that we cannot infer difference of character in the subjects, from the different treatment they receive at the hand of God. And, if this be the case, then natural evil will, in no case whatever, be a proof of God's displeasure, any more than natural good, a proof of his approbation and favor. And thus shall we be left perfectly in the dark, as to the divine character; having no sure interpreter of the will of God, either in his word, or in his providence.

BUT, if the natural good and evil which God ultimately confers on his creatures, be a certain rule whereby we may judge of the views which he enter tains of their characters; it would be inconsistent to suppose that he should ever pardon a sinner, without any atonement; or without taking some effectual methods, in his providence, to discover his infinite hatred of their characters and actions. If the providences of God are expressions of his own character, it is inconceivable that he should not in some way or other, in his providence, express the views and feelings of his mind toward the characters and conduct of sinners. But, if the natural good and evil that are ultimately, and on the whole, brought on creatures, are sure and certain indications of the divine disposition toward them; then, the abhorrence in which God holds the characters of sinners, must of necessity be expressed in some other way, than in evil finally brought upon the sinner himself; in order that his salvation may be consistent with the end of God in the creation of the world, and the invariable rule of his providence, whereby he expresses his own character to the views of his creatures. For, unless this should be done, the pardon and salvation of a sinner, leave us to an utter uncertainty with respect to the divine character itself; whether God were an hater of iniqnity; and, of course, whether a lover of righteousness.

Ir God should pardon the sinner, without taking some sufficient and effectual method, at the same time, to discover his infinite hatred of iniquity; if he should treat the clean and the unclean, the virtuous and vicious, alike; we should have no means left whereby to determine that he held their characters in any different estimation; and, either approved, or disapproved the one, more than the other. Therefore, such a mode of providence would be inconsistent with the end which God had in view, both in the creation and government of the world; which was to manifest his own glory, and to display his own infinitely holy and virtuous character.

III. THE government of God could not be respectable, should he pardon the sinner, without discovering, at the same time, his infinite hatred of his sins; and the perfect abhorrence he hath of his character.

THE supreme Being cannot be regarded as a governor, any further than he is believed to hate iniquity. And he cannot be believed to hate iniquity, when it actually takes place among his creatures, any further than his hatred is, in some way or other, expressed. But, if God, in his providence, should treat the virtuous and the vicious alike; making no difference between the clean and the unclean, the holy and the profane; if he should confer the same good upon the one, as upon the other, taking no measures in his providence, to show that he regarded the character of the one, in any different light from that of the other: his government would, of necessity, lose its force, and be no restraint upon his creatures.

No one can respect a government which provides no punishment for the wicked. And, whatever punishments be provided by law, if the executive authority neglect the execution, the government must, of neces

sity, fall into contempt. No sooner, therefore, will God cease to discover his hatred of the rebellion and wickedness of his creatures, than he loses his authority, and renders his benevolence and good-will justly suspicious. But if the treatment God gives his creatures, in the good and the evil he confers upon them, be sure indications of the views he entertains of their characters; for him to pardon the sinner without an atonement, or without taking some effectual measures to discover his hatred of his sins; must necessarily injure his character, weaken his authority, and bring his government into contempt.

IV. FOR God to pardon the sinner without an atonement, would be inconsistent with the true spirit and import of his holy law.

Ir God's written law expresseth his true character, and is a genuine transcript of his moral perfection; we may confide in it that his whole government will be administered in perfect conformity to it. The government of God can no more vary from the true import of the law, than God can vary from himself. If the moral law expresses the true character of God, his moral government will express the same, and will therefore be perfectly of a piece with the law.

RESPECTING the written moral law, we are to note the following things, viz.

1. THAT it abounds with pains and penalties, and those too of a very awful nature; threatning death, even eternal destruction, for every transgression. It curseth every one who continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.* It makes no provision for pardon, and gives not the least hope of mercy, in any case, or on any condi

Galat. iii., 10.

tion whatever: But most explicitly and unconditionally condemns every transgressor, without one exception, to everlasting misery. That this is the unequivocal language of the law, it is presumed no one will deny. This is the law which expresseth the true character of God which is a transcript of his essential moral perfection. This is a law which expresses the mind and will of God, the very feelings of his heart.

2. THE penalties, or sanctions of the law, express an exceeding high degree of righteous anger and indignation, in the divine mind, against the sinner. They express in words that same displeasure which will appear in effects in the eternal torments of sinners. When God actually inflicts eternal torments on the sinner, he will no more than act out the same disposition, or character, which is expressed in words in the threatnings of the law.

IF the threatnings of the law do not express divine anger, it is impossible for words to do it. If these do not paint displeasure, it is not in the power of language to paint it. If the language of the divine law is equivocal, the providences of God may be equally so: And all those dreadful punishments which will hereafter be inflicted on his enemies, will not af ford unequivocal evidence of the real indignation of God. For eternal torments inflicted on sinners, by the great Governor of the world, express nothing in action, but what the threatnings of the law express in words.

3. WE are to note that the principal importance of the penalty, as well as of the precepts of the law, consists in its expressing the real character of God. What, above every thing else, makes the penalties of the law necessary and important, is, that they express the purity of the divine mind, and his unalter

able and infinite aversion from all iniquity. This is the grand consideration which makes punishments necessary in the divine government. The misery of a creature, merely in itself, answers no valuable end: And were it not a glass in which God's infinite hatred of sin is seen, it never would be inflicted. As the great end of God in all his other works, is to mani fest his own excellent character; so it is in inflicting punishments upon offenders. And no further than punishments answer the end of exhibiting a disposition that really hath existence in the divine mind, will they ever be inflicted.

Now if it be true that the law represents the Governor of the world as being indeed angry, and that in a very high degree with the sinner; it is easy to see that his government would not correspond with it, should he pardon the transgressor without exhibiting at the same time, in a sensible manner, his righteous anger against him for his sins. A method of administration which exhibits anger against sin, is directly counter to that which doth not exhibit anger against it. If, therefore, the divine law denounces curses against the sinner; and as far as words can do it, exhibits divine anger against him; it is manifest that the forgiveness of the sinner, without testifying, at the same time, in some proper and convincing way, an abhorrence of his character and wickedness, would counteract both the letter and the manifest import of the divine law :-Unless pardoning and punishing, doing good and doing evil to the creature, naturally express one and the same view of his character and deserts; and the same degree of pleasedness or displeasedness with him. It is hence evident, that it could not have been consistent with that character of God which is exhibited in the law, to pardon the sinner without an atonement; unless disregarding crimes and punishing them, treating the same per