. soul of man are the entire property of God, 
 and therefore man can never bring the Almighty under obligations, 
 by employing the powers of either or both in his service... From 
 these Considerations it appears, that if man had never. fallen, he 
 ‘could. do nothing to merit that salvation which is eternal. ile, 
 
 But’ since the fall what can man do tomerit s salvation | > He has 
 no power to keep the law—no heart. to love God ; but ” carnal 
 mind thatis enmity against God, (see Rom. viii, 7: \—until i itis. re- 
 newed by divine grace: And the Saviour says. expressly, ‘that 
 after we have done all that we can do, we are.unprofitable servants. 
 —-Liuke xvii, 10. We conclude from these facts that man can . 
 not merit heaven on any ground, whatever, and the fore canuot’ ae 
 glory,in any thing but the free gre ace of our Lord a 
 ‘Jesus Christ. , ete t 
 We have een the more particul in giving. har y . ‘i 
 point, | because we haye been ica charged by our opponents | 
 with holding the very. reverse—-notwithstanding | this point has b be 
 ‘clearly set forth in all the standard-works. of. our. Church. —s 
 Alechodist Dis. page i, Art. 9,—_We are “accounted. rg rt 
 
 ae? aR, 
 
Ft OT os pe ted j 
 
 1 me 4 % Re Leh y 
 before God, only for the merit of ofr Lord and Saviour Jesus 
 Christ by feith, and not for oir own works or deservings. Where- 
 fore, that we are justified by faith only; is a- most wholesome doc- 
 , that we are j faith only, 3 , 
 
 trine, and very full of comfort? cae 
 And yet we have something to do; though we cannot buy sal- 
 vation We can supplicate grace, and we must beg for mercy in the 
 name of dur Lord Jesus Christ. And we must beg it too, relying. 
 alone on the merits.of his death; and not upon our prayers in any 
 sense. These works give man no room to glory, save in the cros% 
 "OR Christ 3, for surely no man ever gloried in being a beggar,—ifhe 
 did, few, very few envied his crowa of rejoicing; And uoprofita-. 
 ble. as these works must be*to God; and dishonourable as they may 
 Seem to the unrenewed heart of man, we see the infinite wisdom 
 of God, in fixing them as the condition of our salvation. For as 
 the dark empire of sin; which commenced in Eden was found- 
 ed in pride, and-superstructed by believing a lie; so believing, 
 the truth opens those doors through which the prisoners may es- 
 cape to the.shadowing Rock. Yea, it grasps the dark pillars and 
 Collossian tewers of the kingdom of night; and sinks and buries 
 them in the primeval shadows of the nether world, never, never to 
 “rise: And humility annihilates the foundation [pride.] ‘Thus all is 
 . gone—the kingdom of darkness removed, and a flood of day; from 
 the light of life poured down, which kindred earths with heaven! 
 “OQ! the depth of the riches, both of the wisdom and knowledge of 
 POUR Ne aa? WAS a , 
 © This brings us to the third thing proposed, to shew in what 
 sense the doctrine of unconditional election and reprobation is true: 
 _in-order to this we proceed to prove— 
 _ 3. That those texts of Scripture, which speak of unconditional 
 election have no relatien to eternal glory ; but to time privileges, 
 
 : which may be so abused as to incur the Divine displeasure, and 
 bring down eternal destruction on those blessed with them ; and 
 
 that those who are unconditionally reprobated, may, nevertheless, 
 come at last; to life eternal: Pas, 
 This to some, will appear a task impossible: But the Scrip- 
 __. tures cannot lie 3 and therefore cannot be a system of contradic- 
 tions ; but one grand chain of Truth and Light, let down from 
 leaven, on W men may ascend to that glory, which flows in 
 “pirennial str is; from the eternal THrone, emblazoned with the 
 lé brightness of Errrnity. | vy 
 ithose texts will not admit of a zecohéiliation with the 
 _ doctrine contended for under the last head, we will have. to re- 
 _ Concile those texts which were brought to support the doctrine of 
 conditional election to eternal life, with the doctrine of uncondi- 
 election : this we have seen is impossible. . We proceed to 
 
 es one’ that the other is not only possible, but easy and natural: 
 
Sra g ‘4 q 
 20 ii : 
 : ‘i 8 Be 
 
 “Some may tremble for this promise ; but we shall redeem it to the’ 
 satisfaction of every unprejudiced mind—and even prejudice. shall 
 iremble, though it may not fall. All this we fully expect to ac~ 
 eomplish in the sequel of our discourse. te es ' sa 
 
 The first passage to which we will eall your attention, is, Rom. 
 vill, 29, 30.—“For whom ‘he did foreknow, he also did predesti- — 
 nate to be conformed 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 : and whom he called, them he al- 
 so justified: and whom he justified them he also glorified.” The 
 ‘ealling, justification, and ‘glorification’ here ‘spoken of, which a- 
 rose from the foreknowledge and predestination of God, had all ta- 
 ken place previous to the time in which the Apostle wrote this 
 
 _ Epistle; for they are all spoken of in the present tense [time;] and 
 are therefore too restricted to be applied to the calling, justification 
 and, glorification of ‘the elect, many of whom ate yet to be called, 
 justified and glorified. — 3 | : 
 
 The true meaning of this calling, &c. will be better understood, 
 if we take into view the subject the Apostle had under considexa- 
 tion. He is here ‘vindicating the Divine economy in calling the 
 Gentiles to partake with the Jews of the privileges of Christianitys 
 and establishing the Gentiles, in the hope of their ‘calling, by shew- _ 
 ing them that God purposed to call them to these privileges, even 
 when he called Abraham. In order to this, we must take into 
 
 view the state of the Church generally at that time, and of the 
 Church of Rome in particular. The Jews at first thought that 
 Christ would set up a temporal kingdom for their exclusive benefits 
 as they had always conceived themselves to be the elect of God, 
 and that all other nations were reprobates. And when they were 
 disappointed in this hope, many rejected the Saviour as an impos- 
 tor ; and even those who believed on him, still retained their for- 
 mer prejudices in favour of their exclusive claims, to all the bless- . 
 ings of the Covenant of mercy. This led them to reject the Gen- 
 tiles, as having no right to any of the blessings of christianity.— 
 That this was the state of the Church generally, is evident from 
 the fact, that a council was held at Jerusalem to decide this very 
 qiestion—See Acts, 15th ch. ‘The question was whether the 
 Gentiles, as Gentiles could be received into the Church, or must 
 they first become Jews by circumcision; and then as Jews, ap- » 
 proach the Saviour? The Jews had always received proselytes 
 from the Gentile nations, and still contended that they must. be 
 made Jews before they could be made christians. Hence the Jew 
 was unwilling to fellowship the Gentile, and the Gentile was 
 afraid to assert his privilege. as a member of the body of Christ-— _ 
 
 Thus was brotherly love banished from some of the churchess; a Me 
 
 Some members (the Jews) boasting of their fancied superiority, 
 
 \ 
 
wee U 
 Ns 
 
 _ “looked down on the others with contempt, while those who were 
 
 * thus contermed (the Gentiles) were led to doubt and fear; and 
 
 _ thus dejected were exposed.to many temptations. This was the 
 
 situation of the Church at-Rome when Paul wrote hig Epistle to 
 
 the Romans. ‘These were the circumsiances in which he wrete, 
 
 ' and if we carefully examine tlie Lpostle, we shall find that this ques+ 
 tion is the burden of the first eleven’chapters. 
 
 The Apostle introduces the Epistle by informing the Romans, 
 that he was called to bé an Apostle, and that by Jesus Christ, he 
 and the other Apostles had received grace, and an Apostleship unto 
 all nations —Ch. 1, 1—5. Paul had never been at Reme when 
 he wrote this Epistle. Fromthis fact we may at once discover one 
 of his leading designs, to’ prepare the Gentiles to receive him when 
 he:should come unto them with the offer of life. This he does 
 by shewing the Gentiles that they were as favourably related to 
 
 - God as the Jews were—See Chs. 3 and 4; and at the same time 
 reproves the Jews for their arragating to themselves the exclusive 
 privileges of the covenant of grace. Inch. 3, and from v. 9—31, 
 he shews the Jews clearly and irrefragably that they were no bet- 
 ter than the Gentiles, notwithtandiag their boasted privileges. 
 
