DUKE UNIVERSITY DIVINITY SCHOOL LIBRARY LECTURES i ON TEROLOGY3 OR DISSERTATIONS ON SOME OF THE MOST IMPORTANT DOCTRINES OF THE OHRISTIAN RELIGION, BY THE REV. MOSES P. BENNET, MINISTER OF THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH. “What harm can gold catch in the fire, or truth in discussiom?”—Archbishop Cranmer. ¥ KITTANNING, PENN. PRINTED FOR THE AUTHOR BY COPLEY, CROLL, & Co. 1826. = k bad Western District of Pennsylvania, to wit: eG ie ty-eighth day of February,in the fiftieth year, Sse Minister of the Episcopal Church, of the said District, hath deposited in this office the title of a Book, the right whereof he claims as Author and Proprietor, in the words folowing, to wit: : “Lectures on Theology;er Dissertations on some of the most important Doctrines of the Christian Religion. By the Rev. Moses P. Bennet, -Minister of the Ejisco- — fial Church.” ‘ ; In conformity to the act of the Congress of the United States, entitied, “An act for the encouragement of learn- ing, by: securing the copies of Maps, Charts, and Books, ‘to the authors and proprietors of such copies, during the times therein mentioned.”—And also to the att en- _ titled, “An act supplementary to an act enti! n act for the encouragement of Leann y securing the - copies.of Maps, Charts, and Books, to the authors and — proprietors. of such copies,-during “the. times therein - mentioned,” and extending the benefits thereof to the _ arts of designing, engraving, and etching historical and. other Prints.” E. J. ROBERTS, Clerk : - of the District Court of the United States for the Western Disprict of Penna. > bY one _ en BAGEL ADVERTISEMENT. ‘ yi . Archbishop Cranmer hath said, “What harm can gold catch in the fire, or truth in discussion?” tal ; / na ee ee 3 r mais CONTENTS. if “ page — LECTURE Vill. ' ve The Nature of Man. - - - - - - - - by & LECTURE IX. The Covenants. a a rr ate 190 LECTURE X, a Hlecigp and Reprobation. - at aie Eee 207 LECTURE XI. Justification. - - -y- ------- + - - 233 LECTURE Xid. 11) 94st A Faith and Good Works. - - - - - - - - - - 268 .% > ‘LECTURE XII. = . ; : th “ip Regeneration and Snes sees 4 27 ERRATA. ae. ay Pase’, 2d line, for Theologos read Theologia. Page 38—for the 5th line from bo read the 6th, and for the 6th read the 5th. Page 70, 2d line from bottom, for simple read _bimpler, ' wing Poge 171, after LECTURE VIL insert” The Na- eure of Mun. & _ghignd oN mumOLOeY. ” LECTURE f. The importance and various sources of Theo- ‘logical knowledge, and the Being of God. Turotocy is 2 name whose derivation may be found in the Greek word Theologos, which was originally used to signify the systems or tales of Heathen Mythology, which were taught in the Grecian schools in the dark ages of ignor- ance and superstition. Since that period the word has been adopted by Christians to signify that particular science under which is compre- hended the theories of the Divine existence, na- ture, and dispensations. In establishing our faith on these very impor- tant points, evidences of various kinds are to be received and relied upon according to their mer- its, With respect to the Divine existence, the voice of Nature alone is to be received and relied upon as, our argument; and this is of itself per- ‘feetly adequate. The appearances of the universe ‘gencrally, and the course of events with which we are conversant, indicate the existence of some superiour, intelligent, and personal being, who formed and governs the same in all its beauty and glory. The science of Nature, so far as if tends to enlighten our minds on these subjects, B Vr * 8 LECTURES OX is termed Natural Theo Permian x | that which is sia or ae? id of God. Hence arises the distinction between — Natural and Revealed Theology, under whi are comprehended all the various sources of know- ledge concerning the Divine existence, and his relations to man. Natural Theology is to be considered the first in order, because this is the corner stone of the whole fabrick, and without which the voice of Revelation would ae pe aseless. The arguments thence de: only arguments which ean be admittedas au- thoritative in proof of the Divine existence, an until this is proved, all attempts to build’ upon revelation are vain. “Not that revelation is 'infe- riour to the voice of Nature when pro’ he ain real; but as this cannot-be done until we fi prove that there is‘a ’God who ean make such a revelation, it must remain reutral and of noforce whatsoever until this isdone. Whether our first ideas of such a being are derived from Revela tion or the light of Nature only, matters m the veice of nature only -which-can be admi as proper evidence concerning the truth of these ideas. The proposition-which asserts the exis- tence of a Deity, let its origin be in what it will, may become a-subject of investigation; but the arguments in proof of this proposition are to be drawn from the light of Nature only; and if-~we here find sufficient argument: to establish the proposed fact, the origin of the proposition itself can have no influence upon the validity of the a) Ma ee y proofs adduced. ves Natural Theology, therefore, is a science in the study of which, an investigation of the sen~ ’ Aible.and visible appearances of the ereated uni-. * + _ - THEOLOGY. 9 ing, nature, dispensations, and relatio he Dei aving thus laid the foundation, and raced the outlines of our first ideas on these a nportant subjects, a new field for investigation ha study is now laid open, whereby we are en- abled to learn every particular which may be useful to our happiness either here or hereafter; and this is his own divine word, as afforded us in, the seri tures of the Old and New Testaments. Through the voice of Nature we learn. the first rudiments; but in Revelation is to be found the beauty. and perfection of that which Nature’s rude pencil has only sketched. That God can make sucha revelation will not be doubted, after haying learned from the appearances of the uni- verse generally his nature and attributes; and that he Aath made such a revelation will not be necessary for me to prove, as such has been ful- es by Paley, Grotius, Lardner, halmers, and many others too numerous to mention. For this reason, and the prevalence of the Christian Religion in all civilized nations, Ihave thought proper to admit the scriptures as true, and indeed the highest source of all tes- timony in matters of Faith, where demonstration is impossible. The voice of Nature, as far as its testimony Teaches, is, to be sure, positive; but as demonstrative proofs are seldom to be obtain- ed, we are obliged to rest upon revelation as our surest guide in matters of a religious natur erally. And though when arguing with suc men as Hume and Voltaire, the light of Nature alone can be urged as an argument for the truth: of any proposition, whether in Theology or any other science; yet in addressing myself to Chrisg: sed for the purpose of scents : n Se ning: 6 Set ! 40 LECTURES ON tians, who submit not only to of ture, but af Nature’s une if far mo 4 jime and extensive is offered, = Though the study of Nature be ever so de- lightful and pleasing, our knowledge concerning the Divine perfections and dispensations thence derived must be imperfect. Nature without the aid of revelation is incomplete, it is like a gar- den well planned and laid out, but without tivation. Nevertheless when this field, s sive in itself, is ornamented with the sweet smé ing odours and flowers of revealed truth, Th logy at once becomes a garden of roses, foreye fresh, forever verdant; where we may sit and ad- mire from day unto day, and still GR we with the glory and majesty which are ever ap-- parent in the Divine works. , Tha bet There is such a harmony and intimate con-- néxion between the voice of Nature and Reve- tation, that it is very difficult to continue an i vestigation of any of the first prinei Christian religion without occasionally referring to both, which method in a Christian land must be acceptable whenever pursued. Accordingly I haye seen proper in the diseussion of ae Theological proposition, excepting that of th Divine existence, to unite the voices 0 : and Revelation in support of my opinions. a Theology, therefore, as a general and impor- tant branch of human scienee, in th - study ‘of which both Nature and Revelation are to be carefully and minutely consulted, comprehent s those subjects. which relate to the rafal e! nature or perfections of the Supreme Being; his pe pores in the end and creation of the universe, oth material and spiritual; and also his more » ie oon shade ah, particular dimpailcatign® and ae to the hus - man family. Though our capacities, as engaged in the study of so extensive a subject, are no: more in comparison, than the feeble efforts of the. Babylonians to ascend to the regions of other worlds; yet every light upon subjects of such infinite importance, whether derived from reason or revelation, ought to be received with erati> tude and pleasure; every information concern-. ing the great and mighty Author of the universes, whether in relation to his nature or his works, is so mueh in the perfection of our own natures, and extent of our progress in the likeness « sim who is the object of our researches and stt A and ought to be sought after with eagerness and. joy by every being who feels interested in the welfare ¢ of his own immortal spirit, in other words, by every rational being. For from our’ knowledge of these all important subjects, every being who duly exercises his rational powers re- ceives the hope of bliss eternal in a future state. ‘The doctrine of the soul’s immortality is found- ed upon the evidences adduced in the study of natural and revealed religion. Nothing, there- fore can be of greater importance to mankind. than the study of Divinity; and every informa- tioh thus derived adds to our happiness here by confirming us in the hope of happiness hereafter, To know that the soul does not end its career immediately when the warfare of this life is brought to a close, and to know that there is a Supreme Being who formed and governs ‘the universe in order and harmony , and feeds us from his gracious hand, is the corner a on which we build all our happiness a ona. and intelligent beings; and without tl asibik “ LE Pigas ‘on Se _s : ~ 7? ope, this spiritual "view of a sublimer- state ‘ia vorids beyond the’ grave, man is in no cts. ‘ = periour to the ‘beasts rish. Like them e may spend him a Fears in the satisfae- tion of bats assio ns and earnal appetites, and fi-. nally sink. a into the pit of dark oblivion.— rrid thought! And can it be all our. hopes and all our Tongings after immortality must pth in disappointment and despair?» meee 8 it ets so base a thought. There is mething hich eontinually stirs within - et whis- er to the meditating mind, “Thou s al *The breeze of time wafts the delig to. Ose who glide plone sea’ whe- -ther in the sunbeams o! ates rity, or orms of adversity. Tt is is a subject whieh has been music to the-ears of those who lived ages before the flood, and which floods of ages'shall never be able to eradicate fro » huma t.— This was the theme in Ed and shall.it cease to be SIRE heathens have gloried i in the 0 But to know that man was de nity, we must first know that there isa who is himself Stebel i knowledge an -power, and the plenitdde of his Goodness * never suffer a being crea his own ii eness, to be. extinguished b breath of time. Reason alone teack such a being exists, that there is som hind the scene, which, though not-to be fully comprehended by us, ne nevertheless. Feige and has existed for ages infinite, and whose natu and attributes. become to us important Hae for investigation and study. |” py a ohw ) : “ THEeLoos. ae In the discussion of these, as well as allvother f importance, the same course of logical reasoning is to be pursued." Because are favoured with an additional fountain of heed brightness of revealed truth, we are not se that every other testimony is exelud- or nthiat. the voice of reason is- unnecessary. - Allknowledge is derived from evidence; andas _ the’ subjects: to be discussed ‘are important in ves, it will be proper to mention the va- -riousisources of evidence which are to he receiv- as the foundations of: all our green re ie "The first is thot ‘of ietinattioss:; or in éthee words, self-evidence. We know and intuitively u srstand that there are in the visible universe If . of various orders and descriptions; that “Suecessively take place, whieh, though he in many instances may be incompre- hensible, are nevertheless fertile fields for the ‘exercise and improvement of our intellectual fa- culties. | Webecome acquainted with these facts, not fromany systematick mode or course of rea- ‘soning, but from immediate Sika aieaye r ideas being derived from consciousne illnot admit of proof; neither issuch proof necessary, for selfeyidence being superiour to any other testimony, supercedes the use th of, even if it could be had. No-proposition.can be capable of stronger proof than that which is atiested by self- evidence, unless the facts given in evi ‘more plain than those which are to be proved; ‘and as no facts are or can toe plain than ‘these which ‘are aitested b ness self-evidence, it is Paarl sa tes “mony beside can Siow “aly addi Phght up a rs ew a 4 « i ‘ t on facts, the truth of whiel feanded upon the ; first principle of knowledg te Ma, ings are conyinced by tei. ow i tional stre and ‘thie ape ah though we had. the. testir ron a avs oom * worlds, our conviction could t be made str er than itis. What argument, , what on He eould be made use of, which could strengthen us _ in the belief of ourown existence? To Des Cartes has proffered his services to uae ‘ who may chance to doubt their own existence. His argument is, Cogito, ego sum think therefore J exist. But if a man is doubt his own existence, he may as wel j his-own thoughts, and therefor cath of the argument is lost. Self-evidence or - ousiesstherefore isthe firstand primitive ," of all human knowledge; and to this ev: ’ feuntain of knowledge must be ener se- condary and inferiour. ~ Wie nd Demonstration is the second, an ore the truth thus obtained is not so imm that sensibly striking to the score as which is attested by consciousness or dence, yet it is as certain and infallible. “The. knowledge which is self-evident and that which is derived from demonstration are in point i. Aly the same; and the only difference be- ween, the one and the other is, that in demon- aos a process is required, but in conscious~ of the one isthe foundation, the other ‘ In self-cvidence, we drink atthe \ hare a and in demonstration thro regular channel, although the purity. o Ay the same. Every conclusion, when d from a regular syllogism or ebncatenation of s ; : | PHEOLOGY. bs aad be true if the premises are true, d therefore ‘as far as we have the power of fol- ng this mode of f reasoning, wherein the pres ses are founded in consciousness, or are de- ° rived from < a former syllogism whose premises ° Ke thus founded, we have an infallible guide sand. ‘ecrtainty. ‘d source of evidence in matters of Faith j is that of external testimony, which is ef various Kinds, and admits of infinite degrees of certainty. The highest, however, is that of Di- vine Revelation, where God hintself, by the mouths of his prophets and apostles, informs us of his relations and dispensations towards us in every point of view which is necessary or useful. ‘This, though not to be considered of equal | strength with the intuitive declarations of con- sciousness or self-evidence, is nevertheless to be . depended upon as the highest and surest fountain of theological knowledge generally. ‘It is true that Christians very frequently place the same bee ‘in the declarations of the scriptures in the declarations of their own senses or the ray ctions of demonstrative reasoning; and some ed reprove me forsaying that the know- te is derived is inferiour to ‘that which is 2 e of demonstration. ~ Tt will not, Hombres, denied by any who maturely have studied the fst ‘principles of human knowledge, or the rules | of logieal reasoning. Our own intuitive know- - ledge mast certain! y be received in preference to every other source where a possibility of error exists, for in demonstration error is altogether impossible when the premises are trtle. * Beside the evidence of Divine Revelation, _ there are other sources of Historical evidence, > ig LECTURES ON the strength of which depends in a great m sure upon the number of wi , the ria wledge, ; reju- ishness, with many : r iions in connexion with the same. Pri R tory, however, must be relied upon only:w the declarations thereof are consistent with | Divine word, which is to be considered supe our toevery human poocasaes cause inspi from God himself, wh sdom is unsez able, and whose truth e ns feos om generat to generation. From these rema ks, there! it will be perceived that to these two fir ; of human knowledge, consciousness and stration, in point of certainty and intalibilstyy Revelation itself must submit; but te Re all other testimony must be- considered i in 5 that is, all historical evidence, analogy, sok eve- ry deduction of reason where the ops © ) THEOLOGY. B7 jroposition therein found must be admitted, though contradicted by all analogy and” leal evidence. Let it~ emembered, jowever; that it cannot be received in contradic- ion’ to the voice of self-evidence or demonstra~ - Not that the Scriptures contain any pro- ions that are so; and whenever we view em in sucha light, we are to consider our- selyes in error as to t emises of the demon- stration, or the idea which was intended to.be conveyed in the Divine word. Wherefore it must be our objeet to detect and correct our er- ror, and obtain a true interpretation of the scrip- 3, When we shall at once perceive their con- acy, with themselves and all logical demon- ration, ue" In the investigation of all doctrinal © pointe this rule ought ever to be observed, that where our doctrines do not correspond with Revela- tion they are erroneous, and when they do they cannot be disproved. To be possessed of the highest degree of certainty, however; concern- ing the truth of our doctrines, they must corres- pond with eyery portion of the Divine word; we are not to take a verse and form a theory upon this, without any respect to the context general- ly; but on the contrary, unless our sentiments are consonant to every part they must be incor- rect. And this leads me to reflect upon the me- thod which many writers have pursucd in reli- gious controversy. They bring every particu- lar passage which has the least appearance to fa- vour their theory, and omit every one which sa~ vours to the contrary. And although we are allimperfect, and are rather inclined to show the wWiledge in the science of Theology. Eve- #. ‘than answer'sach .against them, yet this is b: 18 LECTURES ON reasons which support ¢ ar Of or honorable method. | Bye to arrive at a knowledge f th very particular in consi as wellas the ments in faeou of hie ystem Prejudice pee s been a prevailing cataract which tends to blind the eyes of be derstanding; and ’ will scarce ever be bet habit, and nelGilicdoaieel el ur opinio ly from reason and the word o! od this is a task which requires more str resolution than many may suppose, are so subject to vanity and self conceit, t acknowledge an error is nating lls Vie esta man. » THe! , ort . The method which I haye here adopte considering the various sources of evide the investigation of Theological subject eannot well be. refused, as p is found ; reason, ‘To besure some ctions against losophical and gine g speculations vs been made, and yet I believe without any other foundation than a want of ability to understand them. To be sure, ifthe word metay understood, as perhaps it was among the Grec philosophers, as merely the art of yaibbling Lat once will give my voice against no desire of promoting a stience whic ly to deceive. Pa 2 Pent Jot - This, however, is not the : sense i he word is now generally used; but on ontra- ‘tyj it is viewed asa science ‘which brings us to. - «THECLOGY. £8 a true knowledge of the human understanding, and in the study of which our rational powers are highly improved. Truth, whether derived ix one way or another, is good; and the only object.of philosophy is to discover it. The fact is, they who so.much ob- ject to our use of philosophic reasoning, make use © ef the same philosophy to prove the falsehood of ours. ith such men I do not wish to dis- pute; for they who deny. the use of reason, can- not be supposed to make.a proper use of it them- selves. Reason indeed is our distinguishing characteristic in this world, and without it we should be as ships without their pilots. Itisour polar star which guides us as we: wander upon e: vast ocean of imagination.and thought, which rings us to the discovery of worlds before un- known, and by which a fund of knowledge is Jaid up for our'use and happiness. _ ; } een regular argumentation it will be proper remark that two methods have been generally set forth by logicians, which are denominated the analytick and synthetick. In the first me- thod wearrive at the truth by tracing things back- ward until we arrive at the first principles, which is also called the method of invention. In the synthetic, which has also been termed the meth- od of doctrine or science, we are to commence with first principles, and continue ina connected — chain, until we arrive at the conclusion of the series. This is the method which is commonly pursued by writers engaged in the discussion of important doctrines, and is much more useful in affordingyconviction tothe minds ofothers, As. an application of the two-first sources of e human. knowledge, oe is, consciousness and de~ , wy 20 LECTURES ON monstration, it will be valed to bring in at _time some of the principal arguments m prot the Divine existence. I am indeed inclined . or rather that we learn froih intuition the neces- sity of a pre-existent cause of all finite existences, and this cause is that which we call God. | In- tuition, however cannot teach us the nature of this being, but only its existence.’ Wet if it'be denied that we receive the knowledge of a Sus preme being from intuition, we haye at least the _proofof demonstration, which;tho’ notse sensibly striking, is “nevertheless as certain as the voice -Of'self-evidence or consciousness, As Dhave bes -fore said, all demonstrative knowledge is found~ éd upon the declarations of self-evidence, ’ -May be traced thereunto by demonstration, or syllogistic course of reasoning. The intuitive principles which are the foundation ofall’ our Wiese on this subject, are, that we and other’ ‘beings do at present exist in space, and that be- ings “cannot begin to exist without a. cau and these are pr opesitions which need no be- cause they cannot be doubted: ' Therefore those beings which exist around us are either eternal, or there i is an eternal succession of finite’ beings from everlasting, or there isa Supreme who is the cause of their existence, © “That they are eternal, as Spinoza has endeavoured to main- fain, iS so absur a” that but few remarks: will be necessary on this point. The projectile foree of the planets is said. to be.continually decreasing, sand therefore the earth as well as all the planets are continually approaching nearer, es ‘and therefore if the earth was etern ago oe jhad it fallen into the sun and been destroyed: , sat THEOLOGY. Qi For though this continual approach to the sun” be ever so small, yet it must have finally arrived. to the sun in a less period than eternity. Again, - the inhabitants of the earth are continually in- creasing, and had this order of Nature continued from everlastin g, the earth would have been o- yerrun with inhabitants many ages before this; but on the contrary we perceive that at the pre- sent time the greater part remains still uninhab- ited. Sir William Temple, if history be true, éntertained some ideas which were in some res- pects similar to those of Spinoza,.as he thought that the present system of things were necessary and eternal. And many Atheistical writers have endeavoured to solve the phenomena of the visi- ° ble universe which:appear in opposition to their system by saying that matter is animated, and necessarily such..as produces all tke changes whieh are visible in the universe. Such were. anciently called wlozoikoz,; while those who. supposed matter to be inanimate were called. alomion. None of these sects, however, with all their reasoning and false doctrines, are capa- ble of accounting forthe appearances in the earth, by supposing it eternal; for the necessity of an eternal designer is as apparént.as the reality of our own existence. Other arguments might be brought against the eternity of the visible uni- verse, but which, in the present enlightened age, will be unnecessary. i se That,the visible world is only the production ef some other material and undesigning being, and one of those which’‘according to the nature of matter has existed in infinite succéssion, is ime possible; for an eternal succession of finite be- ings, is a contradictionain terms; because ifevery *% F i m. 22 oF LECTURES ON part of that suecessiow is finite, then-the’ whole is finite, and consequently not eternal-in their existence. There must-therefore be something which is extraneous, and upon which the whole depends. Furthermore, as it is undeniable from present existence that a being or beings have ex- isted from eternity; is it not, from the harmony and beauty-whieh has ever prevailed in the cre- ated universe, much mere reasonable to suppose that the same being who now exists and upholds the host of wandering worlds is hiaself eternal, the same being who created the universe from everlasting? Even should we perceive in, this earth the same disposilion-and arrangement of perts for the promotion of its speeies as we ob- serve ia the animaland vegetable-kingdoms, in whet respect could this lessea thenecessity of au eternal and-designing cause? It would on the contrary only heighten our admiration and further tend to convince us of his existence, that we might be enabled the more satisfactorily to aecount for this order so. necessary to continue such a succession. ‘This argument, for which I um indebted to Dr. Paley, at once shows, that were a succession of worlds possible, it would not be eternal, and-could not account for its own ne- cessary organization; for inanimate matter is al- together incapable of such design as would be required in each world to continue its species. We behold animals and vegetables continually issuing forth into existence, governed upon the same principles, and framed upon the same mo- del as the parent; yet the parent is never con- sidered the author of this order and harmony which are the distinguishing features.of the spe- ¢ies, and from. which the species.is continued. _ SR Me Ne ‘'s And why, even if worlds were successive, shook - we attribute to each one its own cei specnantoieet, any ‘more ‘than in animal bles?-- Among the insect and v: able 2es, it-appears that not even the idea o a suc~ ing vegetable or insect ever existed in the of either; and yet every part is duly ad- “proportioned with the most wis- j 5 ed : 4 ie the young plant or insect finally comes fter a series of metamerphoses and changes, fect form of its original, surpassing in for- “Behold the lilies of the field, how they grow and thrive; they toil not neither do they spin, and yet Solonton in all his glory was not array- ed like one of these.’?. They are neither planted nor watered by the hand of man or any created: being, yet they are formed and beautified with the same unerring pencil which. must always surpass the’ sublimest seme and efforts of hu- mar wisdom. ~ Perhaps it will be said that these are the pro- ductions of Nature and not of art, consequently no proof of an artist. But permit me toask, what is this principle of Nature? Does it plan with skill? Does it execute with power and unrival- led. wisdom, -and surpass. the most sublime ef- forts of any finite artist? If SO, Nature itself is God; our end is accomplished in proving the ex- istenee of a Deity, for the fact'is admitted. It matters not to what cause we attribute those e- vents of the visible universe, for that cause, be it in what it may, is the being whom we call God. Net that we view God altogether in this light, but even were it admitted, it could be no objection to his real existence. les aoe Oe = See a Ee Ft” % , ae fr ‘ mation and beauty all the ingenuity of man. - eo Py y TO to SE CANT 8% 's Aes eee i # H ces = a4” Pag sa | ‘We see, therefore, the nec ity of an ae hand which directs a ok per” channels, and tae ible wisdo A being must consequ sty est ois ; and essentially i in epen ent, and by whose st porting and upholding arm” the uni in all its sublimity and beauty was created ‘and pre- — served from the beginning, For re ever was a time when all v id, and er cause nor effect existed in unfathomed space, the same state of non-existence would have continued for- ever; - no part of existence could ease ne beginning without a cause ian the effect. Atheists have attributed the e ence ¥ the universe to an accidental concurrence of floating atoms, whereby the earth and all the various species and orders of beings, whether animate or inanimate, have been formed without the least — intention or design, and having been thus form- — ed, cannot cease to exisMbintil some superiour and sufficient cause ap r their annihilation. _But even this, were it admitted ,aceording t to the use of the word chance~by all, correct write does not take away the necessity of a first at creating cause; for though many eventsa sidered : accidental, they a are notconsid A less. A man while digging a well mighi intl course of his labours fall upon a ehest of and though this discoy ery was altogether acei- « dental or -chance-work; it was. not» without aa cause. . By the word chance,whenevenit is 1 propriety ; We mean only that-s taken place unintentionally, ort asd.the cause of which we new not THEOLO oa 2S: event. Wherefore even should it bé admitted that the creation and existence of the visible uni- - was accidental or undesigned, it in noman- ‘prove that the being and author of the uni- vor whom we call God, was a being without intelligence or design, and egnsaquently not a i a. teat 4 Tn contradiction, however, to such an —— opinion; we have in the immense fabrick o creation abundant proofs of his intelligence and © personality; for every particle of matter testifies that its formation and organization were design- ed with wisdom and art. To exhibit all the in- Stances wherein the designs of the Creator are particularly manifested; would require a full in- vestigation of Philosophy, Astronomy, Chemis- try, Mineralogy; Anatomy, Botany, and indeed the whole science of Nature, for every atom is a beok of wisdom to those who study it. If, in traversing some uninhabited island, ¥ should discover in some conspicuous and parti- eular part thereof, a magnificent building, form- ed agreeably to some particular order of Archi- tecture, for instance, the Gothick. And if in some particular part of this building there should be an observatory, in which were telescopes, or- reries, quadrants, globes, and: all other instru- ments necessary for taking observations in the science of Astronomy; what, I ask, after having very minutely examined this eollection of in- struments and the building wherein they are found, what would be the most probable opinion which I should form concerning their> origin? Is it to be supposed that I should attribute their existence to accident or chance-work; an unde~ sthe necessity ofa cause. It would. bat a 26° Seiten signed formation and ac io) of mirrors, convex and concave many other necessary appur belonging? — Is it-not’ likely that 4 should attribute their bite fo the 1S « some eminent artist, who had planned-the sam« for important purposes? And eve . though I should not at ieee pore po for whi every particular instrument was de: would not be sufficient. tomake me belie naend was intended, I should still eonel they were the effects of contrivanee and design. If then, towers,, observatories, and: Astronomi- cal instruments cannot be formed and pt ther without superiour contrivance and design, what shall we say of the various animal and ve- getable existences which are continually present-_ echtaatee consideration, as. the source ofso much: wonder and admiration? What ‘shall we say of that noble fabriek man, formed with sueh skill, » and endued with such superiour powers? And what. shall we say-of worlds and systems of © worlds, formed and-governed in their several . motions and revolutions without a single devia- tion? : ‘oS ? Every pitiga: of the intron meee : fitted for the place which it fills in the multitude — of finite existences. The fowls of the air, the fish of the sea, and the beasts-of the forest, with. the humble worm that crawls.along the dust,are ~ all endowed with capacities adapted.to their se- veral circumstances in existence. To se particular species-ofanimate nature as spec of what, has already been asserted, will be at*this timeuseless. On this poin' pa ) THEOLOGY, . 27 Wc en proper, however, to mention one particular in- stance where the Divine wisdom is more parti- eularly manifested than perhaps in any. other part. of the visible creation; and this is in, the anatomy of the human: body, the..circulation, of the fluids, tl:e disposition of the bones, muscles, ,tendons, ligaments, blood-vesse!s, glands, x nervesy and the like, all adapted to.our use and happi- ness, and performing their, several functions in harmony with each other to the benefit of the whole. The circulation of the blood,-and. the economy of the absorbent system are subjects of the greatest importance.and curiosity in the hu- man frame All the ingenuity and wisdom. of the philosophie world, wita all their plans and devices, could never have disposed ofa single atusele or fibre to greater advantage or with more’ propriety than has beendone by the hand of Na- ture. And when we see such wisdom, design and contrivance in the formation not only of man but of universal nature, what canbe a stronger proof of the personality of that being who thus formed and goyerns all things? ‘The. heavens declare the glory. of God, and the . firmament showeth his handy work. >~ Who can contem- plate them without acknowledging them to be the sublimest specimens of inanimate creation; and in which the superiour wisdom of their au- thors at all times particularly manifested ? They continually lecture.us in the science of Theology; day unto day and night unto night they inform - us in the language.of the. poet, “The hand that made us is Divine,” The Sun, the Moon, and the Stars magnify his holy name; the mighty sea waves in hoarse mur- murs.the. praises due to: Him 3 while the drop- 2 28 maine oN ng caverta pad ater vales in softer language Oe. his glory. : In order to prove that the universe was in its existence and organization undesigned, some have endeavoured to show that among the visi- ble works of creation there are evident marks of. irregularity and disorder, and especially in the human system, where disease, pain, death, and wnoumbered evils continually attend us) whiclt could not have been, were our existence and mation designed by a being who was infinite in knowledge ‘and power. Bat let me answer, though apparent disorder may exist in ereation, yet the same undoubtedly tends to the good of the whole; although we may be incapable of showing Meh arets such may be the fact. He on- ly who ‘is infinite in k nowledge can be a proper jadge in this casa He only who is fully aes quainted with the art of creating worlds and spir- itual beings, and who knows the end for whieh every part was intended, can be allowed togive — his opinions concerning the irregularity and des fortnity of Nature, as no being who is’ himself. imperfect can always judge correetly. Conse~ quently until our opponents possess such know- ledge, and become omniscent like unto their Cre~ ator, let them be content to remain silent con-- cerning the imperfections" of the universe, espe- eially in those points whereof they are “sean. trih | It is useless, however, to continue our ar ments in proof of an eternal, independent, and designing cause of the visible universe, when the different } parts thereof so positively confirm’ the assertion. And not only so, but this kind of evidence, the testimony of Nature, has been re- seived and admitted as true in every land, forthe : “THEOLO CY., AL) “inhabitants of every land from timeimmemorial have read in her records the being and even the attributes of God. . The necessity of such a being. in-accounting for the wonders of creation, is apparent to every sensible and intellisent mind. The learned and the unlearned, the Hindoo, the Turk, the Arab, and the American savage, with the Heathens of every age and nation, allalike, honour and revere © a being, whom they acknowledge as the invisible author and director of the wonders of existence. And though their ideas have been from time to time corrupted with all manner of superstition -and prejudice, yet they have always admitted the -existence of a Deity, whether worshipped under the name of “Jehovah, Jove, or Lord.”? And shail people who live in an age when science and moral philosophy are brought to the highest degrees of perfection and refinement, be more ob- .stinate than the poor illiterate and blinded Hea- then, who was favoured only with the misty moonbeams of knowledge and truth? Can itbe ~ possible for any man to be so presumptuous, and so insensible to the honour and dignity of human nature, as to suppose that only a few such men as Paine and Voltaire with their followers are _ possessed of real wisdom and .knowledge, while the remainder of the whole human family are mere fools and bigots? -But alas, so it is; and it is_an unfortunate circumstance in the history » of man that his name has been so disgraced by the madness of such reasoners. True it is,as the Psalmist hath said, that none but fools can say ‘in their hearts, there isnoGod. For after hay- ing considered all the testimonies in favour of othe existence of a Supreme Being who is the apy- 30 LECTURES OW thor and ebPether of all finite existences; none but a being who is void of understanding,’ or at least makes wo use of his reasoning powers, can ever beso presumptuous asto deny a fact so in- controvertible in its nature. To every rational being the successive events of time are a suffi- cient argument of both the existence and person- al nature of their Author. The latter, however, “ will become the subject of a future lecture, and therefore any further remarks on WA Ean at the present be unnecessary. we ee : 2 Oo Pt RO Bs desi ee) ; ; ais. ee se 1 SS URE Ripe 2h Mr, CAPR Ne ita 4 te e: at phe The. Nature and Penfections of God ‘and a bee spiritual creatures. “Bromt the undeniable attestations of reason and common sense, we are ‘compelled 1 to acknowl- edge the existence ofsome Divine and ‘superior being, » who created the universe and isin hisexis- tence prior to all other beings. “Under this con- Viction, we are naturally | led to inquire concern- ing his attributes and nature génerally. When. We attempt to investigate a subject of this’ na- ture, however, we are to be calm and consider- ate ;, when we attem pt to look into the nature of so august, so sublime a being as the Author of the mivere: we: are at once dazzled with the Splendour of his glory —wwe aré confused and lost in ourown insignificance—we feel and know our A An liar perfections of st ~ for.unless we know wherein per! Tab Perfection, if I understand the te ness or natural propriety, disposit ty.in such beings te answer the: _purposes. In order, howeyer, thai our re haa him, an him, for. our happiness ourselves so far acquaintec as may tend to his g creatures. fo underst f fectly. we do not ask or wish ledge is too high even for an so for man, But before we attempt n” ee ee Oe i be necessary to ascertain the standard to which our ideas of perfection are how can we say that God is perfect? Tl ing ascertained, our next object will be t that God possesses all those aa ot 7 consists this standard. when appliedto spiritual bein, est sense of which it is capab e that abeing is perfect, or endowed attributes which render fim fit and ihe attainment of his own ends and we must. know what the those ends and purposes are, _ The only primitive and original which any intelligent being aets, : able to ascertain, is the attainment. or tien of happiness. We can assume even for the actions of the Alm be proper to remark, howe obtained i in the eternal operat Q PHBOLOGY $3) own mind, and not from transiené. The actions of God, therefore, nderhim eternally happy, whil ae are the cessary result of his. is happiness, Man in alk aims at something to be jos ala oe when the act is accom- times, nnot aim at future good, but acts only in consistency with his Sao nature, in the exer-. consists, his happiness. Continu- $5, therefore, is the end ‘and conse- ‘ quence 0 pare the Divine attributes and their exer-. om ae as he exercise of them is eternal, his- happiness is eternal also. Weare indeed inform- ed from his own word, thatit is tohis happiness, pleasure and glory, that he exercises his atiri- nutes for the welfare of men; and we know. of 3,,this s motive does not operate in God as it does im men; because his immanent acts be- in; arnal, the effect, which is happiness, is e- tern: also ; but with man it is. otherwise; the inward acts of his mind being successive and re- newed from time to time, his happiness is suc- cessive also. It is true, that the visible events | whieh take place in the universe through the agency of Ged, are successive, but these are not the eyents which constitute Divine happiness ;, they are only the effect thereof, as the Divine’ happiness consists in the internal operations of his own mind, from which all external aus take place. The attainment and preservation of ions being the final and grand object for which God _ and every spiritual being acts, our next inquiry but God being icfinitely happy at all” ‘whieh any being acts. Never-" al 3a LECTURES 6N is, what are the qualifications necessary to attainment? For in those qualifications c ? the standard of all spiritual verfe tion. In- an- swering this question, our evidence must be drawn chiefly from analogy. We know those’ qualifications which rende capable « of hap- piness, and we are to ‘conclude, that in God they are the same in nature, though farsup rior in ex- | tent. Perfection is not always infinite; but ev- ery thing which is good, or tends to ha ; is, as far as its influetice i effectual, a pe though perhaps a finite one. To rai there- fore, from the analogy of human nature eoncern- ing that ‘which is Divine, is altogether eorréet, although his perfections are infinite and ours fi- nite. That his perfectionsare in kind similar to ours, may be inferred from the analogy be thee works of creation or the visible universs the works. of nien or created ee ee manifest power, wisdom and design’in mation. And indeed the Divine ee of and confirms our mode of reasoning rm- ing us that the attributesef God a nan are similar-in kind, that we are formed afte s like- ness, and created after his own image. And: thus we find that both reason and the word of God unite in showing unto us that the Divine perfections arein kind similar to human. But God being an eternal spirit, and self-existent in his nature, must not be compared to man, as to- the succession of his thoughts or mode, of what, in maa is called reflection; fer God in all his thoughts and internal actions, is, as 1 have before said, eternal. By internal actions, 1 mean the operations ofthé mind or spirit, which in man THEOLOGY. 