life. God promised and called all Israel to the rest of Canaan, and doubtless he was sincere in it; but notwithstanding this, we find that he "sware in his wrath” that “many of them should not enter into his rest;" nor did he give them that "heart to perceive, and eyes to see, and ears to hear," which were requisite to their fidelity to God, and their consequent enjoyment of the promise. Such, in this case too, was the fact. But it was their unpersuadableness (aπeideía) that interfered; and, for wise and weighty reasons, the will of purpose to destroy took place of the will of inclination to bless. So with sinners now. The gospel comes with an assurance of “the kindness and love of God toward man," the race of man, and is to be preached to every creature; yet men having been “endured with much long-suffering,” become, where God sees fit to let justice take its course, "vessels of wrath" notwithstanding.

In neither case, then, does the universal aspect impugn the divine sincerity.

Nor does it impugn his wisdom; for his wise ends are accomplished hereby. He hereby proves manhe hereby bears a testimony to himself of his love and righteousness; and, in fact, gives to himself his due, ―does justice to himself; and he also gives occasion for the display of his sovereign "goodness," in a new and superadded dispensation of grace, as we shall hereafter see.

Having thus answered all the objections that occur to us on the subject, either directly or by fair inference, we will now in our turn propose a few questions to those who may still confine the Redeemer's under

taking to an elect number, as though for all others nothing was provided. 1. Would God call to the "Great Supper" those for whom he had not provided such supper? Would Christ say that " he was the bread of life that came down from heaven, that any one (TIS) might eat of it and not die," if he had not been bread for 2. Would God be angry with the persons every one? invited to the Great Supper for not coming, and declare in anger that they should not taste of it, when, behold, in fact, there had not been any supper provided for them? 3. How could "the Son" of God -the King in Sion-be "angry," and men "perish in the way when his wrath is kindled but a little," if he were not, conditionally on their "trusting in him," commissioned and ready to be their deliverer from the kingdom of Satan, and to receive them into his own kingdom? So, again, how could he say at the last day, "As for those mine enemies who would not that I should reign over them, bring them hither and slay them before me," if they might not have availed themselves of his propitiatory death, of his victory over Satan on the cross, and of his mightiness to save, if they would? 4. How could the man who came in to the supper, not having on the wedding garment, be blamed and punished for it, if there had been none provided for him; and why should he be "speechless," when he might so readily have answered in excuse, "There was no wedding garment provided for me to put on ?" 5. Could the apostle Peter have said to the unbelieving multitude of the Jews, that "God had sent his Son Jesus to bless them by turning away every one of them from their iniquities," (that is,

if they would call upon him,) if there were no conditional design in God thus to bless them, and no commission given to his Son to save them thus conditionally? 6. Would God condemn and damn eternally sinners for not believing for pardon, justification, salvation and eternal life, if no provision was made of the kind; but, on the contrary, they were previously reprobated to eternal death? 7. Could a general proclaim pardon to a whole rebel army, when, if he told them the truth, he must say, that his majesty designed to pardon only an elect number? So, also, would "God command all men every where to repent," if there were not a way opened for the pardon of all, and a readiness to pardon all? 8. Would not the restricted view of the subject furnish a plea to the sinner to continue in his rebellion, and tend to harden him? Two persons are sitting in a congregation hearing the proclamation of the "gospel of the kingdom," inviting them to submit. One of them believes that God neither loves, nor has commissioned Christ to save and bless the greater part of them, but hates, has eternally reprobated, and will certainly damn them; the other believes that God has a love of benevolence to all, and has commissioned Christ to bless every one by turning them away from their "iniquities." Now, would not the latter be more likely to be drawn, or, if convicted, to be encouraged than the other? nay, would not the other be likely to be hardened?

Having thus considered the scriptural statement of the universal and particular aspect of the gospel revelation, and shown their consistency with each;

having also considered the objections that might be made to the universal and comprehensive scheme, we proceed next to show the advantages of this scheme, as well as of the scriptural statements concerning the human will and the human agency, as in consistency with the Divine will and the Divine agency; concluding with a view of the advantages of the whole scheme altogether.

CHAPTER V.

ADVANTAGES OF THE UNIVERSAL AND PARTICULAR ASPECT, AS WELL AS OF THE SCRIPTURAL STATEMENT OF THE HUMAN WILL AND HUMAN AGENCY, AS ALSO OF THE DIVINE WILL AND THE DIVINE AGENCY, TOGETHER WITH THE ADVANTAGES OF THE METHOD ALTOGETHER.

SECTION I.

The Advantages of the Universal Aspect.

1. THE grace of God abounding in the righteousness and life brought in by the second Adam, when viewed as of the same extent with the sin and death brought in by the first Adam, glorifies God's love more than the partial and exclusive view of it does. Moreover, while "the kindness and philanthropy of God," attracts and encourages, the exclusive view of the subject repels and discourages.

2. Provision for all furnishes a reasonable ground for a call to all; and a gospel for every creature authorizes the preaching of the Gospel to every creature. And, since it shows that God desires not the

F

death of any sinner, but that every one turn from his wickedness and live, it gives occasion and accounts for those repeated and earnest exhortations and expostulations which he addresses to sinners promiscuously; as also for the "reasonings" and persuasions used by his servants at his command.

3. Men, being assured that there is no want of mercy in God the Father-no want of merit in his Son's atonement or righteousness-no want of power to save in the Holy Spirit indeed, that there is no obstacle to their salvation that has not been removed, and no facility that is not or will not be granted, on God's part; and that, in fact, he exhorts and persuades and beseeches men to be reconciled-we say, this being the case, not only does all the failure appear to lie with man, but it most strikingly discovers his perverseness, in his rejection of the gospel invitation. It also accounts for the solemn facts, that the " Master of the house" is "angry" at the refusal of men to come to the feast,—that his Son is angry when sinners refuse to receive the blessings, and submit to the obligations of his kingdom,-and finally that, while God declares that such as "believe" shall "enter into his rest," he "swears in his wrath,” that those who, through unpersuadableness, do not believe, "shall not enter into it." Moreover, a point particularly to be noticed is

4. That, whereas "the Gospel of the Kingdom" was to be preached in all the world for a WITNESS to all nations, it gives occasion, by its universal overtures and by its conditional form, for proving all to whom it is preached; and thus as the Mosaic Law was