 He also shews them that salvtion was not by the works of the 
 
 daw; but by faith—Verses 28-9, He says: ‘Therefore we con+ 
 ~~ ¢lude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. Is 
 the the God of the Jew only? is he not ako of the Gentile? 
 Yes of the-Gentiles also,” (v. 30.) ‘Seeing itis one God which 
 shall justify the circumcision by faith, and the uncircumcision 
 though faith.” He then shews that even Abraham was justified 
 by faith and not by the Law. See ch. iv, 33 and that salvation 
 was. through faith, that it might by grace, to the end, that the 
 ‘promise might be sure to all the seed, not to that only which 
 is of the law (the Jewish nation,) but that also which was of 
 the faith of Abraham [the Gentile world] who is the father of us 
 all. ‘The argument is continued (in .v 17,) by shewing, that 
 the original promise made to Abraham, Gen. xvii, 5, included 
 the Gentiles ;. for Abraham was promised that he should be the 
 father of many nations; not one nation, (the Jews,) but many 
 nations; consequently, it was the original design of the AL- 
 m@HTY to extend salvation furtherthan the nation of the Jews— 
 
 e also shews that the Gentiles who were thus provided for in 
 the covenant of mercy could.be saved without being circumcised, 
 and taking upon them the yoke of the law ; for Abraham was jus- 
 
 : tified before he was circumcised, and he received circumcision as 
 * the séal of the’ righteousness of faith which ke had, yet being un- 
 7 ‘circumcised, that he might be the father of all them that believe, 
 _« though they be not circumcised ; that righteousness might be im- 
 
 puted unto them also—And thatthe dews could not be saved with~ 
 
Av 
 i an 
 ” 
 
 * 
 out walking’ ta his steps;, as he was  gaved by faith, ‘they must be- 
 
 vaved in the’samie way. or they could not be his sted. gs 
 to the prounse, —Sée thoivye. 11 Sn ee 
 
 In the 5. ehs he showed the nature of this justification by faith, © 
 
 to which both Jew and Gentile wight atiain peace with God,—. 
 which enables its possessor to rejoice, even in tribulation—and that 
 
 much higher attainments might be had, ‘and higher privileges en- 
 
 joyed, he infers from the goodness of God i tn sending bis Son to 
 die for the worid of the si SN and thus encourages them, (both 
 Jew and Gentile) to seek after more of the divine life ; assuring 
 them that God, who withheld not his Son, pes Rely. give them 
 all things. 
 
 Inch. 6 he shews’ this’ salvation’ to be, not bily a salvation 
 from guilt, but also from the’ corruption of fallen nature.’ This 
 regeneration he called a death to sin, and a life to righteousness— 
 Tt exonerated from the bondage of corruption, that they might 
 bring forth fruit unto holiness, the end of which is everlasting 
 hie. ‘ 
 
 In ch. 7. he shews the design of the law, and itie nature of our 
 exercise of mind, when through the law we become convinced — 
 of sin, and ofthe im possibility of being saved by any thing we cat 
 do—We are ee to ery out “O wretched man that I: ‘am, who 
 shali deliver me from the body of this death.” He concludes this 
 
 chapter’ by giving’ thanks to God who giveth the” victory 
 through Jesus Christ. The 8th chapter commences with describe 
 ing the happy. state of salvation thus obtained through Jesus Cl brist- 
 It is here placed in lively contrast with the horrors of the state de- 
 scribed in the preceding chapter. ‘They are now made free, by 
 the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus ; from the law of sin 
 and death, and not by the Jewish law, which was weak through the 
 flesh, not having power to renew the heart, and therefore could. 
 not save from mbred corruption. But this salvation which is 
 obtained through the redempuon of Jesus Christ, and wrought by. 
 the agency of the spirit, extended to the renewing of the. 
 heart; and thereby gives man ability to fulfil the law, by walking 
 after the spirit. He continues to speak of this happy state of grace 
 which is more clearly deseribed here than in any other part of the 
 sacred records we have noticed, until he comes to the 17th verse, 
 where he makes mention of some of those afflictions to which they 
 were exposed:—he encourages them to bear up under their weight,” 
 assuring them that the Divine spirit would aid their infirmities, ae 
 that all those things should work for gaged to those who are called 
 according to the purpose of God, and assures them that they were 
 called according to his purpose tn the words now-under considera-_ 
 tion—“ For whith he did foreknow,” &c.- 
 We have been the more ‘prolix in our observations on ‘i 
 
 7 
 
 f) 
 
snail 
 
 , ae oe b meat at Me ara ‘a ee ee eae SD An 
 ee ee ae ee Os, Ki 
 . ® 5 . 
 
 t a 
 
 previous part of this Mpistle, thatwe mighthave a ‘clear view of 
 the *Aposile’s design; and. this we think we have clearly seen. 1. 
 /Phat there was no. difference between. the Jew and Gentile; jor 
 
 & 
 
 they were both sinners beforé. God. 2.. That salvation is by faith 
 
 to both Jew aud Gentile, apd not by the law, as the Jews believed; 
 jor Abraham. wasesaved by faith. 3. That the. Gentiles were in- 
 cluded inthe promise made.to Abraham; and that they were as 
 favorably related to God.as the Jews were, having as ready ac- 
 cess to God by faith asthey.. 4. That the Gentiles were now 
 called to partake of the blessings of the covenant of mercy, accor- 
 ding ‘to the original design of God, which had been expressed in 
 uhe promise made to-Abrahaw. © 
 
 _ He then foreknew the Gentiles, and then predestinated those 
 whom he knew would believe, to be conformed to the image of 
 his Son, and those whom he foreknew, [the Gentiles,] he also 
 
 » called by the preaching of the,Gospel; and those that believed he 
 
 justified treely, through the redemption that is in Jesus; and those 
 that he justified he also glorified, by taking some to Heaven, and 
 rendering many others illustrious, by dignifying them with the 
 privileges of the Church of Christ... This is the true meaning of 
 this;passage; and I am bold to say, that to apply this text to indi- 
 vidual and eternal election, is a gross perversion of the Apostle’s 
 caning... 3 
 
 ‘But it may be said that the word to glorify, means salvation in 
 seaven ; and therefore our solution is not correct. To this we 
 answer in the words of Dr. A. Cuarx. “The word Doxa, which 
 we, render elory, and Dexazoo to glorify, both mean to render 
 wlustrious, eminent, Sc. &c. in Various parts of the New Testa- 
 ment; and in this sense the verb is used in John xii. 4—xi. 23, 
 28-—x111. 31, 32—xIv. 13—xv. S—xx1. 1!.—Acts mr. 13, and 
 in Romans. x1. 13, in none of which places eternal beatification 
 can be intended.” Having thus shewn that it was God’s purpose 
 to eall the Gentiles to salvation through Jesus Christ, and that this 
 
 » purpose had been maintained and accomplished by the Almighty, 
 
 he concludes. that God is certainly for them,. [Gentiles:} sud if 
 God be for them, he enquires; who can be against them? Ii God 
 spared hot his own Son, but gave him freely for their redemption, 
 Tyaleyt ele withhold?—-Surely nothing that is needful to support 
 
 * them under the weight of the great figbt of affliction that was 
 
 daily coming upoa them; with this support none of these things 
 should, be able to separate them from the love of Christ Jesus, 
 
 but they should be so overruled as to work for their good.— 
 
 ‘These conclusiong close the chapter. . 
 
 He commences the 9th chapter by preparing the minds of the 
 p ARE for what- he was abont to declare, more clearly, viz: That 
 God had rejected the Jewish nation because of their unbelief. 
 