35 may be comprehended under meditation, deter- mination, willing; and which may continue years and azes without producing any external effects. We may continue to act in determina- ‘tion, or what in God is more properly called de- ereeing or ordaining, for years without the ac- eomplishment of any external consequences, And in a similar manner, the actions of design -and willing in the Divine being are perfectly in- ternal and eternal; his decrees are everlasting, ‘although the accomplishment of these take place only in time. These internal acts of the Deity, as I have before intimated, are called by some, his immanent acts, as-being distinct from those which call forth the effect at the appointed time ; and his effecting acts are those which are called transient, because successive, and taking place in time; and are the natural’ effects or consequen- ‘ees of his immanent actions.. With respectto his immanent acts, therefore, the Divine spirit is very different from that which is human and finite.. That reflection and willing are not successive in God, may be infer- ‘red from his infinite wisdom. The successive acts of reflection in man are useful only in im- “proving our knowledge, and recalling ideas which have been lost; whereas God being pos- sessed ofall knowledge at all times, successive reflection and determination: would be useless. All the designs, thoughts, decrees-.and counsels: of the Almighty are only Omnipresent actiony in him, and therefore; though continued now,, are nevertheless eternakand without beginning. These eternalactions of God are the necessary eonsequences of infinite perfection; and werethey mot eternal, but successive asin man, they wou) A 36 LECTURES ON be evident proofs of imperfection; for in| but imperfection in the Divine knowledge wou restrain him from perfecting his decrees and de- terminations from everlasting, thers showing that he was not sufficiently’ nae.” | with the circumstances of things as to fe Upthie mind concerning them, until other events should hap- pen; or he could obtain-more light upon the sub- ject; which, if God is Omniscient, is altogether inconsistent with his nature. ‘The immanent a eternal actions of God, as-before said, consti his happiness, and ee, transient acts ‘are merely the necessary consequences of. _ his immanent ones.. As the Divine happiness consists in his immanent actions, or the inward application of his own spirit, it becomes necessary in order te constitute his. happiness, that he should be con- stituted capable of such actions. To do this re- quires certain attributes, or what may otherwise be called perfections, and which, as has been be- fore. proved, are similarin kind to human perfec- tions, and which it is my object now to consid- er. st These attributes, as far as we are “acquainted with the Divine nature, may be generally com- prehended under two classes, those which are denominated Essential, and those which are cal- led Moral: In the first-class amay he-cnumera- ted Spirituality, Omnipotence, Omniscenge, Om- nipresence, Immutability, Eternity, Self-exist- ence, and Unity. In the seeond class are Holi- ness, Justice, Goodness, and Merey. . That Gad possesses many more attributes with which we abe at present totally unaequainted, ‘isn to be questioned, as we cannot think of | hend- Sng iafinity, when the minu f finite beings. - FRECLOGY. by a our grasp. As these attributes are in existence attested by the voice of bothrea- and Revelation, itis my object only to. make h remarks upon them as ma y tend to a better “conception of the Divine nature generally, or “may be useful in iNustrating some particular doc- trines, which may come under our considera- t -in the course of these Lectures. . ae behead these remar|s upon the standard of per- fection, it will be perecived, that if the: attributes _which I have here ascribed unto Deity are ade. quate: for. the accomplishment ofall his purposes, _and in their exercise render-him perfectly hap- py and full within himself; then we are to.pro- _nounce him a perfect beings and so we do, know- ing of no other attributes which would add j in a- “ny respect to his happiness or glory. And tho’ _ he may possess other attributes. with which we are altogether unacquainted, as before remarked, yet they are rendered means of happiness: cnly in being subservient to those which I have alrea- dy mentioned and which constitute his real, per- fections.. Those-attributes whieh T have termed Bees. . tial, as Oninipotence, Omniscience, Omnipres- ence and the like, are the necessary qualifications _ which every spiritual-beigg must possess in or- _ der to render him capable of infinite happwess. . These qualifications are also useless unless they are exercised,:and their exercise, especially in. God, is:indispensibly neeessary to: their oxist- ence, and-is known by the consequences which follow, as a tree is- known by its fruits Tn the next place, is there any particular. mode -or law according to,which these ‘Essential sattri- ~ butes. of the,Deity are to be exercised? or.is.eve- v z 38 LUCTURES ON is-as edeoaby ‘tothe fs 4 «ea cerning him, asthose altrithites wihidh bets Gate neta to action. This standard consists in his moral attributes, and which are comprehended under Holiness, Justice, Goodness and Mercy and the Divine pleasure consists in a measure exe ercise of his-‘Essential or Intellectual according to this his standard of m tion. It is not the effect of this exercise, sists in it; as indeed: we find that roe ness, though ever so imperfect, eatisletcaiellly in the exercise of our mental faculties. God ere- ated man only for the pleasure that he received. in creating him, and supports him under: the: various dispensations of his providenc for the pleasure which he receives in suppe him. And this’ is the great end in the ‘plishment of which, all the events both in the natural and spiritual world are bree of ef- fected. The standard of perfection, therefore, consists in those qualifications or attributes which ave: necessary unto’ the attainment of happiness in ‘the possessor, and are to be comprehended un- der the-general names of Power, Wisdom, Spir- ituality and the: like, as exercised in the ways of being who is more orless thus qualified, and ex- Holiness, Justice, Goodnessand Mercy. And that ercises his attributes in the way of morality and, religion, isin his nature more or less perfect. Aind from: this we sre cnablet aa correctly eoncerning the perfection or imperfection of ey- elligent being. He who is thebest qual- happiness, cohsequently enjoys the most;, ev ho enjoys more happiness than others, is to be known asabeing who is more perfect his nature, and cee of more power and a jae, exampleiéf what hie been afarmed, F the condition of our first parents while they were inthe garden of Eden. They pos- sessed more power, tiore knowledge, more ho- liness,and more extensive priviledges; their ) refore, were certainly more exten - sive for the attainment of happiness thaa ours, rh ate more perfect: ‘And as far as they ions, they ‘became imperfect; be pte eve inherited the samé, being their chil- fale) Ot paves partakers of their fallen ar powers have ey tr limited , and consequently, so far is the ima eur Gal lost; and as farmas’ ve lost ie eee our God, so far do we want in the per- fee of our natures, because we’ are deficient jn the qualifications for happiness. The per- fection of every spirittal being, therefore, con- sists in his qualification for happiness, and if God js these in an infinite degree, being capabie of infinite happiness, he is infinitely happy: Previous to any thing further concerning’ the partidular attributes of God, it will not, perhaps, be amiss to staté that there is another, ae lower’ standard; according to which our ideas of per fection are sometimes regulated, and which, though inapplicable unto God, is applicable’ unte all his creatures. Por example, a clock is inten- ded to keep time, and if it possess every qualifi- sation for that’end, it is to be considered a per- Oe 4 Set clock, and it beco ssdisqualified to aid be called passive penf ness to answer, all th signed by the were is “applicable unto man; b tare designed by his Crea eadsand purposes in the, his ,universal kingdom. «4 answers the end to whi created, I think, cannot-b eke who maintains thepevfee for whieh man was- -— have before intimated God, and he answers t send well, as another; in his. dar tion. Were we to admit -f would be"obliged to. adtinit 4 ih frustrated i in his designs, w whi ' nipotent and bag age i That th no ch} i answ ers the en iy creatéd must also be admitte principle; for unlesshe does, that God, ither for want of wis power to accomplish, was ine such a being as he intended. Thi tween the ends to which and f being is-created, may perhaps n tion. : The end to which a of the keeping of time, and | create a machine for the kee happiness, comfort aad conveniense er way the ends to which man was ¢ La signed are both salvation and d: as sickness, disease and ironegie’ ab world, and man fully answers the “-GHoroey. ay for which God’ designed and created bei gs salvation and damnation was his own Pp d Glory. Perhaps it will be denied t t ath any pleasure in the death. of sinner $,as ftis said in the scriptures, “as: I live, saith the ‘Lord, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicks ed; but that the wicked turn from his way and z ive.” ‘Ezekiel xxxili—1l. ‘This, however, is o be taken in an individual sense, implying that the damnation of an individual afforded him no ( a harcore than his salvation, provided. that *h had Barrdrniawany other part of. the le works ; yet-when we consider the do- isa in a general point of view we must edge that the damnation of souls as well as their Bisisa, must be in some measure sub- _servient to his glory when viewed in relation to ; for if such was not the ease, God di ever ‘have created such as he knew would bate, and.as he does nothing but what does t tend to: his glory, so the. damnation of the wicked must do the same ‘Therefore, in this lower sense of the word perfection, man is in no respects imperfect, be-. “cause he answers all the Divine designs, whetter! by obedience or disobedience, salvation or dam- nation. But perhaps you will reply, if sinners -answer the ends of their creation as well and as fully as the tighteous, why are they not equally rewarded? I answer, rewards are not bestowed because we answer the ends of our. creation; but because we take that method in answering them which is consistent with the moral nature of God, and which he requires at our hands. But per- heps you will again. ask, can man answer the ends of his creation, without pursuing the way ko appointed by doing his « ‘Pharaoh was Solara up. for the express purpose of and power of God thr how did he answer, this ap created? Was it in the pe Far otherwise. It was on bellion against God. Neve the Divine purpose as well eit l righteousness and holiness. It rocure him a reward ae done; but, on the co punishment. Thus we s as well as the righteous a the ends of their creation, fect when viewed aecordin ard, which is applicable unt To say that it is the aay the end of his creation is a is a duty implies in the. ee power, it implies a law comme plishment of certain thin plies Free Agency. But in 2 of our creation liberty is nol ean be without giving man power | the intentions of the Deit big 9 : correspond only. with thea first s¢ have defined them. I therefore 1 ther consideration of the Divin which have been enumer ated.as qu ‘pure happiness. ‘ “From these remarks it will be perceived that ~when we speak of the perfections of God or of any other intelligent and spiritual being as such, We mean a capacity and fitness in such beings for the attainmentand enjoyment of happiness. As their capacity consists in the several attri- _butes which.I have ascribed unto God, and which, in a finite degree, belong to all his spiritual erea- ‘tures; so he who possesses a greater share of these attributes, possesses the greater happiness and perfection. And as this capacity or qualifi- cation in the Deity is infinite and infinitely im- proved, we must pronounce him, so far as we are gapable of knowing wherein perfection consists, a being infinitely perfect. And in the same pro- portion, that men and angels possess the same -qualifications or personal attributes, so far may they -be considered as perfect. It-will not be necessary for me to’state that “these attributes of knowledge, power, and others which I have ascribed unto the Deity, are quali- fications for happiness; for I presume that eve- ry person possessed of them, learns this from ex- gperience. Wherefore, I now proceed to make a few remarks upon ‘these attributes as possessed by ithe Deity, and show some reasons which prove them to belong: anto him. Nature alone, were no other testimony admitted, is sufficient to confirm the fact; yet when we consider the declarations of the Divine word, every doubt must vanish, and our conviction becomerclear as the noon day. Who can deny the Omnipotence and Omnis: eence of God? We behold the hest of wander- ing worlds which glide along the mighty -con- #ave, of blazing comets performing their 4 AM) E 444 LECTURES 6N amense revolutions in their appointed seasons)— “We behold the earth, the ocean, andthe sky; r@ lete with beings formed in beauty harmo; Ee and to rac ean eth Hy unta a God who is wise and powerful beyond com: prehension? He who can do these things, what ean he not do? He who can so wisely direct the operations of the universe, what can he not | know? “He that planted the’ear, shall he not hear? He that formed the eye shall he not see? He that teacheth man knowledge, shall he not know??? Psalm xciv—9, 16. «We see no limits in the immensity of his works, and ean ascribe no bounds to hispower. Weare not tosupp that it is exhausted; that all which could have _ been done is done; but onthe contrary, he who could bring into existence one wera could — breathe forth millions more, and*find no stay to” his Almighty ‘arm. ‘When -we consider the na- ture of man, who is even a miraele unto himself,’ we have an unparalleled proof of the infinity of the Divine knowledge and power. “We view! ourselves as the Lords of this lower world, and» trace our origin from age to age, and from gene- " ration to generation, and in every portion of our inquiries we are astonished at the powers of the” human mind, the extent of his imagination, ‘the | progress of his towering genius, the extent of his — ambition, and his endeavours to rise from per- ’ fection to perfection, and indeed at his intellec- ° tual faculties generally. In this once noble and happy being, the re- licks of which, are even now visible, asa temple “in ruins, do we behold a living image of the Dei- ty, thongh now fallen and degraded; possessed of all the known and personal attributes of his. _ THEOLOGY,, 45 Creator, though ina very limited degree, such as wisdom, power, spirituality aad intelligence _ And when we behold a finite being endowed with powers which are capable of al- most infinite improvement, it must evidently ap- pear that none but a being whose powers are in- finite, could thus wisely direct the organization: and formation of such a creature as m mipP “The Lord by wisdom hath founded the earth, by un- derstanding he hath established the benueing Prov. i—19. “O Lord, how manifold are thy works; in wisdom hast thou made them all.” Psalm civ—24.~ oPhe Divine Omnipotence’ and Omnistence may very. properly be considered: as arguments proving. Pm presence. For he who is capa- of kn < and doing all things, at all times, : hy: places, must be ev ery “where present at t] e time; as a being cannot act where he is. note. Andgtherefore his capability of acting in iafinite space, proves tha fills immensity. As we perceive no limits"in the extent of the ereated universe, or in the sBccession of passing events, we must at least suppose that he who go- verns in infinite s must be Omnipresent. Matter is of itself inert, and incapable of begin- ing motion, or continuing the same when begun, without some supporting power; and without some extraneous principle of action and motion, the revolution of planets and the succession of: animal and. vegetable existences could not be ’ continued for a moment; consequently wherever there is motion, there is the hand and power of: God. Perhaps it will be said, motion and the ordinary operations of physical powers are con- tinued-by the commen laws of Nature, the at- Cd ‘ a traction of gravitation, the Centripetal and"Cén. trifugal forces which in balancing each other;! are the support of all planetary motions. But’ as I have before intimated, the efficacy of the laws of Nature depends altogether upon the con- tinued agency of an intellectual being. Lawsare - aot agents, but only rules according to which a-- gents operate; and as matter in and of it- self, has no power to cause any effects, the rules. which are observed in the operations of the uni- verse, are no more than rules which an intelli- gent being observes in the suecessive accomplish- ment of his. works. Motion must commence~ from action originally, and continued motion ean be supported only by continued action. It is: 4 who upholds all things by- “er } of his... power, and wherever we behold om ‘ pebble, there do we perceive the i * manifested presence of God. “Whither,” saith the Psalmist, “shall. } flee from ‘presence? If I ascend up int ven, thou art there; if I> make my hed in hell, behold thouartthere; if F take the wings of tH®morning and d “a the uttermost parts of the i there hand: lead me, and thy rig \d shall Hold “The heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot: contain thee. Psalm cxxxix—7,8, 9; 3 Kings vili—27. ve With respect to the Unity of God, the light of: Nature declares only a unity of council, while’ the scriptures supply the deficiency of the oo of Nature, by declaring that there is but one: the Father. Every plant.and vegetable which springs forth in the fields are formed upon one. general plan, and are possessed of similar proper- ties. All vegetables are supported and nourish~- THEOLOGY. : oi the air, theearth, a: pee tbe same; covered wit > oe ne Eeoened pd seed. rng ft : in which causes a stone to fall the ear as the moon in her revolutions*round | tis soles in ety ees ith ites in their. appoiht- lutions round their superiours. The same prevails in this world, is observed Tit ott cg ae a greater or le . « ac sur- rounded with an-atmosphere similar to our own, each warmed and enlightened by the ch revolving upon its axis, as the fittest mode for the pie a a and heat, and each re- » months, ataee Om if y This: rmity of planat once a of council, which must have e: di in the OFr- ation and support of the visible universe. urthermore, that there is:but one God, is ren- dered highly probable circumstance that is necessary. “who co form ‘one. lor universe could ‘for: e wh could organize one animal or veg eee or- ganize various genera and: species; and for this reason “me may much more consistently believe that all the operations of created Nature are de- sy een ga ramtie many,, - ; 9 weep coats aun pies or inant, yet f ae : $4 ‘LECTURES ON ‘heart and affeetions which eannot well be bed, and which in aymeasure has some re to all the moral attributes of our spiritual nature. It is by this that we are inclined to ayoid sin and live agreeably to the rules of religion and virtue. But when we turn to a contemplation of the Di- vine Holiness, we are lost as it were in wonder and amazement; we are blinded by its radiant — beams, and must cover our faces in shameand re- | proach. © All that we are to conceive of this glorious attribute, being from analogy er revelation, must of course be but dust in the bal- ance. With him all is pure, all is perfeet, and consequently all is holy, either.as respects his natural dispositions -or actions. Ati is an attri- -bute apparent in all his revelations, and especial- ly in his providences and dispensations towards man. He has prescribed unto us those prccdmrs ‘which are the most proper for the attainment of happiness; he has given unto usa ‘Moral Law, and therein requires strict holiness at our hands; he has shown his detestation to unholiness,by threar’ tening and deereeing punishment all aio who walk in-the ways thereof; and we ny instances recorded where his- Aemaiesinen ‘have been fulfilled upon the disobedient children of this world. Weare positively informed, that. without Holiness no man shall see the Lord;, therefore, we are to conclude that in requiring such purity in his creatures, he has abundantly manifested his own purity and Holiness. “The. Lord is righteous inall hisworks,”? Psalmsexly.. 17. “There is none holy as the shen conan ii. 2. The Goodness.of God may bertahecinie ie ‘position or inclination to exercise his different . se OLOGY. 55 away which shall be productive of ific ations im his creatures which are ; ndering them capable of happi- is is an attribute which shines brighter hte r as we continue to advance in the nowle Ige of God and his dispensations towards 1S. every portion of-our lives do we experi- nee the influence of its enlivening beams. By lave we been pérmitted to taste the fruits of istence, and the blessings of this life, in addi- to sich, we havé the promise of a glorious i hereafter. The foibles of youth, the enjoyments of manhood, anc the consolations of e are all derived from the -good will of our enly Father. “He is good to-all, and his ender mercies are over all his works.” Psalm exiy—9. Even the beasts of the field may praise him, as they also ~have experienced: his bounty according to their capacities. But above all, man 2ems to be the greatest object of this attribute of. any earthly being, though perhaps the inhab- itauts of other worlds have received the same blessings at his hands: When we contemplate the crowns of everlasting glory which are laid up for those who love the Lord their God with their whole heart and mind, and their neighbors as themselves, how can we refrain from exelaim- ing in astonishment, “What is man that thou art mindful of him, and the son of man that thou visitest him?” His goodness is not to be mea- sured by ourgratitude. Though we are unwor- thy the least blessing, no, not to pick up the crumbs under his table, we are invited to a par- ticipation in those which are eternal. “Every good and perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights.” James i—17. ¥ we gO Su ence _w 56 LECTURES ON To enumerate all the particular instances W wh one in his goodness has been parti larly manife towards us, would be to ae ete pe Listo of our lives, from the cae w Mebacsnce first grace our infant cheeks, until tate into the owly chambers of the dust. sae would _praise the Lord for his goodness, ier me Pal erful works to the ehulcire: of evii—8, strict CaF to his rights, and the rij ghts " creatures, according to a certain aw, with < termination to exercise his, power and authority in causing these rights to he satisfie ‘in the which that law has pointed out. » All rights, vil or ecclesiastical, or of any other denomin tion, except perhaps the natural right of God to do as he pleaseth with his own, are derived fom existing laws. . The laws, according to whie man may possess aright to the ea pein aoe of his maker, were given of God himself Or=, ding to that law or covenant which was institut- | ed between God and man, both the Creator and, ’ -ereature are bound to abide. God being the au- thor of man, as wellas of all his happiness either, in this world or that which is to come, possesses, on account. of this his goodness, a natural right to perfect obedience from him, and therefore full power and authority to impose upon him, such laws as he shall see fit to appoint. ‘Perhay it will be well to remark, however, that consis- tently with his attributes, he ean appoint ‘no laws but such as in some way tend to his” alla glory, or the welfare of his creatures; cordingly we find that it is by those rei B,. “that happiness is rendered accessible unto us. “As “THEOLOGY. st 34 right to demand 6bedience from nan is in consequence thereof bound to o- tad furthermore, 1 man, according to the which God in his covenant made unto possess a title to rewards and punish- ling to his performance or non-per- of the Divine commands; and God, confo Paty to his attribute of Justice, is hound to sati fy this right. The nature of this law be- eer ind man, though discoverable in part ym the visible works of the universe, is chiefly made by his Revelation; and aecording thereu , Justice will be fully administered, or in oth ords, rights will he perfectly satisfied. ae ‘Ge work Of d man shall Ke render nto , and cause every man to find according to 8 ways, ” Job xxxiv—ll. “He will not t lay upon man more than right, that he should enter Fatd patric with God.” Job iv—23. “Is not my way equal? saith the Lord. Are not your ways unequal?” Ezek. xviii25. Mercy, t though generally considered a faistines: attribute o ithe Deity, i is perhaps little more thaw” a partic modification of his Goodness. It consists in a particular disposition or readiness to do goo I, by delivering from pain or impend- * lisery, and is one of the most conspicuous: utes of God. Without passing through a fall investigation of the gospel history and doc- trines therein found, it would be impossible to’ give even the outlines of the many blessings whie ‘have been conferred upon us in this par-. ticular way. By this are we, who are naturally unclean and unholy, permitted to purify our- selyes in the blood of the Lamb; and become spotless in: thé | of our Heavénly Father: te 58 LECTURES ON eseape the pangs of everl ed for the deyil e querors over death shell, ly to mount-up. on ea mortal in the skies. It is spring from on high hath vis ite to them that sit in darkness anc of death, to guide our feet ‘into t Luke i—78, 79. Knowing our un worthies n positions which continual] and war agaiast the soul, we tonished in oct a kindness of God, as manifested various dispensations of his p fore nothing should so engage os to render usin the least a ly privileges which we now joy under the glorious dispensat satio nant of Grace, t nor negligent in th ‘of those duties which, according to gratitude alone compels us to ackne just. ‘Though he cause grief, yet w compassion according to the multity mercies;. for he doth not afflict willi grieve the children of men.’ A different definition ai ™ cy been given by some, wherein itis ou. mercy consists in the dimin inasion ustic that the demands of justice satisfied, sentence of the law being in some par cumstances repealed. This may et in human laws, and in the ministration thereof}. but with God the demands of justice perfectly fulfilled. God isir mmutable, a sgeyer he hath said . cannot e rec r . THEOLOGY. . 5g a God that cannot repent, because his ways are ! ae eal There aap. when. we speak of Di- vine Merey, we must define it in sucha way as shall be perfectly consistent with his Justice. Man isa being very far gone from original right- eousness; and because he hath rebelled against his God, Justice demands punishment, and pun- ishment. must be rendered. Yet as God is a be- ing of infinite goodness, and wishes not the death _ of a sinner, he hath, from his disposition to mer- " ey, appointed a way in which both Justice and Goodness may be fully exercised, while man is delivered from punishment, which will be more fully illustrated in a future ‘lecture. Ihave been more lengthy upon the subject of the Divine perfections than I had originally in- tended; yet as they constitute an important part of the first principles and ground-work of all Christian Theology, perhaps I have not said too: _ Much.. ~ +. 60 \ LECTURES ON ; Apa LS SOpee? s 2 sae i¢é tae a zeorvaei ei ee VAR Dade Ss hoisted ne Hit | Bigs Spent ante In my last discourse I ndeavourec brief and comprehensive view of the Perfections of the Supreme Being. 1us undoubtedly, as heis a perfect being, act in eve ry point of view consistently ; neither ean his attributes, either in their existence or exer- | cise, be opposed to cach other; for a perfect God cannot be divided against himself. Cons __ly every doctrine which is contrary to, 0 sistent with, either of the Divine attributes, mot be considered erroneous. To the remarks which have already vd inade concerning the being and attributes of God, it: will be proper to add, that by those attributes. which I have denominated Essential, I mean those which are essential in constituting him such a being as he is, such a Meh Fs aby Di- vine being must be; but not that they constitute, according to the opinions of Dr. Doddridge and some others, his real or substantial essence, Meehanism, for example, is that which is indis- pensably necessary in the constitution of a ma- chine, yet mechanism is not the subsisting es- sence or matter of that machine, Extension, fi- gure, colour, divisibility are the essential attri- butes of matter, yet extension, figure and divisi- bility ere net in themselves the ‘essence of mat- PHEOLOGY, 6Y ter; but-matter is something which is extended, figured, and capable) of division. And such is our conception of a spirit or mind; it is not cons sciousness, thought, or volition, but something ch is possessed of consciousness and volition, And as our ideas of the Deity are derived from analogy, we are to suppose that the attributes of Omnipotence, Omniscence, Omnipresence, and Spirituality do not ppetints the Divine essence, but are perfections which belong to that essence, being distinct from it. I have introduced these remarks merely to warn my readers against such an error, lest in the discussion of the important doctrine which is the subject of this discourse, my ideas should not be perfectly understood. Whereas I have made it my object to show the consistency of a Trinity of Persons:in the Unity of this one es- sence, which is called God, and to which belong the attributes already named. . In entering upon a subject of this nature, a subject which has been a rock of offence and a stone of stumbling for ages; a subject which has engaged and continues to engage the talents of the most learned’ and eminent Theologians, I eannot but feel my own littleness and insignifi- cance. Ff cannot but feel that like all other men, I am fallible, and therefore cannot expect that my opinions will be infallible. Yet I feel it my duty, so far asin me lies, to throwin my mite in endeavouring to spread the knowledge cf the truth among mankind. ‘The scriptures, as far as their testimony goes, are undoubtedly to be received as the standard of all truth; but it ap- pears that the learned of this world are in their opinions. yery much divided concerning that: 62 LECTURES ON. which the scriptures really do teach; and’ this’ truth’ and falschood have heeome so a ae blended together, that a proper designation is rendered very difficult. And for this reason I have made it my object, in the present lecture, to render the doctrine of the Trinity perfectly consistent with the attributes of the Deity, espe- cially his unity, without the use of seripture lan- guage. ~ One great objection to the doctrine of the Tri- nity in Unity is, people do not understand it; — and for this reason, many do not eonsider them- selves bound to assent unto it a§ expressed in the language of Athanasian writers. In sayin that people do not understand this doctrine, I wish to be understood as implying, that they do . not understand what is the-subject of their faith. It'is not necessary that we should become ac- quainted with every truth that is: connected with: the subject; itis necessary however that we un- derstand the articles of our faith. We may be- lieve in many facts, the nature of which we do not fully comprehend, or we believe in the exis- tence of many facts although we cannot eompre- hend how or why they exist; and such is alto- gether consistent with our nature; our minds having been corrupted and our imaginations de- praved by sin and iniquity. Yet,though we can not comprehend every truth which may be con- nected with the subject of ourfaith, we must at least understand that subject so far as we make it» a subject of our faith: for-we cannot believe un- less we know the subject of our belief; indeed: we cannot believe a proposition of any kind un= Igss we understand the meaning of the terms madeuse of. For example, if a person speaksa THEOLOGY: 63 nknown 1 language, and then. you believe ‘his? y answer Lean say neither yes ~ | be sure I may believe in the credi- spe eaker generally and therefore may. s trut atthis particulartime. show not to belieyein the” hones for there is no subject: erstanding as.a-matter of be-: oposition is in an unknown ithout a subject to be believed faith - Therefore, tosay that we believe - in the doctrine of the Trinity while we know not what that doctrine jis, is altogether’ aheiresss. : ear to be as much divided con-. Poise of their ee he. plainin it as those who of op- inions. For imstance, Mr. Baxter, as - we the schoolmen, seems to have su bey that there was one God, who Suleeeoal willed and loved himself; and that wisdom, pow- _and love were calledhis different persons. Philip dd ridgeagain uses the word person in: two different senses, pilcenmhice! and political; ses’ that in a philosophical sense, s the true and common sense, there can hy poogyeesorte but in a political sense there and he illustrates his meaning by Dg ¥ e Seg Bi parison of a man who is at the. father, husband and son; or of a prince ingof Great Britain, Dukeof Bruns . Treasurer of the Empire; being thrée: per= s in a political sense, but only one in a true sos philosophical sense. Watts appears tohave. 64 LECTURES ON favoured this theory in some | ned more to the Sabellian syste who have €ndeavoured to expl have in effect denied it, manife gree of doubt and uncertainty conc particular matter which the k oul: tablish as subjects of thei¥ fait! yar ing the subject altogether unfi have never been able to state explicitly ly what is to be understood by a Trinity o sons in one God. And this is one reason’ the Unitarian system is ofteueel ed in pre ence to the Athenasian erced. ‘The reasons Shick these writers assign for thus leaving the peas unfinished is, that it is a mystery and int ) of human comprehension. - Butt! move'the difficulty; for as far“as tends our knowledge’ must”exter eapnot believe any fact w the m tha fact remains unknown. Tt iat least the du duty of ail writers to state what the satjeck' of their be- lief is, and whiga this is done, there can be no fone with it; but’the matter of our belief must EAownt whereas in the case before 18:1 that our writers have been ine img what are the facts which they wistto lish. If the judgement of Doetor Doddridge i be depended upon, wé may as well give up the’ doctrine ofthe Trinity, for it is only a non inali and not a real distinction which exists between the Divine persons: If there are not th soris in a true and philosophical sense in the nity of the Supreme Being, the Unitarian ; ys- tem is preferable to the Trinitarian, because moré consistent with itself. ot acheeomsbial nature,.con- e most evident. mar of Ar Stench my. own Opinions n may, dif. fer from the opinions of learned and eminent men. who have written before me, in support. of very important, article of Christian faith, I shall endeavour to be consistent with myself, and stat distin y. my own opinions, and. why they Her fi om. the popular doctrines. of the present And by so doing, trust that I shall be en- J, wa ay many of t io important, objec- tions which have been made to the doctrine of the Trinity, ‘esperially those which relate to the Unity of God. Agi though I shall in some mea- sure expose my self by dissenting from. popular opinion, yet I trust that those who hear me will treat me with. charity. pi commencing this subject, it will be proper, in the first place, that we havea clear conception of the terms made use of. . The use of words is of very considerable importance. in discussing subjects which are important in themselves. “Every writer who_uses particular ‘terms, ought either to abide by the interpretation of the most approved standards, stating the particular wri- ters of whom he isa follower; or if there isa dif- ference between his and their ideas, he ought at least to give a distinct definition of his own ideas, and abide. thereby. : In. considering the doctrine of the Trinity ig Unity, the words person, personality, and. es- sence frequently occur. I would here remark, that none but complex ideas are capable of defi- nitions, although they may sometimes be con- veyed or expressed to others by the use of differ= ent names for thesame. idea. Tho word eSSERCe,, ns - 86 therefore, being a simple id sistence, Cannoteadmit of a it i@ perfectly understood by e is capable of ideas. ‘Tne idea of mode or ble ofa definition as phe 1 are, however, various kinds: son 1s acquainted, and which a by different names. They ren derived from the different» moc various essences or substances exi: “we know of no other ei ee ‘he nam va- rious genera and species of beings beside the mode of their subbistehce Sieve the chiardie teristie of every particular being ¢ : tence. Concerning the internal ¢ being or essence, we know nothi we can know concerning matt the sensible qualities which belong? other words, from their mode of bi ent modes of being receive differer the same manner that a figure with f ceives a different name from ones ‘three. Thus the general idea of essence or real substance, pase ht pstrac ideas, are undefinable. But as these two sir ideas always coexist together in Wh same st ject, they form a complex idea, and thi idea is definable only by stating what pa mode is united with the idea of being For instance, we have perfect ideas of firure, and we cannot define them unless im one complex idea, and ‘then we | complex idea by stating “What p belongs to the substanee, Which m ‘ THEOLOGY. (63 q 7 osama nist iexre- But when autien- umeration of all the simple id s, becomes, tedi~ ous,or cannot be shown, the common and only method, to be pursued isto state what are the sim- _pler ideas of which the complex one is constitut- ' The nam@jef every creature, therefore, arises ‘fromthe mode under which its substance or es- sence exists, and every particular creature is de- finable only by shgwing that.particular mode which constitutes the name, and in union with an essence, forms a complex idea of this name. ‘The simple ideas of modeare distinguishable on- dy from their different names, unless by sensation or reflection; but.are not capable of definition, unless the mode -becomes:a complex one, Personality is no more capable of being defined, than essence, and can be.understood only, or con- weyed to others, by using a different fame for the same idea. ; Consciousness or intelligence may be used assynonimous with the word per- sonality, and is one particular mode which is uni- ted with theideaofjbeing or essence. We all know that we -posséss',sensatien and reflection, yet to define whetjsensation, or reflection is, is ampossible. It is, however, as far as any, person understands, the-meaning of the word conscious- ness, that faculty by which we know that we are ourselves, that our thoughts and ideas are jour own and mot.another’s. Thus to know, is -that faculty. which ave call consciousness or per- ‘sonality; but what: it iseto know and feel cannot ‘be described, it can piel cidade These two simple ideas, personality, and es- ‘sence or substance, being united, constitute a omplex idea. called ason and:this complex J ¥ PM ee 1% * 68 LECTURES ON Py _ 4dea is definable only by saying that it is compos: ed of the simple ideas already named. We have but one idea of substance or essence when ab- stractly considered; and though we speak of dif- ferent kinds of beings, yet our ideas of existence or simple substance are in no respect changed, the difference arises only frome different modes under which beings exist™in time and , Bpace. ‘ . "A person, therefore, is aggeicigers being, ca- pable of considering itself as itself and not ano- ther, constituted a complex idea of this particu- lar name and kind only from that particular mode ofexistence called personality, under which an essence exists; because as there is no diversity of our abstract idea of essence; whenever a be- ing becomes of a particular kind or species, it must arise from some other idea than that of es-_ sence or substance, and that idea is of a particular mode, and of which there is an infinite variety. If the particular species of any complex ideas — are derived .only from the particular -mode to — which the essence is united, then the name of © every complex idea is derived from the same © source; therefore we have a right to call every being a person which exists under that particular mode of existence called personality. It will be here perceived that my object has been to show that every complex idea derives its ‘name from the particular mode which is united with its essence, and that the essence is no foun- dation for determining the name of the idea. We learn this from experience, for the same substance _ may become at different fimes the matter and substance of various machines, and receive’ dif- ferent names, while the essence is the same.- iv “ THEOLOGY: 69" Therefore if a being possess two different modes of existence at the same time, two different names may be given it with the greatest propriety, while the substance is the same. = But if a being can possess two diff rent modes of existence at the same time, and therefore be- ing two plex ideas, receives two different hames, W nay not two modes of existence of a similar kind, though different im number, exist jn the same essence at the same time, and receive ~ two similar nanresy.as they are two complex ideas of the same kind. aa® an illustration, a fa= ther has two sons. Paternity is arelation which one person holds towards/another, and that rela- - tion which a father holds to one son is not the - identity ofa similar relation which he holds to ~ another son, therefore as the relations held to two sons are in identity different relations, the same perso who holds them may with preprie- ty be ealled two fathers, although but one man or one person. - Consequently if personality de- termines the name of the complex idéa of per-. ‘son, why cannot two personalities belonging to” ~ the same substance give us a right to call the two complex ideas two persons? For the same es- sence united with a different personality must of course be a different complex. idea from the union of the same essence with another persona- lity. But lest I should be misunderstood, it will be proper to inquire! Yere wherein identity of person consists? Undoubtedly in the identity of the simple idea of which the complex one of ~ person is composed. Wherefore the same per- sonality united with the same essence constitutes-__ the same person, and none but the same simple ‘idea in union can constitute the identity of the : * (ep ee” vie 3 —-s f . . “ ‘LECTURES ON sume person, If prmrepe? a8 ‘erelaaiaae. sists in the identity of cons united with the same subs , wherein consists diversity of person? Perhaps you will answer, maaueiaiy in *y diversity of consciousness or. personality and a diversity ofessence with which pevsonality is united; thatis, to different chy at there should ifferent st a different oe An : ery true that a diversity . s "Eaicherodinpis nek ee ste An @ id would constitute mh cy ete aa id uch a diversity is n - solutely r or ifit was necessary that every simple ‘tue sh e changed in order that gomon eh complex che may be formed; thea a rson who \js to-day a intieen eaten ot become a. eggar ity becoming a @ifferent man; the. n a ass whi ov a clotk canmot become a dif- erent machine hereafter. on the contrary we. perceive that.to become a differentimachine does not require different materials, buta different, echanisth; and for the same reason that Ged! 1ay become three persons, does not require three © | essences, but three personalities or consciousnes- : Ses There may be moré complex ided’ rmed out: of a number of simpler ones than the whole num-® ber of sitipler ones, consequently a diversity , all the'simpler ones cannot take place, hicseety two simpler ideas at least’aré required to consti- tute a complex one. That this may be better “understood, perhaps an illustration will be ne- _ cessaty. For example, here isa figure com- posed of four equilatural triangles, and each tri- angle may be considered at least a ee idea mae any two united in a complex one, and te. # ‘ . IPHEOLOGY, ~*~ be the’ same complex idea requires thé union of the same simpler ones. os fae Here A B when viewed together constitute a “ys 2 complex idea called a Rhombus ; consequently no other triangles but A and B can constitute» the’same Rhombus; therefore A and © when united form a different Rhombus from that which is constituted by the union of AandB; while A and D constitute a third Rhombus ‘different he from the others. Now though each Rhombus ~ i or complex idea is differentfrom the other, yet = Ais a part of each different one; therefore i though thejidéntity of each complex idea is con- stituted by the identity of the same simpler ones, yet a diversity of complex ideas does not neces-° sarily require a-diversity of all the simpler ones; ‘Neither A nor B when copsidered abstractly, constitate the idea of a Rhombus, but a union of the two is required. If therefore A represent .~ the idea of being or essence and B, C, D, as three » personalities, consciousnesses or intelligences u- 74° ‘Luctomeson? nied aswell to A, then the personality B ena ted with the essence A eonstitutes one~ al idea called person, C united with A constitute a second person, and. ‘D ugited with A oa tutes a third. Re r if kipbe t lex i s ‘at they eee the same I have Stren ay proved, be ae are not composed of the same simpler ones. If then’a bein possesses three c ivietiionaes » or similar modes of existence at the samie time, sonality by beiag united with the same 4 e or fe ie ‘constitutes a differén 7 x idea whic -we call person. ‘Tt may, th e, be seen that identity of person requires the- identity of all the simpler ideas which constitute - he complex one; yet diversity of person re- quires only a diversity ‘of enat while the one essence remains the same éfore, | ‘doctrine ‘three personsin th ty of vie BO | or Divine essence; is perfectly consistent ae greeable to all the rules of sound re Though a complex idea inclade’simpl cones, v t we have fully proved that the annihilation’ of 1 the simpler ones of’ which ‘it is composed ‘is eessary to the annihilation of savant “eomplex - Though a king is’ possessed “of ‘royalty and hiumanity, and these arethe o nly as which: ean constifitte the complex one of a king, yet — the = Te! =. king-is aninihflatetl bytes mere an- — nihilation of reyalty, while humanity still res mainsthe same. ‘Sif te eomplex idea ofking ‘be destroyed by the destruction'o mo of its'sim- o pier ideas, then it was that idea whiely ren- ‘dered his human nature a being of that ‘particu~ lar Kind called-a king, > e € ~ a , ae. * otal e “e | THEOWOEY. « \ Again, if a being possess personal powers ‘or eonscioustiess, by destroying his personality you. © also destroy the person though not the being; and ifthe annihilation of a person does not .im- »ply the annihilation ofa being, then the érea- ion or restoration of a person does not imply rs creation of another being, fortiny thing: whieh cannot diminish the substance by being. taken from it, cannot increase it by being united -or,added to it. Therefore, as the ideaof person ’ — destroyed cannot necessarily 1 e destruction of the essence or subst - more than royalty when takenaway dk manity ; so; by adding to a being one, tr three'persons, implies:"no plurality of esse any more than the addition of: royalty to hu- ‘manity requires a‘second humanity; wherefore, the doctrine of three persons and one God or Divine essence is perfectly consistent and rea- sonable. For if God is really possessed of three ‘als. or consciousnesses, he:must be con- sidered in every point of view three persons... Again,-supposing that a substance or being is presented unto us without life or animation and gonsequently not a person, all that isawanti , constitute it such, is personality: By attribu-. ting this, the being who before was not, now he- comes a’person, but not another substance; it is the same identical being now which, though now a person, it was before the addition of personali- ty. Iftherefore, all-that was-onriginally want- ing to constitute this being a person was the ad- dition of intelectual attributes: or personality, then all thatis wanting to eonstitute the same Be- ine another person is the addition of another per- a and-so-of a third, -. 