Page images
PDF
EPUB

pursued and confirmed from the declaration of God to Moses: I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and compassion on whom I will have compassion; intimating, not only that a sinner had no natural claim of mercy on God, but even amongst the Israelites, who were a people in covenant with him, he ever preserv ed the right of sovereignty in the forgiveness of sin, and every dispensation of saving grace. The result is, that in God's leaving great numbers of Abraham's posterity to perish in unbelief, and calling a people for himself, partly of jews, and partly of gentiles, (ver. 24. 27.) he had proceeded on the same principle as that on which he had proceeded from the beginning.

Paul saw indeed that the corrupt mind of man would allege, that if things were so, the agency and accountableness of man were destroyed, and therefore introduces the objection, ver. 19; Thou wilt say then unto me, why doth he yet find fault; for who hath resisted his will? This objection affords irrefragable proof, that the doctrine maintained by the apostle was that of the absolute sovereignty of God, in having mercy on whom he would, and giving up whom he would to hardness of heart for against no other doctrine could such an objection have been made with any appearance of plausibility. This objection is the same for substance as has been made ever since, and that by two sorts of people; namely, those who disown the doctrine, as being destructive of human agency, and those who contend for the doctrine for that very purpose. The language of those who disown the doctrine is this: If it be so, that the state of every one is determined by the will of God, why are men blamed for not believing in Christ? God has his will, and what would he have more?' The language of those who contend for the doctrine, with the intent of destroying human agency, is, 'It is true that the state

[ocr errors]

of every man is determined by the will of God; but then it is not right that he should find fault with sinners for their unbelief; for his will is not resisted.' It is easy to see that both these positions are at variance with the gospel. With respect to the first, if we follow the example of the apostle, we shall think it enough to prove that God actually exercises an absolute sovereignty in saving whom he will, and yet finds fault with unbelievers as much as if no such sovereignty were exercised; leaving him to justify his own conduct, and them who reply against him, to answer it at his tribunal. With respect to the second, if we keep to the principle laid down by the apostle, we shall not deny the truth because they abuse it; but avow it, and at the same time find fault with unbelievers, ascribing their failure, as he did in the same chapter, to their seeking righteousness as it were by the works of the law, stumbling at the stumbling stone. If on this account we be accused of "self-contradiction," "saying and unsaying," "preaching half grace and half works, "beginning with truth and ending with falsehood," &c. &c. we have this comfort; that the same things might have been objected with equal justice to the writings of the apostle, as appears from the above remarks, and were in substance actually objected to them.

3. It is introduced to show the certain success of Christ's undertaking, as it were in defiance of unbelievers, who set at nought his gracious invitations. When Esther seemed to hesitate on going in unto the king in behalf of her people, she was answered by Mordecai's order thus: If thou holdest thy peace at this time, then shall there enlargement and deliverance arise from another place; but thou and thy father's house shall be destroyed! Such, in effect, is the

language of the doctrine of election to sinners of mankind, and that on various occasions. It is not designed to supersede universal invitations; but to provide against those invitations being universally unsuccessful. Thus, our Lord having upbraided Chorazin and Bethsaida for their impenitence under his ministry, it is immediately added by the evangelist, AT THAT TIME Jesus answered, and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes: even so, Father; for so it seemed good in thy sight. (Matt. xi. 25, 26.) This was like saying, Though Chorazin and Bethsaida have not repented, yet I shall not be wanting of subjects: deliverance shall arise from another place!' -Again: When addressing the unbelieving pharisees, he applied those words in the cxviiith psalm to them, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner, his words convey the same idea - Ye builders may set me at nought; but God will exalt me in defiance of you. God will have a temple, and I shall be the foundation of it, though you should persist in your unbelief, and perish!' (Matt. xxi. 42.)-Again: Those very remarkable words in John vi. 37, All that the Father giveth me shall come to me, &c. are introduced in the same manAddressing himself to those Jews who followed him because they had eaten of the loaves, and were filled, he saith, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger, and he that believeth on me shall never thirst. But I said unto you, that ye also have seen me, and believe not All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. As if he should say, You have no regard to me in my true

ner.

[ocr errors]

L

character, but merely for yourselves, and for the meat that perisheth: but I shall not lose my reward, however you may stand affected towards me.'

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

THERE is something in the nature of evil, which

if it appear in its own proper colours, will not admit of being defended, or recommended to others: he therefore who is friendly to it, is under the necessity of disguising it, by giving it some specious name, in order to render it current in society. On the other hand, there is something in the nature of good, which, if it appear in its own proper colours, cannot well be opposed he therefore who wishes to run it down, is obliged first to give it an ill-name, or he could not accomplish his purpose. This species of imposition, it is true, is calculated only for superficial minds, who regard words rather than things; but the number of them is so great in the world, and even in the church, that it has in all ages been found to answer the end. In the times of the prophet Isaiah there were those who called evil good, and good evil, who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter: but as the wo of heaven was then denounced against the practice, it becomes us to beware of going into it, or of being imposed on by it.

It is not the design of the writer to trace this abuse of language through any part of history or politics, or

any other worldly department; but merely to notice. a few terms which are very current in our religious circles such as moderation, liberality, charity, &c. on the one hand, and bigotry, narrowness of mind, and ill-nature, on the other.

There is a spirit gone forth in the present age which is calculated to do more harm to the Church of God than the most erroneous doctrine that has been advanced since the days of the apostles. It bears a favourable aspect towards those systems of divinity which depreciate the evil of sin, the freeness of grace, the dignity of Christ, and the glory of his righteousness, as the only ground of acceptance with God; so much so, that it is seldom known to oppose them. Or if, for the sake of preserving its reputation, it strikes an occasional blow at them, yet it is with so light a hand as never to hurt them. It takes no decided stand on this side or that, and thereby obtains admission among all parties. If the friends of Christ meet. together, it wishes to meet with them, though it be only to oppose every measure which may bear hard upon its favourite designs, and would take it very unkind to be treated as an intruder. If his enemies be assembled, it will also be there; and if no untrusty brother be in company, will commonly manifest itself to be then most in its element.

Now let a spirit of this kind make its appearance in any other department than religion, and observe how it will be treated. In the year 1745, for instance, when the great question in the country was, Shall we support the reigning family, and the constitution? Or shall we admit the Pretender, with Popery and arbitrary power in his train? What would have been thought of a man who should have pretended to be on neither this side nor that; but talking against war,

« PreviousContinue »