 = 
 ae 
 { 
 \ 
 
2 
 
 rh 
 
 This he does by expressing his sorrow for his brethren, his kins- 
 men, according tothe flesh, in the most affectionate manner, ‘Sec 
 verses 1,2, 3 That “he might the more ‘successfully convince 
 the Jews that God had rejected ‘them, "he shews them that they 
 were mistaken in claiming the’ blessmgs of the Covenant. on the- 
 ground of being “the natural descendants of Abrabam; and that 
 the children of the promise were accounted for the seed. ‘This. \ 
 he does in the most masterly mabner, by shewing that Abraham’s 
 seed were not all embraced in the promises but in Isaac should 
 his seed be called: This was an unanswerable argument, for A-- 
 braham had seven other sons, and they were: all excluded; and | 
 one of them was heir to the Patriarchal inkeritance. Abraham. 
 willed that Ishmael his first born should be. the heir; but the At- 
 miGuTy said in Isaac shall thy seed be called. ‘This. was a sove- 
 reign act of the Deity; and if seven-eigths of Abraham’s imme- 
 diate descendants were excluded who had done no wrong, what 
 gould the rebellious and stiff-necked Jews expect, on the ground 
 ef being Abraham’s children? Their claim before the force of 
 this argument, vanishes like the mist before the rising sun. _ 
 
 This sovereignty of Jenovan was. farther. manifested in the 
 ehoice of Jacob, and the rejection of Esau; and that the seed ac- 
 eording to the flesh was not heir to the promise, does most clearly, 
 appear from this case also; for Esau was Isaac’s son, his elder 4 
 the heir to the Patriarchal inheritance—yet Jacob, the young 
 was chosen, and Esau, the elder rejected. But as the case of 
 Jacob and Esau is particularly religd on by the Calvanists to sup- 
 port their decrine, we shall gve it a more particular consideration.. 
 ‘Fer the children being not yet born,” &c. oe, 
 
 In our previous observations on the Apostle’s design in this K- 
 pistle, we saw that he was speaking of nations, and not of indi- 
 viduals—of time privileges—not of eternal beatitudes; and these: 
 we propose to show are his subject and design still. That we 
 may have the best and clearest possible view of this subject, we 
 refer to Gen. xxv. 23. “And.the Lord said unto her, [Rebecca,]. 
 Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be 
 separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger 
 than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger.”—. 
 Here nations and not individuals, are not only meant but ‘clearly 
 expressed; and.as the Apostle is arguing. a national question, we 
 kesitate not to say, he uses it in this sense, and this only. ‘This 
 will appear more evident from the fact, that it is not true when ap- 
 plied to individuals; and surely none will charge the Apostle with 
 so base a perversion of God’s word, as to make an application of 
 it which would destroy its truths. i 
 
 We say in an individual application it is not truae—Esau did not 
 #erve Jacob, but the reverse; Jacob served Esau. See Gen. xxee 
 
25 
 
 4, and xxxit. 3, 13, where Jacob acknowledges Esau to be his 
 Lord, first'in his servants, and then in bis own person; and bowed 
 himself seven times to the ground inobeisance to him. Nor does 
 it appear that Msau’s immediate posterity served Jacob or his de- 
 scendents. Jacob and his children were poor, shepherds, and 
 went down into Egypt for bond-men; while Esau’s sons were 
 twelve Dukes in the land of Edom. But this servitude is true, 
 nationally, for the Jews were a much greater nation than the tdom- 
 ites, the descendants of Esau, and exercised dominion over them, 
 particularly in the days of Davin and Sotomon. And as this 
 text is true, only in a national application, it cannot be used m 
 truth jn any other sense; and as the Apostle spoke as he was mo- 
 ved by the Holy Ghost, he could not lie, and therefore could not 
 have used it in apy other light. | : 
 
 Nor is the love and hatred here spoken of individual love and 
 hatred. This does not only appear from what has been said, but 
 from the fact, that the prophet whom the Apostle quotes, speaks 
 of nations, and not individuals. ‘Was not Esau Jacob’s brother? 
 saith the Lord; yet I loved Jacob and | hated Esau, and laid his 
 mountains and his heritage waste for the dragous of the wilderness. 
 Whereas Edom saith, We are impoverished, but we will return 
 and build the desolate places; thus saith the Lord of hosts, They 
 “shall build, but I will throw down; and they shall call them, The 
 border of wickedness, and, The people against whom the Lord 
 hath indignation forever.” Mal. 1. 2,—4. ‘That God never ha- 
 ted Esau as: an individual is still further proven by the promise 
 that his ‘dwelling should be the fatness of the earth, and of the 
 dews of Heaven from above.” See Gen. xxvi1. 39. Nor is the 
 love and hatred here spoken of eternal: For it must be acknow- 
 ledged by all who have read the Scriptures, that many of the 
 Jews were eternally Jost: St. Paul tells us of twenty-three thou- 
 sand who fell in one day under the ancer of God. See 1. Cor. 
 x. 5—-8. And the Saviour told the self righteous Pharisees, ‘That 
 
 many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down 
 with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, in the kingdom of Heaven, 
 but the children of the kingdom, [the Jews] shall be cast out.” 
 See Mat. vir. i1, 12. Again. The Lord declared that he 
 would laugh at their calamity, and mock when their fear should 
 come. See Prov. 1. 26, and Isaiah txv. 12. 
 
 It cannot be necessary to add any thing more to prove that ma- 
 ny of the Jews were lost; this would have beep admitted by many 
 without argument. We have most certainly proved that this love 
 was not an eternal love, but a love that bestowed time blessings, 
 which were so abused as to bring down the eternal displeasure of 
 God. The hatred of Esau was not an eternal hatred, though 
 “Malachi says Edom is a people against whom the Lord hath in- 
 
 D 
 
26 
 dignation forever: For John, in the Revelation, tells us that he 
 saw an innumerable company, saved in white, before the thrones 
 and that in this company there were some from every nation, 
 Kindred and tongue under Heaven; consequently some of the E- 
 domites were saved. ‘This point is so clear that we will not pur- 
 sue the argument one step farther. 
 
 Frown the preceding view of facts, we see’clearly ‘that the elec- 
 tion hére spoken ef, is an election to time privileges, that may be 
 so abused as to incur the displeasure of God, and bring down his 
 wrath on those blessed with them; and this really did take place 
 in the destruction of many of the Jews: And that the reprobation 
 here tatght, is a reprobation or hatred, which deprived the Edom- 
 ites of those peculiar blessings with which the Jews were blessed ; 
 yet if the Edomites, [¢alled Esau,] would improve the smaller 
 privileges with which they were blessed, they could secure the 
 Divine favour, and get te Heaven, as many of them actaally did, 
 
  God’s‘hatred towards them notwithstanding. But ‘to apply this 
 ‘passage te the doctrine of unconditional election and reprobation 
 to eternal life and death, is foreign from the meaning of Gen. xxv 
 23, and Mal. 1. 5; and also the use the Apostle makes of it in this 
 place; and isa perversion which can only be excused on the ground 
 ‘of being ignorant of the Scriptures, and of the power of God. 
 The Apostle also shows that the Lord bestowed those blessings 
 @ecardiess of merit; for Jacob was confirmed in the covenant of pro- 
 »misein.the very act of deception and intrigue: See the account 
 ‘of Isaac’s’blessing Jacob, Gen. xxvii, 18,—30. 
 ' In verse 14, the Apostle enquires, “ Is there unrighteousness 
 with God?” Here he shews the Jews that God was not unright- 
 eous in rejecting them, as they might vainly think. He does this 
 by introducing the declaration made to Moses:— 
 “J will have mercy on whom J will have mercy; and ¥ 
 will have compassion on whom [ will have compassion.” verse 
 15. ‘This verse refers to Exodus, xxx, 19, which has refer- 
 ence to the sin of idolatry, that the Israelites committed in ma- 
 king and worshiping the golden calf; for which the Lord threatened 
 to destroy them, and ‘confirm the promise ir Moses. ‘* Now 
 therefore, let me alone, that my wrath may wax hot against them- 
 and that I may consume them; and I will make of thee a great 
 nation,” Exod. xxx11 10. Their destruction was respited lest the 
 Egyptians should rejoice, and say that the Lord had brought them 
 out of Egypt for mischief; but the Lord assured Moses that they 
 should not go unpunished; their names should be blotted out of his 
 Book. Nevertheless, his angel should go before them; but while 
 they were guided by the angel the Lord fulfilled his threatening, 
 by sending plagues on the people. The plagues wasted them gra- 
 qually until all who were guilty ef idolatry were destroyed. This 
 