0 . » We> Ea a “ * 2 ® er a ie ae oo MM sscrinas on ia” : Although subsistencesisa partiof the idea wl ‘ person, yet 1 is no part of personality any than it is of philosophy. ° A philosopher i ing under two modes of existence, personality _ and philosophic Laoricdgiietibieosbeanee a or essence is no-part of either although united with both. Consequently it will be perceived that ~ although*the word person com) the idea | of substance as much as the word philosopher comprehends the idea of personality, yet it dey not the essence which constifutes the eae of complex idea called person, any * which is called a philosopher; suas can Ait substance constitutes no part of personality, any additional substance or escence is not necessa- ry.for the addition-of another person, And as it is the mode only which determines the name ofevery complex idea, so where there is one or more personalities in union with the same es+ sence there must be one. or more complex ideas ealled persons, and yet without any diversity of essence, and therefore, in a way peripahy con- sistent with the unity of God. . : In saying, therefore, that there are three per- sons in one God, I mean oaly, that in the gener- al idea of the Sipr eme Being, there is a union of three complex ideas called persons; that is, God. possesses three sets of personal attributes, or three consciousnesses and is therefore a thrice personal being. . And as the phrase peronal ie 2ne& is synonomous with the word person, th God in being a thrice personal being is three per- sons. Plurality f persons, therefore, is consti- tated only by a plurality of personalities or sets of intellectual attributes, and although personali- ty is not the idea of person, yet it is that which - .- dial ed toanother idea, which oP artes by this union the idea same way that royalty though net 2 of pking, i is that which when added to- ns hy that Bor. 1 a =o ._" % Perhaps it may be argued‘ by hat if pla=- ee : plurality of aaa _ties pena ought to say that there are ities and ‘one God, and not three s. What has already been said, is 2 he answer to this objection; for though sonality of itself is not 2 person eny more than mechanism is a machine, er philosophy a philos- epher, yet it constitutes a person by ‘ts union ae - has mechanism constitutes a machine whe united with a substance. Each complex’ ideabeing: a different one from the other on account of its different personality must be ealied a different oan which is certainly very eorrect, forevc- complex idea ought to be expressed by a term that tough tcomprehead all the simpler ones of whieh it is composed. I presume it will not be asked whether the annihilation of the Divine personality or consciousness would_imply or cause the annihilation of his essence or being, for ways ean be supposed unless. personality i isal- w ential to being, whereas experience teac that there are millions of beings. in» the universe which exist without personality. Wherefore personality and essence being differ- ent ideas, the increase of the one cannot neces- sarily imply the increase of the other, although. it implies the increase of eomplexideas. There- fore the unity of the -Divine essence continues ever the same, though there be a diversity of per- - gonalilies or consciousnesses, and ther air’ versity of eomplex ideas called persons, fr ‘anion of each personality with the same essen vhich I : @pavoured to establish as cot and the word of God is this: ‘Phat one true and éyerliving God of o: substance or essence; that this one ¢ *ed to one consciousness or set of personal attri-’ butes is God the Father, and stands related to us as a father or Creator. The same €sSen¢e in e-™ nion with a second consciousness or personality 3s God the €on, and stands'related to us as a Re- deemer. ‘fhe same essence united with a third personality is God-the Holy Ghost, and is rela- ted to us as a Sanctifierand Divine assistant. So that these three persons are different in number. and stand-related to man in different ways, al- though perfectly consistent with the general na- ture of the Supreme Being. Not that these re- lations as some have supposed are the foundation» of the different persons of the Godie are- the effects of the different designs of each Divine. | person, though the designs of each person are in perfect harmony with those of the others, and consequently with their several relations also. | The doctrine of three consciousnesses i en 3 God may be thoughta strange doctrine ; tishow- j over the only doctrine which can render that of: — three persons in one God consistent with reason: ~ and truth; for no other definition of the werd’ — person than that which T have given ean be con- ; sistent with the Divine Unity; and as thisisthe. — definition whichis given by Locke, and many U- _ nitarian writers also, I have.thought it the ot : Which could be used in an inquiry of this - - ' > ‘ >. - THEOLOGY, at : ella tends. to counteract their own objec- tions to the Trinitarian system, . Furthermore, ee sersons must indisputably convey the idea e consciousnesses, let the definition . be ‘eae may, if we have any correct meaning f for the word. That, consciousnesses should dwell toge- ther in the same being is in no respect contra- dictory to any of the. “Divine attributes, neither » to reason nor revealed truth. For as each per- son is pure and holy, so their actions and designs must accord with each other in every respect; and not only so, but the designs of one are ac- eessary to the designs of the other in their fihal accomplishment. Neither is such a doctrine con- trary.to the word of God himself; and though there are three consciousnesses united with the same essence, yet this Divine essence is only one essence and consequently but one God. For though we say that each” person is one God, we do not say that each person isa distinct: God or a Triune,God, but the same undevisible essence. And therefore all those passages which have been quoted by -Unitarian.and other writers to show’ the, Unity of God in opposition to a Trini- ty of persons, can have no effect in showing that pinions are erroneous; for we believe in te ait of God as forcibly as our opponents. the word person has been defined as an in- telligent being who is capable of acting ‘and thinking for itself; Dr. Worcester as an objec- tion to the doctrine of the Trinity says, “As you, Sir, profess to believe that the Father and the Son are two persons and but one intelligent being, I would ask, whether the Father is nat * One intelligent boing? And is not the. Son also Wes ‘LECTURES ‘ON an intelligent being? Was he not an in being who came into the world to die’ om “sins? And. was he who car e ‘end he who sent Bit follow, ee must be rol - beings, w I readily admit in se though. the ther and the Son be diflere Uigent beings, they may be stillone and the same being. Fo. explain myself, however, I bring the * following illustration: A kingis a royal person; supposing then that he is dotidtinad! and looses a royalty, is he the same royal person after as ore his dethronement? Certainly not, Al- though he is the same person, he is not the same voyal person, ‘The question, however, is ‘an un- fair one, considered in any point of view ; ‘soever, because ‘it is intended to cause equivoca- tion; for the word samemay Qe applied to both being and intelligent. If the writer means - to ask, whether he who came and he who ‘sent are the same intelligence ? we answer as before, no: ‘but if he asks, whether hewho came and he- who sentare the same being or existence? we -an- swer yes. But as the question now stands, the intention of the author is not so well Liew: ‘Still it may be asked, how ean ‘that bei o sent, and that who came, beone and wnewame be ing? ‘This is readily explained, if we consider the words come and sent in ‘their proper light. God is‘ Omnipresent, therefore‘he cannot come or be sent, in the commion aceeptation of the words; butrin saying that God‘the‘Father ‘sen’ his Son, we are to understand that he caused aesigned his manifestation, that is, a a manifesta- ion of the.second personality or intellectual eon: - eg ixthededl: ws $ ies Deity: 3 and that this ‘second per- * 7 Deity in being sent, in harm« » design of the first person, voluntari 5 20 d to be manifested: tothe world. ‘There- e person ‘who was manifested and he who aiigeis yr caused his mahifestation were the ‘same bei 1g, al though different persons. | Dr. Worcester seems to lay great stress upon fhe Phrasesyindelligent person and intelligent deing, considering them as ar hg aps ask- with great appearance of defiance, wherein Po tog age ea Now the difference is this, one expression is proper and the other im- proper. The expression intelligent being is ve- ry proper, and synonymous with the word per- son; but to say that it is synonymous with intel- ligent person, is perfect nonsense. Theyexpres- rip ya person, when used in determine ing the first principles of our nature, is tautolo- hy baits oat as to say, a philosophic philosopher, Faasiasl priest, or a medical physician, for the word 'persom alone signifies an intelligent being; ‘and consequently to say an intelligent person, is the same as to say, a personal person; because it is intelligence which originally constitutes a per- sonal being. ‘To besure, when we use the ex- pression intelligent geen ina different sense, implying that a persons possessed of fine talents, and las properly improved them, the language Is very correct. But when it is used to signify. the nature of our being, it is altogether improper. The chief points which I have here endeavor- ‘ed to establish may be thus briefly condensed: The word person, being a complex idea, com- prehends ‘the two simpler ones of personality and ‘essence. A. diversity ow ideas may be r ‘ %,, lp i, tee. . 80 ries 4 formed without a ) simpler ones, or the same sim constituting different 0 cor identity of a pte ge the identity of all the sir a diversity of persons do¢ ply or require a eg | which it is composed, part stance or essence. ‘The may remain anchangeal in three persons in the Godheac ing three persons must nee consciousnesses ‘unttel ie “senee, and consequently sets of those attributes den tence, Omniscence, Omni tence, Eternity, Immutabil Goodness and Mercy. Th applicable only to the Divine and therefore it cannot be suf them belong to the same God, tributes which are necessarily unit r sonality are plural. Each person'th e pos- sesses a distinct consciousness and will, , but is nevertheless the same substance, the same eter- nal Jehovah. And this I take tobe the true and only method in which the doctrine of the Trini- ty in Unity can be explained consistently with — reason or the word of God. But lest it should be thought that this system is similar to that of Sabellius, I would here re- mark in the first place, that the three persons of the Godhead, as here considered, do not co in three consciousnesses or personalities. Son have supposed that personality or conscio and person were synonymous terms, but this I eonsciousnesses- ed in constituting, the Divine ty of persons, and not that cone . person, or that three con- persons,any more than that . a machine, or royalty a king; and y of this doctrine with the Unity 1 have sufficiently illustrated. at od -.% 7 = ; 5 node : ¥ ‘ % a ohe= - i : > fes sites é - » - y Yd a is? eer ei Dnarehage Sdidee liie OG os 3 * - Tv will be recollected F endeavoured to show t' 2d in the, first princi i those ited whieh as stitution ofan intelli which I Lave other general name of coyscio ality, in union with @ Sp by the complex*te¥m of p person consists in the ident wnion with. the same essence. different personality, whether same or a different essence | erent person. For pene: ism existing in a certain substa chine of a particular kind, and the ider machine consists in the identity of 1 ey union with the same substance; — mechanism being given to constitutes a different mai sence is the same. A different personality, the that is necessary to the constitution o person, I am led to infer that under th ble aspect of our Lord and Saviour there THEOLOGY. y 83 two persons, Because there” were two personali- ties, Pe and human; and which ‘it will be, by pote bject to prove in the courseof this lec- I sincerely regret that from a love am compelled thus to pursue a different osite course from that which has been so tt sally observed by the Orthodox gener- ; Gur b writers on this subject, both Trinita- rian and Unitarian, have generally endeavoured to support the idea that in our Saviour and Me- diator there was but‘one single and individual ter “The Athenasian doctrine is, that in or- our Saviour to become a‘complete and t iadince between an infinite God and ioe nore two natures, infinite and fi- pt were absolutely necessary.. To come into this world and correspond with humanity, a hu- -man nature must be given, and to correspond gd God, a Divine nature was also indispensable. ‘Relative to this doctrine, in which I cheerful- lyreoneur, the Rev. John Brown says that these natures were distinct in every point of view, and wholly uncompounded; that our Saviour pos- sessed two “infinitely different Natures. Rom. — 4-34; viii—3; ix—5. Pet. ili—18. Heb. ix— 14.2 John i—14. 1 Tim. iii—16. Phil. 2—6, 7. Different understanding es and wills; knowing all things, as in John 1i—25; xxi—17; and yet not knowing the time of the last judgment, as in Mark xxii—32; having one will with the Fa- ther. John ix— x—30; xiv—9, 10. i John v—7, and yet having a will different from the Fa- ther’s. Luke xxii—42. Almighty God, yet ern- - cified through weakness. Gen. xvii—l. Isaiah ix~-6. 2 Cor. iii 34.” Brown's Divinity. oy LECTURES @N- The judicious: een wor d@oetrine; for he says, that the G ht nd m hood, as to their intellect ati well as every other, are p the one nature does not ies other; that there is “no tion thereof out of: ances such mutual infusion as natural operations or prof mon unto both substances; bi : tural to the Deity the samen ; uncommuniecated to his sa ha ever i8 natural to man; the ity is thereof.’ See Hooker’s v Mr. Brown alsoad ‘sent our Saviour as having a true Isa. liii—10, Psalm xxii—2i. Matth Sohn xii—27; with a finite ved i standing, Luke ii—52.. Mar distinct -from,.and subordin: Matth. xxvi—39, and a true hu KKVI—26.” Brown’s- Divi ie. PhS Asa further confirmation -of this di in the two natures of our Saviour, I wi those passages from the irispired ig give unto him the names, titles, and «Pie ind .4 whieh can belong to none but-the supreme God; : as also those which can belong te none but an in- feriour and ereated being, And firstly, our Saviour i knowledges the coequality Father, saying, “I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning: and Daediiug. saith the Lord, whieh is; and whieh was, ae which is to come, the Almighty.?? Rev. i ii—8; vi—13, 20; xxi—6; xxii—6. “Theli -his own words ag- his nature with the 5 4 am;”? er “I am a as ‘PHEOLOGY. - 83 eee tee JI Jobmiii—2o. Rev.i— 18. ? «The g et and the mighty God” ‘a Ti i ce only = Seep Jude 25. “Ge ° ts > Rom. ix—5. : To, of Kings. ” Rey. xvii- #1 “he a of “hosts, and fae sobadiics fei ny ic at once $ is D1 = one timp; be ving been in co} swith a the pee taser ag = te Paes ni—3 “All things were pe ae without. him was mot! any ing that was made. Alsoin Heb i—2 i is also styled the governor and pre- server of all things, as in Col. i—17, 18. Heb. i -3. And again, the same worship is ascribed unto him as unto God the Father, and that even by the command of the Father, saying, “let all the angels of God worship him.”’? And indeed we are positively informed that Jesus Christ him- self thought it no tomake himself equal with God, or be so considered by his sau Se f Other passages might be selected; but as our Sa- viour’s Divinity is notso much the object of the ase discourse, I defer any further remarks atila future Lecture; as a suflitiency bas alre’- 86 LECTURES ON 7 dy been said forthe conviction of any unpreju- diced mind. pat I now go to show from the same writers Ui certainty of our Saviour’s inferiority to God the — Father. And firstly, from his ow Father is greater than I.” xiv Ale so his subjection to the pe d dominion of — God, as is expressed, Joh —38, “I came down from heaven Maas dc a ne own will, but the will of him that sent m@z? Also in 1 Cor. _ iii-23, “Ye are Christ’s, and Christ is God’s.”? — Our Saviour is also called the servant, -of God, as in Matth. xii-18. Acts iii-26; iv—27, 30. He is also said te have been sent by God inte the world as by a superiour. “As my Father ib | seat me, so send! you,” John See Weare also informed that, like unto the: and prophets of that and former ages, spired by the Holy Ghost, rte ot la coe a would be unnecessary. This we learn eae ny passages, as in Luke iv-18, “The Spinit the Lord is upon me.”? He is also represen as having been chosen of God, as wBenold | servant whom J have chosen. » Matth. xii—18. God is called cur Saviour’s God and Father. John xx-—17. Rom. xv-6 Eph. i-3. 1 Pet.i-s. Col.i—s. He also possessed all the frailties and imperfections of man, except sin; and like mor- tal man, died and was buried. These different accounts of our Saviour’s co- equality and inferiority with God the Father; can in no manner be aecounted for, aecording to the Unitarian system, beeause perfectly contrary facts are here asserted, which, if there is but one nature in our Saviour; as they would wish to have us believe, are altogether irreconcilable. 1f 2 compelled cnowledg a he Christ” ace araly ant ires, as is ma en, OF ‘that the seri ah al ae ot my object. It is ite so much in this lecture to counteract the the- r ans, @ as to oppose 2a » eur own church, a e personal t unity of the sé ty hat is, our brethren who cal! them- x endeavour to maintain, that al- tures ei 8 eontra- 14 this is, a be- Jesus Christ, yet this union can con- @ person, as is expressed in the se- eofourchuareh. “So. that two whole ject natures, thatis, ihe Godhead and were joined together in one Berton never fo be divided.’ Now, i in the first place, if this article ‘ba true, then i in order that the distinction between the Divine and humannatures may hold good accor- ding to the scriptures, the same person must be both wise and ignorant, superiour and inferiour, . strong and.weak, perfect and imperfect, capable of pain, agony and death, : and altogether incapa- ble; and this, we know, nn ok possibly be true ef one and the same person; and therefore, those intained by our Rever- eimselves, and, ror. which : ptures fuily confirm a diversity of ~ 7 88 LECTURES ‘ON who hold tobuitone person in our Saviour, m give up either his manhood or his Divinity, or else admit an evident contradiction and incon- — sistency. ‘Toavoid this otherwise unavoidable — inconsistency, and to keep truth on my side, I shall wy a to show that our Saviour and © Mediator not only possessed two different and distinct natures, but persons; the one -coequal with the Father, the ether a created and eonsb- quently inferior: being. al To prove this, all that 1s necessary on my p: has indeed been admitted by Trinitarians gener- ally, in admitting a distinction of natures. For itis admitted that in our Saviour were compre- hended two perfect natures or sets of intellectu-. al attributes,is well as spiritual essences. Now. ifour Saviour™possessed two different conscious- nesses, as has been by them admitted, and which indeed they cannot deny without making the Supreme God capable in his own consciousness. and person of agony, misery and death; and if also there are two distinct spiritual heings or es- sences, a Divine Spirit, and created. human soul, to which his consciousness or personality was: united, which is also admitted by Brown, Hook-. er, Whitby, Burnet, and all our brethren gener-* ally, then nothing can possibly be wanting to the constitution of two perfect and distinct persons.. That our Saviour was perfect God as well as perfect man, has always been admitted by the Orthodox generally, that he possessed asdistinct, set of intellectual attributes distinct from those of his Deity; and how can we admit of adistinct set of intellectual powers,a distin¢t conscious- ness belonging to a distinet human soul, without admitting a distinct human person, when per« nsciousness, I would be what it does consist. And fu: writers who deny a distinct person g¢ to our Saviour’s human nature, have quoted as supporting the exis- ta: p admitted that personality does consist in those qualifications. “For,’’ says Mr. Saviour’s _ umanity did not stand in need of a distinct p rs ty when Haas, ae superiour intelligence of God.” 2 Ww after having acknowledged that distinct ‘natures were united to and distinct spirits, God and man; tes of the one were never the at- = Suh and that the identity of the dt different from the identi- ty of the marhopd apd they will not say that these separate and idual beings can constitute two And why they will not admit this, is beyond my conception; for where nothing is wanting to such a diversity of persons, there can be no reason for denying the fact, but prejudice and education. That this distinction of natures was a personal distinction, cannot be denied, if we have any i- deas of a personal nature. They spoke as differ- ent persons, each using the pronouns I and me} and therefore, unless they were different persons, they were guilty of inconsistencies, especially in their declarations of knowledge and ignorance. Our brethren tell us that when our Saviour pro- fessed ignorance, it was that of his human na- ture, and we will acknowledge this, because his _consciousnesses, wills, and under-. eras “= iui, 90 LECTURES ON human nature was a distinct personality. Ana we ask, What nature but that of personality og 5 t la e\ consciousness can in proper language be‘said ta — be wise or ignorant? riety would there be in saying our bodi wise? Our Saviouf,asman, is acknowledged by eur opponents to have a distihet understanding, and therefore, to possess some knowledge. And what but a.personal nature is capable of aration- al understanding and human knowledge. © hes These inconsistencies cannot be reconciled — without ascribing to our complex Mediator two distinct natures and persons, the one created, the | " other uncreated, the one perfect, the other im- perfect, the one superior, the lier Our . Saviour as the second person of the Trinity is e7 qual to the Father in every wipes per- haps in his Mediatorial character, ch ‘cannot -lessen the dignity of his nature, though the office © itself may be an humble one; butas man, he was inferior, because created in time, and finite in his powers. And it will be found that all those passa- ges which imply an inferiority in our Saviour » _are applicable either to his human nature or his € ignorant o¥ — office as a Mediator. To be a Mediator, towey=, er,'as before hinted, does not imply inferiority” in nature. When two or more persons are e- qually interested in the attainment of some im- portant end, it in no manner implies inferiority, because one becomes subservient to the will and designs of the others. It is his own voluntary act whenever he thus offers his services, and not in the character ofa menial. And, for the same rea- son, Jesus Christ, the second person in the Trini- ty, in becoming subservient to thewill of the Father, is perfecting his own ends as welk 2s * _“Lheref ty ine either. inferiori d 's, as 1 have before said, I ‘leave the common received o-. ans, and ascribe unto our Sa- “natures but two persons; first- ye doctrine of the'Trinity cannot be thout it, PO 4 4 ag ‘the. ose passages which I have quoted ifferent a ate in Savi _ - and ignorant, strong and weak, per- “fect and rfect, either teach it, or are to be 1o ed: inconsistent in themselves. And w those who profess aunity of persons in our Saviour attempt to prove it consistently with the doctrine of the Trinity or the word of God, ‘Tknow not. Atleast, Lhave never seen any . . thing on this‘point which was in any manner sat- isfactory. Ifiam called a Nestorian, it matters not, provided that truth is on my side. ») Our “sig all tell us that Jesus CHFlst who came into the world to save sinners, was 1n eve- xy respect, sin only exeeied Me unto other ect Gac od, and Tee as eet A being totally iva i personality and e -still thesame person. ‘wvith whom he was, explain, bennett in nt agin of plain se _ The consciousne: gtha, suffered upon ‘the _ be the consciousness Trinity, or God the same consciousness, a sufferer, and such. ture. And if it wasas -it must haye been a _consciousness in uniongwi “ual part, constitutes a dis sti explained ina former lecture. of the Divine persons could»s _ ture, unless the human and Divine nate or have one consciousness, is foolist if they possess but one sonata monly believed, it must begthe ec of God, whieh I trust. will not be who Lelicve 1 in the infinite | pe mighty. s/t wh oh THEOLOGY.) . n - i inp. arperidaulltg, y, then fonda teehe ped were ; n of- who cimtiotinsatiee- 3 Ss ain his promised bless- : e rari t of pain, cannot be con-*. a being of the same perfection as he who - be Omnip potent” 7 without-misary? wherefore annot bee ome mise able in any ight what- eV coming imperfect.also. Infin-~ ite” dy eyil in the subject who possess s it, and as misery is the rootand foun-~ evi hse ag 28 Ossessits « ~ oi irthermore let meask, what was want- state our Saviour homanity a per-— person from his Divi asayh 2 omg “Athenasian b a & fend intelligent: vrs er nae . towel Seen sdistinet fi = Fa ere essence, vet all those several attributes whichnecessarily ” 4 rahe rsonal being ; a distinct mind, per= iapeoen and wil nd will 3 and ifso, why was « t person? - eg rther considering this subj ak, permit me’ to ie her enor his fuk Gallatians” iv—4: “But when’ the fullness of time was” ¢ome, God sent forth his son. made of a gee made under the law.” Theunavoidableconclu- _ sion to be drawn from this, is, that some person’ ir ‘e#tled a Son was’ made under the law. © The map’ mee 94 LECTURES ON i Jesus Christ. was the subject. Permit me to ask then;:wh a3 all our Peinitares yret Saviour to have beer without the creation p ery perfect manvis a person personal being was cneatec m must bea distinct personal be ; was uncreated, . peptic ne au human attributes are word; under which are implie are personal and which ] ed, as power, eae bike. A power, knowledge iierefore, were created a » . Was this the power, kna ness of God or man v Not of God, for his attrib ferna were consequenthy the at rene ar man soul, therefore, 4 all the tri longing unto it must have be ‘ifa perfect man was made, pe God or the second person | - sessed of a distinct rt and ¢ he rin onal tributes belonging thereunto, — was wanti or could be wanting to constitute a d. son? Personality consists either came e or the attributes of that pg Tf it consists in an Bh ao tinct person because a pT pres ea ace 5, sists in the attributes thereof, asI hz voured to show, then there, was a» di son, because a distinct set of attributes | consists in both the essence and attr utes i nion, there is stilla distinet person, | yecause be were united distinctly from theunion.o i ‘ea =— it y and essence. ‘Let Pp ju Sete sire prenontal tia OR: , and was ‘therefore — ed: sin every sense of the wor sit may be said # it tw rr s may Sater is all that is req j Pp rsoayand therefore, if i rere are two | ‘conscidusnesses a itil must I think acknowledge, then’ ; thet daat-also: be two'different persons: Agaisi, when our Saviour was apnea his ie second coming, he says,, “But‘of that ‘day and that hour kKnoweth 0 man, no, not the angels which arein hea jeither the Son; but the Fae ther” Now if the humanity’ and Divinity of ‘our areonstituted but one’person, one con- sciousness, Pe that: ignorance which was as~ cribed tate the Son was as truly applicable un- to his Divinity'as his» humanity; because “both constituted’ but one and the same person, whe as God the Son is repeatedly spoken’ sof in't *striptures a8 being Omniscient. Asa’ distinct 96) LECTURES ON person of the Godhead, Jesus Christ was ee Jedged by St; Peter and others:as: knowing all » things—*Lord thou knowestall things.” It was. the humanity only, therefore, who was ignorant, as a distinet person from the Divinity which was. in him and to which he was united. » in another, “I and my Father are one.””?, In the first instance he was evidently speakingjas aman. ‘only, and in the second, asa persen who was Di- vine, and therefore equal with the Father.. And though the same organs of speech were used both by the Divine and: human natures, yet they were evidently speaking as different and distinct, persons. For the Divinity, with to his eternal nature, could. not. say,-“My Father is: greater than I,’’ neither could the humanity say, “I and my Father-are one.””, And in respect to his knowledge, the Divinity could not-say, I know’ not the day nor the hour, neitherjeould the humanity be accounted as omniscent. And: yet, ifthe popylar doctrine be true, thesame: person is wise and ignorant, powerful and weak, anortal and immortal, Divine and human. All Trinitarian writers have acknowledged: that the assertions ofiand concerning our Savi~- our are frequently applicable only to one of his natures; and this -distinetion is certainly very correct;. but if both of those natures constitute only one person, then this distinction can no lon~ ger hold good. For whatsoever that one-person: - says of himself must be applicableuntohis whole self, which comprehends both his humanity and Divinity: For neither the humanity. nor Divi~ nity could use the personal prenouns)Zandeme- . | : 7 ‘ Is ignorant of some ety i as our Saviour did, is © a contradiction. » fact is, every conscious. - being-who is po d of ideas distinct from the. ideas of another conscious being, must bea dis- - THEOLOGY. ge 1ce to Ne hate ME idual nature was.an individual an nm. To say that our Saviour, w! of his ignorance, was speaking only ignorance of his humanity, when there was ne by between them, is-absurd. Sup-- r example, that F-should be called. as a ‘toa certain fact, and shouié pro- ignorance to the whole subject; and then ES it should be. auld: that eee reese preteen was only that of my material part; in my spiritual nature I possessed | a perfect knowledge of all that had of me.- Such language would be ~ considered as altogether absurd, unless my mate rial-part was'a distinet person, -and as such an- - swered for itself. And such isthe fact;as rela, tive to the person of our Saviour; if he was only one person, then:his humanity was only a part of the same, and therefore the language:of our Saviour as a person, respecting his ignorance, . was altogether absurd; because either a Divine or human person being but one-and the same person he is said: to know all things, and for that. person who knoweth all things, to say that he tinet person, and as such only can be permitted to.use the personal pronouns, I, me, &e. Bi Ifin our Saviour there is but one person, then’ the inferiority which in the-scriptures is repeat- edly ascribed unto Jesus’ Christ, must have been a- personal inferiority, consisting in want of - kaowledge and power, and must -be applicable. - 98 LECTURDS ON unto the second person eh Trinity ing but one person of © Sav the Son; and if this inferior ty ap he cannot be the true‘God ty of our Saviour still renyains withou Ifthe man Jesus Chrietoth! God | or son of God, why needed he the i the Holy Ghost, why called heh to the Father, why in ‘his agonies was with him? For to say t ourselves is absurd. Andalsoin his e: tion he might as well have said, myself, 1 why hast thou forsaken me? as to say, my my God; unless it be urged that one one pers the Trinity was uttering an. exclamatio another which I think will note serie, a is altogether impossible that one” pers: Godhead should forsake and leavethe othe misery and -despair; because no person of the Godhead is capable of misery and‘despair. ° - But if our Saviour was truly tworpersons, all these objections of inferiority’ enh once at’ an end; for the inferiority ‘of Skat cae a no argument against the coequality of the Divine or séeoud person of the Prinity, the human ‘per- son being no part of the Godhead though united to him who was. This expression of our Savi- our in his agonies was evidently an address or supplication of one person to another. “The person who uttered these words was ‘undoubt- edly the person who suffered, and ‘whom fora few moments God had forsaken,” an meter the*address was made to God the Father the Son, it matters not, for the persom to “RHEOLOGY. - 99: ore 85 Col and the person who cried was God, unless God is a sufferer. ‘Ttis admit. d howey er by all, that humanity alone wast ie 1a Therefore, the person who aires as re the exclamation, was different from ‘ the Father or God the Son, and consequently, . bags.) ast have been two persons in our Saviour. © e evident. intention. of the passage is this. Tt e human_ person or man Jesus Christ, in all ~ his trials and troubles i in this world, had always - received the assistance- -of God the ‘Son who was unite d with ee manifested under the same é peer body. But in his last sufferings, in or- | * der to accomplish his whole work, Godthe Son withheld. his assistance from the homes person, and the benap person cried to his Divinty “Mwy *God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me ?? Why dost thou not afford the same assistance’ whieh thou hast heretofore done, ; and deliver me from this cruel: death ? > And this interpretation - is certainly 1 mere reasonable than to say that this ° expression was uttered by the Divinity, for it is uttered in that style which is truly consistent. with human frailty and weakness. ; The Athenasian writers, however, willstill say, wedo not profess thatit was uttered by the Divini- ty, but by the human nature only. But how this can be admitted. without acknowledging that this _ human nature was a distinct person from the Di- vinity, L know not... For if, as Mr. Locke says, “g person is a thinking, intelligent being, that ~ has reason and reflection, and can consider i self as itself, the same thinking thing in "different 3 times Hon places”’, then, why was not the faery, » ity of our Saviour a distinct person? For it ° rig 3 100° LECTURES ON was possessed of all that was required to consti--\) tute it such. without the loss of a single attri-~ bute ; it spoke of itself as itself without any re~ ference to the Divinity with y it was con-— nected, of its inferiority in kr and pow- er, making use of the ibe py: Fead me like all other persons. Bishop Burnet attempts: oo salde-the ditedtey- arising from the doctrine of two natures in one rson, by comparing our Saviour’t> man. We- now, say's he, that in man there are two differ- ent and distinct natures united, matter and spirit, and which constitute but one man, and although this is aninexplicable mystery, it is neyertheless true.. Why then shall we not admit the possi- bility of two natures in our Saviour, Divine and” human, united in one person, although: a myste-~ Pry? To this it may be replied, that the comparison: 3s not a good one, and therefore is no argument in favour of the position. Although in man there » are two natures, material and spiritual, yet the material is not the personal part, neither consti- © tutes any part of the human person, for if such were the fact we are indeed never the same per-* son; our skin, our flesh, and even our bones are continually dissolving and changing, and in the * course ofa few years not a particle or vestige of | the same body remains. In man, therefore, there | is but one personal nature, one spirit or created soul, which is capable of ideas and t whereas in our Saviour two personal ee must be acknowledged, the Divine and ‘hut The comparison, therefore, is not a correct | ea ae betause in man no one allows the union of two personal natures. ae te _ THEOLOGY. 191 From these remarks it will be perceiver, that s Christ, who came ito the world to’ save ers, was really two pcrsons: one of whom aor ! Beecond ero ofthe Godhead, called the Son of God, and the other a man in all respects, sin excepted, like unto other men, who bled and died upon the cross to make an atonement . for the sins of the world. He also was a e Son of God, because begotten of God, very ‘different’ from-him who was the Beka _person of the Trinity, and called the only begot- _ten of the Eat _ Seripture language, it is true, is not so plain yand positive on. mths point as could be wished. _Whatsoever is said of our Saviour is mostly said in general terms, and is frequently applicable to Hae Divine or human persons. It is pro- fable that the ésttes received this mode of ex- their ideas concerning our Saviour from his. sia Be but one body, one visible aspect in the world, and from which every person who was not particularly inspired, or had received _their information from inspiration, would natu- rally consider and speak of him as only one per- son, especially Heathens and Jews, who believed nel in the testimony either of Christ or his apos- tlegs = “After all that.has been said, the dispute-con- cerning our Saviour’s personality i is only a dis- pute about words. For though Trinitarians do notin plain terms acknowledge two persons as existing under the one aspect of our Lord and se yet they do in cflect. They allow the _ same versity ‘of atiributes or natures in our “Saviour which I haye ascribed unto him} they eceeo ctor the same diy engity of essence or “402 LECTURES oN spiritual substances; they do not, it is true, give this union of human nature and essence the name of person as I do,and asthe seriptures have done; but all that is real in either nature or essence has been alike admitted by both themand me. They acknowledge all the simpler ideas whieh go to constitute the complex one of person and admit , theirunion, but cannot call that union a person. , And why they thus refuse to admit so plain a fact I cannot conceive, as it can in no measure interfere with the other articles of the Christian _church, unless incorrectly interpreted. - Person- al attributes in union with a rational soul are all _that are necessary to constitute a person, when’ considered individually or separately, and why , they should not do the same when considered in connexion with another person or our Redemer _God, must be shown before I can give up the point; forin giving up this, I should have rea- sons for giving up the doctrines of the Trivity in general. ~ s s- fos) _ persons, therefore; ' Jesus Christ, consti ee _ thy God,” “thou sh F me Saviour.and Mediator, wh the God who is acknowledged to be three per- complex haracter,! tho Le a general use of pronoun alae no. interfere with the doetr: f one a we Mediator between the “Father id fallen man; the one to atone for oursins, the other to purchase — by his active and perfe ‘} 3 S or- the use of personal — to be depended up- — n, genera prese Saviour as one, the | same may be also 0! enerally. -The- i) Almighty, in alr ost all‘his declarations, speaks ve no other Gods but me.”? Nevertheless Trinitarians acknow- ledge him to be three persons, and why ma} not two persons, | f e, as well as in the singular ai saying, “I am the Lard he singular.pronouns I sons? It per be very safely — that y Janguage of the scriptures is =i! eral, and when- ever God is spoken of heis as the Tri.” une God, an Ricretae in the ctagecl — . in his addresses: also,.to his creatures he speaks in the .same general. terms as the one eoniplex | God; and ina sim nner, and with equal priety, our g but one Saviour or ediator, often speal ods is oe ins of in that J Th Saviour under two persons than with the.d Atine of God under a Trinity | of —— ie ee ‘The doctrine of a Trinity of persons ' Godhead proved from the Sarintigen adics's in the two Se ‘shown the con- acy of the doctrine of the ‘Trinity with the Unity of the Divine essence, and explained the personal na of our Lord and Saviour,s@ne- > eessary to the truth of what has been said con- © ok tes his real Divinity, I am now led toi inquire © to the nature gh ona testimonies which are so petal pte insp writings in < Em as only rendered consist-- Thong h God is universally represented as one ~ God, a a of persons is nevertheless taught — in all the writings bo , Old and ee aay ae And though this may have been e respectable writers who deny the © the ae yet the origin of their Pn was the ei, of F reconciling is doctrine to the Unity of God, which it has been my first object to explain, and render con- wy reason and truth. This objection be- ing d, the truth of the doctrine ay be ne el from the yoice of Revela " % * - That God subsists or complex ideas fo Med bythe uni vine essence with personality, emer: concluded from his name some translate =e, the word is use a Old Test The word is als verb or adjectiy ra number,asiefound in various pass ey Ger af KRXV—T7} ‘ Dent. sale Bourn ashi 355, Psalih iit ; Daniel Se aL and adjectives must always agree with substantives © atthe same number, we must eit se-that ° fis word in the original is ‘of plural import, ve | ae rbd has Been guilty 0 ross mist in grammar, and this is Be icat ~ But our. ponents say, although God speaks of a plural being, yet “how. much > does he speak asa singular eing;, ler we are to judge from this ie langu have more proofs of his being three. This, however, is not co for whenever the fyi ge ats three persons. aed b true and correct, for hill e perso speak KS himself as one, the whole fe of the selyesasmany. God fey ko atd speak of himself-as one. times as one person, and on et nity the plural or wae sin ex be proper. The ae 8 ¥ “ - tinorosy. 107 wa ~ ‘been the anguage of God himself, where. he so wk out _ creating the world, “Let w en mr image, after our likeness 1A vas he thus addressing himself? We it Is? Certainly not; for they hadno share n ation. whatever. God alone hath ere va Mo Hetvaninned-the earth, and if so, then one ~ person wasadd ressingano ler person‘of the dime : ‘Ge sig as the eis but one God, Another of similar import is found i in Genesis xi —6, 7, oer ne said, let ws god down and ‘there found their language.” Also in Isaiah ‘vieeay. he voice of the Lord saying, whom shall Isend, and who will go for ws,” ev- “fi pe aticibt lyse one person was holding ouncil with another or others. It is true, as be- fore observed, that such passages-are few incomi- ' parison with ‘those where the Almighty speaks ~ of himself in the” singular number, yet this is no Spr fc ‘incorrectness or corruption of the origin- bE aly ‘neither is stich an objection made by those who dispute the plurality of persons in the God- head. Mr. Yates, in explaining these passages, denies that they are indicative of three persons, _ upon the ground “that in all languages with. “which we- are acquainted, persons of gr reat pow- er and dignity sometimes speak of themselves in _ thesplural number.’? And in proof of this: he brings two passages in particular from the serip- tures. “Firstly, where Rehoboam in ‘consulting *some of the young men, asks “What counsel give: ye that we may answer this people?” 1 Kings, xii—9. And secondly, in the letter of Artax- erxes, king of Persia, i oh he replies to Bish- lam, Mithredath, Tabeel, and their companions, in these ee ds: The letter which ye sent un- & oO 7] allege to ws hath been plain. asking their ad may answer this plied than that the as well as himself. HA vas own people who were as self, and the answer which in troth to be the answe him as their head and r therefore was very p asifhe had said—we, ‘ment answer you thus The same was the m taxerxes to his petition ter which he had receivec people asa nation,.and head and monarch. A ple Mr fore, was evidently impliec consequently can bear i vine language, as implyi sons of the Godhead. © e tng with his. angels in order the their minds, he néedeth: “not-the angels or any. ereated being, consulting: with the F ictal head. ‘And. furthermore, suel inferiours: would be highly i ty, as it would be making, or at] them, as beings‘eqnal with himself. me: pect to such. language among king om the same-objection cannot b: nation itself is.to be consi pectability as the king w ' Kates intimates that it isa) “V THEOLOGY. 308: Ms favour that we determine the number of per- ‘sons in the Godhead by the use of personal pro- 4 eif God speaks with a singular — fers that he is but one person only, ies ask, how this-can be. applied to his © For’ though one person. in the: God- y speak of himself in the singular num ne the pronouns I and me, what argu is this to-prove that there are no other per- sons who can dothesame? Because we acknow- re that God i ‘is one person, it cannot be infer- at we acknowledge no more. An argu- oft is kind, t therefore, i is altoge ther withe - dation. — ' itr remains that we now proceed to a consider. - ation of the particular persons who are compre- hended under.the unity of the one Supreme Bo- tae and these are, God the Father, God the Son,., God the Holy Ghost. The Divinity ofeach 1 ‘these persons is very clearly intimated and . roved from various passages both in the Old and New Tes taments. n speaking of the Divinity of God, it will be SSary to remark that it consists in an essence, al id all those personal attributes which I have heretofore described! In saying, therefore, that each person i is a separate and distinct Divinity, I mea aly that each person possesses a distinct of Divine attributes; but that the same essence mmon unto the three. Therefore it will be perceived, that cach person eannot be 2separate anddistinet God of itself, beeause each person does not possess:a separate and distinct essence. And therefore the objection that three Divinities- eonstituted three Gods canbe of no force. My enly object i$ to-show that each person possess- so Z ef * _ deeds done in the body, and he who is it SEOTURRS | on® _ ed those attributes whie constitute ing. * Met): © a) ‘As there appears. ‘to ‘- the Divine nahure of 6 3 be no necessity of ri his attributes and perf Proceed in the consid which may be urged our Lord and Saviour. sonal knowledge of tho: former ages, all our k standing in those days is testimony of others, fro I been given him, and the which have been aseri evidence concerning o God. What then are are which are here ascribed 1 he bears the name of God m ly, from the words of St. . xiv chap. 12th yer. “So th shall give an account of hi ce it isevident that this passage rela and final trial at the bar of God on the when everyman shall give a strict son that will judge us on that day is Hoi whom. this account is to be given, ar son, we learn, is God. That this petstin God the Father is fully proved from John, it is said, “The Father judgeth nom sohbet dommitted: all judgment'to the Son; ad given him authority to execute ju ma because he is the Son of Man.”? Tohnv22, : ¥f the Son, therefore, is the ister “igh account is to be given, andynot t * * | TREOLOCY.” 11% : 0 ot Ws “then the Son must be God, because it isutodG that-our ace s areto be given. In theinex lace odea. that Christ. -was tempted iD iess'by those who were destroyed:of fier a “Neither let us tempt Christ a3 some =. tempied and were destroyed 3 or. x—9, It may be said that the . word Aim is not added after tempted, and there- fore cannot: preve that he was the person who Patra tempted; urging that the explanation ts, that we are not to tempt Christ as some of them also _ tempted God in the’ wilderness.~> This exposi- ‘tion hasybeen given by many Socinian writers. t this, instead - ing any- objection, is an » exposition in favour of our theory: Fer if it is true, then it is-very apparent that St. Pant con- sidered our Saviour as a person of equai authori- ty and power with him who was tempted in the wilderness, and considersit as wicked and.dread- ful'to tempt him. as it was to tempt God in the — wilderness; for we are warned notto tempt him, lest similarvevils befati us as did them who tenrpted in the wilderness, and were destroyed of fiery serpents... It is therefore evident that if this interpretation be admitted, our Saviour is a being of equal dignity with God who governed in the wilderness, and therefore. God himself, as none but different persons ef the same Godhead cam be equal in dignity. - Again, God the Father hath admitted_the Di- vinity of his Son by expressly calling him God. “But to the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever, .a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.” He also contin- ues his address to the Son, saying, “And thou, Lord, in the begianing hast laid the foundations - * _ * va a ?? ats me ri2- LECTURES ON : of the earth, and the RS are Me wor thy hands, They shall perish, but thou fee 9 est; and they shail all wax old as doth a garment; and as a vestureshalt thou fold them up and they shall be changed; but-thou art the same and t years shall not fail.”? Heb. i—8, 9, 1,12.— That Jesus Christ-was truly: and | ‘the au- thor of the heavens and the earth may here; as also from many other places, be fairly deduced. And he was not only their anther, but their Lord, and for whom they were ented and o sO, then there is no higher. powe St who’ — them to be made for himself api: as his instrument or mean as some hi 4 the primitive fathers. St. ‘Bar as says, ° voured to prove Theale e doc the Lord of the world, the maker of the sun, the person by whom and to whom are all things.” “He is,”’ says Justin Martyry“the word by. which * the heaven, the earth, and every creature was made.” ‘Tatian says, «He made man the image of his immortality, and before man he made the ~ angels.” Consequently -he must have existed previous to every created being. We rational ~ creatures,” saith Clemens of Alexandria, “are the work of God the word; for he was and is the Divine’principle of all things, by whonr all things were made, and who, as the framer of all thing gs, in the beginning, gave also life toms, by whom are all things; who made man, and is our God and maker, the cause of all. ereati¢td’ * And in the third rf the same doctrine was by Tertullian, St. Cyprian, Novatian and others; erefore we perceive tha age the Daiepone Saviour was admit ted by aie learned members of the ayn « : 5 -. DHROLOGY. 113 And the assertion of his being the Create of the universe seems to have been in part the founda- tion of this belief. « x In the next place our Saviour was not only lled God, but the frue Ged, asin 1 John v— 20. “And we are in him that is true, in his Son ' Jesus Christ, this is the true God and eternal ~ life,”?. and, this:pass vidently implies: that both the Father and the Son were here believed as the true Fae both.of Whom they consider- ed themsely being their members and fol- Jowers. eis also called) God manifest in the “And without controversy great is. the ry of liness; God was manifested in the flesh; justified in the spirit; believed on in the world, received up into glory.””: 1 Tim. iii— 16. That this.passage can be.applieable to none but Jesus Christ, I think every. person will ad- mit, because.to God the Father it cannot a ; as he could not be received up into glory with- out heing firstly manifested in material’ form up- on the earth. “i .The interpretation of these words by Dr, Whit- by.is. very plain and forcible. “1.* The word, saith St. John, was made flesh and dwelt among us, Joh 14, and we have seen his glory. * He was ephanerothe, i.e. mani fested,.1 John iii—5; Vili-l, 4, and came in the flesh who was the Son of God. ; He who. was in the form of God, and thought it no robbery to be equal-with God, was found inethe likeness of «man. Phil. ii—6, 7. He that was God blessed forevermore, was also of the seed of i > tl ix—5. 2. B was justified .of the.spirit, as do- ing those miracles onearth by hich he justi ' his mission against all theaccusations of the Jews “ ae, ey “H ae ¥ oie » f David according to the flesh. Rom. . i aS rad LECTURES ON he Spirit }of God, Matth, xii-—28, einai.” bgt Set Gat Math a, inh spirit of holiness, Rom. i—3, 4 ' sending that spirit after his ascensi _ Acets ii. 23. Which he had promised lessup= on earth, and by whieh By pest 4 nvinced of his righteousness. ngels, oat hiss entrance i he world worship Heb. i—6; wh rated. irth, and Ms. notice of it to"thegw orld; who minister # m in-the desoiditien and. inh “agot ies} 2 2 who were presentat his resurrection, him at bis oe into heaven. ellie ~»whole history of the*'Gos that « preached to hb Gentiles se ele on in the world.” Ané lastly, he was received up ‘into heaved, as is proved - ~~ Mark x 9; Luke xxiv—dl; Acts i—2, _ These there- fangyean ie icatia. to no person but our Sa- viour, who. must ‘therefore have ‘been the God who was manifested in the flesh. aren: tho pe is also called God blessed forever. “Whose e fathers, and of whom as concerning the é dech,-Ch st eame, who is : blessed - + forever.’? Rom:ix—5, He is also called God —13. He is. actiepatnaedl said. to possess. all the Sulness of the Godheud bodily, being thehead of allprineepality and power.* r in him dwelleth all the fulness of the'Godhead And ye are:complete in ser y bis th , of all-principality: and power.” | » In the next place, that our Saviou: appears from the declaration of 1 th migh * himself, where: he says, “I,eveniI,am tl ie L end beside me there is no Saviour.” Joasdiiia2a. ; over all,in Rom. x= 2; the great God, Tit.ii A THEoLody.. ~ $45 Fe: ‘But it is/acknowledged by all that Jesus Christ ts viour, therefore he must be the one ieee , he Gad, as none but God can be our Salant aceedine to this declaration. Many o» Sapptied an might be cited-where the title God” ed unto JesusChrist; the quotations, how- ‘ever, which have been made are sufficient. for ys Sonim of everyunprejudiced mind. As a second argument in proof of the Divi ty of. our Saviour, I will endeavor to shaaal : possesses all those qualifications which ‘e tute a Divine being, and which have been a: -eribed unto God'the:Father. That he was a Spi- ritual being will not bedenied. That he was an Omnipotent being may be proved from various passages of the inspired word, He acknowledg~ es himself that all power was. possessed by. hith both in heayen and earth, and if he possessed all power, nothing more was wanting to constitute him Omnipotent. The history of: his: works, however, decidedly confirm our belief in his Om- -nipotence. The winds and the sea obeyed him. With power and authority he commanded the” unclean’ spirits and they obeyed him. He'could raise the dead, cast out Devils, heal the sick, give ‘sight to the blind, ears to the deaf, and finally burst the bands of death and raised hijupell fi from the sepulehre wherein he had ‘been laid; and who but Omnipotence couldthus change the com- mon laws of Nature at his own will and pleasure? “who shall change our vile body that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, accof- ding swith the working whereby he is able e- ven to subdue all things unto himself?” His Om: -nipotence is also proved from his being the au- ‘thor of the ‘universe, as * a Paul yery plainiy in- i & ee a ia . "4 116 " 2HOTURES On forms us; “who is the image of the invisible God, the first born of every creature ; for by hi were all things created that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, . or powers; all things were created by him and _for him. And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.” Col. i—16,17. The -same fact is also related in Hebrews i—2, 10, as -» Ihave already quoted. Learning, therefore, that - esus Christ is the Creator of all things, beeen timony of Natural Theolgy which yery evident- _ly proves the Omnipotence of him who is their _author can be applicable as well to our Saviour # 1 pur i God the Father. The Divinity of our Saviour therefore proved even from Natural bier”) provided it is allowed that-he is the author of all things, and which must be allowed hy all Chris- fians. v rid ' But it will be answered, Jesus Christ created _ them only through the command of God the Fa- ther, and therefore God the Father is truly their creator, because the designer, and our Saviour al- so, because the executioner or agent ef the Fa- ther. This interpretation, however, is no argu- ment against the Omnipotence of our Saviour; . for he who executes must possess the same active power as he who commands and designs. And furthermore, unless he was really the eternal God he could not be the author of all ereatures, nor exist before all creatures, as the Scriptures inform us, as he eould not ereate himself, nor ex-~ ist before himself. “And this evidently confirms his Eternity, for none but an eternal being ca exist before all other beings, unless betwee “come into existence withoute cause. a « " ~~ ‘ THEOLOGY. tit’ | Omniseience: is another attribute which has seribed unto our Saviour by his apostles liseiples. His disciples, upon hearing his uae and the wisdom with which he spake said unte aim, “Now we are sure that thou know-- a 1 thi ings; and needeth not that any man should ask thee ; by this we believe that thou camest forth from God,”? John xvi—so. Paui tells his Collosian converts, that “great was the mystery of God, and of the Father, oes of Christ, in whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom wad knowledge.”? When the Scribes and Pharisees ‘reasoned together he perceived their thoughts: - “For it is he that searches the reins and hearts.” John informs-us, that when Jesus asked Si- mon the third time if he loved him, Peter said unto him “Lord thou Enowest all things; thow * knowest that E love thee.”? John xxi—@7. These are certainly sufficient illustrations of the Om- niscience oftJesus Christ, though others might be cited. And from this arises ‘the attr ibute of Im- mutability. He who knoweth all things, know- eth also to act in the best and most proper man~ er. And therefore as his’ knowledge tbe increased or diminished, neither can a hie actions @ or determinations be changed, because they are pee s founded upon wisdom ‘and truth. "That aviour was- Immutable may he inferred - fromthe words of St. Paul to the Hebrews, when he says, “Jesus Christ the same yesterday, na: and forever.” He is consequently the same i knowledge, in power, in space, in duration, ees everlasting to everlasting, the one and only God. From what has been said it will be- ‘perceived — that Jesus Christ is a being who ssses all . power, wisdom and knowledge; eteraal,immuta- a 3is. Paki ab ble and self- ; Lord of lords: kings, and very God. In addition to these prools of our Saviour, it will be proper to quote of Isaiah as relative both to his natu ance in the world: “For un i unto us a son is given; and the gove be upon his shoulders ; and th arena called Wonderful, Counsellor, the Mi the Everlasting Father, the Prince of saiah ix—6. Furthermore, our Saviour said of himself “Iand my Fatherare one.” / other passage may be cited from our Redeemer is spoken of as a distinet person from the God of Israel, and yet is called the Lord of Hosts: “Thus saith the Lord the one of Israel, and his Redeemer the Lord of H Tam the fitst, and I am the last, and beside | there is nowGod. ” Tsaiah xliv—6. ‘That pied, bees ist isthe ‘Redeemer oken of is evident, bast a ee s ealled toast Old e ents; and th a8 as. ‘ aa srael says, beside me there is: no’ ease this Redeemer and the i... al must be the same God, though persons. Similar language coneerning our Sa- viour is bea in the Revelation of St. John, xxii 13: “| am Alpha and aa the beginni wand the -endy the first and the ppp. ij ms which are here applied to our Saviourcan. e applied to none but God, so Jesus Christ must — be the God who isthus spoken of. bape te crt there- ore to unite with St. Paul and , dwelt all the fulness of the Godhead “box ‘iy? Our Unitarans say that all ese a attributes of Omnipotence, Omnisciencean hole fulness. ™ | THEOLOGY. 119° tf God were ouapge to our Saviour as a king 3 power to his son, a do not belon es as a Divine ~ This hae ever, i ossible; for if our Saviour possessed fuln God, then he was Eternal and Self-- ent, which are attributes which never--ean he delegated, and therefore can.only be essential, - These areonly a few of the passages which might be-adduced in proof of the Divine nature of Je- sus Christ, and ought to be sufficient for the con-- vietion of every unprejudiced mind. Yet, that- there’may remain as little doubt as possible con- cerning the truth of so important an article of the Christian Faith, Iwill here make one re-- mark, and which I think can be fully established; - and that is, if our-Saviour- Jests Christ was not God, he was:the minister of*the Devil, a deceiv- er, a liar, a hypocrite, and his doctrines were in-. to lead people into Polytheism and Idol- »atry. Every person knows that we are com- ‘tmanded to worship. the Lord our God and him only, and Jesus Chri “rts ie -com~ mandment with his own word.. also a weil known fact that our Saviour was worship- ped in many instances. When he wasin the ship. -with-his disciples they eame and worshipped | him; he was-also worshipped by the ruler and Canaanitish woman, and‘when he came from the sepulehre and went forth to meet.his disci- ples, they held. him by the feet and worshipped him. They didnot do this from enthusiasm, but from a sincere love of God. And indeed the My mighty himself hath commanded that he sho he worshipped, saying: ‘‘Let al) the sper God worship him.’’ And this command was ob- served at his birth, not only by angels, but by ae ae a of the mattyr Stephen, when Pryce ana . “Lord Jesus-receive my spirit;” for Sate 120 LECTURES ON men. Now, if the Peart Se On manded us to worship Christ, and orships none but God, then Ch is inconsistent with k God, his disciples. w dolatry, and he of the t sumption in suffering h ene when he knew tha only as such, a mere man Begins creatu would undoubtedly have errr, { shipping of him as an act of Idolatry. € our also received and was “pl cased worship; whereas if he wason righteousness was not equal to the right of his disciples. For when the ape stles | bas and Saul were at Lystra, and the people ee with oxen and garlands unto the gate “for pre 4 purpose of doing sacrifice unto. : “rent their clothes and ran in among the people,» : saying, “Sirs why do ye these things? We alsov are men of lilvy passions with you.” Acts xiv—— M4,15. Again,if our Saviour was mot truly God, it was certainly a very foolish ae of all men: must return and be committed to God’ who gave them. Our Lord is also very frequent~ ‘ ly addresséd as a person who can forgive sing and who can forgive sin but God only? ini { so evident that he himself taught his~ Divinity, ; and this was the very reason “why the Scribes — and Pharisees objected to we , because, say writ he maketh, himself equal with God. And u he did thus teach his equality to God, su objection could not haye been made. In our *. v [Hone ey,” 19¢ pe {Titenoey~ 12% seriptures he was ever addressed with the same reverence'and respect as God the Father. The A~- postles were taught to baptise equally in_ r ‘ather, Sonand Holy Ghost. - of the-benedictions of St. Paul, the name , is put the first in order, thus, nae grace of our Lord Jesus Christ; and the love of - God, and the fellowship°of the Holy Ghost be with yowall.”” Asanother instance of the e+ = persons of the Godhead, we read in 1 John v—7, “There are three that bear re- cord in heaven, the Father, the Word and the — Holy Ghost;and:thesethree are one.”? These sages certainly tend to confirm us in the be- Hef of our Saviour’s Divinity, and must have been very improper language in the. inspired writers, unless it was their object to teach the py to the world. “The age in which our Sa- viour appeared urto mankind, and in which the New Testament was written, was anage of Hea-. thenism and Idolatry; consequently it was the duty of the inspired writers in all their ‘histori-. cal or doctrinal writings, to avoid every thing which could have the least tendency to Idolatry among the people. But if Jesns Christ was ne more than’a man, or a finite being of any kind, their writings generally certainly tend to the op- posite effect, as they are calculated to encourage the doctrine of Polytheism. Butas the voice of inspiration is not the voice of error, it is very eve ident that the Divinity of Jesus Christ was be- lieved and'taught in the apostolic age, and: it was the particular object of the inspired penmen to. convey this doctrine to succeeding generations as well es to spread the same throughout every part of the earth, r x _ this is algo'the redson why our Saviour P ® .. sufficient proved the Divinity fJe- sus Christ; vit rim be my bjt » collect those’evi v0 0 es the ninth | chapter of the Epi tl Romans, where the Apostle c and Jesus Christ to bear witness 0 his words, which was in substar - oath. An‘dath “is allowe rs on the Bible to be an ae ship, in which God is call to the truth. He is thas e of the truth, because he knoweth all Holy Spirit are said or intimated to be wi of the truth, beceuse they are*pérsons who pos- © sess all knowledge and all wisdom, and therefor are the most proper as j s concerning the rectitude of our conduct or the interitionsiof the — heart 2 et, Sy That the Holy Ghostis Omniscient, the same — apostle teaches us ‘in his Epistle tothe Corinthi- ans. * “The Spirit searcheth all things, yeathe — deep things of God.” That thie-opint is a per- son, and, not the influence or inpiration of the Deity, whereby he stirs up the mind to medita- tron and godly conversation, he fully shows b comparing the spirit of God with the spirit maa. “For what man‘knoweth the things of ¥ man save the spirit of a man which isin him? : Even so the things-of God knoweth no man but — the Spirit of God.”? The Spirit of God, there- fore is.God, inasmuch as the spirit of man is mans wae ve] _THEOLO Gy. 123° ‘The spititof every inte laztopsh being is that es-- ential part which is possessed of knowled power, and the otherattributes which are pe Tamabipuctiended under, that of personali- - ty, and is-represented as such in the.seriptures;: . as may be inferred from the worde of Stephen, . which Ihave already quoted, when he «said,. “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.”” The same ale Por ei of the apostles concerning the meaning of. this-»word, as -we may learn when they saw our Saviour walk cing on the sea, “they were troubled, saying, itis a spirit, and they cried out for fear.”’ Matth. xiv—26: That the Holy Spirit isealled the Spirit of God-in the same sense. cannot be denied, because he is-at the same time spoken of as-a personal being. Theapostle fur- - ther says, “But all these gifts worketh the same spirit, dividing them to every man seycrally as he will.””? Here again we perceive that not only personality i in general is ascribed unto the Holy Spirit, from the use of the pronoun fe, but a will also is said to determine his actions, whereas 2 will or freedom of choice and power of determi- nation is never ascribed to any but a-personal - being. It also teaches us that this Spirit was no created person, because no created being of his own inherent power is capable. of” conferring those gifts which were bestowed. upon the apos- tles and diseiples. Again, this passage very evi- dently implies that-this Spirit. was God; for 5t Paula little before had heen ascribing these same - operations to God, which he now says were perr - formed by the Holy Spirit. We have a further proof of the Divinity of the Holy Ghost in the account of Ananias and Sa~ phira. ‘Peter: said, Ananias, why hath satan, 7 324 LECTURES ON : filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, to keep back part. of ‘the price of the Ja While it remained was it not thine own, and af. _ ter it was sold was it not in thine own power Why hast thou conceived this ‘thing imthine heart? Thou hast not lied unto men but unto~ God.” Acts v3, 4.) 158 » Ananias lied — unto the Holy Ghost, the Holy Ghost must have — been.a person, and that person, ‘asqwe are told; — was God. It is true that the werd spirit is fre- _ quently used in the scriptures in a differentsense — from that of-a persona! being, or the essential part of man or God... This, however, cannot be said of the passages which I have quoted, as they are sufficiently plain to warrant the above ex- planation, as will appear from the context: That the Holy Ghost isa person wih appear-evident, if we will only take the trouble of consulting those various. passages-where he is represented as promising, comforting, speaking, acting on many occasions, teaching, ordaining, conmmmand- ing, and many other things whieh can be attri- buted only to persons. In confirmation of this, — see Acts ix—31; John xiv—i6; 1 Cor, ii—i3; Acts xiii—2; xx—28; xxviii—25; ii—33. With — these evidences, the Holy Spirit is to be consid- ered as God, coequal and coeternal with theMa- — ther and the Son, and possessed of the same glo- rious perfections. The passagesfrom the Divine — word which Dhave here quoted, with many oth- — ers which might have been cited of equal weight and authority, in confirming the Divinity of Je- — sus Christ and the Holy Spirit, must-eertainly be sufficient with any man who duly-reads and — understands. Upon this doctrine of the Trinity @hristianity. itself is founded. Tf this fallspaye - e throw away our Bibles, our prayer- : Il our former hopes of ever arrivi . _ THEOLOGY. 129- therefore, the second person of the Godhead has. by his active righteousness given unto man the privilege of receiving heaven as the reward” thereof; or of remaining in his natural state of condemnation for sin and disobedience; and this. second person must have beena secondconscious- se God, for none but a Divine person could perform the lala which I have here ascribed unto our Savio In rig oe of what has been said concern-- ing this i important doctrine, we have, in addition. to “the bestimony of the inspired writers, the voice of those who immediately succeeded them; their testimony, therefore, must cer tainly be ve- ry important, because they had a better opportu- nity of understanding the primitive doctrines of | the church, before they became corrupted with - superstition and error. Clemens Romanus has’ been acknowledged by all chronologers to have been contemporary with some of the. apostles, and was probably per sonally acquainted with them, especially St.Paul, who is said to have own- ‘ed himasa fellow labourer, he says, “The scep-. tre of the majesty of God, our Lord Jesus Christ, - came notin the show of pride and arrogance, - though he could have done so, but with humili- ty.”? By him, therefore, whom writers acknow- ledge to have been a fellow labourer with Paul, our Saviour was considerec and spoken of as the true God, Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, who was mar tyred under Trajan in the year 107, also ac- knowledges the Divinity of Jesus Christ in his epistle to the Ephesians, saying, “There is one physician, both fleshly and spiritual, made and not made, God incarnate.’ In the same epistle he agaia says, cTenorande was taken aay, and Not ; ee Np ad ww 430 LECTURES ON 2. the old kingdom apelin God himself'appear- ing in the form of man.” ; Ta the next place, Polyearp, bishop of Smyr- na, who flourished about the same time, says, “Every living creature shall worship Christ;’ pit: he is to be aa he must he od. ; Justin Martyr, who flourished about the year ~ 118, says to the Pagans, “We worship and adore the God of righteousness, and his Son, and his Holy Ghost of prophecy,—and we hold it un- fawful to worship any but God alone.”’ See his Apology. This isan incontrovertible proof that the Christians as a body, in his day, held to the doctrine of a Trinity in Unity. Tor he asserts. positively, that it is unlawful to worship any but God alone, and still says that they worshipped the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, which’ ts an evidence, that each, in their opinion, was truly God. eae And Tatian, also, who wasa disciple of Justin Martyr, confirms the same to the Grecians, say- ing, “We donot, O Grecians, act the part of fools, nor do we tell you idle stories, when we declare that God was born in human form.”— Irenzus, who wrote in the year 202, and Theo- philus also in nearly the same words, says, “The Son from eternity coexisted with the Father, and from the beginning he always revealed the’ Father to angels and archangels, and principali- ties and powers, and all to whom it pleased him to reveal him.”’ Lib. iv. against the Heretics. St. Clement, A.D. 200, says, ‘So that the God of all things is only one good and just Creator, the Son who was inthe Father.” And the Sy- ned of Antioch in their letter te Paul of Sama- ¥ THEOLOGY. © — 13h. the year 270, in confirmation of our | , “The messenger of the Father is is himself Lord and God.”’ Epist. © Synod Antioch ad Paul Samos. Tertullian says, “Some think that Omnipo-; tent is a title which does not agree to the Son as if he who is to come were not Onsite _ Whereas the Son of the Almighty is as much ty as the Son of God is God.” Lib.i. — og c. 8, p. 119 D Paris 1629. ‘Hermas, who flourished about the year70,thus ~~ speaks: “The Son of God’ is more ancient than ~ any creature, insomuch that he was in council with the Father upon the subject of creation. The name’ of the Son of God is great and with- _ out bound, and the whole earth is upheld by him.” *s Enquiry, page 17.° Athenegoras, who wrote about the year 175, says, “By him and through him were all things made. The Father and the Son being one; the Son being in the Father and the Father in the Son, in the unity and power of spirit." We pro- fess, and his Son the word, and the Holy Ghost, and that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are truly one as concerning power.’ Athene- goras in Legation, pro Christianis p.27 A Ed Colon 1686. - . These extracts undeniably prove that the doc- trine of the Trinity was held and taught by the immediate successors and even companions of the apostles; and indeed it was never disputed until a little before the Council of N ice, which was summoned in the year 325, when, 1n a pub- lic council of the whole church ‘the decision was still in favour of the doctrine. And if this was the doctrine of the primitive ages, we have reu- 192 LECTURES ON son to believe from this circumstance alone, that: it was the true doctrine, as there would be far less opportunity for corruption than in those ages which were further removed from its first insti- tution as‘an article of Faith by Christ.and his apostles, “ / MHEOLQST, «3 peeeie tik esigt LECTURE Ve eee ts ete : ‘ aT aas Some Objections “nswered. - ; : a? Hayne sufficiently proved the doctrine of a Trinity in Unity, from the declarations of both reason and the word of God, ail that now remains is to answer some. particular objections which have been made against the equality of the Son with the Father, and the personality of the Holy Ghost; wherein I shall endeavour to shaw: that many of these passages of scripture which have been so confidently quoted against us, are appli- - eable only to our Saviour’s human:nature, and ~ therefore can be of no service in disproving the Divinity and equality of the second person of the » Trinity with God the Father. -. The following are some of those passages which have been considered by Unitarian. wri- ters as unanswerable objectionsagainst the equal ity of theSon with the Father: “Yeare Christ’s, .. and Christ is God’s.’? 1 Cor. i1ii—23. .“That is, . as ye are subject to the dominion of Christ, so Christ is subject to the dominion of God.” This Reith B94 LECTURES ON is very true in relation tohis human nature. As a created being similar in all respects but that of sin to othermen, he was truly obedient unto the. will of the Father, but this being altogether ap- plicable to his humanity, is altogether without force or effect as to the inferiority ot his Divini- ty or the second person of the Trinity. Mr. Yates has also cited the following passa- ges for the same end, wherein itis stated or pro- ved that our Saviour was anointed by God the Father, and therefore must be considered, as our author supposes, inferior-and subservient unt¢ him, as when our Saviour said, God “hath an- nointed me to preach the gospel to the poor.” Luke iv—18. “He said unto them, but who say ye that lam? Peter answering, said, The Christ (thatis the anointed) of God.” Luke ix—2t “The rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against his Christ, (or his anointed.) For ofa truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod’and Portius Pi- Tate, with the Gentiles and the’ people of Israel, were gathered together.” “Acts ivy—26, 27. “God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit, and with power.” Acts x—38. “God, e- ven thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.” Heb. i—9. These passages, with many more which have been urged with the greatest confidence, to prove the inferiority of the Son to the Father, are ap- plicable generally to the human person of Christ. Few remarks, therefore, upon these passages — will be necessary. That this man; Jesus Christ, was anointed with the Holy Ghost, and with the oil of gladness above his fellow creatures, wheth- er memor angels, will-not be denied. Thathe suf= * ? THEOLOGY: - 495° fered pain and’'agony in this world in an extreme degree, and indeed possessed all the frailties of human nature generally, except sin, and was in- finitely inferior to God the Father, or the Son with whom he was united, will also be admitted. It will therefore be altogether useless for me ta. review many more of our author’s quotations on) this point, as they can no longer be considered objections to the equality of God the Son with the Father, but have a reference only to the hu- man person of Christ, whose inferiority all ac- knowledge. __ It will be proper, however, to note a few par- ticular objections which are connected with the- present subject in debate. For Mr. Yates con siders if a very strong argument in his favour,. _ and against the Divinity of Jesus Christ, that the> seriptures in speaking of God and our Saviour’ in the same sentence, always represents them as” distinet fromeach other. He says, “If with a sincere desire of arriving at the truth, we apply to this source of information, we, inthe first place, observe numerous passages which represent Je- sus Christ as a distinct being from God.” To ~eonfirm the strength of this argument he brings seventeen passages of scripture, among which are the following : “Grace be to you, and peace from God our father and the Lord Jesus Christ.?” Rom. i—7; 1 Cor. i—3. “Grace be with you, mercy and peace from God the Father and from . the Lord Jesus Christ.”” 2 John, 3. “Peace be to the brethren, and love with faith from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.””? Eph. vi —23. The inference which he draws is this:— “One of the two is in every instance called God, to the other this title is neyer applied, and since te LECTURES: ON it is certain that there is but one God, the i “rence appears irresitable that this other per namely our Lord Jesus € i Yates on Unitarianism, pag John i—1, 2, where it is said that the word, or Jesus Christ, was with God, and therefore con-. Bludes that he must be a different being. ' In answer to these remarks, I would observe;- in the first place, that though our Saviour as not possitively called Godin all the passage here ci-. ted, the title is given him in some of them,- and- ‘in many others which he has not particularly quoted. To select a few passages and form our “ opinions from these without reference to the, : context generally, is indicative of a regu- lated by prejudice and bigotry; not safe 2 ter truth, but zealous in the support of certain, ve preconceived opinions, whether founded in truth orerror. One ofthe verses quoted by our au- thor in part, expressly asserts that our Saviour was with God, therefore, says our author, he must be a distinet being from God. Yet, hadhe been so kind as to have quoted the whole verse, he might have seen that her was God. “In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God,and the word was God.” John i—1, Secondly, we acknowledge that te mca, very frequently imply a distinction in persons, but as I have already shown that diversityo f persons does not necessarily imply a diversity of substances or essences, ‘so his ‘inferenee being. not a necessary one, cannot be urged as a. Bett ~ of the assumed fact. And thirdly, ifa few passages are thus to. be’ selected from the inspired writers, to show that our Sayiourand God the Father are differentand a ’ -THEOLOGY. 137 - distinet beings, because addressed and spoken of as distinct persons, then we may with equal ‘propriety use his own argument, and prove the ‘Father to be a distinct person from God; andif | .a distinct person from him who is called God, and yet God Himself, then there are two persons who are called God; and thus his own argument proves the plurality of persons in the Godhead. “To prove this I will bring some of the very pas- sages which he has quoted against us. It is.said, “Now God himself, and our Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, desired our way untoyou.’’ 1 Thes, iii—11. The same language is used in Gallati- ans, i—4: “Who gave himself for our sins, that “he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the willfof God, and our Father.” Alsoin Philip. iv—20: “Now, unto God, and our father, be glory forever and ever.’’ The Janguage, therefore, quoted by Mr. Yates to prove thatthe Father and the Son are two dis- tinct beings as well as persons, must, in the end, prove that the God here mentioned was a differ- ent person from him who was called the Father ; and if different from the Father because the Fa- ther is mentioned separately from God, then there is a plurality of persons in the Godhead, and our theory is admitted. It may with perfect safety and correctness be urged that when it is said that. Jesus Christ in . his human person gave himself for our sins “ac- cording to the will of God and our Father,” the idea intended. was, that the human person Jesus Christ gave himself for our sins according to the will of the Divine person, or God the Son, and God the Father. And the passage before -guoted from 1 Thes. iii—11, is to-be interpret: »~ $e ~ \. ed ina similar manner, “Now God himself, ithe Son and our Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ the human Hevea Ly you.’’. These passages, th 1 -youring the Unitarian, systen the contrary, ‘go to establish the Divinity of our Lord and Sa- -viour, because had there been, but one person in _the Godhead, the word Father immediately after ‘God. would be altogether improper, without the removal of the conjunctive wai. The next which he brings i is from. ‘the words of St. John, where it is asserted that Jesus Christ came from God and went to God.” He ponigha ~“’That God should come from himself a himself is a manifest absurdity. sioys, therefore, imply terech God and Christ as The’ senile hele ‘quoted plicable unto the second | hut unto the humanity, as ir Abe disciples were evide our Saviour, and in referen nity; for, say they, “No man ca racles that thou dost except God Neither did he as a man, and only, accomplish these .wonde from the power of that:Ged whe him. , His human: person truly came fee God, as all created beings must, in- reference to their first origin, and also-returned unto him at his as- -cension, that is to God the Father, who had ere- ated him. » It must be acknowledged, however y ever, i is not ap- f.the, Trinity, 2. ‘ Sy 14 - ie, a | ‘THEOLOGY. 139 that similar Janguage is applicable unto the Di- vine person of our Saviour as well as his human; but this is no reasonable objection to our theory, _ fared | has frequently expressed himself in six milar language, saying, I will go, or I will come, -and as God is Oninipresent, this language can haye no relation to space whatsoever, therefore itis as proper to say I will go to the Father, as -for man to-say, that we. must return to our Hea- venly Father; because, as he is omnipresent, we are as much with him in point of space as we will: ever be. For.one person of the Godhead, there- fore, to be sent by another, is the same.as being manifested by the will of another, and again dis- appearing, or, in the language of men, returning ‘to his former state of invisibility. The mean- ing of the passage, therefore, is not that one per- -son of God came from and went to himself, but that one person came or manifested himself to the world according to the will of another person of the same Godhead, and in a similar manner re- turned or disappeared. And as this was an act of our Saviour in his Mediatorial character, it would not, asI have before remarked, be degrad- ing to his Divinity. “Another impor tart objection has been made te the Divi ty and coequality of the Son upon the suppositi Boia all his miraculous powers and. facia ely were derived and. not inher- -ent; in proof of which many passages of scrip- ture have been quoted, as “All power is given unto me in heaven and inearth.’’—Matth. xxviii —1i8. Hesays unto his disciples, “All things are delivered unto me of my father.??” To the Jews ‘he deelares, (John v—19, 36) «Veri- auy, verily, dsay unto you, the Son can do 220 M t wy “6060 ® “ets ea ON thing of himself “The ther ha given me to fini I do, bear witness of m sent me.”? And to his ; apos of eapbadestye he sa ‘The speak unto you, I cheat not of myself; but the Father thatdwelleth in me, he’ oet the works.” John xiv—10. % That this point may be properly aaeied) I will here remark, that the faculties of all cre- ‘ated beings are secondary. and derived, a therefore our Saviour in ‘speaking spo ed man, and in this light must consider a figesk of his powers in a similar light w with those of o- ther men, given of God and to bee ployed ‘to his glory od our own happiness, Th s, howe- ver, is no proof that the essential powers and fa- culties of the Deity who was in our Saviour were derived. To be sure his *Medistorial powers being not essential to Deity might have been de- rived or assumed as they really were, iat to the will and assent of the other persons of t Godhead in union with himself. But this is in ~ no respect disparaging to his ine person. — — All power was given to our Saviour, because he was the son of man, and was man; but it was €x- ercised. by the fulness of God the Son who was in him to whom power was unddr ed. And when using the language whic been ascrib- gd unto him, saying, “I can of mine own ek nothing,” he was undoubtedly speaking in’ man person. To govern all things in heat and earth is a power which belongs only | to hi who is the Lord and maker of them, and th fore he is known by thistitle both in the Seri and among the heathen, as is particularly men- © 2 x » | FHEOLOGY.- 2410 tioned in Rom. ix—5. To ... power over death, and to be able to raise the dead is to have that power which is proper to God alone. Phil. iii—20, and to have power over thesouls of men, and have the knowledge of all hearts, belongs te God alone. 1 Kings viii—39; Jer. xvii—10. Our ” Saviour, therefore, had this power given unto him as to his human natare, but inherent as. to bis Divine. We are alsc positively informed in other passages of the same facts: “Who shalk ~ ehange our vile body that it may be fashioned like anto his glorious body, according to the working w hereby he is able to subdue all things _ unto. himself”? Phil. iii—21. And in Colos i— 19. “Hor it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;?? in other words, it leased the Father that in the man Jesus Christ the fulness of God the Son should dwell. And that. -our Saviour did possess this fulness of God may be also further learned from Rom. xo “and of whom, as popes sing the flesh, Christ eame, who is over all God blessed forevers?? which also explains in full the objection which I have before noticed, concerning our Saviour’s coming from God. For. this passage expressly informs us that it was according to the flesh that he did come, and if there was nothing more than humanity belonging unto him, why was this dis- tinction made concerning the flesh in particular? The evident intention of the passage is this, “and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ (the promised Mesiah) came (he being born of one of their nation, and so according to the flesh, their offspring, even he) who (according to his Divine nature) is over all God blessed forever.”’ Tn the next place, as Unitarian writers cannot * . 7 ; r42 j LECTURES éx deny but that Dibide honours fave been f Jesus Christ, they vi te hace ogee it, endeavour to evade the foree of our arguments by saying that these ho ere not given him on aecount es his Godhead, but because he wes the Son of God, the messenger and. agent of the Supreme Being. They tell us that our Saviour was worthy of | Divine fina only because he was the son of a Divine being, and not because he possessed a real Divine nature or any of the essential attributes of the Deity. «Nothing more was necessary to constitute Seth a humaw per- son than being the son ofa human person, And . if God be a Divine person his own son must be a Divine person.’ ‘Worcester’ s Bible News, page 135, _ . This may indeed be a very plausible hanes among the ignorant of evading an aretanest, a not among alin of even common understan ing and judgnient. Seth could not have been a es person without possessing in e rery re- spect the fulness of human.nature, let his birth or origin be what it may. HI tand the intention of the author on this subject, the only inference which can be drawn from the manner in which he expresses himself is, that sonship2- lone,thatis, human sonship, constitutes humanity; and if it constitute humanity, it must also con- stitute Divinity, without any reference to the veal nature or attributes of his person, whether these attributes are inherent or sorte: and this. is foolishness. I had always supp that the na~ ture of a being consisted in the attributes be ing to that being, and therefore to cc human person human attributes were absol ely necessary; and that if any being possessed these,, * THEOLOGY. 143 whether born in the usual method or immediate- ly created, that he is to be called a human being. But if, according to Dr. Worcester’s reasoning, humanity consists only in being the Son of hu- manity, then we have reason to say that Adam was not a human being because he was not the son ofa human being. According to his view of the subject, it is not humanity which really constitutes a human being, nor Divinity which constitutes a Divine being, but to be the son of a human or Divine being, whether possessing any of the attributes of man or God, or those~ of the lion and tiger. And therefore upon the*same ground, in order to be a ‘clerical person needs not that we possess priesthood, but that we ‘are the sons of him who does. According to all propriety of language, Jesus~ Christ could not be truly called a Divine person, . and worthy of divine honours, unless he pos- sessed a divine nature; neither: could Seth be called a human person without possessing the same human nature as his father. To be a Di- vine being it is absolutcly necessary to be en- dowed with the fulness of God; in other words, all those attributes and perfections which belong - unto God.'