27 
 
 gradual destruction gave time for their posterity to arise and take 
 their place, and thus the nation was kept from being extinguished. 
 And the Lord assured Moses, that this respite of their destruction 
 was not for their righteousness or his. prayers, but of sovereign 
 mercy. How pertinent and cogent is this argument, when taken 
 in connexion with the preceding part, of the E\pistle; and how ful- 
 iy does it overthrow the arguments of the Jews, that God acted 
 unrighteous in rejecting them: For if the Jews in the case of 
 daron’s calf had forfeited all claim to the Covenant of Promise, 
 as the Apostle clearly proved, even by Moses in whom they trust- 
 ed; and as they were then saved frem destruction by the sovereign 
 mercy of God; and as he would have been just in rejecting them 
 at that time, he could be so yet; seeing that they had continued 
 their idolatry, until they had become as bad as the Gentiles; yea, 
 even worse, for the name of God was blasphemed among the 
 Gentiles through them. See chap. 1. 24. From these facts, the 
 Apostle concludes: So then it is not of him that willeth nor of 
 him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.” The Jews 
 being the peculiar people of God did not depend on any thing 
 willed or sought after, by any, or all of them; for Abraham will- 
 ed that Ishmael should inherit the promise, and Isaac willed that 
 sau should be the heir; and Esau ran to get venison that he might 
 be confirmed in it. But God chose Isaac and Jacob contrary to 
 the will of Abraham and Isaac, and had continued the Jews as 
 his peculiar people, who had done nothing to merit this favor, but 
 much to call for the righteous displeasure of God in their destruc+ 
 tions . 
 
 These facts do not only justify the Almighty in rejecting the Jews, 
 but also in calling the Gentiles, who had equal claims with them; 
 but especially as those blessings were of the sovereign pleasure of 
 God, freely given to whomsoever he chose. 
 
 And te place this beyond all doubt, he introduces the case of 
 Pharoah, as being precisely similar to theirs. God had determin 
 ed to destroy all those who worshipped the calf, yet they were not 
 destroyed immediately, but spared for a time, and then destroyed 
 in a way to promote the Divine glory as we have seen. The Jews 
 who were’rejected, although they were not immediately destroyed, 
 should; like their fathers, in the case alluded to, certainly be at last. 
 And as Pharaoh, whose cup of iniquity was full, was raised up 
 from the plague of boils and blains; which had been sent to destroy 
 him, and his destruction respited to the overthrow in the Red Sea, 
 
 So the destruction of the Jews being respited, did not prove 
 ahat God had still designs of mercy towards them, as they no 
 doubt argued: For if God spared Pharoah, who was an enemy 
 to God, the Jews, and all righteousness, and thus saved him from 
 feeling the bitter pains of hell so soon as he otherwise would, they 
 could not conelude that they were stil] the favorites of Heaven, 
 
 ~ 
 
 Lenin Re sete nee 
 
28 
 
 because they were not yet cut off. The reason why God spared 
 Pharoah, was that he might shew his power, and that his name 
 might be déclared throughout all the earth; which was done in deli- 
 vering the Israelites, a feeble band, from the hand of Pharoah, and 
 destroying him and his powerful host in the Red Sea: And if God 
 saw that he could be more glorified by respiting the destruction 
 of the Jews to a future time, they must not rashly conclude that 
 they were still the favorites of Heaven. The Apostle concludes — 
 this argument: “Therefore he. will have merey on whom he will 
 have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.” en 
 
 It may not be amiss te spend a moment on the hardening spo- 
 ken of in this place. And as the hardening of Pharoah’s hearts 
 particularly alluded to, we would enquire what was the design of 
 it? It is manifest that Pharoah’s heart was not hardened with a 
 design to effect his damnation; and if it was not hardened for this 
 purpose, Calvinism derives no support from it. ‘This clearly ap- 
 pears from the fact, that Pharoab had committed the most aggra~- 
 vated sins, before God hardened his heart. Sims enough to damn 
 him forever; and such sins too, as hardly admitted of pardon.. 
 
 Witness his oppression of the Israelites, requiring of them the 
 full tale of brick when they were denied straw, and» beating 
 them, for not accomplishing impossibilities—putting all the male 
 children to death—horrid murderer! And when Moses and Aaron 
 delivered the message of God to him, he proudly replied: “Who 
 is the Lord that I should obey his voice, to let Israel go? I know 
 not the Lord, neither will I let Israel go.” All these. dreadful 
 acts of wickedness took place before the Lord hardened his heart; 
 and surely his cup of iniquity must have been full, or if not, op~ 
 pression, murder and blasphemy could not fill it. And if the cup 
 of iniquity was full, the hardening of his heart must have had re- 
 ference to something ether than his damnation. But we are not 
 left to conjecture on this subject; the design of the Almighty is 
 clearly expressed—That he might not let the Israelites go. . _And 
 thus the Lord would multiply his signs and wonders in the land of 
 Egypt; overthrowing all the Egyptian gods, and confounding all 
 the Magicians; and thereby prove that he was the Lord God, 
 ~ svhom all men should worship—the God of the whole earth. See 
 Exod. vu. 3—5. ‘ , 
 
 Again. It must be admitted by all, that repentance was neces- 
 sary in Pharoah in order that he might be saved; and if so, there 
 was no need to harden his heart to secure his destruction, for the 
 Saviour says: “No man can come to me except the Father which 
 hath sent me draw him.” John vi. 44. Repentance is coming to, 
 Christ; and if we cannot come to Christ except the Father draw 
 us, all that was necessary for the Lord to do in the case of Pha- 
 roah, was not.to draw him; this would have made his repentance. 
 
29 
 
 impossible, and his damnation inevitably certains From. this 
 view of the subject, we see also that the hardening of Pharoah’s 
 heart was unconnected with his eternal destruction. It is no 
 where said that God*hardened Pharoah’s heart against the calls and 
 iovitations of mercy3 nor is it necessary to harden any man’s 
 heart against them to effect his destruction; for if the Almighty 
 do not give them, eternal woe is certain in the case of every man ; 
 and to give those calls and then harden the heart against them, is 
 doing two things to accomplish that which would have been cer- 
 tain had neither of them been done; which to say the least, would 
 be acting very foolishly:—a charge which will hardly be made to 
 lay against the Deity—and in whatever point of light we view this 
 subject, we see that the hardening of Phareah’s heart was uncon- 
 nected with his everlasting destruction. r 
 
 And we. also see that it is not necessary to harden any man’s 
 heart to effect his destruction—all that is necessary forthe Lord to 
 do, is to withheld his spirit. But to give his spirit to soften and 
 draw the heart to him, that he may hardenit, is labour in vain, and 
 insincerity, with which the Deity cannot be charged—God har- 
 dens no man’s heart to damn him. 
 
 And while we see the Lord did not harden Pharoah’s heart to 
 effect his destruction ; we see that he done it in mercy to the 
 Jews, and to the world; for thereby the true God was made 
 known to all the earth—-and thus we see that God hardens the 
 heart through mercy to others, and not to destroy those hardened. 
 But to say that God hardens men to damn them, is one of the most 
 foolish and absurd notions that ever entered into the. bewildered 
 brain of man. 
 