. Therefore he must possess Omnipo= tence, Omniscence, -Omnipresence, Eternity, - Selfexistence.- | But it is immediately answered, that’although he possessed these, it was by delegation from the Father. That our Saviour’s human powers were ~ by delegation I admit; and furthermore, that’ God the Father delegated -to Christ’s human person another Divine person, God the Son, and consequently all his attributes; this,* however, was the delegation of one nature to another, to , iF Ser ee ocala 0 whi pleasure, bestowed th, ie m1 ee | “144 LECTURES ON _ be in union with it, become oe w still ie a it. The Divine attribt utes of theaiivane person, | he So united with a hum ret our Saviour said, did not intend to ¢ human person he po human attribute; but th nipotent was in him or | son, and therefore that by the aic tent person within him he coul In this sense his attributes \ we cause a second person, God the him; but in. no other; beea Eternity and. -existence a legation to one person exce is, by the delegation of a ph one who is created and finite. — ing to our Saviour two in. delegation to the ot! say, all power is given unt _ty could say, my powers ‘rived, And thus alt difficulty. « ¢ entirely. removed.. ree om Again we are told, iat ane san of God : er that is, as our. if this reasoning be true,. any kingly honours wha has. reee the king'to, do business for place. -it-is true that an special minister o nation or thet nation is considered as. an bad wage’ =e » He THEOLOGY. 145 | tion and its Hels but this does not make this minister or plenipotentiary worthy of all the ho- nours of the | or ofits ruler., If such were the fact, 3 it mig with equal propriety be said that a preacher of the gospel, a minister of God, is equally to be honoured with God, for an in- sult to a minister of God, when in the line of his ministerial duty, is truly an insult to God; but this does not make 2 minister equal with God or worthy of Divine honours. Our authorsays, “The offices of Saviour, Judge, and Lord ofall, are as truly divine offices as any offices sustait 1ed by God the Father. And if he truly possesses these offices by the gift of the Fa- ther, so faras official character may be the ground. of divine honours, Christ is as worthy of Divine honours, as if he had possessed the same offices ence.” Therefore, according to this system, a mere human, ereated being, subject to pain, agony and death, with a finite and limited understanding, possessed of all the frailties and “imperfections. of man, except sin, is equally to e honoured with the Lord of hosts, who filleth immensity, whose glory is. beyond the bright-- ness of ten thousand suns, and to whom angels and arehangels bow submissive. God forbid that such a doetrine should be listened fosby Chris- tians of the present age; even Heathens would shudder at such a character given to their Deities. Official character, therefore, i is no ground upon which a created being is to be hotioured equally with his creator; and no being is to be honour- ed as a. Divine being but he who naturally and y possesses the essential attributesofGoc, That our Saviour was w orthy of honours on ae- count. of his offices. I- ‘readily acknowledge, but.. a ¥ ae & »* - i- bag he ae ¢ —¥46 LECTURES ON ® not of Divine honours. In this point he was ho- noured only as a Judge, a Saviour ought to be honoured; and he was honoured as God and Lord of all the earth, because he wasso. = Again it is stated, “The Son of God is worthy of Divine honourson the ground of Divine works. Creation is a Divine work—and by him were all things created. Judging the world is a Divine work.” We acknowledge that they are Divine works, because authorized by a Divine person, God the Father. And our Saviour executed these works; but without a Divine nature of his- own the execution of the work would no more entitle him to Divine honours, than the execu- tion of a master’s commands would entitle the servant who executed them to the honours of his master. The same author argues, that parti- eular honours have been paid to hington on account of the offices which he held, and the works which he performed, and that Christ is to be honoured on the same ground: And we acknowledge it. But on the same ground it must be also acknowledged,. that these works were the works of a Divine’ person as much as the werks of Washington were his own works and not another’s. Washington’s works were his own, and not authorized by asuperiou er; therefore to make the comparison a one we must allow that the works of Christ were. not authorized by any other being. a ask, do you not honour the Son on aceount his offices whether he is a Divine or human bein } answer, we honour him on aceo fhis o fices and works, and we consider | because no man could do ‘these mit he did, but. God alone. We do not ase , “THEOLOGY. £47 vine honours unto him because he hath done these, but because he is a Divine Saviour, a Di- vine Judge, and Divine Author of these mira- cles. We hoiour him as a Saviour, because he isa Saviour, and as a Divine Saviour, because he is God. ~ ' I now proceed to a brief consideration of the- eharacter of the Holy Ghost, and the objections- whieh have been made to the personality thereof. The Holy Spirit isa complex idea composed of the simpler ones of being or essence, and 2 third personality,2s being the third person in the Godhead, The interpretation given by Dr. Wor- cester, seems to confine the idea to ‘his attributes only. “By the Holy Spirit, or the Spirit of God, is not in my view intended any one attribute merely, but al] those attributes which are impli- ed in the fuloess or all sufficiency of the Divine Being.” This, however, cannot be a full inter- pretation of the meaning of the word, because the Holy Spirit is often addressed in the serip- tures asa distinct person, and our author’s defi-- nition of the word person, is the same as mine- which comprehends the idea of an essence as well as of intellectual attributes. To be sure Dr. Worcester argues that the Holy Spirit cannot signify a person, because God speaks of it as his - Holy Spirit in the same way that he would say my wisdom, my goodness, and it cannot, there< fore be a person, because it is said to be God’s- Holy Spirit, unless it be also admitted that it is his person, and this he thinks is improper. But if such was improper, thescriptures are guilty of it as well as we, for they speak of a Divine per- son as being the person of God, and that our Savi- our was the expressimage thereof Therefore, * _ person can be tempted, wher . ther, to direct and assist us in mortifying #48 LECTURES en if this reasoning were-true, either the lang of scripture is improper, or the person of God not God. It is consequently no_more imprope to say his Holy Spirit than his person, shoe fore his Holy Spirit and. his person may, very reasonably be one and the same person. In the Acts of the Apostles it is said, * e ith 3 have agreed to tempt the Spiri arte Lord? fo —9. Now itis folly. peed a, onthe a it é rit isa person.. Furthermore it J Spirit itself maketh intereession Viit—26. Consequently itm m the Father, or hi is | att, age is always mad Hee i other... Again, “And the I Lord sal ole not always strive avath eae “And it. was. revealed unto hi es Ghost that he should not see d seen the Lord’s Christ.” Lu —10.. Holy Ghost said, separate me Barnabas for the work whereunto have ca Acts xilii—2.. Now: the. H yG sented in these passages as Secs p king intercession, striving, spp er other acts; and. with what pro Holy Se hese several acts. be aseribed unto the oly Spirits . less he is.a distinct person? The n re of - Holy Ghost has been sufficiently e yer _ former Lecture. His office is to co % of their sinfulness and iniquity, to minds with the MEI sere | the Justs of the flesh.and regenerate our hearts. I his influence upon our minds we are comforte and look forward with delight to the time whet “TE OLOGY. 148 he shall finally raise us from the dead, to a state of immortality and light. ‘As another objection against the personality of the Haly Ghost, Dr. Worcester “says when ycu speak of a great outpouring of the spirit of God, » do you want to represent that one self-existent ‘person has made a great outpouring of another equal person? Do you not mean that God has made a great display of his power, wisdom and goodness upon the hearts and minds of men?” page 199. Butwhatargumentis this? Foritis as improper to speak of the outpouring of a per- son’s attributes literally as the outpouring of his person. Now our author at once acknowledges the outpouring of his attributes, because he ac- knowledges that the Divine Spirit consists in his attributes. Therefore, if he allows the expres- sion to bea figurative one, the outpouring of a person is as proper to signify the display of his personal powers as the outpouring of his attri- butes. The same author in his second letter on the character of the Holy Spirit, in explaining the following passage in the writings of St. Paul “The Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Ghost, ‘be with youall, Amen.” 2 Cor. xiii—14, speaks thus: “This passage has often been urged with eonfidence, as a proof that there are three self-ex- istent persons in God, and that the Holy Spirit is one of those persons. But a little attention to the natural import of the passage may be suffi- cient.to show that neither of these ideas are im- plied. The text does not say communion with the Holy Ghost, as theugh the Spirit was something to be received.” page 204, For my cn 2 50 ameTuREsen © own part I consider the expressions ‘ete similar import. When Isay I wish the fe -ship of my brother, what is it but to say, I wi feliowship or friendship with my brother. author says, “We have much said in the serip- turcs of the love of God, and also of the love. ca -the Son, but what is said wi the love nl Wha towards our human race? Nota wo saith St. Paul? “Now. e for the Lord Jesus Christ? an dove of the Spirit, that bh sg wi pS -pravers to God for me.”? _T ur ae is text, but a abid, st hat ‘tip not the love Spirit . bere meant, but the love which we hae Fen the, Spirit. If this exposition be aieht to be ti xeuauen reat here he says, “The love of “nbt the love which God has which you have for him, and this is an a all language, especially when said i ium br tio. These remarks will be suffici thalthere is no real foundation for. ying the personality of the Holy Ghost; eee trary, the scriptures repeatedly speak ofhim asa distinct person of the Godhead, as may be fur~ thes een, in John.xv—16, xvi—13 ; Heb. iid Cor. ii10. Itis however.acknow: thee the Spirit.of God frequently. $e ao 3 scriptures God himself, an the warmest | -Unitarians, particularly by Mr. Yates. _ ie 2 ~THEOLOGY: Lod i> He; . “. . LECTURE VII. & f { ke The Designs and Actions of the Godhead. GOD is undoubtedly a designing and active “being, but-his designs and actions must be con- sidered in avery different light from those of ‘ereated beings, although perhaps the general principle may be the same. Every personal be- ‘ing, in all his designs and doings, whether in time orin eternity, hath in view-some particular end for which he acts, and our first inquiry relates to the nature of that end. As each person of the Blessed Trinity is truly God, and possesses wis dom, power, goodness, and infinite happiness, we cannot but think that the principle, or that which in man would be called the moving cause of action, must be’the same in each. Manis a being in some respects like unto his Creator; he possesses power, wisdom, and a place in exis- tence, and he derives these, as well as the many enjoyments which belong unto him in this life, from the Godhead. And when we observe the Unbounded goodness, the unerring justice, and N ; "2332 © LECTURES ON ‘infinite mercy which is shown unto us, we not suppose that the Almighty does all this wi out any end in view, but we are led to ask _$*What is man that thou art mindful of him, the son of man, that thou vyisitest him?” what purpose dost thou create and bless a bite who only oceupies a speck in mon and Te Is it because he deserves such at ntion 2 or is it for thine own pleasure at it be thought that we are not justi ie vein ing out any particular. motives or aes for the actionsof.the Godhead, it m replied, _we do not ask as by way of challeng ing the propriety of his actions, but or. pose of ascertaining the end ‘of creation, in or that we may perceive the reasonableness: propriety of his actions, bei hereby le mire and adore. — oi In speaking of God, whe individual person, as bein act somewhat similar to that which in mat a motive, we only use his own languz language of the Scriptures generally. ing | tie nature of this principle in th vine Being, if we argue from analogy; and we haye no other mode of treating these subjects, as it is observed even in Revelation, we must acknow- ledge that the great end of all his doings in the creation of the universe ahd its spiritual inhabit-~ ants, is his own pleasure, happiness or glor ‘y. some have been Haim get it, and this is ful- ly confirmed by his own wo In speaking o} the pleasure of God, it will be necessary to mark, that I have used the word as —_ with happiness. For though it h: happened that a distinction bet asa Trinit 7 ut ‘THEOLOGY. a 53 been observed in regard to human enjoyments, pleasure signifying sensual, and happiness men- tal, enjoyments, yet this distinction eannot be re- ~ ecived as applicable unto Divine enjoyments, as — these are altogether of a spiritual nature. Plea-— sure and happiness, therefore, when applied unto God, are words ofa similar import. And though the word pleasure is sometimes used to signily the will of God, yet it retains its original mean- ing also as it is used in the ‘Scriptures. For whatsoever God accomplishes by his own will he also takes a pleasure in accomplishing in some sense, or it | never would have been his will to acé in this rticular way. God is perfectly happy from eternity. “In his ‘presence is fulness of joy, Me: at his’ right hand are pleasures forever=" Psalm xvi—11. The heaven is his rone and the earth his footstool, and strength and beauty are in his sanctuary. This i is perfec- tion, to be capable of infinite happiness, and this itis whieh constitutes the perfection of the Déi= tv. In saying that the happiness of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost was the great end of jl] their perfections and actions, I mean only at the happiness of each person consists in the xercise of their attributes, and in the various” odes which are pointed out by his moral per- etions. The actions of man frequently arise om motives of a similar nature, that is, the end ‘accomplished in the execution of the act, as ay be observed in the pleasures of music, the yts of the field, and many other amusements. nd as far as the Divine actions can be compared human, I presume to say, that this is the best 2a which we are capable of conceiving con~ ing the Divine designs. God created man * as ‘3 i i _ towards them, and this is the Was brought into ex! ee Dheret i ver goes, dead a Mens 0 pleases r “as the xercis toe of all ou _the pleasure sehich ibe cely supporting him. Not th any ‘holiness or obedience, even ee | perfect, could r addition ppiness, for it is in ; to be profitable ce yut th of the Divine-attrib | y was and is af, itself 1 ion a Mciaants con upor are only the effects of those-ac ecutes for his own pleasure. re, if as St. John saith, he “ I these are and were ¢ eated, >? then ‘that pleasur ie ’ ne ore ih we ated is plea ich God rocdige in suy ‘as initted to enjoy th either tale r ae , Our gre is derived from the ties. Powers une iselets being produc i yments wha’ re ‘na | real enjoyment our moral or sensual, we hat te re know of no other way i ir happiness we or can be enjoyed. This ‘end for which God created and continues to manifest his any intellectnal being is excited t t + mi ~ _Telates to: ee rad illy hereafter. ‘isja being whose happine » to conclude that the exe nal. Not bomegetl® yo 99 ta ve ited eit vist 1e works of God. _ Atges-in- rable had 2 awe said ’ bere be light,” an a a } allow us de that before theereatio ps world “was inactive. Wherefore ' w Co hath eternally possesse er fections or cree a for happi le ' princip ~ mode o ecising. | that his own ivaaas ei t ch designs and acco 1 ha a as s end in views ee ae ned th God or this - ing the events which, would be emo ea to pa cnowledge to» the accom= ee whose existence de- on the: ca without | fering Son oe ae THESLOGY. | ion whatsoever. Of this hes...» | mee a so himself, esigns must be eternal as his knowle ee Sail nae we ater 156 LECTURES ON ty, there wasatime when he was indeterminate, and he who is indeterminate with regard to his actions, is so from a want of knowledge upon the subjects of his actions. But as God is both — Omniscent and immutable, we must believe that his designs are eternal: me An important and interesting inquiry here a- rises: How far do these designs.and decrees .of God extend? Or are not all events onenalay designed and predetermined by oneor the ot of the persons of the Deity? ‘To this I answer: The designs of each person of the sacred Trini- ty extend to all their own actions and the sub- jects thereof. And I think from what hasalrea- . dy been said concerning the end of all action, as accomplished in the persons of the Godhead,™ which is happiness to be obtained or misery to be avoided in some shape, it is apparent that be- yond these their own actions they have no de- signs and execute no deerees whatsoever. And as their pleasure eonsists in the exercise of their own perfections, no events which are unproduc-— tive of pleasure could proceed from them; for no intelligent. being can be supposed to have de- signed events which were contrary to his de-, signs or prejudicial to his in . There ar however, no events which do take place in the universegwhich are contrary to the willof either — of the ‘persons of the Godhead, except the ac~ tions of Free Agents, consequently all events but those, have been designed and deer by. one or the other of the persons-of,the Ge id All events but the free exercise of our ep proceed from the power and od; consequently all human actions eomprehended under the exercise of thei: at powers, and all events which do not 0 sist n this exercise are not, strictly speaking, the ee actions of man, but only effects wwhiglfttake lace according to the will of God, and which exercise of our mental faculties area or Our internal ghts and meditation, bay ae oe own, ch sequences of these are ranked among the events which take place the designs and will | oe For ex- iple, the determination of finger is an act of our own; but t the rise of the finger is only an eventswhich takes place accor- ding to the laws of God, but which would not have taken place had it not been preceded by the determination of our minds. The acts of: osing, ahr &e. are 2, Consists in the exercise of our chesttal aereeiae ‘and the consequences are the events of the Divine designs, and not ours. “et in the exercise of our mental - faculties in way of willing and deter “events” which aah terwards aecomplishe his . Our wills are merely the signs af allies eo ever vhich God is the es one yet as | Go joes: not accomplish. th without our wills, their existence is de by us, although we are not the efficient ez aE 0 actions therefore do notextend alton our- ely es, or cause effects distinct from the action itself, but are signs-of the- effects which are to be accomplished b great author ofallthings. — sci * * bal eet oe 15s p wneronmoN But as God does not accomplish ma ings: without the exercise of our own powers, eir- existence depends upon our own wills; while os et ‘not the efficient causes 9) yreey God" heing Omnipresent, | aieslichan all: things but moral actio hehe an a changes which take pla pte cept the exercise of the athe Ag ereatures. A man is called: a murderer, or is” | guilty of murder, not because he has been the efficient cause of death, but becduse'the event of death took place by his own choice, whether he- was the immediate catse‘or not. - The intention. and exercise of the wn nlaneeeee event.may take ‘place; is for w are rewardable or pun the efficient cause of this eve therefore is punishable for wil \dlepatlichenigdeie order that ‘an event may take place, owers ae is capable ving his euted or not. In et man i frée agent, that is,. ree to use whether thev-prove effectual or not, and-man is | free in no other sense. He is not free to eause such and such events separate he exereise of his mental powers, because all external or take place through the power of God, oF NB free to exercise his own mindein orde het may take place, and for y praiseworthy or reprovea ' Perhaps it:may be asked, acide we stri we never effect?» why do we exefeise our | faculties provided that we nevencamipaey to succeed? It is useless to-use es something can thereby be. this, however,.I would answer — © ‘nd vite, a THEOLOGY. - Se ertions are not the immediate cause of the events, yet this in no manner lessens their usefulness, provided the event takes place upon our exer- tions. Although the walls of Jericho never would have fallen down except upon the blow- of the rams horn, yet it was not the sound ofthe ‘rams horn that caused them to fall, but the very finger of God. The use of this méans; therefore, was justas greatas if it had been the very eause of the event, ‘although in faet it was not. And so our own exertions are just as useful, pro- vided that the desired events take place. FE orif God always executes upon the cxercise of our mental powers, it matters not by whom the ef- fect is wrought, if wrought at all. are free egents, therefore, not in the production or non- drotueliitof external effects, but in the exercise of our own personal faculties, and upou which God accomplishes or does not accomplish that for which we strive. Consequently as E have before be all sin consists in’ the exercise of our mental faculties, and in which alone con- sists obedience or disobedience to the Divine command. , Another question may now arise. All sis and disobedience having been expressly forbid- den by the Almighty, could never have been de- signed or decreed by him. But as sin and con- demnation to misery, are absolutely necessary te the exercise of Divine mercy ; for where there is no misery nor danger thereof, there can be ne deliverance therefrom, wherein consists mercy ; does it not follow as an inevitable consequence, that sin and every other thing decidedly necessa- ry to the exercise of the Divine attributes, and the fall accomplishment of his designs, must 7 S| P w k60~ LECTURES ON- come to pass through the Divine designs; orren-) der him capable of disappointment in his de- signs?’ I answer, no more than I am rendered capable of disappointment in my designs con-. cerning the publishing of this book, because I - was not the designer of the printing press, which was so necessary to the accomplishment of my~ object; and yet no person supposes that any de- lay will take place, because the existence of the press was not designed by me. Such a pressis ~ undoubtedly necessary for the accomplishment- of my designs, yet if lam certain thatsuch a ma- chine will be ready through the designs of ano- ther, this is sufficient forme, It matters not by” whom or in what way such a machine is provi- ~ ded; if it is really obtained. And though the. existence of sin and misery is necessary to the exercise of the Divine mercy, and may be made use of by the Almighty for the execution of his own glorious- purposes, yet itis no more to be’ concluded that God decreed its existenee; than I~ decreed the building of a printing press because | I had determiued to make use of one, If the. means are certain, God-ean make use of them~ whether they are supplied by his designs or the designs of his creatures. We cannot suppose that all the sins and iniquities of this world, came to pass through the designs of a righteous God... _ God hath no pleasure in the existence of sin, but his pleasure is in showing mercy on account of ut. Rey Another question is suggested. If the God-. head or particular persons thereof, had, from e-_ ternity, designed the exercise of mercy towards ~~ mankind, in a way which shall eventually deliv-) ethem from the dreadful punishments due to” ; ’ P ww r THEOLOGY. — VEL “sin, and man had power to avoid sin and conse- quently condemnation, without which the ex- ercise of mercy could never have been accom- plished, had not man power to frustrate the de- -signs ‘and decrees of God? I answer no, un- Jess it can be proved that truth is falsehood, and knowledge ignorance. A reconciliation of this “seeming inconsistency is necessary. God know- eth all things; sin was to him certain; its exis- tence was written down in the book of omnisci- ence. From this certainty of Sin originated the Divine decrees concerning the exercise of mer- ey. Thecertainty of sin, therefore, rendered _the execution of his decrees unavoidable, though not the necessary consequence of his decrees. Sin, therefore, though necessgry to the accom- plishment of the Divine designs, was not the ef- fect of necessity, any more than the existence of a printing press is the consequence of necessity, because itis necessary to the execution of my own purposes. Sin, therefore, is necessary only In one sense, and that is for the exercise of mer- cy on account of it, but is not necessary in its existence. ‘Yet, as it does exist, the execution of the Divine decrees is rendered so certain, that no poweris capable of overturning them. But suppose it should be asked,-.what would have. been the consequence had man always avoided sin, which he certainly had power todo? I an- swer no designs or decrees concerning the exer- cise of mercy could.or would have-existed, and where there are no decrees there can be no such _ thing as avoiding or frustrating them. But you say, the decrees and designs of God concerning mercy were made before sin existed; consequent- Jy had sin never existed, which it might not, » d6u ‘LECTURES ON : then these decrees might still have been frustrtag | ted. I acknowledge that the Divine designs ex- isted long before sin, yet not before the certainty _ or knowledge of sin: wherefore, if sin was cer- tain, though not necessary, the designs and de- erees which were formed in a. of this certainty, were certain in themselves, and there- fore not to be frustrated, because founded in a certain knowledge of the truth. For example, we will suppose for the present, that it was a a known truth that Judas would ay his mas- ter, and upon the certainty of this God decreed that he should perish, but because Judas had pow- ~ er to avoid this sin, it is no argument that he had power to frustrate the will of God, unless that ._power to avoid sin was the real annihilation of its certainty, which we know was not the fact. ‘Thepower.to avoid an .act.is not the power to _destroy the Divine knowledge concerning its -existence: the Divine knowledge coneernii - -our actions does not depend. upon our will, it is the act only which is to be accomplished by us, but the knowledge of the fact is altogether a dif- ferent subject. -If God well knows that ona cer- tain day hereafter, I shall preach in St. Paul’s church, London, although Iam perfectly igno- -rant of the fact; this certainty isin no manner lessened because I have power to avoid the act by staying at home, or preaching somewhi else. The certainty of the truth, whether its re- ality is necessary or unnecessary, is sufficient for the perfect accomplishment of the designs of God which have been founded upon it, concern- ing the regeneration and conversion of sinners. Theevents, therefore, which take place through human agency, and upon which the Divine de- = — . s a . * THEOLOGY.” | BGS as of merey have been founded, though not necessary, are nevertheless certain, and the cer- tainty of the Divine knowledge renders:the exe- cution of hisown-designs as certain and unavoid- able as his knowledge. To make void his de- signs, therefore, is impossible, without making void or false his knowledge, which is also im- possible without proving that knowledge is ig- norance. And though in committing sin we cannot act different from his knowledge, yet this’ is no-proof that we cannot act differently from what we do; for his: knowledge concerning our. actions is founded upon thecertainty of their ex- istence, while their existence is founded upon our own choice. Thus if it was certain. that man would sin,.and.a truth which God foresaw from eternity, and therefore had decreed tobe “mercifal, then the exercise of the Divine -attri- butes:in the accomplishment of his decrees: was certain and unavoidable by man; thoughsin might have been avoided. Therefore, though man was originally capable of avoiding sin, yet the cer- tainty that he would not avoid it, rendered it impossible for him:to avoid:the execution of the divine designs. If we could avoid the fulfilment of the divine decrees, we could destroy the-cer- tainty of sin, and consequently the Divine Om- niseience. But youask, if we can aveid the act and existence of sin, cannot we destroy its cer- _ tainty also, as its certainty is dependent upon its existence? Tvsanswer, there Is no-eeriainty of e- vents where»events donot nor will not take. place; so, though we afay avoid" those.events; — swe destroy no certainty or foreknowledge of these, because there is none to be destroyed. ‘Where there is no certainty of future events 0 * e ae es zk and by avoiding sin we could ne + is an ‘ " ynerons on “164 LECT Ss ON there are no designs formed upon their presup- posed on ieees and teow ose no dele to esigns of mercy, g ot have frustrat- ed the designs of mercy, as they would never have existed. On _this poin -many people, and indeed almost every person w: as meditated upon them, are apt to occasion into a gross error. They say, supposing God hath eternally designed my salvation, have not I who am at) per fect liberty to do good or evil, power to over- turn that decree by sinning, as no finally.impe- nitentsinners are permitted to enter~into the kingdom of heaven? Now I would here observe, that we have no right to suppose that which is impossible or inconsistent with c i : By supposing that God hath design bly suppose also that it was on account 0. ousness of some kind that the Pre “hath thus decreed concerning him:. then as. soon as we > suppose that God hath made the righteousness of this particular. person, or the righteousness of Christ imputed to him, thie conditions of his sal- vation, and hath thereupon decreed that he shall inherit eternal glor y, we immediately. turn and suppose that | hath no righteousness, reich. in- herent or impu ed, and yet suppose the remain nee “ee pitas r false. God dcienes his dasa e have remained faithful to his: ter, theretied he might have avoided the exeeution of the divine — decxees, for none but the faithless are damned. ’ P= os & 4 THEOLOGY, — 165 Any person may see the imniprapeicty of ar- guing in this manner, ‘because two o wed and contradictory propositi sare both re ceived as true; it is in the’ ed that the =; was founded fulness of Ju the second place that it might still have exi without his sinfulness, which is in tent with the justice of God. Though si be certain unto God it is not thereby rendered unavoidable unto man. The eertainty of any event does not render itan una- idable consequence of human nature. Cer- ty. and necessity are terms fa ar from being synonymous. Ifsuch were the fact, and certain- ty alwayssupposed necessity, then.truhy ‘are necessary, because with God all a. Bree agency would pm, eared be a r ras belonging to God orman, for ible for any intelligent being to act’ hen <7 eompels them to act another. — ee The designs of the G Cis 2 therefore, will be ultimately fulfilled; and though sin be so eer- tain and so. necessary t the present. lesigns of God could not have been accomplished : ity yet there isno compulsion i human wil neither is sin in any manner inevitable, except the sins s of ignorance and original depravity. ©" Tt may be thatifthe designs eann effec sdfathout sin, it isn at once be perceiv- determined to preach. acertain day in aul’s Church, London, is not therefore reasonable to. suppose that this ppos-" |, 1) the sin-- to aeppese that he has or-" pthis very purpose. The ~ Pa 7 ae die » ‘ ; “166 * eo ON > ' an a . 7 7 ; . # S S chat wos . x. | 4 was the very end for which that’ building*tvas planned and raised? brs pe no—the build: ers never once thought of your convenience when they designed exect is not this perfectly applicablesto the Sxistenbe of sin? The existence of sin cing foreknown and supposed as certain, d has upon the cer- tainty thereof determined to he merciful in de- livering some from its evil qvences, This, — however, is no more proof that sin rakes place — through the divine designs than that the above — mentioned church was. built from my designs. — The certain existence of either, whether arising | from one cause or another, is sufficient for the © execution of further designs which have been formed upon the same. The truth is, that the di- vine designs have been formed upon e certain- ty of sin, wherefore the certainty and not the nécessity of sin was necessary to the full aecom- plishment of the divine designs. ‘ We see, therefore, that all the designs and de- ‘erees of God are founded upon his foreknowledge of all events which would precede the accom- plishment of his designs, though these events were In no respects the necessary consequences of human nature or the divine will. And weal- so perceive that these designs and decrees of the Godhead extend only to the actions of the indi- vidual persons thereof, and not to the actions of any created agents. Neither obedience ne dis obedience, therefore, could have been design or decreed by the Almighty, forthis wou x lave ; taken away the liberty of mam. What then are the inevitable consequences of this doctrine? They are, firstly, that all the op- erations of. nature, arising from: physical or se- - ~PHEOLOGY. 167 edndary causes, were designed and take place ~ through the decrees and will of the persons of the Trinity, even to the effects and consequences of the exercise of our own attributes, which sueceed all the actions of which creatures aré eapable. Thatthe physical operations of nature are the immediate works of God will need no further proof or illustration than has been given, -as the scriptures fully attest the fact. The ef- fects which follow our own actions, and which, in common discourse, are denominated, though improperly, actions of themselves, are also to’be attributed to the same author.’ For example, the betraying of our Saviour was an effect which followed upon the actions of Judas. God -un- doubtedly decreed that Jesus Christ should be betrayed, that is, should be delivered into the hands of his enemies; this, however, does not~ prove that he decreed that Judas should betray him. The delivery of our Saviour and the aet of which Judas was guilty were altogether dif- ferent.» Perhaps it may be thought that this distinction, and which I have before explained, cannot be mainained. But if such a distinction - has never been observed by reasoners before, let ~ it henceforth be observed, as it is both correct - and important. - As an illustration: I have dis- ~ covered a den of robbers; I have also ason.who ds well aequainted with the fact, now I send my son to that den in order that he may be murder- ed; and my-son goes with the same design of be- ing murdered; this does in no respect prove that they, in committing the: deed, were moved or -- actuated by my will and com mand; they commit the deed from-thé designs and suggestions of © their own minds, and are just as guilty asthough - 168 Thad never detignedly my and his falling among’ had And though I may be considered in} pects as preparing or using the me son’s death, yet Iam ‘hot : called murder; at least, w manner lessens the gu really guilty of the deed; truly caused his son-to be betrayed and ed, by sending him intoa world where hek that he would be murdere _ and with the vi intention that he should 1 in the scriptures. God k exercise his,own mental of haying his master betrayed, _ should be betrayed and be the had contemplated. But the act then performed, and. wi crbich Jesus opald not have suffered, were’ his own, al the effecting cause dont Saviour’s being vered up and crucifiedjr"any more than aves ‘son who blew the ram’s*horn was the effecting cause of the fall of the walls’ef Jericho.’ Judas - betrayed his master in using those means or perfor mide ‘those actions which arr ry to his being betrayed, end God produced the effect in the same way that he produces»all the effects in the order of nature.. AH that we | can doin-this life is to use the means to do those acts which precede the desired event, and God has appointed as proper: tor precede t anda that follows is to be deft :tolth wisdom of God. . They who used ee the destruction of Jericho were not the authors of its destruction, neither do they who make use- ‘of a trumpet cause the “airte: and make- @ “7 a | : 3 { 7 = ~ ‘ 3 < "seats ’ 169° only call. sou , but this) takes to the laws of ature, and all e- d which take place in the order ecording to its laws are. the im- orks of God. The exercise of the men: ‘s- only are to be corisidered the free ac- aden: the consequences, such as the sound ofa trumpet, or vibration of the air, or fall of rd walls are the heme vg on sivine rest d or nature, by siniaiol d = ets. Aman is cal- Jed_a suicide, not because he he dies, but be performs those actions which precede. sce and God isthe author of the effect which follows. God is indeed the cause of all effects, whether de- ned by himself, i. ‘ever, does notunake him the eause. of human aec- tions. Actions are not to be ranked among the common class-of physical effects, but are more: properly exertions that effects may be pro dieee. The only difference between all ; etts: and the EE of Jericho upon ‘the soun ee = ing of the ram’s horn, is that one is uncommon ) ‘and thus called a nga while the others take place daily, and so cause no astonishment, altho? God is to be considered as much the autos of. as ofthe other. Had it been eustomary for . the walls of anae fall down upon the sound of a tgp pet ey who used the means would have considered themselves as much the causevof the event, as they were of the sound of the trumpet or vibration of the. air, and so they were. This distinetion betw. een our sation and. the a "2 a : yy mankind; this, how- ihe o> 4 ae 170 LECTURES ON common events which succeed them according 'to the law of nature, ought always tobe key ept in view, for of ourselves we are al and ble of doing any thin; ‘ - our mental faculties, and oug _as to suppose that any of the < sical universe should he comm! unless previously directed an i Him who is the great sates ofall. - A S€tond consequence of fa te is, that the future happiness or misery of every individ- ing in the universe, is to be vin rena thé'Same author of all; but- secondary causes as they might be termed, | uman actions, = to be attributed only to man. ‘Won this is fou ed the doctrine of Election and Saat I shelltsenb ind pana aaa ot eA Het} “ ; nth. fr i om is : > ie UPR os . sin geri t ei > pee me 1o0hs OK -eekar teiamitas, ? ; ’ * Ne . 1h : a mb ie - | ie 4 - bap ¢ 1 Shseheg by a | Jestwemgess, ' e* a _ r K, td % ’ oe he: enn w ae Foe hel ° oe PHEOLOEE: a ss * Havene considered the designs of God in the ereation of man and the dispensations of his pro- videnee towards him, as also the great end for which he eyer acts, ¢.e. the pleasure which he derives or receives in the exercise of his di- vine attributes, Iam now led to consider the particular nature of man asva being fit and pro- per for the exercise of those attributes. hat man was created in the image of God, seems to be the fag rice of importance contained in the divine word, and appears to be the natural consequence of the divine nature. As a proof ' of this it is evident that God would take more pleasure inthe creation and support of a bein like unto himself than in any other, and because there would be a greater field for the exercise of the divine attributes in his dispensations towards him than could be toan inanimate being. Inan- imate beings to be sure have been created, yet only in subservience to the promotion of human happiness. And as the pleasure of God consists: in all probability like the pleasures of man, in the exercise of his perfections, the ficld for this ae - % | : : arcise, would be faniitag er towards a beings > unto himself, and ea ed, consists. in the stmil: of their att tan Goi is possessed of Omnipotence, Om- _niscience, Omnipresence, Spirituality nd the ce, whereby hevis re ect being, and ie of infinite happiness. Man, also, posses~\ power, wisdom, space, spirituality an¢ ed all the known attributes of God, yet in limited degree. He possesses power, but not power; wisdom, but not all wisdom; existe nee, but not an eternalor self- -existence;. an. ly perceptible = is, that they power is finite and of the other in ptt I speaking of the att putes of | or thesoul which w Without such an proper subject for tributes, especially ere Moral. As a proo into consideration the go if exercised towards n supposes in man. spiri For as the divine. ae 5 readiness to bestow upon his creatures gree of happiness, or rather those which shall render them capable of so he must endow man with the attri telligence and spirituality before he proper subject of his goodness, as. telligent and spiritual beings are capable piness. Without some degr ee of knowled understanding, our natures would be only asenseless lump of matter, incapable of ideas sa e 3 oPHEOLOGY. 173 and consequently incapable of pleasure or pain,, When we. speak of showing our kindness or ess, we evidently mean toa being who is possessed of sufficient intelligence to receive and ‘ enjoy our kindnesses. The Scriptures inform us also that God created us in his own image, “and when he had breathed into him the breath ef life man became a living soul.’?. This spirit- uality is the foundation upon which the likeness between God and man chiefly depends; for with-— oe this we could possess no other similarity. e are indeed of ourselves conscious of possess- * ing this spiritual nature, and it is by this that we ate rendered eapable of happiness; for had this ‘never been granted us, the goodness of CC never have been exercised towards us; for-to say that goodness can be shown te inani- mate matter is absurd, unless inanimate matter is ae of happiness, which we know is not the et. The creation, therefore, of an. intelligent and spiritual being of some kind is an inevitable consequence of the.divine goodness. Not. that “ore of man was thereby rendered neces- ‘sary, but , ie intelligent being; God might have created millions of them without calling i in- to existence man. Yet as man seems to ae been that particular order of intelligent beings which God chose for the exercise of his attri- butes, we are to be thankful that such is now our situation, that as creatures we are now pos- sessed of those qualifications which are necessa- ry in the attainment of happiness, and all. this through the goodness of our Creator. Astothe nature of this spiritual part many and various -have been the opinions of philosophers. The Epicureans supposed that it consisted in a. very subtile fluid) shpat f sw _» particles of matter.’ T endeavored to” mai portion of heavenly man and angelic natures. this, howe mere conjecture about that of which nothing; and it is altogether useless to ‘spend our time or talents in formi: scone he essentials of spiriepwhile'shauliled’ aurdia clay. We know that it is the most portant and interesting»part of human ‘na and is absolutely necessary in nbaeeret fit subjects for the exercise. G ness, Justice, or Merey; ‘for. speak of dealing justly or mere beings of a spiritual nature. a man is of a'substanee- aleogsthiondi mme the communication between’ the-soul and ‘ecw. dy is certainly very intimateand sensible. Whe-) ther this Conte stam oe pebenea | is a matter of ' very. ‘Titt tous and ouglit not to: draw awa from matters of far gréater importanee. Our first’ ideas are received through’ the medium of the — senses, upon the reception’ ‘of which new ideas. are again formed by comparing’ my together’ and viewing the relations which’ st between them. ‘Thus by ‘the power’ of reflection our’ minds are continually receiving new ideas, and’ our understandings becoming enlarged. | And: though reflection is a secondary’ process in’ “the: © formation of our ideas, it is neverthi ss far more , extensive and fertile than bare sensation. | the powers of the imagination, we Pise from to step, and from perfection to. psfetion, nt } THEOLOGY. 175 the further we-progress the more extensive ap- pears t Id for the exercise of our capacities. From t apparently unlimited resource of the intellectual powers, I think we may safely in- fer the immortality of the soul. Ifour existence had been limited to threescore years and ten, and this world the only theatre of our actions, much m limited capacities would have answered all our purposes. If this world was our all, it would _ only be a source of regret unto us that we pos- sessed such powers, capable of anticipating worldswhich we could never enjoy, and looking forward to such a boundless ocean as that of Im- mortality. Were itnot for this enlivening hope, this anchor to the soul, we would be carried off in the tempest of despair; we would be more miserable than even the beasts of the forest; we ayould be continually mourning that we had ever existed. The idea of annihilation is the most horrible that can enter into the human breast. It would be better to be a snail and live forever, _than a God for threescore years and ten.» Fur- rmore, the infinite goodness of God confirms e doctrine of the soul’s immortality. We must “indeed esteem but very lightly the goodness of the Divine. Being, if we can suppose ‘that he -wouldibring into existence spirituai and intelli- _gent beings, endowing thenrwith almost infinite graces, and then, when they had just arrived to a knowledge of the beauties of existence and the blessings of life, having tasted the pleasures of this world, annihilate them forever. And fur- thermére, ‘his justice would not allow it. Cot cannot be called a being of-perfect justice, unless »periect justice is rendered by him to all hiserea- tures. In this world we know that such is not ¥ 4 76 oo ON done. *aReg ahihe a are ¥ ty and’ abandoned lives, 1 God who made them, ; wet nd , ishments after death,’ a fina Pera of yeu ao where each would receive according to the deeds done in the boty ete it ‘dered unto man. . The t f the: and the oppressed wou neither would we have an} ‘to induce us to be kind and just: Jow beings. Our only motto would be. “Let us eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow ve die. But as the contrary is our belief,” rmly -fonvinced of the immortality of the § soul ‘the ; future distribution of j justice to all men, at the fi- _ nal bar of God, we have a perfect e for ‘gulating our lives and conduct accord rules of religion and virtue. oe O ever, though now clearly and firr ‘by the gospel, was, before the con ring ‘viour, a controverted po ‘Ss Ammortality “is that which ot promise, but do not prove.” ‘S his death, said, “I hope to go hence € socie ty of good men; but of that I am ‘n t very e i- dent; neither doeth it become any wise ma ‘be positive that’so it will be, =I must n and you must live; but which of us is in ter state, God only knows.” Such w doubts of Socrates, and inde philosophers of the primitive Christian era. This doctrine; hes 0 a ss THEOLOGY. 177 "fully, oil by. the acndion God himself, as ’ revealed unto us, in the. gospel. Our. Saviour saith, “Fearn - them which kill the body, but are not abl kill the soul.”? Matth, x—28, “And these shall go away into everlasting pua~ -ishment, but the ri hteous into life eternal,’ bs Matth.xxv—46. ‘urthermore, St. Paul saith, - RS Christ hath, ab shed death, and. hath t life and. immortality to light by the gos- pel.”” Pi etin. i—10,° It isthe hope ofimmorteli- ty which supports us in every situation of life. Though friends must separate, yet soon w ill they -meet again, t omore. Though riches,and honour, and worldly pleasures must all be for- saken, still the riches of a life to come are much more precious in the eyes of the just, whendeath shall confer a crown that never perishes, a flow- er that mever fades. Then may we say with tranquil minds, “Q death, where is thy sting? O° ave, where is thy victory: fhe B ‘The next important trait in the character of man is his Free Agency. ‘This was a necessary | equence of the First Covenant. When man * ae originally placed in the garden of Eden, appiness was to be obtained thr ough obedien-e, and misery through disobedience, ‘Without free ency, | erefore, he could obtain. no right to- either happiness or misery, and without a right, God could not bestow upon him, according to the attributes of his justice, the one or the other, Consequently without investing man with apow- er of choice, or what. is in other words called free agency, God could not be to.us a God of i Justice: The term free agency may be defined aS a power of acting from designs and motiyes of hii seereshant restraint either from God ee sr | 1 age a ees « a a 178 » LECTURES ON i er any other being. It is true, God ean, if. he sees fit, deprive us of every power of action, and guide us into any way that he is pleased to point, but not without taking away our free a~ gency. As far as we are free we are like unto God, possessing a eapability of doing as we please without restraint; for as soon as any re- ’ straint is laid upon us, so faras that restraint ex- tends, our free agency is lost. The lawof God, — therefore, lays no absolute restraint upon our moral conduct, or in the performance of our du- ty to God, our fellow beings; or ¢ ourse an as far as we haye any liberty; and unless a restrai laid upon us by ourselves, we g me 1 S> l sats isfaction ofour desires. While free, no but that of the will can change our conduct. the word law, I understand a mode or +2 conduct which has been laid down for regulation of the course of events’ Nal h take place i in the physjcal and moral universe. "That which is commonly, though rather improperly, called the Law of Nature, is fixed and albsoletie The sun, the moon, and the stars; the earth and all inanimate creation are guided by d-rules . which none but God can alter, and als te in every respect agreeably to his will. may more properly be called the Law of the Diving actions, according to which he governs ge nature. The Moral Law or Covenant; God and man, is that rule of condu ‘ich th Almighty has commanded to be observed men, but which he does not enforce, as in the — physical world. It is that which he has decla to be the most proper for answering the & and purposes of his creatures, and such as men ought te follow, whether the same be agreeable + a in ord uee his creatures to abide: b ‘promised that it should of those enjoyments whi rld, mp ics ay ‘free i in his moral con duct, being. to happiness or misery. That m _ pable of obedien g ay LTS 9 intentions and designs or not. And the existence | laws, | 33 eapability of RS disobedience ther which is as ras a. Pit disobedience among intelligent beings: nd the distinetion between nt are one fi requentl yas istence of law; for ead It is.the eat panishment, Shale which induces msn te r h awe ad dition. ~ ble, fear also would be impossib! no inducement would be held fc tae > ¥ ca os ihr ‘ g fohari * Ps > d ; iy F ‘ i. . P. i “180! ‘ LECTURES‘ON = vs ae and iniquity. When Adam was -placed in= sarden of Eden to till and dress it, we see. at God gave unto him laws, promising rewards- . ri ceunlaeoe and punish: 3 for disobedience. . Both obediénce and diso ice were therefore possible; and were it not tice could not have been rendered om his Creator, because man would had no power to obtain. any viet either to happiness or misery. Thet ity of doing wrong, therefore, issabso- lutely necessary to render us capable of areward. for doing right. A person cannot be deserving: ore reward for acting by ¢ ape and he. pei cannot do wrong is co d ion. We see sherelaah ademas er= ist be possessed j aatabe: of Ce do good or evil, or hee be er | ~ That this faculty may-be necessary that there sho stir us up to action. And the pals mo} which I am acquainted i is happin to -ed or miseryto be avoided. The: a are guided by this motive, in ] cforene other i is, because there is no other, ¢ from apassion which is implant nature, and is inherent i reasonable bela called Self love This Te given us by © our Heayenly Father, is the ee = tion inthe human system, and sti irs.up the to actions of every kind, whether they i® or evil, and which it.is impossible € counteraet. To this it is probable that th ee wilk » arise in the mands of some meee ofienuaenas Ie: ol ss oa ‘THEOLOGY. | P 18h may be argued by some that self-interest or pri- vate happiness isa motive of action highly im- proper, and contrary to many of the precepts of the bible; that’ instead of being guided by self. love, we ought to act from the love of God and our fellow beings, for on these two command+ ments hang all the law andthe prophets. _ In the first place, the term self-interest has’ been used very frequently to signify those en- jeyments which are obtained and enjoyed in this world, such as wealth, honour, sensuality, and every carnal pleasure. If self-love or self-inter- est comprehends no more than this, it would certainly be a yery evil principle, highly. disho- nourable and abas!fg, and tending to the worst - of evils; and though such a kind of self-love real- ly exists, yet itis only partial. Perfect self-love ‘ comprehends as the object of its exercise every enjoyment eitherin time or eternity, and he who aets from stich a principle stands a better chance - of acting coumgetly an he who acts from a pare 7 tial principle, or that self-love which is limited to the enjoy ments of this world. The only fault. among mankind is, that they do not love them- selves sufficiently, and this partial self-love being imperfect, is the cause ‘of all our evil actions in. this world. That we ought toact from the love of God and. our fellow beings will never be denied, and though there may~be various objects of love be- side ourselves, yet they become’so from self-lovey: or on account of their being subservient to our own interestg and happiness. We act from thex love of God, because in so doing we promote our own happiness, and we love. God only: because. he is.the author of our happiness. “We love hii: & Psa LECTURES" ON from gratitude, on account of the individual piness whieh we have’ received from: the means with which he has supplied us forthe attainment of future ha -and glory. “We ‘love him,” saith the’ay “because he first loved us,”? and has manifestec care in protecting us among th ¢ hs of life. Had we derived no blessings promise of any, from our Heavenly Father, we would have no more reasén to love'and. serve — him than we would the HeathenT . .Asto “benevolence, or the love of our: ings, it” arises also fromthe same principle. -We love them because itis our duty to do so, and we take pleasure in doing our duty*to ou or our fellow beings. When we see a fellow being distress, we reflect that he is a being of the same family, formed and governed by the same hand - as we oursdlyes: and in reflecting that we our- selves -may possibly at some future ~ a be” reduced to the same or Similar et een feel jt our duty to assist him: sides ‘thi haye been taught from our infaney to help: poor and needy, knowing“that without t sisting our neighbours we have notitheupbemice ofthe divine aid; and thatwe may ‘preserve this, we are inclined to the performance of our duty: - ‘Furthermore, society and friendship are greatest blessings in ‘this life, and to promote ‘this: ‘ we are to promote the good of mankind in| gen+ j eral. Therefore, education and the voice.of consciences -dictate us in the performance of our duty to’our fellow beings, and werdo 80 our consciences reproach us; wh . a . void the reproaches ofa guilty cotiseience, . oer duty with pleasure. © pester “THEOLOGY: “383 general, because we love ourselves, knowing that the good of the whole is the good of every part. And permit me to say that not only all our actions, but all our passions, arise from the same fountain head. Anger, malice, revenge, ‘envy, sympathy, andall our passions may be tra- eed to self-love. It isa principle as necessary to our existence in this world as food and rai- ment; and he who leves himself the most will serve his God the best; he will be the mgst zeal- ous and arduous in the cause of Jesus Christ, and ‘in the attainment of everlasting glory. And we may safely affirm that such isthe Primum Mobile of all our aetions; for what should be a motive of action but that which offers something benefi- cial to the actor? Show me one action of choice performed by a rational man which was uncon- nected in its origin with self-love, or underived from it, and I will acknowledge that my theory is false. God himself acts from the same prin- eiple. It is for his own pleasure and the enjoy- ment of himself in the exercise of his several at- tributes that he is induced to be good, benevo- lent, just, kind and merciful to the children of _ men; and his own word confirms it, wherein he informs us that it was for his own pleasure that all these are and were created. Are we not per- mitted to act from the same or similar. motives ; to be kind, benevolent, just and good to our fel- low beings on account of having received the same kindness from God? Forit is according as we do unto others that we shall bedone by. If self-love, perfect self-love, be an evil principle, God only is to be charged with it, as he is the author. But it is not-an evil principle, except when it is restrained to partial good. All the ¢- Sa ee : * *. + ¥ 184. LECTURES ON” Vil lies in confining: our self-love to good, without ar farther views. Buthe who. extends his views andistrives for universal good. becomes in’ his actions anove perfect aces, whose self-love is only netlels God. ught us in his hol rd the: way tn | may be satisfied in the most exte orin which we may derive the greate and had we fellowed that way o' i would be far greater than it now is. We ear call that an evil: way which-God has appoi as the path of our duty; -and the most per! mode of satisfying self-love is the way w "i leadeth unto life eternal, for which God has giv- en us every qualifications: The existenceofsuch — 2 principle negessarily implies alaw pachagion out the mode in which it may. be satisfied iow showing also: orhitgandiiilaae events, will follo our actions... The motive of the farmer in pla ing his grain isthe derivation ofa crop; them tive of the Christian in giving due obedience the word of Ged is, that he may thereby receive the fruits of righteousness, even life eterna But, without some law pointing out what efiee should follow what causes, what happiness actions, free agency would be: ‘peatag? ; Such a law, however, divine goodness has seen fit to-establish throughout the universe, and the great object of all our knowledge is to ascertain what that lawis, what those actions, are which — will be produetive of our happiness ry. Though these. laws determine what consequences-of our actions, they do not de mine our actions themselves,as they are ou but merely show what actions are follow what consequences. As before observed, - ° ne — . _* - -'PHEOLOGY. 486 _@re established to give man a motive of action, and ‘epoti the Same principle is all civil-as well . ~ asmoral law founded. When our -laws_ point putan action to be rewarded, we then have some acement for pursuing it, and if on the other ‘show another whicivis to be punished, ave a reason for-avoiding it. As to the mo- ral’ law, the same is its object. If we foilow af- ter righteousness and holiness; it will lead us to glory, and this is our motive for-being guided by -the principles of Christianity. The moral law, | she, “ahaha net to enforce but to gi¥e _motives for our actions. Thus, in ali our actigns, the first incentive thereunto is the desire of ob- taining an additional share of -happines, or .a re- dief from’seme pain or impendize evil.. Butper- haps aquestion will arise: These motives itis said are good motives, and if we always act from sod motives, wherein consists sin? -And fur- erm God has implanted within us a-de- of happiness, and an aversion to pain or mis- ‘ery, howdo-wesin in being guided by this.prin- ciple? The answer'may be anticipated from a t has already been said. This pvineiple . of _ ‘self-love or-desire after happiness is-a good. “perfect motive only: when extended to the eed. ‘est good possible, and it becomes imperfect: -as ‘we restrain it to imperfect degrees of happiness. Many of our actions which arise from seiflove, produce sometimes pain as wells pleasure; this, however, is perfectly natural when the good. fo beo ed is far the evil. For ex~ ‘ample, the chief motive to acts of righteousness is the promise or expectation of happiness here- after, although we know that much pain and trou- “ble of mind must be: suffered in the attainment. i qsv LECTURES ON ee n the conttary, the motive to disobedience and sin, is pleasure or happiness as viewed with res- — ‘pect to this world only, which is very trifling, and accompanied» with endless misery. vo the happiness for-which we here ‘so far superior to the pleasures which are deri-. | ved from-sin, that, although we do si a few years of trouble and disappoint ‘thi ‘world, it becomes us to pursue the 4 liness rather than sin, forin so dei MW endless misery by suffering that 1 mentary, and enjoy-endiess pleasures by g up those which are no suoner obtained than As an example: God planted in the garden of ‘Eden a tree, whose fruit waspleasant to the eye, — and a tree to be desired to make one wise. T ' -". * motive which induced Eve to eat thereof, was a the desire of knowledge of good and evil, which she supposed would add considerably. to p- piness; and couid she not have obtaine i ver knowledge and gredter happiness b ng differently, it would certainly have been a very good motive—who does not desire knowledge ? ‘Yet we perceive that she committed a very great crime. Firstly, because sherestrained her self-love to less instead of ‘greater happiness, : which she might have enjoyed:had she not eat of % this forbidden fruit; and secondly, because this was a kind of knowledge to which our first pa- rents had no right, as God had declared thatin . the day in which.she should eat thereof she ; should surely die. This denunciation of pun- — ishment ought to have*been sufficient to have _ prevented her from eating of the fruit, although” Mg its appearance might have been enticing, ye 3 seems, that for want of reflection, she. wv pe - _ THEOLOGY. 187 sa less to agreater good, and was thus led into er- ror; whereas, had she suffered the principle of self-love would have been her choice. Her con- t was sinful because she suffered herself to be Jed astray by a partial motive when God had commanded her otherwise; and because she sub- emitted sites eat evil in order that she might obtain so little good; whereas we are not to do evil that good may come. Alfhough God has planted in this world certain pleasures, and for- bade us the enjoy ment of them, unless in appoint- ways, yet their existence is necessary to try our faith and confidence in our Creator, making ivagperehy: capable and prepared for those pure unsullied enjoyments which are laid up for -us above. Without the existence of forbidden pleasures man could not be a-fit subject either for rewards or punishments. The only motive ‘sures. - -out an inducement sin would become impossible, as we do nothing without some motive. or in- ‘ducement to action. If temptation and sin were impossible, we would deserve no reward from -our Creator for resisting it, we eould in no man- ‘ner take up our cross daiby and follow. Jesus. -Perhaps it may be asked, if happiness is all that we seek after, how is it that we pursue the way which leadeth to misery and death eternal? For it is certainly no more than reasonable to sup- _pose that-among all rational beings a greater good should be preferred toa less, or even to mi- sery. But let it-be answered, men do not al- ways act reasonably, but on the contrary very t to have ruled: with perfect sway, the , duces man to sin is the forbidden plea- low if no pleasures were forbidden © there would be no inducements to sin, and with-— all 388 LECTURES, on : unreasonably. Though self-love,may excite us to deeds which in the end tend to our misery, yet it is because we mistake misery for hope ness, and not on account of the imperfection of the principle. We do not always know what will be productive of our rie ig wherefore our ignorance often leads us toevil) Variousare the reasons which might be given for the con- duct of mankind in often,choosing a less to. a greater good, or evil rather than good; for evil and a less good are often used as synonymous — terms, especially when applied to our, moral conduct. Drunkenness, profligacy, and all the - sinful lusts of the flesh, when considered alone, are sources of pleasure to many people, and when — compared with other enjoyments,.are properly called inferiour degrees of happiness; neverthe- less they are evil because they produce misery — intheend. It is often the case that any apparent and momentary good is set re us, ~ we do not sufficiently consider its real yalue, or the consequences which will arise from’ it, and therefore, from our ignorance andearly prejudice | we often make an improper choice,though guid- — ed by self-iove. And though we perfectly know the superiority of some particular courses of life, some particular enjoyments to others, yet the want of due consideration at the moment, our intuitive propensity to sin, the prejudices ofedu-_ cation, the influence of habit,and our attachment ~ to some particular modes of vice in preference to others, all conspire to make us think at the moment of our choice that one good will not at the least deprive us of the other, and in this way we frequently choose the less good; and some- times even when we know that our choice will bam r FHEOLOGY. » i89 probably be followed by much pain and trouble, eur habits and prejudices will overcome reason. We are all led to acknowiedge the superiority of heayenly to earthly enjoymenits, and did we al- ways act reasonably, we would pursue the etraight and narrow way which leadeth unto life; yet because the pleasures of heavenly-bliss are so far distant as we sometimes suppose, and im- perceptible to the.carfal eye, they do not make the same impression upon our minds; and even . when spiritual impressions are made, they are easily eradicated, and in this way we are often Jed to act unreasonably in preferring the pleas- ures of this world to those which are promised hereafter. To-act reasonably, is, to act in that way which is productive of the greates¢ good ; in that way, where self-love may be the - most perfectly satisfied, and to act unreasonably ts to prefer a less to a greater good. » Rs. € From the nature of man, .as oxitoniinap ‘Vis lecture, it will be perceived, that alth sel love is the first’ principle of action in all spir- itual beings, it becomes an active principle only — through the existence of certain laws h re: gulate the consequences of his actions. For without some known laws, pointing out What consequences, what happiness or misery shall follow our actions, no motive could be raised within us sufficient to excite us to the exercise of our attributes in any way whatsoever. Thi the nature of man, therefore, might be fully” fected and made’ capable of answering all the ends of the Deity, it was necessary that Ged should set before him a certain code of laws ac= cording to which the consequences of human ace tion should be regulated. ‘This code of laws, ac- cording to which the happiness or misery of moral creatures is regulated, is what I call a Covenant. And when we say that God is | God, we intimate as much as that he iny y abides by the law which he has originally esta®- ‘ 5 ‘ + : “ty ey rs “De Covenants. Seone | 7 ‘edt nt -, THEOLOGY, 191 lished. Using the word Covenant in this sefisey two have been made with man; the first, that which was given to Adam upon his creation, and according to the terms of which. salvation and misery were and ever shall be regulated, The second is that which was also given to Adam immediaiely after his fall and condemnation, and according to which man remains in his original state of reprobation and despair, or obtains a Redeemer, a Saviour, who in his own body suf- fers the condemnation and punishment of the first law, and by obedience restores man to the fur of God, and gives hima title to heaven. Under this second covenant is comprehended both the Jewish and Christian dispensations, the - one being a type of. the other. Here it will be x well to remark that the word diatheke, which ia the New Testament is translated covenant, strict ly speaking, signifies no more than a dispensa- tion, and is viewed in this light by the learned Parkhurst in his Dictionary of the New Testa- ment; and therefore the language of Paul, partie eularly in his Epistle to the Hebrews, concern- ing the old and new covenants, relates only to the two different dispensations, the Jewish and ‘Gospel, as comprehended under the new covee » nant of grace: - The terms of the first covenant are found ree corded inthe Peatateuch, as comprehended under these words, “And the Lord commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat; but of the tree of the know- jedge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.”? Gen. ii—16, 17. God having pro 1 Masud happiness upon obedience to all his insti- - ‘pw 492 LECTURES ON © 46) a Sek vor tutious and ordinances, perfected human oi by perfecting | the motive and first prineiple ¢ our actions. Mai however, being a free agent possessed a power of disob dience, upon the ex- ercise of which, God ditealdhied: punishment and. eternal misery. The reward of happiness and — the punishment of misery, however, although the first incentive to action in the human breast, - could not have their proper influence without reflection; and the want of reflection is the ori- gin of disobedience, because our ideas are there- by rendered imperfect, and consequent! if often led to act from false views. Su error of our first parents when they first trans gressed the divine law, and became subject t : the condemnation denounced in eae previously made. And this sentence ot be recalled, unless God is an unjust and mutable _being. The seals of this covenant were i of the knowledge of good and evil, and the of life. As longas they partook of the tree of life, of which they undoubtedly did partake be- fore the fall, they were to live; and upon the day. on which they partook of the tree of know- | ledge they were to become subject to death, natural and spiritual. hing While they partook of the tree of life, situation must have been truly a happy one, rt they were favoured with the presence. of God and his holy angels, and were perfectly unac- quainted with the miseries and pains which now - infest our fallen natures. Universal harmony reigned in their hearts, and their delight was i the law of the Lord; nevertheless, like all ereat- ed beings, they were in some respects imperfect, ‘because capable of error: eae i THEOLOGY. : 193 In this covenant of the Supreme Being, Adam acted as our federal head,and we his natural des- cendants must be contented in submitting there- unto. ae The garden of Eden, according to the signi- fication of the word, implies a place or state of pleasure. The.tree of life in all probability was intended as a sign.or emblem of that spiritual and happy life which they were to realize so long as they retained their purity and innocence, and walked in perfect obedience. to the terms of the Covenant. The tree of .the knowledge of good and evil, was, we find, placed in opposition- to the tree of life, and was; consequently, an emblem of death, and also infidelity the cause thereof. God had expressly forbidden them the use of this tree, saying, “in the day that thou eat- est thereof thou shalt surely die.”” Satan, howey- er, that old serpent, knowing the weaknessof our first parents, determined to deceive them. He informed them that by tasting of this fruit, they should become as Gods, knowing gocd and evil, and that death, though threatened, would never be inflicted. As knowledge. is desirable in all cases, they were pleased with the idea, and, in open violation of the word, took of the tree and did eat, and immediately their eyes were open- ed, and they knew that they had sinned, and hid themselves among the trees ofthe garden. They could not, however, hide themselves from the presence of the Lord, but he appeared unto them yn his anger, and condemnation passed from the lips of ’an offended God. Death, both natural and spiritual became our portion, the, earth was: eursed for our sakes, and the flaming sword of justice guarded us forever from the tree of lifes ter inundates, whirlwinds rend theair, and vol- game covenant whieh was given to our first - \ a : 4 : 194 LECTURES ON | ' Guilt passed: ‘upon all men for the sin of our in parents, for in Adam all die. From this one sin of Adan proce eded others, until from a connex- ion of causes and effects, a habit of and disposi- tion to sin became inherent in: all men. Tha man is a fallen being, and very far gone from hi original state of perfection and: righteousness, may be pereeived from his liability to pain, mis- ery, ignorance and general depravity; from his — Blindness to ever y thing which relates to af state, and to his happiness even. in this from the curse of toil and labour, which wehi to suffer in the attainment of this world’s 's goods; from the general rebellion of the brute creation i eae us, and the thousands of ‘natural evils ich infest this world in general.” ~ The ele+ ments-are all at war with man, fire devours, Was —~-.S CC canoes the earth ; and even these appear insu cient: man himself must wage war with his fellow being, lest death should be too negligent in his . ravages. Sinis now the ruling principle in the | hearts of all, to which we are inelined as the sparks are to fly upwards.» In the first coven- ant perfect obedience was required, and let man suppose that life eternal shall ever beo! ed without a perfect satisfaction of the law. rents is. also binding upon us; it hasnever been — repealed, and consequently the promises and — threatenings which were there made must bee- ventually fulfilled. All men are by nature un- ~ | der the sentence of this broken covenant; A- | dam’s sin has also become ours beeause he was our federal head, and we have now an a “disposition and i inclination toxin: “Thea ¢ . THEOLOGY.. EES rations of men’s hearts are only evil continu- ally, “What manis he that liveth and sin- neth not??? “The just man falleth seven times day.” “The heart of man is deceitful above all Mingo desperately wicked.”? “The carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.” Original sin is now “the fault or corrup- rof the nature of every man, that naturally is engendered ofthe offspring of Adam, whereby man is very far gone from originalrighteousness, and is of his own nature inelined to evil, so that the flesh lusteth always contrary to the spirit, and therefore, in every person born into the world, itdeserveth God’s wrath and damnation.” Art. 9. “It is evident (saith the Rev. J. B. Summer) that this doctrine paves the way to the whole dispensation of thd Gospel. If mankind had not been in a lost state, there would have been no need of Christ’s becoming man, or suffer- ing death to redeem them.” Paul, in particular, endeavoured to impress this doctrine, upon the minds of his hearers and followers, in order to convince them that regeneration or a new: birth was indispensibly necessary to salvation, and he gives himself as an example of that corruption: ‘That which Ido, I allow not; for what I would, . that do I not; but what [hate that I do. For Y know that in me, that is, in my flesh, dwelleth no goodthing; for to will is present with me, but how to perform that which is good, I find not. For the good that I would, I do not; but the evil which I would not that I do. For I delight in the law of God after the inward- man; but I see another law. in my members: Warring against the law of my mind, and bring: P96 LECTURES ON me intocaptivity to the law of sin, which is im’ my members.”? We see, therefore, that in trans- gressing the law of the first covenant, not only our bodies, but our minds, our immortal souls, — have become corrupt and subject to all kinds of imperfection and consequent woe, We have be- come dead in trespasses and sin, we have lost, ia agreat measure, the image of God and intercourse with him, and which, by our own works, can never be restored. Our situation is now such, ~ that, even though the sin of Adam should be blotted out, perfect obedience hereafter is impos- sible. We are daily liable to the sins of igno- rance; for heing not at all times acquainted with our duty, we may sometimes err, though our mo- tives be ever so sincere. Sincerity is not always a standard of purity in our actions; Paul was too fully convinced of this; for though in persecu- ting the Christians, causing them to be stoned, put in prison, and sawn assunder, he says that he verily thought that he was doing God service, he afterwards saw that he was sinning against his maker; yet he says he obtained forgiveness, be- cause he did it in ignorance andunbelief. In this state of reprobation all men are natu- rally born; and they who never recover from this state are eventually lost in eternal misery. They shall at the final day of accounts appear be- fore the judgment seat of Christ, and God shalt place them upon his left hand, saying, “Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepar- ed for the devil and his angels.” The grave can- not hide them from his wrath, but from this prison house of clay they shall be called forth to everlasting punishment. Tiow fearful then, how awful the situation of man: as lying under WHEOLOGY. 197 the curse of the brokén covenant of works, But he hath noreason to complain. Justice demands punishment, and itis by his own folly that he ‘hath thus subjected himself toits awful demands, A conviction of this is the first step towards a recovery. And what blessed intelligence’ must it be to mankind that such a recovery is offered; that though condemnation surrounds us like the waters ofa deluge, we are permitted, in the ark of Christ’s holy church, to rise safely above the floods, and finally rest upon that celestial mouat ’ where clouds shall never come, nor storms arise. ’ The conditions of our salvation and reproba- tion having been originally established. in the first covenant, cannot be changed or annihilated, unless God is a mutable being. «He hath once given us the conditions of our everlasting hap- piness or misery, and it is contrary to the per- fections of his nature to charge them for any new conditions. Who then, it may be asked, shall be saved? “For we have all become guilty, we are all partakers in the disobedience of our first parents, and fulfilled the necessary. condi- tions of our misery, instead of those which were necessary to salvation. This.is the great para- dox of the Christian religion, and which I shall endeavour to explain in the course of this inqui- “ry. God knowing from everlasting the frailty of human nature, and the certainty of his fall and condemnation, saw proper in his infinite goodness to propose a plan which might relieve him from the condemnation of the first covenant, while justice should still be executed and the law satisfied. This was by making a new cove- nant of grace. This. covenant of grace, with “vespect to its fulfilment, may be divided ingo J9s LECTURES ON 4two parts, the Jewish and Christian economy. -The parties of this covenant are the same as in the first covenant, God and man. I judge thus for many reasons; and firstly, because God, in establishing the covenant, either requires condi- -tions on the part of man, and whieh are to be fulfilled by man, or the scriptures cannot be re- lied on as records of truth. It will be recollect- ed that this second covenant is not the covenant which ensures unto us heaven, but redemption through a Saviour. The conditions of our re- demption are faith and holiness; and these con- ditions are to be accomplished by us and not by our Saviour. The scriptures command man himself to believe and be baptized for the re- mission of sin; and unless believing and being baptized, do, in some measure, either directly or indirectly, procure this remission, then they are useless and vain eeremonies; and if they do pro- cure this, then they must certainly be called con- ditions of our redemptien, though perhaps not -of our future happinessin heaven. The condi- tions of our future. happiness are fulfilled by our Sayiour; and the second covenant was instituted — for the purpose of enabling man to obtain a Sa- viour, who should thus satisfy, in his place,.the terms of the first covenant, which were the terms -of happiness and heaven. If, as some of our Cal- -vanistic writers affirm, the parties second — -covenant were God the Fatherand the Son, then our redemption as wellas future happiness — are to us unconditional. And if unconditional, then faith and all the requisites of the New Tes- tament are useless; because redemption can ve obtained as well withoutthem aswiththem. Per- dhaps it may be said, that though faith and obe- | THEOLOGY. 198 dience do not obtain either redemption or life eternal, yet they are necessary, because com- manded; or it is our duty to do them, because we are ‘thus’ commanded; but this is no argu- ment. For what should excite ts to.do our dus ty when nothing is to be gained by it; or‘ why should we obey our maker if by so doing we re- ceive no good? Why should subjects obey their rulers, if they do not gain their protection or es- cape some evils? The fact i is, we are bound te do nothing but what is recommended by utility. ‘In all our actions, as Dr. Paley observes, private » interest is our motive, and is the foundation of all duty, “Whatsoever is expedient is right.’’ _Paley’s Moral Philosophy, Chapt. 6.. And if ‘no benefit is to be derived from our actions, we cannot be'said to have neglected our duty in ne- glecting them. Therefore, if our faith or obedi- -ence tend in no manner, either directly or indi- rectly, to procure some good, either here or here- -after, we are not bound to comply with them. ‘In the next place, a covenant between God the “Father and the Son, is representing the persons of the Godhead as mutable like unto men. The nature of the Godhead necessarily requires that the persons thereof, should be consistent in all their cous and ‘actions ; consequently a cove- ‘nant between any two persons of the Godhead — would be useless and unnecessary. Again, the >-scriptures positively inform us that this second covenant-was made with man, in particular with Abraham. Itis said that ‘Abr raham believed, and it was imputed to him for righteousness. But how became it imputed to bim for righte- -ousness, unless it was the fulfilling of some co- wenant? The covenant which then existed wus sd ’ : es * 200 LECTURES. ON ~ ¥ the same that now exists; and it was theobe> dience which Abraham rendered to this cove- nant which was imputed to him for righteous- ness, although the dispensation under’which he served was a different one from the present; the one being the type, and theater the atiype . The conditions ofthis second covenantare faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and its consequent obe- dienee; and are offered untoall who enjoy the bles- sings of the gospel dispensation. The promise of — God, upon the fulfilling of those conditions, was thata Saviour, a»Redeemer, should iven ~as a substitute for those who ‘comp | conditions of the second covenant; whoshould : them only, satisfy the emand of the first eove-— nant, and.thereby enable them to eseape the con- demnation whieh had already f ) upon them. Man, by disobedience to the conditions of the first covenant, became liable to death eternal, but God hath said, if you will comply with the con- ditions of this second covenant which I am a- bout making with you, that misery, which by — your works you have deserved, shall ffered — by Jesus Christ; and that obedience ¥ ich is necessary for the attainment of heaven, shall be — performed by him also, and the reward.of his — merits shall be applied unto you, evenslife eter- nal. No penalty was deus b6it aimeeat disobe- _ dience; for they who would not comply with the f terms of the new covenant, were by nature in a — state of reprobation ; and to. remain in this state — was all the penalty that would be necessary. The seéond covenant is only the medium through which we receive salyationupon the eon- ditions of the first covenant ; for without the se- cond covenant, our damnation would be inevita- THEOLOGY. 20k we bles because the terms of happiness as stated ia the old covenant, could not by us alone be ful- _ filled. That weare made inheritors of the king- | slom of heaven upon the conditions of the first eovenant, bas been denied by many and able wri- ters. Tshall, however, endeavour to show that their objections are founded neither in reason por revel ion ; and that the conditions of tke first cove tare still the conditions of life eter- nal.. They who object to this doctrine, do it,as did De. Whitby, upon the ground of those dec- larations made by St. Paul concerning the lawy where he says, “Knowing that a man is not jus, | tified by the works of the law, but by the faith _ of Jesus Christ, even we have believed on Jesus : Christ, an ‘not by the works:of the law; forby the works of the lav shall no flesh be justified. 38 Gal. ii—16. “If rig) teousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.” “Therefore, by the: deeds. of the law, there shall no flesh be justified ia his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin, But now the righteousness of God with- out the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; even the righteous- ness of God, which is by faith of Jesus Christ, un- to all and upon all them that believe.” Rom. iii —20, 21, 22. Now,say they, to he saved by the law, and to be saved by the first covenant, is the same; and, consequently, if we are:still saved according to the first covenant, then the argu- ments of St..Paul are vain and fale: Permit me ~ to answer, the law of the first covenant made be- tween God and our first parents, and the law con- cerning which St. Paul spake, are not the same. St. Paul was evidently speaking of the Jewish #@r ceremonial law, when sacrifices were offered cause of transgressions till the seed shoul come.”? Gal. iii—19. It was hot, therefore, the law of the first covenant which he meant, but that which was added after we |! en the first covenant, and because we had broken it. And again, it was to continue only until the seed shod, and then cease whereas the : law_of the first shee still the same. - ‘Farther, he says, ‘ efore, the law was our — sehoolmaste bring us. unto Christ, tha might be justified by faith,” The law of. first covenant could be no schoolmaster, but was the ceremonial law, whieh,» by its sacrifi hould £ * Petits teotel hese, s relieve mankind from these type ng salvation through the faith of Jesus. d burnt offerings; tau By Christ. — But you ask, is not the law of Moses andthe first covenant the same? Not im the least. The Mosaic and gospel dispensations aro only different parts-of the same covenant of grace, one being a type of the other. The second — covenant was undoubtedly given to Ada I? newed to Abraham, and continued up from: thence'to the coming of our Saviour and the gospel dispensation. By the ordinances of the” dewish law, we do not expect salvation, , through the rightcousness which isof fi sequently the words of St. Paul having n ence to the first covenant, cannot be used a3" objection to the doctriae which L am now enadea- THEOLOGY. 203 “youring to The first covenant still holds pbets must continue to be subject \ an it until it is repealed or its conditions ful- filled. That this covenant has been repealed, I, or but few will assert. The truth is, it can- ek be repealed unless God is unjust. Thecov- was made with Adam and A ia ty in him, asa federal head, and in -all man- ¥ied have en it; Consequently all men must still be nto it, either in their own per- sons or 2 person of Christ. As we all sinned ' in Adam, we must all have sin fore the law was repealed ; and if it was led be- _ fore we sinned, then it-eannot be aa Dasari. to our use, woless God be unjust it w be inconsistent even evi to aman from execution by law after he had been found guilty. ~ If then, the first co still holds good, its terms must be fulfilled b we can attain h $ ven. But we have broken oishmest a cov nant now requires both punishment and:o bedi- ence from all mankind; punishment, be becauis e have all sinned, and obedience, beau itis th which we rightfully owe to our Creator. The reprobate can only satisfy that part which re- quires eed the elect make a perfect and full satisfaction both of obedience and punish- - meitt; they do not make this satisfaction in their own persons, that is, for the demands of the first covenant as do the reprobates, but in the person of Jesus Christ, who suffers for theirsins and renders perfect ‘obedience for their future happi- aes Slory. And that map may have that coy stice pealing the Teze of satisfyi ing the demands of the first sant by a substitute, who s Jesus Christ, a **. » faith which preserved them from di - til they tasted of the tree of death or Wi 204 LECTURES ON - * mew covenant has been made, the conditions ef. which are faith and repentance ch, ifful- filled by man, shall entitle h Redeemer, - by whose Test heaven is allt The con s both of t and new cove- nants term ultimatel faith; our caved | performs the faith which was originally require of our first parents, and we perform that-whic is required as the condition of the enant. He who possesses faith is also ob or his faith is the only thing which can rh self- love excite us to obedience or actions of any kind. _ it is evident that the two trees which stood in the garden were emblems of faith and ieiaelipr ; obedience and disobedience. As long } first parents partook of the tree of life, t or eating of the forbidden fruit ly from death; for to be’ bidden fruit and death was t was the consequence of the fi ~ tree of life, therefore, may be ealled the tree of faith, and of which our first parents partook un- it As soon as this happened, the tree ot Ble forbidden them; for aman cannot be faithful and unfaithful at the same time. It may be thought that our first parents never tasted the tree of life, — for had they done so, they would have’ Jivegiier- ever; but we have nothing in the scriptures to supportithis opinion. From the account given us in the Scriptures, we may safely infer, that the tree of life was always accessible until they _ partoo f the tree of the knowledge orga | and evil. © And as to the influence whic! tree might have upon our first parents, it was aug & uf a ae ee ey -* Maar Ae tes baa? “THEOLOGY. Wiest 05. a - = 4 , ‘4 h lasted dbily. as long as they per- uking thereof, that is, while they, » “were ina state of trial; and had they persevered in, partaking: reof until the end of their trial, we ’ ite influence would have conti forever afters ‘ Is not this tree of life, then, a perfect symbol of ) Snfluence severed _ faith? Faith was the condition of life, and infi- delity the condition of death, which was sym- bolized by the tree of the knowledge of gooa and - evil. en man, therefore, had become un- ¥ faithful tothe first covenant, justice demanded punishment, and no further condition which he could perform could be productive of ing ftaie happiness. - The sword of justice, therefore, ever’ fter, guarded the tree of life, and consequently uld never after perform the conditions of None but Jesus Christ can do this?” ore, in him was held forth to us as of our redemption, though it could never be perfected by us, as the condition , of our fute y. Our Phe: a now becomes to us of th me benefit as the treevof life; for if we partake of him we shall’ still live forever, 9 beeatise he has received the tree of lifein our) ~~ - And that we may partake of him: who) ‘fulfils the faith of the first covenant, we muét ful fil the faith of the second. © And’ a glorious pri- -~ - vilege ought we to consider it, that we may ob- i er any manner, since we have, thro” ingratitude and disobedience, become unworthy of the least blessings. And indeed, haw can we behold that-infinite mercy and love, which our Saviourhas manifested for sinful man, in taking * upon himself the puvishments due fori is, * and executing all the demandsvof the Want, without exclaiming in raptures, iff * THEOLOGY. 