 But as the case of Pharoah is often brought by the Calvinists te 
 support their doctrine, we shall give it a still further consideration. 
 ‘Shor the Scriptures saith unto Pharaoh, even for this same pur- 
 pose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, 
 and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.” 
 Rom. ix, 17. The Calvinists argue, God from eternity, in his un- 
 changable purpose, raised up Pharoah for the very purpose of 
 committing all the sins which he did commit ; and that he harden- 
 ed his heart with special reference thereto, and that he (Pharoah) 
 could no more help oppressing the Israelites, than he could his ex- 
 istence. If this view be correct, we cannot see how the Lord 
 could be just in punishing him? But the answer is at hand, in the 
 mouth of every Calvinist. But O! man, &c. as though they 
 were the infallible successors of the Apostle, and privileged to ap- 
 ply the retort given to the rebellious and unreasonable Jews, to eve~ 
 ry man who desires reasonable evidence for his faith to rest on. 
 But when we take a particular notice of the passage, we see that 
 the raising up, was not bringing Pharoah into existence, but rais- 
 
it 
 
 30 
 
 ing him up from the plague of boils and Blains, which was caleu- 
 
 lated to destroy him, and it would have done it, had not the Al- 
 
 inighty prevented the effect. But it may be argued that this: 
 eutting off from the earth was a future act, and therefore had noth- 
 ing to do with the boils and blains ; but was to take place in a 
 future time, as is seen atthe place.——Exod. ix 15. ! 
 
 If we admit this argument, it will not prove the point intended 
 
 by its supporters, for this might all be true, and Pharoah, one of 
 the elect. God raised him up from this view of the subject, as’ 
 also from the express words of the place, not to commit Stn, but 
 to be cut off from the earth by pestilence,—and surely aman might. 
 die of pestilence, and yet get to heaven. " an 
 
 We would be contented with this view of the passage, if it were, 
 
 not contradictory; for it proves nothing in favour of Calvinism; all’ 
 they build upon cet fall. Although it is expressly said, “For 
 now [ will stretch out my hand, that | may smite thee and thy 
 people with pestilence ; and thou shalt be cut off from the face of 
 
 the earth.’—Exod.ix, 15. Yet the Egyptians were not destroy- - 
 
 ed by pestilence, netther was Pharoah ; but him and his host were 
 drowned in the Red Sea. Dr. A. Cuarg says, (and better au- 
 thority we cannot get,) that this verse is not translated correctly. 
 He says: “In the Hebrew, the verbs are in the past tense, and 
 pot in the future, as our translation improperly expresses them, by 
 which means a contradiction appears in the text: for neither Pha- 
 raoh nor his people were smitten by a pestilence, nor was he by 
 any kind of mortality cut off from the earth.” ‘Af the words be 
 
 translated as they ought, in the subjunctive mood, or m the past — 
 
 instead of the future, this seeming contradiction to facts, as well as 
 all ambiguity, will be avoided—For if now | nan sTRETCHED OUT 
 (had sent forth my hand) and had smitten thee and thy. people with 
 the pestilence, thou SHOULDST HAVE BEEN cut off from the earth. 
 But truly on this very account have £ caused thee to supsisT, 
 that I micur cause thee to see my power, and that my name 
 micut be declared throughout all the earth; or im all this Lanp.” 
 This translation, which is no doubt the correct one, does not say, 
 nor even intimate that God raised up Pharoah to sin; but to shew 
 him his power, and to make his (God’s) name known throughout all 
 the earth. We will conclude our remarks on this passage with a 
 quotation from Dr. A. Crarx, which precisely cine tH 
 our own views, and whichis fully, and undeniably sustained, bythe 
 preceding arguments. ‘I'he sum of allis (speaking of a Calvinistic 
 Commentator whose words he quotes) that this man was raised up: 
 by God, in every sense, for God to shew his power in his destruc- 
 tion ; so man speaks, thus God has not spoken.” fi 
 The Apostle next introduces the Jews as replying to his argu- 
 ‘ment, “why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted. his will.” 
 Rom. ix, 19. 
 
 { 
 
3] 
 
 Ue replies, “But O1 man, who art thou,” &e, He shews 
 the Jews that their enquiries are vain, and their reply impertinent; 
 for although God had exercised his sovereign power in giving and 
 withholding his favour ; yet the sense in which he gave, and with- 
 held, did not necessarily make them virtuous or vicious: for he 
 had bestowed his favours on the Jews ‘and withheld them from 
 the Gentiles; and yet the Jews were as wicked as the Gentiles;— 
 this he had fully shewn in the preceding part of his Epistle. 
 
 This bestowing and withholding, had no necessary connexion 
 with salvation in heaven,—for many of the Jews on whom mercy 
 Was bestowed had went to hell, and many of the Gentiles from 
 whom it was withheld hed went to heaven; as we saw when consid- 
 ering the case of Jacob and Esau. From this view, (and we hesitate 
 not to say itis the correct one,) we see that all had it in their pow- 
 erto get to heaven ; and though God had be owed greater privi- 
 leges on some, than he had on others, yet those who had received 
 most, had most to improve; God required improvement in an ex- 
 act proportion to what he had bestowed, as in the case of the ta- 
 lents; and thus all had an equal opportunity to get to heaven, though 
 they were not equal in tine privileges. And can any man reply 
 against God, for withholding from him certain privileges which he 
 bestows on another, when he from whom they were withheld is no 
 more disabled to get to heaven, the great end for which all men 
 were created, than he is on whom they are bestewed—mitch less 
 can any reply, that in being wicked, they had not resisted his will. 
 
 The Apostle proceeds to the case of the potter and the clay, 
 by, which he shews the Jews, that God had a right to reject them, 
 
 and call the Gentiles to fill their place, as his peculiar people: for 
 
 he had warned them near séven hundred years previous, that they 
 stood as a nation on the condition of ubedience. God had said by 
 the mouth of the Prophet, “2¢ what instant I shall speak concern- 
 ing a nation, and concerning a kingdom, te build and to plant 2 : 
 ff it do evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice, then ‘I will 
 repeat of the good wherewith I said I would benefit them.” The 
 Prophet was directed to inform the Israelites that this should be 
 their case if they did not continue to obey the Lscrd—And the 
 Lord enquires, if he could not do it in the strictest justice. This 
 enquiry was made by referring to the parable of the potter and. the 
 clay. The Prophet was directed to go down to the potter’s house, 
 where the Lord said he would cause him to hear his words : “And 
 behold he [the potter] wrought a work on the Wheels. And the 
 vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hand of the potter ; 
 so he made it again another vessel, as seemed good to the potter 
 to make 7#,”-—Jer. xviii, 3, 4. And as the Jews had marred them- 
 selves by disobedience, God surely had aright to dishonor them 
 after they had dishonoured themselves, and their God. A bare 
 
 ¥i 
 
32 
 
 references to this parable shows most positively, that the Apostle #s 
 speaking of nations, and not individuals—of time blessings, and not 
 eternal beatitudes; and that these national blessings were conditional; 
 for the Jews who were first blessed with them, and who were vessels 
 to honor, were, for unbelief, reprobated, & made vessels to dishon- 
 our; while the Gentiles who were first the vessels of dishonor were 
 made the vessels to honor by the same sovereign power that the 
 Jews first were. And itis strange ! passing strange / that men 
 should have given the Apostle’s words any other application, witl: 
 the Scriptures before their eyes. And we further see, that many 
 who were honoured with the honor here spoken of, ‘were at last. 
 dishonoured in hell, and many that were first dishonoured, were at 
 jast honoured in heaven. “i 7 ee 
 
 The Apostle continues his argument by quotations from Hosea 
 and Isaiah, shewing from these Prophets that God had in their time 
 ‘atended to call the Gentiles, and spoke of it by them—and closes 
 the chapter with shewing that the reason that the Jews had not 
 attained to righteousness, was, because they sought it not by faith, 
 but by the deeds of the Law. | e | 
 
 In the 10th Chapter he assures the Jews, that although God had 
 rejected them as a nation from being his peculiar people, and had 
 thus dishonoured them 3 yet as individuals, they might be saved 
 in heaven in the very same way the Gentiles were. In the 12th 
 verse he says: “For there is no difference between the Jew and 
 the Greek, for the same Lord over all, is rich unto all that call up- 
 on him—(Verse 13:) For whosoever shall call upon the name of 
 she Lord shall be saved.” He closes this chapter with quota~ 
 tions from Moses and Isaiah, who foretold the present state of the 
 Jews, and also the calling of the Gentiles. ae do 
 
 The 11th chapter is introduced by declaring that God had not 
 cast of all the Jews ; but that there was in the language of our text 
 ‘cat this present time also there remaineth a remnant according to 
 the election of grace.” The Apostle further shews the rea- 
 son why all the Jews were not saved; did not attain to the 
 election of grace : ‘Their going about to establish their own righte- 
 ousness, and refusing to receive salvation by faith ; for this ‘they 
 
 were blinded, aud given to a spirit of slumber;—and that the fall of 
 
 the Jews had been a means through which the riches of grace had 
 come to the Gentiles—but that the conquest of grace would be 
 still more complete and glorious, if the Jews would return to God 
 and accept of salvation through faith in Christ—This he proves 
 they might do : “For God hath concluded them all in unbelief that 
 he might have mercy onall”—(v, 32,) both Jews and Gentiles— 
 He then exclaims, O! the depth of the riches, both of the wisdom 
 and knowledge of God.” 
 We sce that the Apostle concludes after having answered all the 
 
‘a 
 oy, 
 re) 
 
 objections of the Jews, that both Jews and Gentiles might be saved 
 thro’ faith in our Lord Jesus Christ; yea “whosoever shall call on the 
 name of the Lord.” We have been the more particular in our remarks 
 on this Epistle, because at this distance from the time, and circum- 
 stances in which it was written many do not perceive the Apostle’s 
 design, nor meaning. And from the view we have taken we must 
 plainly see, that instead of giving support to the doctrine of un- 
 conditional election and reprobation as some have believed, the 
 first eleven chapters is one entire, unanswerable, yea, irresistible 
 argument in favour of the doctrine of general atonement, m which 
 jt is most clearly shewn that all men, both Jew and Gentile May 
 BE SAVED THROUGH FAITH iN oUR LoRD anp Saviour Jesus 
 Curist. We will conclude our observations on this text and the 
 Epistle generally, in the words of a late distinguished and very 
 learned Commentator : “If the doctrine of unconditional, eternal 
 election and reprobation be a doctrine of revelation, we must look 
 for it’somewhere else, than in the 8th and 9th chapters of Ro 
 mans.’’ ‘From thus carefully considering the Apostle’s discourse, 
 and taking in the scope of his design, and weighing the different 
 expressions he uses, in connexion with the Scripture facts; and 
 Scripture phrases employed in describing those facts; we must be 
 fully convinced, that the doctrines of eternal, absolute, uncondi- 
 tional election and reprobation have no place here; and that noth- 
 ing but a pre-established creed, and a total inattention to the Apos« 
 tle’s scope and design could ever have induced men to bind these 
 Scriptures to the above purpose, and thus to endeavour to estab- 
 lish, as articles of faith, doctrines, which, far from producing gloe 
 ry to God in the highest, and peace and good will among mers 
 have filled the Church of God with contention—set every man’s 
 sword agaifst his brother, and thus done the work of Apollyon in 
 the name of Christ. If men will maintain these, and such like, for 
 Scriptural doctrines—doctrines repugnant to the Divine nature, it 
 ‘is but reasonable to request that it be done in the spirit of the 
 gospel.” 
 " The next passage which we shall notice, is Eph. 1, 4—6. “Ac» 
 cording as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of ‘ve 
 world, that we should be holy, and without blame before him in 
 - love. Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by 
 ~ Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will.” 
 That we may have a clear view of the meaning of this text, we 
 will consider to whom the Epistle was addressed, and their pecu- 
 liar circumstances. ‘The Epistle was addressed to the Church 
 at Ephesus. This Church was situated similar to the’ Church at 
 Rome. The Jews had a synagogue there, and exercised consid~ 
 erable influence over the minds of the Ephesian christians. To 
 reconcile the Jew and Gentile christians, seernsto be the maif 
 design of the Epistle. ‘This will be evident to any that will cares 
 fully read it. ‘The Ephesian christians, who were Gentiles, had 
 
34 
 
 the same need of encouragement, that those at Rome had, and 
 therefore the Apostle sets out with establishing their claim to the 
 covenant of promise. ‘T'his he does by assuring them, that God, 
 when she laid the plan of salvation, before the foundation of the 
 world, designed that the Gentiles should be fellow heirs with the 
 Jews, and then predestinated them to the adoption of children by 
 Jesus Christ. ci 
 ‘That the Apostle had no allusion to individual election to eter- 
 
 nal life, is evident from the fact, that the Epbesians were made par- 
 takers of salvation by faith. Though they had been predestinated 
 from before ‘the foundation of the world, they were not sealed with 
 the holy spirit of promise, until they had believed on Christ, nor 
 did they believe until they had heard the gospel. See verse 13. 
 And in chapter u. 8, he tells them that they are saved by grace 
 through faith. a as * Ae 
 
 _ But to, prave more clearly that the Apostle had reference to na- 
 tidnal -or time blessings wwe will take a more extensive view of 
 this Epistle. ‘The Apostle commences the 2d-chapter by con- 
 trasting the.present state of the Ephesians with their former, and 
 _shews the dreadful condition that they were m before the quick» 
 ening spirit was-given; and that this quickening had raised them 
 up to sit with the Jews:in heavenly places in Christ Jesus. This 
 is evident from the werd us being used. Paul, who was a Jew, 
 avould not have used this term,-had not the Jews.and Gentiles 
 been brought together in Christ! But it is clearly expressed in vs. 11, 
 412, 13. ‘Wherefore remember, that ye being in time. past, 
 Gentiles in the-flesh, who are-called uncircumcision, by that which 
 js called the.cireumcision in the flesh made by hands; [Jews] that 
 at that time ye were without ‘Christ, being aliens from the com= 
 monwealth:of Jsrael.{the Jewish church,| and strangers from the 
 covenants .of promise, having no -hope, and without God in the 
 world. But now, in Christ Jesus ye [Gentiles] who sometimes 
 were far off, are made nigh by the blood of Christ... (v» 14.)— 
 For he is our peace who hath made both one, [Jew and Gentile, 
 and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; (15 
 having abolished im his flesh the enmity, even the law ef com- 
 mandments, contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of 
 twain [Jew and Gentile] one new man, {the Christain Church,] 
 so making peace, (16.) And that he might reconcile both unte 
 God [Jew and Gentile] in one body [the Christian Church] by the 
 Crass, having slain the enmity thereby; (19) And came and prea~ 
 ched peace to you [ Gentiles] which were afar off, and to them [Jews] 
 that were nigh, (18.) For through him we both [Jew and Gen- 
 tile] have access by one spirit to the father. (19. )Now therefore, 
 ye | Gentiles] are no more strangers, and foreigners, but fellow citi- 
 zens with the saints, and of the household of God. (20.) And 
 are built upen the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, Jesus 
 Christ himseli being the chief Corner Stone.” 
 