207 4 Kuh . ° : HY = re ere. ss | aa é — . - LECTURE x. Election and Reprobation. - Havive briefly considered the nature of the first and second covenants, the subject of Elec- tion and Reprobation may now very properly claim our attention; as the foundation of either is laid upon our obedience or disobedience to the first covenant. In this doctrine which has been so long the subject of controversy in the Christian world, we are taught that “God before the foundation of the world was laid, according to his eternal and immutable purpose, and the secret counsel and good pleasure of his will,’ hath chosen some of mankind unto everlasting happiness and glory; and according to the same counsel of his will, hath ordained others to dis- honour and wrath for their sin, to the praise of his glorious justice. . “Hath not the potter pow- er over the clay of the same lump to make one vessel to honour and another to dishonour.?? Rom. ix—21. In other words, hath uot God power to seleet out of the same mass of human beinzs, some persons to happiness and glory, and others i@ shame aud misery. God hi a right . new oflered us, whereby weave: ‘ #3 mplished, our election to-life eternal is ac-* hs. _my creditor relieves 1 me; not how Siig EE i 216 LECTURES ox . made members or sons of Jésus Christ,» : nd pable of inheriting his righteousness of our adoption in him, We are adopted. the fulfilling of the terms of the second J nant, and we are saved through the righ e which we inherit through adoption. _ hus inheritance which we derive from our ond federal head or father Jesus Christ, 7 and counteracts the effects of. the inheritance which we derive from the first Adam, in whom all die. It may be thought that if we are elect-- ed on account of the righteousness of Christ. which we inherit through adoption, and that we. becomeadopted and made inheritorsof this right-, eousness on account of our own righteousness of the second covenant, th: are elected on ac- count of our own righteousness, Bat this does, not follow. If my creditor casts me into prison. for debt, and. by my prayers and penitence a friend is obtained who is able and willing to pay the debt, then upon:satisfaction made by him, count of the value but solely forthe s c' has rendered for me. To obtain a friend, my ewn endeavours are necessary, but this is not the act that liberates. To obta of sons and daughters of Cl fr we can do; this, hoy ng the | conditions of this is done by Chri hag dines made. He hath: paid ine ra our liberty and opened the prison doure are we-to attribute all our future * ‘ HEOLOGY.* - QT world through the hope of so glorious a pros- pect; and to him. are we to give the praise, and. not a particle to our own feeble efforts. 8 We may then see that with us our adoption is conditional, while our election is so far uncondi- tone that it is not in the least dependent upon’ ar actions. But perhaps you will say; if adop- uadis to be effected by us, why is not our elee- _tion also, as they are inseparable? I answer, the inseparability of adoption and election is no ar- gument in proof that both are obtained by the same means. If, as I have just intimated, the procuring of a friend; and my liberation from prison, are two circumstances inseparably con= nected, yet my endeavours and his are produc- tive of very different consequences ; my friend a- Tone is the real author of my liberty, while all- thatI have done, is to gain his affection. The cir¢umstances are the same in our endeavours to gain the affections ofa Saviour, and when this is done, we have accomplished all in our power— the rest is to be fulfilled by him. If our adop- tion was unconditional and depended not upon a- ny efforts of our own in endeavouring to obtain a Saviour’s love and the merits of his s righteous- ness; if our faith and holiness have no influ- ence in making us members of Christ and sons of . the pengge’ peace, God hath violated his word: , and made himself unjust; for he hath positive- ly commanded us to believe and be baptized for the remission of sin,.and he who will not com- ply withthese terms, are, according to the divine word, never to see God. « And if faith and holi- ness On our partsare all that are required for our adoption, while our-adoption cannot be obtained: without them, then I would ask how'can they be a z < ee oe 21s EECTURES OW etherwise than conditions thereof? on? is obtained altogether upon the terms of the new ‘ Govenant, and that it is not obtained throughs the merits of Christ, is evident, because he hath in no manner performed the conditions of this* covenant; for had he performed*the conditions’ ~ of the old as well as the new covenant, nothiag* would have remained for us to do, and, ‘aoe: quently, faith and holiness would be required ' in vain. There would be ‘no inducement for a- ny one to lead a sober, Hithbous, and godly life’ in the present world, for alk the sobriety and~ — godliness which has any efféct either in our sal-_ vation or adoption, is, according to this system, - fulfilled by Jesus Christ. The seriptures,“how- ever,every where show the incorrectness of such* asystem; for they continually exhort us to a — strict observance of all the duties required in the’ new testament, and they give us no motives for= the observance of these rules but the reward of: adoption. ‘ RP From what has been said, it may be thought’ by some that we are rewarded or punished here- after on account of our own merits‘and desery-' ings; that our personal piety and holiness are- the considerations for which God bestows upon: us the blessings of life eternal. Itistrue,thatin, — ene sense we are rewarded for our righteous- ness in this world, but this reward eonsistsonly) in our adoption as sons in Christ Jesus, and aa in our future happiness or glory in heaven. T. was never intended in the terms of second covenant as set forth to usin the Divine word; — we may be rewarded hereafter according to works and yet not on aceountofthem. 1 ‘each that cur-actions in this world are co — ~~ py RY, THEOLOGY. BEF ed as any further meritorious, - than deueubinas. according to the terms of the gospel dispensa- tion, the merits ofa Saviour. Our bliss in future” existence is’ derived from the meritorious righ teausness of him whois King of Kings and Lord oPords. If we are righteous according to the second Covenant, we shall: at the final day of re- tribution be rewarded for. his perfeet obedience which: his.love has applied toall those who man- ifest their love tohim. And in this sense, the reward of adoption isthe reward promised aad given for our own actions, while the reward of e~ lection and future glory is obtained on account of Christ’s righteousness applied to us, or rather imputed to us. We are commanded to strive, to press forward to the mark; to be instant in season and out of season; to-search the scrip- tures wherein is revealed the word of truth; to fight with all courage putting on the whole ar- mour of righteousness; and allfor what?’ In or- der that we may on account thereof obtain hea- ven? No. These are not the considerations of. heaven, but of our adoption, and the conditions of heaven are fulfilled by our Saviour Redeemer. Heaven. may he the great end which we have in view, and so it ought to be in the perform- ance of every action which relates to our stand- ing with God, but though it is the end for which we act it is not. to. be considered the reward of our actions, although if may be inharmony with the same. All that our righteousness can obtain is the right@ousness of Christ; and as we know that this when applied unto us, is fully sufficient toensure untous the joys of the courts above, we have the same inducement to press forward, ‘ty strive and persevere in the cause of our Re-- 220 LECTURES ON a deemer, as though these blessings were obtained” as the immediate reward of our faith and holi- ness. The wicked are rewarded not only ac- cording to, but in part, on account of their sins’ | and trangressions of the divine the repro these are not the only causes, as their reproba- tion was sealed in- Adam; yet if they forsake not their evil ways, but unto original sin add the sin of disobedience to the New ‘Covenant, and* that against all light and knowledge, undoubt- edly their punishments will be in intensity ac-— cording to their crimes, 5 In the next place, though our adoption is con- ditional, yet, like our Election, it is sure and de-_ termined, being fully and perfectly settled he- fore the foundation of the world; so sure, that like the numbers-of the Eleet and the Reprebate which are infallibly decreed from eternity bya God who is immutable and changeth’ not from. everlasting to everlasting ; its number cannot by the agency of manor any chenbeing be increa~ sed or diminished. Perhaps will ask, how then is our adoption conditional, when all our strivings can neither add to nor take from the number ?. To this, permit meto answer, that our doings were never intended or calculated to add to or take from the number of those who have’ been adopted or elected, but our doings are the foundation upon which that trae number has been adopted, (not elected.) Those “per-— form the conditions of the gospel are only persons who can be adopted, and as the’real num- — ber of theseis -well known to the Almighty, what inconsistency would there be in saying or decreeing that this number only shall be adopted” when it is well known that none but they can fi-- THEOLOGY. Q3} :mally be adopted and be made heirs of his glori- ous righteousness; as none but they perform the conditions which are required for suchan inher- itance? Let it not be supposed however, that because God has decreed or predestinated one part of mankind to remainin their natural state of reprobation, and the other to the adoption of sons, that the liberty or privileges of either are thereby lessened. A!] have still the privilege of performing the conditions necessary to adop- tion, and if they improve this privilege they shall be saved; not for doing so, but for the right- eousness of Christ which being obtained through their adoption is applied unto them, and yet » without any inconsistency with what has been said. Because one man iseternally chosen to a- doption, this does not lessen his privilege of re- _ Mainiog in astate of reprobation; neither is he who is eternally reprobate deprived of the priv- ilegeof faith and holiness, and ‘onsequent adop- tion and salvation. But you ask how can this be? How ean the reprobate, that is, the finally reprobate, possess faith andjstill have. the privi- lege of heaven when he is already chosen for hell? To this it may be replied, he who has been cho- sen for bell, has by his own voluntary actions laid the foundation of that choice in siu and dis- obedience. Hisown choice isthe reason of the fos ame ; consequentiyif the choice of God s has be unded upon human choice, how can it affect his liberty, when an act of his liberty has been the means of the decree itself. IfGod foreknows the cause, he is certainly at liberty. to decree the effect, and yet his decree concerning the effect has no force in the production of the aause. The cause of remaining ina state of. re- 222 LECTURES ON probation is sin, of whi ch n _man is ‘the author} ‘God therefore, foreseeit n perfect certainty a free act of man, may deere: » the consequence, which is final reprobation, _ having any influence upon man in his © y actions. Naturally all men are reprobate, bt doomed to continue in that st ny own will; on t ie ce will not helen nis state from eternity hath thereupon determined to pass him over as eternally reprobate. ‘No person. has the privilege of becoming reprobate, because all men are so by nature; but all men have the privilege of remaining in, or leaving this state of death, and through ‘adoption casting their re-_ probation upon our Saviour, and by his righte- ousness becoming-one of the Elect. Though the finally reprobate person is free to perform the conditions of his adoption or of the second cove- nant, he is not free to evade) Divine decrees, because he is not free to act i n opposition to his own determination and will, upon which the ’ Divine decrees have been formed. Lest it be supposed however, that I hereby render man in- capable of altering ‘his determination and choice, it will be well to remark, that in all human ac- tions we act only in, compliance with our and where there is no will there is no ac our several motions are guided only sion,and may therefore be ealled “passion. such cases we are only machines moving as we are moved. But in all our aetions we are “9 erned by our wills, and while e havea wi do one way we cannot act differently. Tn crying therefore, that man cannot act come’ ar own will, 1 meannot that he is incapable of chaa- ‘THEOLOGY. 223 ging his will and defermination; but that he is ineapable of acting differently from the last des termination which he makes, and upon which the Divine choice is regulated in sealing our e- lection or reprobation. - God by the immutability of his own laws ana promises, is obliged to predestinate every man, toywhom the righteousness of Christ will be ap- plied, to a state of happiness. |) So, though our own choice determines whether the righteous- tess of Christ shall be applied unto us, and conse- quently whether we shail be adopted or not, yet it is not on account of this choice that we are e- lected ‘to life eternal,’but only according to it: He: who chooses a life.of wickedness and disobedi- ence to the second covenant, is not adopted asa member of Christ, on account of his wickedness, _and therefore perishes in the state in which he was born: and he who chooses faith and holiness on account thereof, is made a member of Christ, and partakes of his righteousness, and on accou nt: of the righteousness of which he partakes, is e- lected-to life and’glory. And thus though the fi- nal state ofevery man be firmly fixed long before his birth, yet it is fixed in perfect harmony with the freedom of his own will. ‘But, perhaps some will say that if our election or reprobation is firmly fixed from everlasting, and all that we'can do in endeavoring to change-it cannot make one hair white or black, then the apostle has given us some very needless advice-In exhorting us to make our calling and election sure, for according to this system it ts‘sure already, infallibly and, unalterably so? Though our election is sure al- ready, yet the certainty of Christ’s righteous- -hees being hereafter applied unto.us"has made it* 4, : ’ 224 LECTURES ON so; and the certainty of that application depen upon the certainty of our fulfilling the term of the second coyenant. Qur actions, therefore, in fulfilling the terms of the second covenant are absolutely necessary to our adoption, and with- out adoption we cannot be saved. T called upon to make our calling and election sure, we are not called upen to perform the conditions — of our election, but to do those things which’ shall insure unto us that those conditions shall be performed by our Saviour, and the fruits thereof applied unto us, Our eleetion may be e- ternally sure in the sight of God, but it would not. be so unless our adoption is obtained on ac-, count of our. own tvorks: our own works fore- known of God is the foundation upon which our election is sure unto God, though: not the conditions thereof... We eannot. be confident that heaven is ours unless we are confident of re- ceiving themerits of Christ, and we eannot he. sure of this unless:we know that we liye a life a- grecably to the terms of the second covenant, for this reason we are to add to our faith virtue, and to virtue knowledge, and to knowledge tempe- vance, and to temperance patience,and to patience~ godliness, and to godliness.brotherly kindness, — and to brotherly kiadness charity. For he who perseveres in doing these things may restin firm assurance that heaven is his, because Christ has purchased it for such. Theadyice of tyes is thercfore wecessary to be observed in confirm - 7 'SHEOLOSY. 225 ing us in the hope of everlasting salvation. "Fhe freatest difficulty in this matter consists in not being enabled to perceive the proper distinction between the conditions of our adoption, and the eonditions of bliss eternal. - For, perhaps, some would say, if weveasnot obtain heaven without fulfiiling the second covenant or the conditions of our adoption, why are not these also the condi- tions of our’salvation? The faliaeyof this, how- ever, is apparent to every mind who can proper- }¥ distipesish between immediate conditions ard #hose which are. secondary and “not ‘connected With the subject) The advice of the apostle, itis true, would beuseless, provided Ged decreed -the actions of all free agents; this, however isnot the fact. Though the physical works of nature, and the final salvotion or-damnation of souls be the _ immediate work of God, vet our actions are our own, and may be influenced by advice. Bat if every action were decreed of God from everlast- ing, then, even were it possible, there would be no use in regulating them by advice, for every action would be agreeable to his will, whether executed: with or without advice, because he could not decree an action against his will. How, then, it may be asked, could he decree the dam- nation of sinners, when we are particularly in- ~ _ formed that he is “not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance ?™ Now in this and many ether similar sentences in the scriptures, all that is to be understood is this, that it is not through the Divine will or de- eree that any man performs those actions or uses those means which will be followed by destree- _ tion, for God-has, on the contrary, invited him te se the means of adoption, and be saved through 226 LECTURES ON the righteousness of Christ. This is the only ‘construction that can be put upon such passages of scripture without. making the word of God in- consistent.. To say that it is not his will that fi- nally impenitent.sinners should feceive theirdue reward, is contrary to eyery sense of scripture. Consequently the only interpretation that can be admitted is, that God doesnot deeree the ac- tions of men, but-only. the consequences thereof, — as agreeably to the established laws of nature, It is by his will that they who perform acts of uarighteousness should perish; but not by. his will that-they should perform those acts. Tor instance, if it were by the will and deeree of God that Eve acted in partaking of theforbidden fruit, why did he comimand her. not to eat of it? And furthermore, if such was his will.and decree, then he punished her for doing his. will, and com- | manded her to do contrary to his will.. Now, we know that sin is contrary to the will of God, and it is inconsistent to suppose that he hath de-. erced its existence. And if every action which comes to pass. were decreed of God, sueh as mur- der, adultery, drunkenness, and the like, then we preachers are only opposing the Divine wiil and decree when we preach against them, or a-. gainst vice and immorality in general. The faet. is, if all our actions are decreed of God, then we are all doing his holy will, and obeying his sa- cred decrees, and shall, consequently all be sa- - ved; for none but those who act contrary to the Divine will can be damned, wherefore no man ean be damned. It is true that man by sinning, or acting contrary to the Divine will in one res- ‘pect, may be in another respect answering his. purposes and will. This, however does not make. THEOLOGY. 22F the act achecstil to the Divine will in that res- ‘ pect wherein it was asin. The actions of men, therefore, are free and come to pass only through the designs and will of man. All other events are decreed of God and take place as that decree is accomplished. ’ From this doctrine, whereby some-are chosen to life eternal, and some to everlasting misery, on account of the righteousness of Christ or the unrighteousness of man, it necessarily follows, that both the elect and reprobate will finally per- severe in that course of life upon which their e- lection or reprobation is founded. This, how= ever does not render perseverance inevitable on the part of man, it-enly renders it certain. » For had not God perceived the certainty of the final perseverance of the elect he could net have cho- _ senthem as the elect. Not that their perseve- _ vance was the condition of their election, yet it being the condition of their adoption, mast becer- _ tainly foreknown before. God eould make a posi- tive choice either in their election or reprobae - tion. Bat it will be asked, how perseverance can he rendered certain to the elect without be- ing necessary. This idea of the inseparability of certainty and necessity, has crept into the miads of many on account of our limited capacities, and the limited field of their exercise. We know of - nothing in the world ascertain, unless we receive _ it from some neeessary, some immutable law of nature or natures’s God, with whieh we are ac- _ guainted. We become certain of some particu- lar occurrences in the heavens, such as eclipses of the sun and the moon, and other planets, be- + _ eause we know that according to the established — orcer of nature it must be so; “and for thi$ reason, “ 228 LECTURES ON having always derived our eertaidtly of common | and physical events from their necessity, we are: led to conclude that such must be the case in the: spiritual world. But why should we judge thus?) Because we cannot perceive any further in futu-- | rity than the necessity of events will permit, be~ cause we. cannot-leok into the hearts of men and read all. their future actions whieh depend upon’ their.own choice, this is no reason for our limi-. ting the omniscience of God. God knoweth all, things, whether they are to be the consequences: of his-own cr human-designs, of course aj] things — to him are certain, whether he has ordained them or not, or whether they are the: “necessary effects. of his predesii ination or not. Although it is absolutely certain, that they. whom God hath elected to eternal happiness through the merits of Christ will finally perse- vere in the righteousness of the new Covenant, and obtain his merits, and consequently-salvation, their liberty to fall is still the same: Butas this- Hiberty has no. influence upon his knowledge, it, can in no manner Jessen that certainty which he- possesses of the final event, as he firmly under- d stands every event which will come to pass; through their liberty. Neither can his khow-. ledge influence their liberty or actions, because. — as we know not what the propositions of his: omniscienze are, we have no power to act con-, trary to our own free choice and will, And ~ though our actions cannot be different from his- knowled: ge, yet we have full power to act differ- — ently from what: we do; and the reason is,-be- cause his knowledge is always agreeably to our, real actions, and notthose whieh might have been. erformed. But though I teaeh the certainand. ee _ |! THEOLOGY. 909 _ finalperseverance of the adopted and the Alect; because none but these who do persevere can be adopted or elected; yet:the final perseverance of saints is altogether uncertain, and cannot bé taught without inconsistency both with reason -and the word of God: | To prove this,.it- will be “necessary to prove that there can be real and sin cere Christians who do not belong to the number of the elect, and» consequently: arenot finally. saved. Mr. Dickinson says that there is no in- stance in the Bible where a man possessing a true and lively faith in Jesus Christ, and. is in ‘favour with-God, has fallen away and eternally perished. (Dickinson’s Five Points—Perseve- ranee.) I think, however, that I can bring one; St. Paul, in his First Epistle to Timothy, partis cularly warns him against falling away, but ex- horts him that he may. war a good warfare; “Holding faith and a good conscience which some having put away; concerning faith have made shipwreck: Of whom is Hymeneus and Aléxander, whom F have delivered unto Satan.” Now if Hynveneusand Alexander fell away from and made shipwreck ot faith,such a faith as Paul was then exhorting’ Timothy to hold fast, it must ef course be admitted that such wasa good faith, and:that they once possessed it, or they could hever have made shipwreck of it... And further, if the righteous man cannot fall away, then there was no use in giving this advice and warning to- Timothy.: Again, that the saints may finally apostatize and-perish, ! quote a passage from Ezekiel, where it is said, “When a righteeus-man turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity,. 4nd dieth in them, for his iniquity which he hatix 330 LECTURES OW done shall he die.”” Ezek. xviii—26. Whateam- be more positive in establishing the fact that) saints, or those who are real followers of Jesus — Christ, are permitted and have full power to turn away from this righteousness, and die impeni-— tent. . That the righteous cannot finally turn a-- way from their righteousness and perish, is a doctrine which denies us the privilege of free agents, because it denies us the privilege of sin; - and the righteous, therefore, are compelled to be _ so, because they cannot be otherwise. We have no certainty of the perseverance of any saints but- those who belong to the number of the elect; on - the contrary, we are certain that none will per-- severe but the elect, although there may be other Christians who for a time are pious and sincere. — The great mistake which prevails in the Cal- vinistic system is the idea that all the actions of man, whether sinful or praiseworthy, are govern- ed and depend upon the deerees of God; where- as, the opposite is the truth, that all the decrees of God concerning the future rewards and pun- - ishments of man are founded upon, 4nd regulated — by, the actions of man, as foreknown unto God, He hath decreed that some men shall be saved, beeause he foreknows that aets‘of righteousness — wil] be performed by Christ for some men who beeome adopted in Christ; and he has) decreed ~ that these shall be adopted, because he has fore- known that they would perform the necessary conditions of their adoption. He hath also de- creed that others shall remain in their» natural - state of reprobation, because he hath foreknowm * that it weuld not be their choice to leave it. Ac- cording to the Calvinistie system, the foreknow= hedge of God is regulated by his deerees’and ac= FHEOLOGY. 33% tions. This is the whole point upon whieh the - argument turns, They say, how could these e5 vents be foreknown unless they were decreed? Supposing I should ask, how should I foreknow. that God will raise. the dead unless I had first de- ereed it? ~Would you not think me mad? But - you answer, this foreknowledge you possess by revelation, and therefore it is no proof that you have decreed it. But this is no argument. It matters not how that foreknowledge i is received by me, whether by revelation or intuition; if I possess it, I can decree events which depend up- ‘on it. If I understand the subject correctly, the divine decrees are regulated according to, and- founded upon, his foreknowledge, and the scrip- tures abundantly confirm the truth of this asser- tion. St. Peter, speaking of our Sawiour, says, “Him being delivered by the determinate fore- knowlede of God.” Acts ii—23. Not being foreknown by the determined decrees of God, as their system would teach, nor foreknown through the election of God as regards the saints; but on the contrary, “‘Electaccording to the fore- knowledge of God the Father, through sanctifi- cation of the Spirit unto obedience and sprinking of the blood of Christ.” 1 Pet. i— 2. Now the. evident meaning of this sentence is; that God, knowing from eternity this sanctification unto: | obedience and holiness, and their. consequent, preparation by the blood of Christ, did therefore, elect them to salvation and life eternal. I think if this point was fully understood, and substitut- ed in the place of unconditional decrees, that ail the cavils concerning this so much controverted point would be brought to aclose. According to this, our election is just as sure, just as free . ae ; 236 ? —_LEETURES ov from a foundation upon our own works of eines ousness; the conditions thereof being performed — by Christ only, and ‘the decrees of God as firmly” established. “The final perseverance of the elect is just as certain, and all the seeming difficulties concerning free agency totally abolished. To say that it-is contrary to the honour of the Deity to regulate his decrees aecording to our-actions ‘is useless. ‘Fo mike laws and decrees concerning the future execution of murderers and: traitors, — to issue those decrees on account of the C se duct of subjects, is no infringement upon he ho- nour of a nation. And beeause Ged forekn that man would hecome disobedient, and remain ina state of reprobation, it is novia ui veaeonnad ble to ‘suppose that God, on account i sheuld condemn him to’ eternal misery. V these remarks, it will be perceived that, ding to the doctrine which I am supper is still saved or condemned according to isfaction made or not made to’ the” bcp first covenant; and though the eonditions of o election cannot be fulfilled by us, Rb And be fulfilled by our Saviour, as a substi tute in our. place, while the punishments of our tae are laid upon him in his sufferings: | For his righteousness only, therefore, are we saved, and) not for our own works or deservings, and we be-. come inheritors of his righteousness by obedix — ence to the terms of the seeond covenant, uty NA % te titty balctey Hee AR d yf? ‘i ®» fi ‘ 7 wash eet ee : ‘ -SHEOLOGY.: 333 LECTURE Xf. Justification. _ IT appears that between God and man two Covenants have been established; and the word Justification signifies a_judicial act, wherein a ‘person is accounted as free from the imputation of guilt, and a& having preserved a strict adhe-' rence to the terms of these covenants. Conse quently justification must be double; to be justi- fied according to the first covenant is one thing,, and to be justified according to the second cove- nant is another. hat righteousness which jus- tifies us'in the eyes of the first covenant is the - righteousness. of Christ only; but.that righteous- ness which justifies us in the sight of the second _ -is Ourown, and consists in our faith and conse- quent obedience, as required in the gospel. This was the righteousness which Abraham had, and whichentitled him to the promises of the seeond covenant, Buta title tothese is not atitleto hea- . yen; this'is obtained only through the merits of 234 2ECTURES ON Christ; and this distinetion ought to be ever. ke in view. ‘The one is a justification to adoption, and the other to life eternal; by our own faith and good works we become entitled to the righ- teousness of Christ, and by his righteousness to the kingdem of heaven. As God cannot be in-- consistent with himself, the immutability of his nature and his word render it necessary that a ‘his promises and threatenings should be fulfille The penalty of sdisobedience to the first cove- nant was death, natural, spiritual, and ene and justice demands that it be inflicted. A was originally given us to which we ow obedience, and which we have neverthele luntarily broken. “This person,” as Mr. Faber says, ‘‘may have transgressed it in one way, and that in another; this in deed, that perhaps only in purpose; but every person has transgressed it in some shape. Every individual, therefore, de- serves punishment, and God, as a just judge, is. obliged, (with reverence be it ’ spoken) not indeed — by any physical necessity, but by that moral ne- cessity which results from the eternal immuta- bility of his nature; God is obliged to exact the penalty incurred. Were it otherwise, God would not be perfectly just, and a God-not perfectly just is an imperfect God, which is a contradic- | tion in terms.”? My great object then, isto. show how justice can be satisfied aceording to. the terms of the first covenant, and man still be permitted to attain heaven. Justice must be sat-— istied, if satisfied at all, in harmony with all the other divine attributes, especially his mercy, Mercy isan attribute as essential to the divine mature, and the accomplishment 0: desi Sy sj his justice. He hath determine to deliver ‘THEOLOGY. © Q35 afrom all the personal punishments due through disobediencé to the first covenant, all those, who, upon the performance of the conditions of the second covenant, justify themselves unto adop- _ tion, or become members of Christ and entitled to his merits. The question which immediately occurs to the mind of the inquisitive, is this: If God, through the exercise of his mercy, pardons mankind of the manifold transgressions, and the punishments due unto them for their so frequent rebellion to his most righteous laws, and on ac- count of which he has already denounced eter- _haldeath, what becomes of his justice? How shall he preserve inviolate this attribute at the ve- ry time that he is pardoning -those whom strict justice would condemn? If we suppose God ~ _ perfectly just, we must also suppose that the pen- _alty of the law will be exacted to the utmost far- 4 ae The coming of our Saviour has in no man- ner destroyed the efficacy of the law of the first ‘covenant, unless it has made Ged unjust; for he who does not perfectly accomplish his own pro- mises and threatenings to the satisfaction of the _ law, is unjust. No exceptions can be admitted i unless we have positive mont of the same by the _ word. itself, whereas in the word we find none. |The coming of our Saviour, instead of annulling ! ‘the law, has fully established it. He has there- | by shown that he will never suffer the least sin tog go unpunished. But you ask, how then caa “God be merciful if sin never goes unpunished ? "does not mercy and pardon at once suppose that the punishment due to sinis withheld? To this let it be.answered, the mercy of God as shown nto man, does not consist in recalling the sen- | tence which has been pronounced upon him. God Wy 236 LECTURES ON o bgas, js immutable : that which he hath once said mu be fully accomplished, for he is a God that ec: not repent, neither can his } justice fail; he . fully render according to their works. But mercy, } as exercised by the divine goodness towards man, — consists in consenting upon certain new Ps a tions to inflict the punishment which unto him upon a being who was not the ede er, but of his own will consented to becomea substitute in place of the offender. Justice might have been satisfied upon man himself, yet divine mercy agreed to receive a substitute, provided man would have faith in him. In this way, an I presume to say in nother which would be con= sistent with the divine attributes, psi pate ig tice and his mercy. may be exercised. ishments due to our iniquities may” be fu flicted upon a substitute while. we ay But you ask, would it not be injustice to punish - aninnocent person and let the guilty go free? — Certainly it would, unless the person sufferi freely and willingly offers himself as a substitute — for the guilty, and is at perfect liberty to suffer j or not to suffer in his place; yet, if it be his own ~ desire and will to become a substitute, and a= greeable to the designs and purposes of God that — he should do so, and all the ends of the law may be fully answered thereby; then there can be nothing contrary to the strictest rules of equity ‘| and righteousness i in pursuing sach a method in, satisfying the demands of the first covetiant a8 relative to punishment. Ifa man by his trans- gressions, has, according to the law against which he rebelled, received sentence of ot aspen r — ee ey and perceives any adequate means of dispo f? that sentence, means which will answer every tes ‘ ae . | THEOLOGY. t 237 end and inidaaen of the law and ‘fulfil i de- mands of justice, certainly we have no reason to charge the Saviour with injustice for consenting Ss such an act; we would rather charge him with justice, or at least a want of goodness, in not - siscntive to it. Justice is satisfied whenever _the ends of the law are fully answered. It is now, therefore, our business to prove that all the ends of the law of the first covenant as instituted be-. tween God and man, may be perfectly answered by accepting a substitute to suffer in the place of tan, wherefore we are now brought to the in- -quiry : for what end did God originally give un- to mana law?» Perhaps some may answer, that. “man might be profitted thereby ; this is the end for which civil law is instituted; that by the : threatenings of punishment for disobedience, an inducement may be held out, by which, men, through fear of misery, might be led to avoid all disobedience, and walk in that way which is most beneficial to society and individuals. That this was one end for which our heavenly Father hath given unto us a law, they think is evident from his attribute of goodness. For God being a kind disposition towards his creatures, would aturally in order to render them more capable f happiness, and to inspire them with a motive r pursuing it, threaten punishment for disobe- jience, and pithout a law man would have been ncapable of rewards:’ They would argue that “the end of the law, therefore, was to display the goodness of God in ordaining such rules as should be most beneficial to mankind. This, however, ies! be the original and primary end of the uw of the first covenant, although these purpo- es thereby may be answered. It is very true - 238 LECTURES ON that in giving us such a law, God manifested his: goodness to a superior degree, because he made us-capable of happiness by performing its condi tions. But God could have made us-capable of happiness in hundreds of ways beside this. His: goodness would have been as gloriously mani- fested had he given us happiness without a law as with one; to manifest his goodness, therefore, was not the reason why he chose to do it in this: particular way. What then was the end which induced him to show forth his goodness through’ the means of justice, or according to a law,in pre- ference to anv other way? The answer is, in erder that he might show forth his mercy also as ~ well us his justice and goodness. Wherethere is- no law there can be no merey, for mercy consists in delivering from evil, or the punishment due to sin; and, as sin could not exist without a law, neither could mercy. The exercise of mercy, therefore, was the great end for which God chose to exercise his justice with his goodness, that is to give unto manalaw. And if the substitution of an innocent person in the place of the guilty could promote the exercise of divine mercy, then it could answer the great and chief end of the law. In the next place, if God chose to be just in order that he might be merciful, there is — no other way in which the end of the law could be answered than by receiving a substitute in the place of the offender, because there is no other way in which the law can be executed’with mer-/ cy. For if the law is executed upon the erim- inal himself, then mercy is impossible; and ifthe law is not executed at all, then justice is impossi- ble; for justice consists in executing the law, or causing the demands of the law to be satisfied. j Zz THEOLOGY. — 239 Consequently, if the primary end of the law isthe exercise of mercy, then it must he executed up- ona substitute or it cannot answer its end. In the next place, the substitution of our Sa- viour in the place of sinful man, is the only way in which man can now answer his own ends. The only end for which he acts is happiness; but happiness, that is heavenly -bliss, is impossible, provided the sentenceof the law is executed up- on himself; but #f executed upon a substitute, his end may still be obtained. ‘The only way, there- fore, in which theends of*the law could be an- _ swered, is, by ‘the decree of the Almighty to re- ceive a substitute in case that man should trans- gress, which God well knew would be the event, and in placing upon this substitute the punish- ments due to all. And such must have'been the design of the Almighty frometernity ; for with- out the promise of asubstitute to- receive this punishment, he knew, that man haying once dis- obeyed, woukl have no further motive to obedi- ence. For, were the sentence of eterna}damna- tion to be inflicted wpon all men, which certain- ly must have been the event without the prom- ise of a substitute, what inducement could there be to refrain from sin? If our destruction was certain, what motive could there be for future o- bedience ? No blessings to be gained, no re- -wards for our labours, death and everlasting mis ery would be our only portion. Instead of obe- dience we would-be rather inclined to disobedi- ence, to enjoy this world tothe full extent of our natural desires and dispositions. For as this _ world would be our all, it would. be no more than reasonable to suppose that we should make the Best of it. Consequently, if no-substitute was t> Y 240 LECTURES @N be provided, we would have no further. indute~ ments to avid sin, for we know that at the best we are but sinners, and cannot at all times es- cape error, which would render all endeavours as well as laws entirely useless. But according to that system which teaches that no new cove- nant has been made with man as a party, who is to perform certain conditiens therein required, moral laws are still useless, and there is even now no inducement to avoid sin. No blessings — are promised him for so doing, neither those of a- doption nor eternal life, consequently man is now deprived of free agency, because deprived — of a motive ofaction. Wesee, therefore, the ne- eessity ofa second covenant between God and — man for the purpose of giving man a motive to future faith and holiness. A substitute is prem- ised upon these conditions, and unless he fulfils them he never receives the promise. With these remarks, it will be seen that the substitution of some other being in the place of sinful man, not only answers the ends of the law oH rendering mercy possible, but has its proper effects upon man through the conditions ef the second covenant, of giving to hin»a metive of fu- ture faith in Jesus Christ and consequent obedi- — ence; and this is the only way in which the © purposes of God can be fully aecomplished. And — without the promise of such a substitute to suf- — fer in our stead, the law of God would now have — no influence upon our conduet... Perhaps the ci- © vil law might retain its influence, because the rewards and punishments there offered, are to be executed or fulfilled in this world, but the divine Jaw would be useless. But, as a substitute has ‘been given to bear thetniguities of a. part of man- _ PHEOLOGY. 