38 
 
 Irom these passages it undeniably appears that the Apostle is la- 
 bouring to unite the Jews and Gentiles together, and not treating of 
 individual salvation in heaven. But to proceed. He commences 
 the third chapter by telling them that for this cause he was in bonds; 
 for a dispensation of the grace of God was given unto him; his words 
 are, I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ, for you Gentiles.” And 
 this dispensatien of the grace of God was, “ That the Gentiles 
 should be fellow heirs [with the Jews] and of the same body, and 
 partakers of his promises in Christ by the gospel,” v6. And in 
 verse 7 he says, “ Whereof I was made.a minister according to the 
 gift of the grace\of God, given untame.” And in v. 8“ Unto me 
 who am less than the least of all saints is this grace given that 1 
 should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches ofpChrist.” 
 ‘Agd the design of this preaching to the Gentiles was to make all 
 men see what is the fellowship of the mystery of salvation,(see v. 9.) 
 And that the eternal purpose of God had reference to this preach- 
 ing, is evident from verse 11. ‘‘According to the eternal pur- 
 pose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord.” Here the 
 eternal purpose of God is explained by the Apostle ; his explana~ 
 tion is that the gospel of salvation should be*preached to both Jew 
 and Gentile, and that both should have a¢cess to God by the same 
 spirit 5 that both might obtain salvation through. faith in Christ 5-—~ 
 And thus we see that this Epistle proves the same dectrine the E-. 
 pistle to the Romans does—That God designed even from before 
 the foundation ofthe world, to extend, in the fulness of time, the 
 blessing of redemption to all men, both Jew and Gentile, and that 
 all men might be saved by grace through faith, and tnstead of af- 
 fording any support to the doctrine of Calvinism, is a powerful ar- 
 gument against it. 
 
 The 2rd chapter verse 23 of Acts, has been brought to prove 
 the doctrine we are opposing “ Him, bemg delivered by the de« 
 terminate counsel and fore-knowledge of God, ye have taken, 
 and by wicked hands, have crucified and slain.” Some have argu~ 
 ed that the Almighty determined that the Jews should “ commit 
 the sin of cructfying the Saviour,” but thisis foreign from the true 
 meaning of the text. God determined that Christ should die for 
 the salvation of man, and foreseeing that the Jews would have ma* 
 lice enough to crueify the Redeemer, determined that he should 
 die in that way, yet the Jews acted free and unnecessitated.. ‘This 
 will appear more clearly from the following considerations: God’s — 
 Prescience which is able to look through all events, gaw the mae 
 lice of the Jews. This malice must have had some kind of exis= 
 tence before it could have been foreseen. ‘To say it had not, 
 would be to say that God can in some:sense, see that which exists 
 in no sense, that is to see nothing, which. is impossible. But it 
 may be asked what kind of existence had the wickedness of the 
 Jews before the foundation of the world. We answer: God de- 
 termined to make man with certain powers, and therefore could 
 
' 36 
 
 istence 
 
 the Savour if he were delivered into their hands, and in the coun- 
 cils of wisdom, God saw that the object of the Saviour’s death, ' 
 would be as well, or better accomplished at that time,and in that 
 way, than in any other time or way; therefore determined to de- 
 liver him into their hands, that they might shed his blood; the 
 thing which God had determined should be done for the redemption 
 to the world. But God did not decree that the Jews should crucify 
 the Saviour; this is not said, or even intimated, but foreseeing that 
 the Jews would freely, and certainly do. it, if they should have it 
 in their power, decreed that he should be delivered into their 
 hands. | fo) ful 
 That this view is correct, will farther appear from the express 
 declaration of the Redeemer when speaking of his death. He 
 says, * Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down 
 my life, that I might take it again, no man taketh it from me, but 
 Tlay it down of myse!f.. Ihave power to lay it down, and I have 
 power to take itup again. ‘This commandment have | received of 
 my Father.” John, chap. x, v. 17,18. Here the Saviour says 
 plainly that he had power to lay down his life of himself, and to 
 take it up again; and consequently his dying through the malice of 
 the Jews was on his part a matter of choice. And we hesitate 
 riot to say that Christ could have redeemed the world in’some other 
 way; a waysunconnected with the wicked Jews; and also that their 
 wickedness, was the result of their own-choice, not of God’s de- 
 ereess’ 4 (> a weg | 
 Many other passages might be considered, for many more have 
 been brought to support the doctrine we have been controverting; 
 but as none of them appear to speak so clearly, and fully to the 
 
 point in contention as those we have been considering seem to do; 
 
 por are they as. much relied on by the Calvinists themselves as 
 those are, we will proceed no farther in this investigation, having 
 clearly shown, we think, that those considered are perfectly recon-~ 
 cilable with the doctrine .of Conditional election to eternal life.— 
 And we hesitate not to-affirm that there is not one text in all the 
 Bible that gives the Jeast snpport to the opposite doctrine, when 
 properly understeed. ‘The way in which it has been kept in the 
 
37 
 
 Church has been by applying those texts to eternal election and re- 
 probation, which speak, of unconditional election to time blessings, 
 which may: be enjoyed and the soul lost in eternity; and reproba- 
 tion from time privileges, and, yet the soul may be saved in the 
 end. Those who do not keep. an eye to thts distinction, are in 
 great danger of becoming bewildered, and no surprise should be 
 excited if they should become Calvinists. For the doctrine of 
 unconditional election and reprobation, is clearly taught in the 
 Scriptures, as we have seen, ur first head, and if those texts 
 which have. reference to t ine, be applied .to election to 
 eternal glory, and this they will the mind is not informed of 
 this distinction, we can hardly fail to become Calvinistic. Acon- 
 viction of this fact has made us entertain a feeling of kindness ana 
 sympathy for our Calvinistic brethren, nor haye we been disposed 
 to censure them, for thinking differently from us; fer we are inclin- 
 ed to believe that if we had not been so fortunate as to obtain a 
 knowledge of this distinction, that the Bible would have made us 
 Calvinists. We would here express our sincere thanks to the pr- 
 rent of all good for the merciful providence which gave us the 
 privilege of reading Mr. Fletcher’s Checxs, and Dr. A. Clark’s 
 Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, and we would advise 
 all who wish to understand this subject to read carefully, and im- 
 partially, those authors. ) 
 
 Permit us to answer an argument in favour of the doctrine we 
 have been opposinz, drawn from the Prescience of Deity. ‘The 
 argument runs thus: God is a being possessed of Ommniscrence by 
 which he can atone glance see all things, past, present, and to 
 come; and if God sees auy. thing in future, ust come to pass, 
 as he foresaw it, or his fore-knowledge will be destroyed; this can- 
 not be, and therefore, as God sees who will be saved, and who will 
 be lost, just as many as he sees will be saved, must be saved, and 
 just as many as he sees will be lost, must be lost 
 _ Before we attend to this argument, we wish tor 
 begging the question; for Calvin rejected the idea 
 God rested on his foreknowledge, and maintained 
 why the Lord foreknew that certain things would co 
 because he had decreed them. The Confession of Faith of 
 byterian church, teaches very nearly, if not altegether, the 5a 
 frine; making salvation and damnation stand from eternity, without: 
 
 k, that this is 
 he decrees of 
 
 ‘any reference to any thing foreseen in man, Nor did the Calvine — 
 ists of the Reformation place the argument on this ground: ‘This 
 
 is one of the unintelligible refinements of Hopkinsianism—a thread 
 drawn so fine that it is no thread, as will be seen in the prece- 
 ding observations. And if it would not be thought beveath the 
 dignity of the occasion, we would say that this argument puts the 
 cart before the horse. God knows who will be lost, and he knows 
 the reason also—but his knowledge is not the cause of their be- 
 ing lost; for this reason they must have been lost in some. sense 
 
38 
 
 before they could be subjects of knowledge. ‘l'o say that know- 
 ‘ledge recognized’ them as lost when they were not lost, is to say 
 that God ean know as-certain, that which has. no existence, which - 
 is not only an absurdity, but an impossibility.. But.it may be said. 
 that the damnation of those who now live, has no existence at this- 
 time, and yet God knows the fact, that they will be damned, we — 
 reply, all the causes. which bring about the end—their destruction 
 now exist in the view of God... “God sees:the end connected with 
 the causes—Man’e agency, sis the cause why he is lost. 
 God sees who will abuse t sy5and therefore sees who will 
 be lost; and in this connexion the destruction of all who will be 
 lost, now exist®; and in this connexion their destruction is. a sub- 
 ject of knowledge, and in no other can it be:. Sin is the cause of 
 destruction. —God sees who will sin, and sees who will be lost—_ 
 and he also sees that they might repent and believe, and thus be 
 saved; but he sees they will not. God’s knowledge is nei- 
 ther the cause of their sin, nor of their destructiun: it only recog- 
 nizes their sin arising out of abused freedom, and destruction ari- 
 ging out of sin. The astronomer foresees that the moon will be 
 eclipsed at a certain tune, and he sees the cause producing it; yet 
 his knowledge is neither the cause of tlie one, nor the other, nor | 
 does it lay any necessity on either. This.is precisely the relation 
 that the foreknowledge of God stands in to. man’s destruction. It 
 recognizes one thing proceeding from another, until it sees the 
 end—and ‘the reason why God can see the end is, he can see how 
 men will act in all the situations of life: Man’s actions depend on 
 his will--God seesayhat that will will be; but to say that the fore- 
 knowledge of Gols necessity on the thing foreseen, involves 
 some of the most dreadful and shocking coasequences of which — 
 the mind can conceive. | é 
 1. Consequence. ‘The Calvinists, to maintain their doctrine, 
 destroy the Ommipotence of God: For if his Omniseience sees all 
 things that ever will’ exist; and if this foresight lays necessity on 
 | being can act from choice, because his actions 
 
 are foresedn, and God himself cannot make a free agent; and if 
 he cann en he has not all power, and therefore cannot be 
 Omnipotent; for to make a free agent is plainly within the power 
 of Om ence~—the power to do all things. 
 
 2. Gorisequence. ‘They destroy the liberty of the Deity him- 
 selfs For if He, from all’ eternity foresaw all things that ever. 
 
 would exist, He must have seen those things which the Creator 
 does, as well as those which the creatures do; and if foresight lays 
 _esnecessity on existence, then God was necessitated from all. eterni~ 
 ty to make just such a’ Universe as he has-—-/Men and Angels just 
 as they are—some good and some bad—-some for Heaven, and 
 others for Hell; and he could not act otherwise; and thus the h- — 
 berty of the Deity, and all his creatures, are destroyed at one 
 stroke. And if God must necessarily know all things, then there 
 
39 
 
 is no such a thing’as tmedom, Foreknowledge drags the Deity 
 
 and all his creatures necesarily at its wheels; and it is dragged by. 
 
 some other necessity, but wha we know not, and we tremble to 
 extend our thoughts! but it does appear that it cannot be in God, 
 for fie, himself, is the subject of US knowledge, according to the 
 view we are now opposing, and theefore none of his other perfec» 
 _ tions can have domiuion over it; anathus liberty is banished from 
 the Universe, and necessity chains the Deity and all his creatures. 
 These consequences seem to us insetarable {rom the premises, 
 and we do hope that no man after seeing these undeniable conse~ 
 quenees, will ever undertake to support a system of doctrines at so 
 great an expense. Be us 
 
 But it may be said that the foreknowledge of God is an income 
 prehensible subject; this we admit, and we would have been wil- 
 ling to let this subject rest, if our Calvinistic brethren had not 
 brought this incomprehensible: witness to prove their doctrine. 
 This has made it necessary for us to say something, and we think 
 we can comprehend what we have said. We will conclude with 
 saying that the difference between us and the Calvinist is this: 
 We believe what God foresees will take place: They believe it 
 must take place. We believe that God’s foreknowledge lays no 
 _ hecessity on tne act of the creature: They believe it does. 
 
 We have now passed through the subject; and we think we 
 have clearly seen, that election to eternal glory is conditional in the 
 ease of every man; and that the condition is such as secures God’s 
 
 glory, humbles the sinner’s pride, and gives justice sufficient 
 sory pride, £ J . 
 
 ground to reward and punish men. 
 
 We will close our discourse by shewing the necessity of men 
 believing the doctrine of the Church to which they belong. By 
 belonging to a Church we necessarily become its supporters, 
 and consequently the promoters of its doctrine; this we do by ex- 
 
 ae * : 
 tending its borders. And how any man can do this when he does 
 
 net believe the doctrine it holds, and preserve a conscience void ° 
 
 of offence before his Maker, is beyond our comprehension: For 
 the truth stares him in the face, that if ever the world, or any part 
 
 of it, be saved, it must be saved by the TruTH. And yet he re~ 
 
 fuses to give his support to what he really believes to be the truth. 
 of God; and instead of supporting what he believes to be the ¢ruth, 
 gives his influence, his personal exertions, and often his money with 
 them, to support, and extend, what he does not believe. This 
 course of conduct goes to say that there is no moral difference 
 
 between truth and error—Angels weep! But to make this point — 
 
 more plain, we refer you to J. Cor. xu. 1—4. 
 
 “Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and 
 have not Charity, lam become as sounding brass, or a tinkling 
 ¢ymbal. And though | have the gift of prophecy, and understand 
 all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so 
 
thing. Aad though I bestow all myé 
 
 shat T could remove mountains, and haw not Charity, T am nos 
 
 car though I give my body to be busted, and have not Charity, it 
 
 profiteth me nothing.” Here we e€ plainly, that no gift or work 
 * will atone for the want of Ch 
 
 fy or Love. And when we give 
 the subject a more particular otice, we find that rejoicing in the 
 truth is one of Charity’s esse(tial attributes. (See v. 6.) But how 
 can any man rejoice in th ruth who refuses te own and support 
 it? And how can any manAave Charity who does not possess ifs 
 
 essential attributes? And Aow can any man be saved wihout Cha+ ~ 
 
 rhy? Jupee ye! Ha | 
 From these reflections we are: driven to the conclusion, that any 
 
 _man who lives in a Chirch, the doctrine of which he does not 
 » believe, when he has it in his power to unite with one whose doe- 
 
 trines agree with his views of truth, cannot have Charity, as defi- 
 ned in the x1. ch. of L. Cor. and therefore cannot get to Hea- 
 yen—lHe has not moral honesty. ‘And while truth drives us to 
 
 these conclusions, O! how we tremble for many we know. When | 
 
 we converse with them, they tell us they believe just as we do, 
 
 and yet they give their hearty support to doctrines, as much op- — 
 
 posed to those they profess to believe as they can be, and retain 
 the name of Christian principles, and refuse to give any support to 
 those they really believe. ‘This they do by joining or remaining 
 members of Calvanistic Churches, and refusing, for fear of man, 
 
 or the reproach of the Cross, to identify themselves with what 
 ‘they believe to be the truth of Jenova. These persons can ne- 
 ver get to Heaven so long as moral honesty, fearing not them who 
 <> ean kill the body; glorying in the Cross of Christ, and .rejoicing 
 
 “> $n the truth, are essential requirements. Those persons have rea- 
 
 ~ gon—great reason to tremble, lest the Saviour should say in the 
 great day, Yau refused to own me, and my truth, before. men, T 
 . .» now refuse to own you before my Father and his holy angels. 
 “Let those who are concerned weigh well this matter. We would 
 -* exhort them not to confer with flesh, but to come out at once Of 
 ~ the side of truth. | : fsa Wi EN Re 
 
 “He that hesitates between duty and inclination, is undone.”” 
 
 These remarks, we expect, will subject us to the frowns of such as 
 have woven for themselves a spacious garment which they call Clhari- 
 ty—for all—whose elasticity extends so far as to cover up in one com- 
 
 mon masg, tye nominal professor, the spirit of the world, the pride of : 
 
 distinction, and contempt for plain experimental Christians; esfrectac- 
 ly Ministers who preach the Gédspel in simplicity; and present the 
 whole with the imposing inscription— Holiness to Ged; zeal for the 
 truth. But we have nothing to fear from this poor passing world; we 
 are God's witnesses, hastening to render aw account to Him who call- 
 ed us to the ministry of his word. Our motives are not to promote a 
 name or sect. What are names op sects to us apart from. Christ? 
 That men may understand the 7ruth, practice it, and get to Heaven, 
 
 are our only objects— Which may the Lord grant to be each of our 
 
 happy lots....--AMEN. 
 
 oods to feed the poor, and.