44 Kind, by suffering in their place, our motive now is to make that substitute our own: by submit- ting to the conditions of the new eovyenant, and thereby escape the condemnation which we haye truly deserved ; and this is the only method by which an escape from eternal death may he ac- complished. » If then a substitute is really necessary and re- quired by the Almighty for the expiation of our sins, our next enquiry is concerning the nature of that being whe is adequate to become a sul- stitute in our place. Perhaps it may be thought ‘that the blood of bulls and goats is as acceptable in the eyes of the Almighty as that of any other being; and by substituting them as a sacrifice in eur place, we may escape the punishment due to our iniquities. But we are positively informed that the blood of bulls and goats can never take away sin. That which is a substitute must be ‘adequate to the demands of the law. The law .Fequires a punishment which shall be equal to e- ternal misery, and as.a beast is not, as far as we know, immortal, it could not suffer eternal mise- ry in our place; and-even if it was immortal, its sensibility is so much less. than that of man, that iis sufferings could never equal the sufferings of eternal misery. It could therefore never be re- eeived as an adequate substitute for man. Thé greater the sensibility the greater are the suffer< ings, for this reason angels could not dwell on earth without suffering infinitely more than we do in this world. We have no real ideasof any pleasures or happiness superiour to_the pleasures ofthis life, and for this reason we do not feel the pain which we would do were we once residents . ef heaven and partakers of its joys,and afier- 249 LECTURES ON wards banished into so miserable and imperfect a state as this. This it was Which rendered the sufferings of the man Jesus Christ, while he was . in this world equal to the eternal sufferings of all the elect. His perfections being so far superiour to any of the: inhabitants of this world, and his enjoyments so far above the pleasures of time, rendered his sufferings in this world equal to the sufferings which we would experience in hell. In the next place, the sacrifice of beasts would not be productive of that obedience'in us which — is required by thecondittons of the new coye- nant, and which a human substitute would. It would be altogether deficient in deterring man- kind from sin, not only on account of that ab- sence of sympathy which would always prevait in the sacrifice of beasts, but on account of the ease with which, in many instances, sacrifices of this nature could be procured. For they who were wealthy, and could supply any number of sacrifices, would thereby obtain an indulgence for the commission of any crime which the pas- sions might suggest. As human nature has of- fended, nothing inferiour'to human natare can effectually answer the ends-of the first covenant in satisfying the law, or of the second, in pre- serving us from sin and disobedience. Sympa- thy has certainly as great an effect in ruling and passion. When we behold a being like unto ourselves, endowed with the same faculties and capable of the same pleasures and pains, suffering for sins which he never committed, and of which he is perfectly innocent, we cannot avoid being affected with the same, especially when we re- ffect that ours.are the very sins for which pe ‘governing the actions of men as almost any other ~ ‘THEOLOGY, Fay bleeds: Butit may be asked, what person or’ number of persons are adequate to the task? No human being who is the common descendant of Adam could become a proper substitute to’ suffer for the sins of mankind, any more than’ bulls and goats. Every man is a sinner by na- ture, and is sentenced by the law to become a’ sacrifice for his own sins, unless some other is’ obtained. We would in no manner expect the means of our salvation from a being-who could: not even redeem himself. No being ot this’ world, therefore, can become a substitute for the sins of his fellow being. And furthermore, no’ man, if he was ever so willing, has a right to dis-' pose of his life to others without the immediate’ permission of God. In civil society, where cor-' peral punishments are necessary for the welfare: of society, a substitute of any kind whatsoever’ could not’be accepted, even though it could be obtained, because it would not answer the inten+ tion of the law. The offender would not then be: deterred from the commission of another and si+ milar crime. But with respect to the laws of* God there isan immense difference. Here a substitute is offered unto man only upon the con- ditions of his obedience to the terms of the se-’ cond covenant, which aré comprehended under: faith and its consequences; and man’ cannot re-' ceive the benefits of such a substitute until he has performed the proper conditions. Unless” these are complied with, the offender can have’ no hopes of forgiveness, and has no promise that a substitute shall ever be received for him, al- though the privilege is offered. His whole life, we perceive. is heeessary for the perfect accom- plishment of these conditions, the ends ef the: - 244) LECTURES ON law, therefore, can be fully answered in, course of the diviae proceedings, although in me vil society it could not; for man eannot be fully justified until he has fulfilled all the conditions » of the second covenant, but if a nd covenant. was made with an offendem of the | vil law no surety could be given of his fulfilling the condi- tions. 15 SERS As I have now shown that no dencindane of 3 Adam could suffer for his fellow beings, we must. ; therefore look for a substitute who, though man,- must be very different from the sinful beings of our own race; a being who is perfeetly innocent, and possessed of both power-and will to become asufferer for the sins ofmankind. This man is the man Jesus Christ who was pre os virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pi again rose to sit upon the right hand of e Father : Almighty.. That he wasa pen took man 10 per- son denies, being possessed of a rational soul ar d humanbody. His obedience as a man unto : laws of God was necessary to his own hap) S as a man, wherefore he could render no a obedience which could be applied t6 the happi- ness of his fellow beings. This, indeed, was not the object for which he was sent into the world; he came only to bear the sins of mankind, where- by those who put their trust in him can cast their reprobation upon him, and obtain thereby remis- sion of their sins. This was the object for which the man Christ Jesus came into the world, and. is the first step in the great doctrine of justifica- tion to life eternal. The word justification is e- vidently forensic, and so implies, acquittal or freedom from any punishment due for the trans-— gression of the law. Not that man is declared: | THEOLOGY. 245 % innocent or figine: never committed the crime which he has been charged, but as free fi sy panies due unto it, because punishment — teady been executed upon his substitute. or example, a person is brought to trial for debt; he does not deny the account, that is, he acknowledges that he contracted the debt, and. has. never in his own person paid it; yet he pleads — that he is not bound to pay it, because it has al- ready been paid expressly nig him by another. And such is just the situation of man with re- gard to punishment due for sin. He acknow- dJedges that he has committed great and henious crimes, for which punishment was justly due; yet he argues that he cannot justly be punished in eternal torments, because Jesus Christ has al- ready paid the debt and suffered in his place. He therefore considers himself so far entitled to justification © as is necessary to free him from punishment, because it has-been inflicted already upon his substitute, the man Jesus Christ. Now the object of St. Paul, in his epistle to the Ro- mans, when he said, «Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation ‘through faith in his blood to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God —that he might be just, and the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus,’’ was to show that such a satisfaction had been made, and those to whom _ this satisfaction should be accounted, were to be © considered justified or free from punishment. In the words of Dr. Whitby, “God justifies the sinner by absolving him from the guilt of his past sins, by a free act of his grace in pardoning his iniquities.’” ‘That justification and remission of sins are words of similar import, I gather still 246 LECTURES ON | - farther from tthe..words of St. Paul, addressed . me | the Gentiles, “Be it known unto you, therefore, amenand brethren, that through: this man is reach- ed unto you the. forgiveness of sins, and by him all that believe are justified from | things, from which ye could net. be justifie . the law of -Moses.’? The law of Moses cou ad not ees or cleanse them from their sins, butthe blood Jesus Christ could. ‘Therefore as the term eee ; fication is used to signify. remission of sin, _con- clude that it is obtained only through the suffer- ’ ings of the man Jesus, who. ‘became a saihdiaeasir for all, those who put.their trust in him. The time when this-remission of sin can and will take place, I take to be no other than the day ’ of judgment. Weare justified, howeyer, \ when- ever the sufferings of our Saviour are a fous. But as we are bound to comply wi ; the conditions of the new covenant bef Shs be entitled to his sufferings, so we c ay po titled to them until this life is ended, _And as we cannot be entitled to them uatil death, hav- ; ing never before fully accomplished the condi- tions, they cannot until then be applied, u applied before due, and therefore our ju: cannot be applied or take place until after death, It is really inconsistent to suppose that we are — pardoned or justified from our sins before they are committed, unless we view it in the same light that the Roman Catholies did indulgences. The scriptures inform us that by justification we obtain remission of sins that are past, and as all our sins are not passed until the day ou ee it cannot be supposed that we obtain forgiv of them until then. It is true that the scriptures sometimes speak of the forgiveness of sigs by * *PHEOLOGY. | 24% * ‘our Saviour, Bb ege: Htapiide 4 little, we shall perceive that it was not an absolute and final re- mission of all sin which was intended, but was given only upon the consideration that they should lead the rest of their lives according to the precepts which he inculcated. It was in ef- fect promising that they should receive forgive- ness for their sinsupon their future persevera ce and faith. "We may learn this from the paste of a king who took account of his subjects, and a certain servant was brought who owed him ten pe aan talents, but being unable to pay, and ry penitent withal, the lord of the servant was moved with compassion, and forgave him the debt. Yet we perceive that, afterwards) when this servant treated his fellow servant who owed him an hundred pence so unmercifully, then his bg lord was wroth, and said, “O thou wicked ser- vant, I forgave thee all that debt because thou desiredest me, shouldst not thou also have had compassion on thy fellow servant, even as'I had pity on thee. And his lord was wroth, and de- jivered him to the tormentors till he should pay all that was due unto him.”’ Matth. xviii-33, 34. Now after this lord had forgiven the debt, we see that the servant was brought to an account for it, and our Saviour says, “So likewise’ shall my Heavenly Father do also unto you;’’ conse- ‘quently it could not be a final forgiveness, but only conditional, and was given upon the condi- tions that this servant should show the same compassion to others which had been shown to him by his lord. And that this parable has re- ference to the dealings of our Saviour with man- kind cannot be denied, from the words which im- mediately follow.. Therefore that justification Vv 248) - EECTURES ON” | which is real and absolute can only take place af ter death, and probably not until that grand tri-. bunal when all men shall be rewa according to their works. We see, therefore, that a sub-- stitute provided in this way,the benefitsof which we cannot receive until after death, will answer ~ .every endof the law. Ifthe design of punish- ment was ever to deter mankind from disobedi-. ence, and show the abhorrence which God hath, ‘unto sin, I know of no being so fully adequate. as our Saviour Jesus Christ. When we consider the extent of his sufferings; the gross abuses to; which he was daily and hourly subjected; the in-— numerable trials which he suffered; the inexpres-. sible agonies which he felt, even to such a degree | that he sweat great drops of blood; and lastly, his cruel sufferings upon the eross, surely it ought to be sufficient to deter man from the com-. mission of those crimes which.shall subject him to eternal damnation, and render him even as one » of those who are eternally crueifying our Savi-' our afresh. In the sufferings of our, Saviour we may behold an emblem of the miseries of the damned hereafter, and when the sinner reflects , that such shall be the acuteness of his miseries” beyond the grave, shall he not receive an induce- | ment to forsake sin. and follow after holiness? And again, if God wishes to demonstrate his— great abhorrence to.sin, in what manner can he, doit more effectually than in giving up his Son, - his only Son, to suffer and die om account there- of, 3 In these sufferings of our Saviour, let itbe re-~ marked, that humanity alone was the subject and there appears no necessity ofany otha 19 accomplish this part, of qur justification which “4 . ‘THEOLOGY: . , 49 ouly 7 in the remission of sin. The ‘mab ‘ist alone was capable of suffering as a te for Ane God being incapable af pain or suffering of any kind. By “original transgres- sion man became subject unto death, and every. ‘sin was worthy of eternal»misery.. And as no means of escape could be found except through the voniidle« a substitute who was perfectly innocent, and had full power to dispose of his life as he saw fit, Jesus Christ, who knew no sin, took the sufferines due to man wpon_ himself, a and offered up his body a living saerifice in his plaee. : The sufferings of our Saviour being not. the suf- ferings of God the Son, must consequentiy be the sufferings of a being who, was ies and united with God the Son. In this way are we “permitted to eseape eternal wrath; but let it be remembered that our redemption from misery iS): only a part of the great doctrine of justification’ unto life. To be perfeetly justified requires thai the demands of the law be answered for us in every point of view. -And I think that unless there were two persons in our Saviour, or, at least, was not this sufferer a distinct person from Divinity, he could not have suffered and died for man. e are informed, however, that it was only the human nature of our Saviour that suf- ‘fered, and not a distinct person.’ But this could ‘not bes for if our Saviour was only one person and two consciousnesses, then we might as well ‘say that God is only one person for the same rea- son, and this will not be allowed by Trinitarians. “It is the difference of consciousnesses which con- stitutes the difference of persons in the Godhead, x ‘and if so, jt must constitute two persons. in aur | oh aan in the time of * gaa hy the human, s 250 LECTURES ‘ON * person only made use of the body as a medium ef sensation, and it was used by the divine per- son of our Saviour for conveying knowledge and exhibiting the power of God to mankind. But as I have before said, the sufferings of humanity eould not fulfil the whole law; the law now de- mands both punishment for. sin and obedience to the first covenant for future happiness in heaven, and unless both are rented we have no hopes of life everlasting. The next requisite, therefore, for our justification unto life, is the perfect and active obedience of our Saviour, which Iam now - “to consider. _ ek ‘As we cannot escape punishment:except by a person who becomes a sufferer in our stead, ne ther can we obtain happiness unless.a person is also offered who will perform the conditions of the first covenant in our place. The conditions are similar to those of the second covenant, such as faith and holiness, but in the first covenant it — was unerring faith and perfect obedience, and the object of faith.then was God the Father, We were called upon to believe in his promises and threatenings, as delivered in the garden of Eden, and which we have disbelieved, therefore we have no opportunity of ever performing the con-— ditions of life eternal in our own person, and cannot thus attain a right to heaven. This is to be obtained only by the meritorious deeds of a substitute, who will perform them in our place. — Though Jesus Christ should come into the-world, © and by taking upon himself the burden of our ~ iniquities, relieve us from the punishment which — was due, yet this mere passive suffering entitles us to no reward, no degeee of happiness after Seath. If 3, through disobedience to the laws ef THEOLOGY. 25% 5 "too Set ae . be 3s he’ my country as an officer,who is required to per- form certain, duties for my country, subject my- self to certain fines, and my friend sees fit te pay those monies in my place, this does not ent title me to a reward for the services whieh I . ought to have rendered unto my country, but did not. I have done nothing deserving of any - reward, although freed fromthe punishment due. And though man, on account of the sufferings of the man Jesus, may escape eternal punishment, yet this does not purchase for him a title to hea- ‘ven. This being bestowed only as a reward, cannot be obtained except by some meritorious “actions, upon the performance of which happi- “ness has been promised by our Heavenly Father. “Rewards are not promised on account of suffer-. ‘ings and miseries in this'world, for sufferings ‘are in no respect meritorious, and therefore we have tio reason to expect happiness on account of ‘our Saviour’s sufferings.’ No person is deserv- - ing of a reward for having suffered according to ‘the sentence of the law; and as the sufferings of pour Saviour are according to the law, the sen- tence being executed upon him instead of us, they cannot be meritorious‘or deserving of any [future rewards.” If suffering for sin was merito- [rious of areward, then they whoare, damned de- iserve a reward, because they suffer for their own [sins; we see, however, that such is not the fact; they receive no happiness, and consequently de- serve none. Actions alone are to be considered as meritorious and deserving of rewards and puns ishments, and there is. no other foundation given upon which happiness can be obtained. The Sufferings of Christ were the consequences of sin, mm the human race, and therefore it would be fol= » bd omy 952 LECTURES ON ly to call them meritorious in a strict sense, aly though it is often done when speaking of the ge- neral event of our Saviour’s appearance in. thi world. But for whose merits shall we be re- warded? We deserve nothing of ourselves, un- less it is misery; when we have done our best. we are only unprofitable servants, we haye not done even what was our duty to do. Conse quently if happiness is to be our portion hereaf- ter, we must receive it for the meritorious a tions of some being superiour to sinful man. I have already shown that the person who suf: fered for our sins cannot become a substitute t _perform meritorious actions in our place, becau his actions were necessary to his own happine: Our inquiry therefore is, for whose active right- eousness do we obtain the happiness of heaven? Not forthat of any created being,as I haye shown; for every created being owes obedience to the Deity as the condifions of his own happiness. We must look, therefore, to some person whois bound naturally by no command, subject to * duties whatsoever, and can eonsequently act be- syend duty in voluntarily consenting to perform that obedience which man owed to the first ¢ -yvenant, and has power to apply those acts o righteousness to those who have no righteousnes oftheir own. This person is God only, thes cond person of the adorable Trinity. He alone” is capable of doing those things which he is no bound to do, those actions which are meritorious, though not cf him required. The aaipuiredl however, inform us that this person is Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ, therefore, is God the seeond person. “The gift of God is efernal life through, eur Lord Jesus Christ.” Rom. yi—=23. “Asin % . “Adam all « die,even so in Christ shall all be made alive.”” 1 Cor. xv—22. “Neither is there salya- tion in any other; for there is no other name - under heayen given among men, whereby we - must be saved.”’ Acts iv—12. “Therefore, as by the offence of one, judgment came. upon all -men to condemnation, even so by the righteous- ness of one, the free gift came upon all men un-- to justification of life.? Rom. v—18. It is in- deed acknowledged by all those who deserve ' the name of Christians, thatthrough Jesus Christ only do we obtain the promise of eternal glory. Therefore as reason at once informs us that God only can perform meritorious aets of righteous- ness which can truly be called supererogatory, and applicable to the future benefit of man; while the scriptures declare that such has been done by our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, we must acknowledge that Jesus Christ is God, or deny the scriptures. Ifa being who was beth God - and man, as was our Saviour, who is perfectly happy within himself, should obtain by his me- ritorious deeds a right to farther privileges which ‘are to him useless, being perfectly full withia himself he has every right to apply these his meriterious deeds or supererogatory works tor. - the benefit of those who stand in need. “And bs such must be ihe course pursued, by which ean ever obtain a title to the kingdom of f heaven. Gur Saviour must suffer in his human person the punishment due to all our crimes, and thus jus- tify us from death eternal; and in his Divine person fulfil all those commands and acts of righteousness which we have omitted whereby a justification is ereomyeaes for us to life eter- nal, which completes the whole work of eur Re- demption as executed by our Saviour. THEOLOGY. | 258- aor wee ? 254 LECTURES ON Bars: ‘That justification which is to be performed on’ ’ our parts, and which I have called justification to adoption, is a different subject, yet as neces- sary as the other,because without this righteous- ness of our own we cannot become entitled to that of our Saviour. —. when we have done this, having fulfilled all the demands of the se- - cond covenant, God is bound to show his justice — unto us, by bestowing upon us that righteous-~ ness of Christ which shall purchase for us hea- ven. To punish-man would then be injustice, for if the debt has been paid by our substitute it~ would be wrong to require it of us also. And if man can be redeemed and enjoy life -everlast- ing, this is the only way in which it can be ac-~ complished to accord with the word of God. By thus distinguishing between the justifica- tion wrought by our Saviour whereby” we obtain heaven, and that which is wrought by us where- by we obtain Christ’s righteousness, all those difficulties concerning faith’ vanish. The per- fect obedience which we owed, and whi¢h fre the Son hath performed for all those who belie on him, was a perseverance in the promises and threatenings of God the Fathers Our first pa- rents did not perform this, for they believed the words ofthe serpent in preference to those of the Father, and we, their posterity, haye followed their example. But this objection has been — made to our future happiness through the active faith and perfect obedience of our Savi iour: “faith ~ Pp is a condition required of us, which we in our © own persons are obliged to fulfil before we can obtain heaven. And Per this be the case, then we - perform the act ourselves, and where would be ie the: use eof our Saviour’s having faith for us when - «: ( ca THEOLOGY: 255 we render the same ourselves, unless the debt is to be paid twice, which would be unjust,” Now,. it is true, as J have before said, that man in his preent fallen state is subject to faith, but not that faith which purchases heaven, er the faith 4 sh in the old covenant, but that which pur- ehases Christ’s righteousness. He is now called upon to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, which was not originally required, and he owes also that original faith required in Eden, but which he personally eannot render. | Man, therefore, is now compelled to have faith in the Lord Jesus Christ in order that Jesus Christ will fulfil the faith for him which was required by the first eovenant. And unless man fulfils this, the oth- er will not be fulfilled for him. Thus, because faith is to be acted by us, yet the. faith required in the old covenant is to be performed only by eur Saviour, and, therefore, the debt not paid twice. The faith to be fulfilled by us is that which justifies or entitles us to adoption or Christ’s righteousness, such a faith as Abraham had, and is imputed to us not.as the righteous- ness of the old covenant, or that righteousness which saves us, but that ‘whieh.i is required i in the . new, and which purchases that righteousness _ which will save us. By our faith we obtain the faith of Jesus Christ, by which, through imputa- tion, we are saved. And that this plan has been pursued is now to be proved and illustrated by the divine word. St. Paul teaches it in all his writings, and more particularly in his epistle to the Romans, where he speaks of our Saviour as being perfectly just, and yet the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus. Our Saviour is there constantly set before us as the person who, ac- (256 LECTURES ON ' @ording to the plan whioh T have lai laid down, into the-world, and in his human person s for the sins of men. The pardon of si become i in God an act of stric mercy. - ‘or as the! ferings of our Savi giveness, God in w be withholding that w be eonsequently-unjust. This tant si ever, which we have reeeived, or are privile ; ceive, threugh the merits of Christ, dees not b : long indiscriminately toall the inhabitants the world; salvation. through . Jesus € | longs only to those “ho are in Jes: are members of his body. AH, however, raitted to become members of Christ if t fitand proper; and. af men diligently to st they may be enable & _ what those conditions are whi formed by man, and so, hy fulfilling these, te qualified to receive the righteousness of Ohris the fruits of which are life everlasting. — jection, however, has been made by some w _ sonable reasoners against this doctrine, and uj on this foundation, that if God has received isfaction from the hands of another then e not be said to have forgiven the de : forgives asks no satisfaction Thi abjeetion, however, looses a vhen duly consider the nature of pardon or ft ness. Forgiveness is to be considered | ase themselves to aetidace ail ‘and. through disobedience to the law are boat era- ated and set free, And if any man by. his dise« ; THEOLOGY. a5F bedienee has subjected himself to misery and e- ternal death, and afterwards through the merey. of God God isdelivered from this condemnation, he is iven, let the means of his deliverance be ey may. For how can- a man be more’ forgiven of the debt than when he is perfectly freed from the payment of it? Itisan act of the greatest goodness in God that he should consent to receive a substitute as an expiation or atone- ment for our sins, and especially when that sub- stitute ishisown Son. God is not obliged to re-; ceive satisfaction from the hands ofany but the offender ; and if through compassion to-our fal- len nature | heis inclined to act ina way whereby) "we may be set free, man is bound to show the ~same gratitude to his God for accepting a substi+ _ tute as if he had pardoned him without ene. For: he receivesthe same benefits in the one way as in the other; he receives perfect freedom from all punishments due to sin, the privileges. of e- ternal happiness hereafter, and the favor of God: which he had lost; and pardon without satisfae- tion could obtain no more. If man can be re- ~ deemed from suffering the penalty ofeternal dam- “nation, and again made capable of happiness and heaven it matters not to him in what manner thi ivine mercy has been exercised towards: him, whether by a satisfaction made by another or by pardon without satisfaction. Ifhe is tru- ly forgiven, this is ali that interests him. The scriptures, howev er, teach us that we can — ceive forgiveness in no other -way than throu h atonement made by a substitute, and though this may be denied by some, yet it cannot bere- jected without making God a mutableand inton- sistent being, Sut you ask, is it inconsistent te. # ¢an be no exceptions. 258 ++ 2LECTURESON -pard ae eriminal upon his sincere repentance,” even though noother satisfaction sho : answer, “eis inconsistent per ceiving that he was ‘call and Sasterhy penitent for what he had done, release him from allthe — penalty of the law and set him free, without any — provision of this kind being made in the law, would you not consider them as violating aes 4 rule of justice? While the law demands ate d, ecute wae nds an having been done, there can k fer sin. Christ hath fully” answered on out parts all the demands of the law of the firs cove- nant whether as regards active or passive ence; that is, he hath answered the same the elect. Itis not to be supposed that he he answered the ends or fulfilled the demands of the | law for those who are finally impenitent and fi fil not the demand of the new covenant; h never suffered for their sins, f t they.shal a burnings ; the ut relief; there $ fer for themselves in everlas day of wrath shall find them This doctrine of the atonement can never ‘disputed by any people who deserve the name Christians. It is in fact the fundamental ground — 4 all our hopes for the attainment of life and im- ortality beyond the guave ; and without it, we ae ae, ‘ Ps THEOLOGY, | "259 “may at once renounce the Christian religion, and writhe. ing the rk corners of despair, till death shall convince us of the reality of an expiatory nature of the Levitical ec onomy. — Our Saviour at that early age, though HF ised, was not yet _ sent to bruise the serpent’s head. Faith, how- ever, and faith in the Messiah, was required of the patriarchs and prophets, and all the children _-of Israel as a condition under the new Covenant, whereby salvation was promised them in the same manner that it now is, only with the dif- ference which has been before pointed out; they in a Saviour - come and we believe in ee already slain. nie er that their faith ime, sacrifices and burnt offerings 1 were insti- tuted by the Almight as typical of the great . sacrifice which should one day be offered up for ie sinsof the world. This institution remind- em of the promise’ concerning his coming Jas theend thereof. Without the shed- of blood, we are informed, there is no re- ~ mis on of sins. But it was not the shedding of the blood of their daily sacrifices upon the altar owhi h was productive of their remission, hel- ther was such ever considered as equivalent to atonement. For St. Pan! says, “It is not possi - ble that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sin.”” Heb.x—4, And, as there could a remission without the shedding of blood, ie be the blood of some other sacrifiee more perfect than these or the end could, neyer hay e been answered. As a further proof of this, St. Paul says to his Hebrew converts, “and every Ww sacri ‘As proof of this fundamental doc- tri the Christian religion, "aepey te ‘the t be preserved x strengthened from time - % _ 260 LECTURES ON . priest standeth daily ministering and offering of- entimes the same sacrifices whichcan nevertake away sins; but this man after he had offered one sacrifice for sins, forever sat down on the right -hand of God.”? Our Saviour, the man Jesus Christ, was this person who offered up himself asa sacrifice for sins, that thereby God might be again reconciled unto man, and forgive him the _ punishments due for his transgression. This a- tonement which was made by ‘the sacrifice of the . tan Jesus Christ, it will be remembered as be- fore observed, is only a part of the doctrine of salvation, being only his passive righteousness which delivers us from punishment. His works of active righteousness, the obedience of the se- cond person of the Trinity, then go to give usa title to the kingdom of heaven and future happi- ness; the same rewards as our faith in the first covenant would have purchased for us had we persevered in the same. ‘The one is a satisfae- tion made for sin by a human person, the other a meritorious work of supererogation obtaining for all believers a title tothe kingdom of heaven. Wor without his meritorious actions or. righte- ousness of faith in union with his sufferings as aman, Jesus Christ could not have complies, 'he work of salvation. It is argued by some'that if we Bathn fordlte- ness of our sins through the passive obedience of Jesus Christ, we can merit heaven by ot t good works, such as faith, holiness, repe eB" atitude, love and other Christian virtues. en bring fer an example a person whose - was imputed f righteousness, the patria braham. But,@s I have before answered, . faith of Abraham as well as the faith ofall Chris. » * “e THEOLOGY. 261 tians of the present age are not the conditions of the first covenant upon which our salvation is dependent, but is the condition of the new cov- ehant and is required only for the purpose of meriting a substitute who shall by his righte- ousness merit heaven and apply the fruits there- oftous. Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ was never required before the fall, and therefore can- not be considered ‘or received by the Father as deserving of heaven, because he never promised heaven as areward for such faith. The only faith for which heaven was promised was required in » Eden, and signified by the tree of life, of which we can never taste; and unless our Saviour tastes ihe same for us we cannot be saved. We are all by nature under the law of the first covenant, - -and consequently all under the sentence of con- demnation until the conditions of that law are fulfilled by our Saviour. Faith in his name is now, under the second covenant, required of us 5- we must thereby become members of his body, - putting off the old man and becoming regener- ate, born anew of water and the Holy Ghost, and become as adopted sons of our Saviour, or we cannot be saved. ‘The faith of Abraham was required for this purpose, and was imputed to him for nothing more than to give him a claim to Christ’s righteousness, and not for a claim to heaven. As soon as we obtain this, we are con- sidered as justified, or as having done nothirg ‘contrary to the law, but as having fulfilled it in every respect, not in our own persons, but in the person of God the Son. So that the great busi- ness of man in this mortal life is to perform those ' conditions which shall constitute him a member ‘of Christ. Not that by doing these we do any FHEOLOGY. 263 LECTURE Xz, - Faith and Good Works: I Am now led to a consideration of those conditions which are to be performed by us, in order that we may receive justification un- to adoption, or become members of Christ. For as oursalvation cannot be made certain with- out them, though not by them, we ought to feel ourselves so far interested as to let nothing go unfulfilled on our parts. Faith being the first, and indeed the only, condition of our own; all the’others, such as repentance and holiness, be- ing the fruits of faith; we are to make ourselves acquainted with its nature, and the manner in which it is to be obtained; “For they who believe and are baptised shall be saved, but they who do not believe shall be damned.”? That faith is ab- solutely necessary for the attainment of Christ’s righteousness, among all those who have thepri- vileges of the gospel, may be proved from the preaching of the apostles anc Christ himself. When the jailor and his family were conyerted, ‘i “a Pies: lai ON i 264) and asked, must I do to be saved?” Paul answered, e on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shall be saved and thy house.” St, — John also saith, “He that bth on the Son hath everlasting life, and he t eth not ifie Son shall not see life, but the f God abideth on him.”’ “For God so loved the world that he gave his enly begotten Sdn, that whoso- ever believeth on him should not perish but have a everlasting life.” St. P aloo aly to the E- phesians, “By grace p saved through faith; po and to the Hebrews, “without faith it is igpes- « sible to please God.” As to thé nature of this ' faith, various have bee mentators and divines. see no reason for — this difference of opinion, cep she seagelait, 7 ich’ has arisem.from not suflicic puishin« between that faith ofo sa Sus, and 1 ossessed by U ications of com- — his. And, fo ven explicable by ioneeive faith to be not sucha firm eonviction or sertalmpropositions,as int same, when we may happiness and welfa the New Testament, is 2fir the Christ, t true Messiah, who was slain ia ' his huméa pe on “and rendered perioet o e Divi 2, in order that we e a on.of sin and ati kia fof Nice wen, and which aith ind sits the ora itions ofthe mem % a ; (FHEOLOGY,: 266 Yt arises from the testimony of od isa as: well as his apostles. This was the faith of the Samaritan woman and those who were converted ‘with her; and sueh was the faith of Martha, for _ * when Jesus said, “he that believeth on me, tho? ledge the doctrines of the Christian religi Me he w ad, yet shall he live: and whosoever liveth and helieveth in me shall never die. Be- lievest thou this??? She answered, ‘Yea, Lord,i believe that thou art the Christ the Son of God.” © They, therefore, who believe that Jesus Christ ts the true Messiah, ed that he hath power te save mankind from eternal misery, by his suffer- ings, and obtain for them, by his perfeet obah. dience, eternal glory; and areso firmly convinc- ed of this as to 1 > it an object of their inter- est, whereby ey are infinenced to act accor- 3 ue Christian faith. », however, I - rinciple’ ‘but its } eS, as der obedience de ess, and al} Chris Ned The. mere act of faith piepes isa gethe er useless, and is possessed by devils, and nen who ee . ow a not malgthofe ith a principle of act ig, the same faith which devils and ditt Weccs so far as it isa belief in the same truth; Rit that. which I eal a Christian frit is that ind 1ich bringeth forth fenit.. The faith required a the new covenant is an active faith, by whick we are induced to follow the ways ofrighteous- ness, because it is) prom) e shall live ; se it is*promised that there ee > vivy Abe ge, less faith, or »* ic worksye ae become: profitable we __ ow * our faith by® ae 2C6E LECTURES ON And in order that we may have such a faith itr Jesus Christ, the scriptures have been given us, for atestimony. God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost have all given their testimony that Jesus Christ is the true Messiah: God the Father hath said, ‘*This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased;” and the Holy Spirit beareth witness of the same, by enabling him to cast out devils, and do many wonderful works, and also-in raising -him from the dead on the third day, as a surety of our resurrection: The prophets and patriarchs of old testify of him in all their writings, and the apostles have still further confirmed their sayings. Therefore, in order that we may havea true and vai | faith, we are diligently toread the scriptures an meditate upon what is therein revealed; to be constant in hearing the word of God read and expounded, and to devote, at least a part of our time, to prayer and reflection. » All who live in a Christian land have full power to enjoy those privileges, and consequently all are offered the assistance of the Holy Spirit; and it lies altoge- ther in the breast of man whether he will accept this assistance or not. But faith without works, or such a faith as devils and men who acknow- ledge the truth and do not perform it, possess, ean never introduce us into the flock of Christ, Even though it were strong enough to remove niountains, yet unless it does remove them, or prove effectual, it is vain. Many are the argu- ments which have been used to prove that it is © the mere act of believing only which is required as a full satisfaction of the terms of the new co- venant, and that works have no share in meriting the righteousness of Christ. I havealready aé ¢ pees THEOLOGY. - 269 incertae that faith isthe only active condition required, yet I have said that it mwst be active, and bring forth fruit in due season, Neither faith nor ‘works, as required of man under the new covenant, are conditions of our salvation, yet they are means or conditions whereby we receive justification to adoption, as I have before iermed it, or, in other words, justification to Christ’s richtcousness. In order to prove that we become members of Christ through the mere act of faith, they bring us such passages of scrip- ture as these: “For by grace are ye saved thro” faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast.’ Eph. ii—8, 9. This passage of scripture has no reference whatsoever to the conditions imposed upon us under the néw covenant; it has no re- ference to the faith which we are called upon to possess in Jesus Christ; but itis such as express- ly applies to the conditions of our salvation, the faith which we ought to have rendered in the garden, but which our Saviour renders for us, to fulfil the claims of the first covenant. This faith is not such as we posses of ourselves, but which is given by God asa substitute for that which we ought to have rendered. For had it been our own faith possessed by us, then we would have had cause to boast, saying, we have performed the work ourselves. It cannot, there- fore apply to the present subject. In the next place, “Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, that we might be justi- fied by the faith of Christ; for by. the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. ?? Gal. 1i—16. This isno more applicable to the conditions of . ra 8¢8 LECTURES ‘ON ‘the ae covenant than theother, but ave meres ly to show that the terms of our salvation and the terms of our becoming members of Christ are different, and therefore proves the correct- ness ofmy theory, For we are here informed that we are not justified by works of any kind which have been performed by us, either of faith in Christ or in the works of the ceremonial law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, not our faith in fosus, assome would haveit, but his faith which he has possessed as a substitute for that which we ought to hare possessed, but have not; aud we have believed in him through the terms of the new covenant in order that we might be finally. justified or obtain life cternal through his faith, — but not ours. “Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law”? of Moses or the cermonial law. But itis not our faith which justifies us to life eternal, but that of Jesus Christ ; and this isfurther confirmed by St. Paul when speaking conceraing the - means of our justification, saying that it was not our righteousness; but it was “Hyen the righte- eusness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ. unto all and upon all.them that believe.” This righteousness of the faith of Christ, was apphed. to vehtose | who had faith in Christ, and not their | it were if ‘could not have been given or ed. Their own active righteousness, bec faith was necessary that they might receive the application of Christ’s righteousness, by which they were justified, All these passages, therefore, have no reference to, our faith as Christians, but: to the faith of Jesus Christ which I have endea- voured all along to set forth asthe only condi-. tien ef our final salvation or justificatien. Phe THEOLOGY. 969 - faith required of us is altogether different; and is as well as its consequences necessary to obtain that faith, which, by imputation, shall save us. St. Paul did not wish to have us understand by any of these passages that either our faith or works were means of our salvation, but that they were necessary to obtain the means. That we may become.members of Christ, faith and works are both nesessary, although one is the fruit of the other. For we are exhorted to “add to our faith virtue, and to virtue knowledge, and to knowledge temperance, and to temperance pa- tience, and to patience godliness, and to godli- ness brotherly kindness, and to brotherly kind- ness charity.”” 2 Peter, i—5. “For though we have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mystery and all knowledge ; and though we have all faith that we could remove mountains, and have not charity, it is nothing.” 1 Cor. xiii—e. These passages go to show that our works are as necessary in fulfilling the terms of the second covenant and obtaining justification to Christ’s righteousness, as-the act of faith. It has been ur- ged, however, as I have hefore mentioned, that our faith and works are conditions, not only of the second covenant, but ofthe first, and, there- fore, are conditions of our final justification to life, that we are saved by them and not by the faith of Christ, and they bring us these words as - a proof: “But know, O vain man, that faith with- _ out works is dead. Was not Abraham our father | justified by works when he had offered Isaac. _ his only son upon the altar? Ye see then how that _ by worksa man is justified and not by faith only.” it may be thought that this passage is a per- )_ fect proof cf the ineorrectness of my theory, as tk J he ts ~ ing that to be justified according to this covenant, | -and of that righteousness which was Bi ‘I have been teaching that we ar@inot finally. ia. : * 9 +8: 270 LECTURES ON i tified either by our faith or our works, altho by them we obtain Christ’s ghteousness. reconcile this apparent diffiet it will be ne- cessary to understand. the invention: ‘of each of these apostles who have spoke upon the subject. St. Paul, being a man of great learning, wrote more upon doctrinal points than an er per- — son, and more particularly upon th trine of justification unto life. He was endeavouring to . show us that by our own works we fulfil no con- — dition of our final justification and salyati which IT have been particularly speaking taught that it was by the faith of Jesus ‘Shri, and his only, that we might expect justi tion and salvation, as this was the fulfil the first covenant. ButSt. James ‘was more pa ticularly showing what was necéssary on oui parts for the fulfilling of the second covenang and obtaining the righteousness of Christ, T have for distinetion called justification’ 0. as f doption as a member of Christ. He > was | show- a Suit without works was dead, and ais without ‘ works we could d not obtain the merifs of Christ, . He brings us Abraham asan exa , who be- — ing under the second covenant as well as we, performed works of righteousness. as the conse- quences of his faith; and the Sea + son was one of those works which, in union wi his faith, entitled him to the merits of Cr To be justified, therefore, in his language, to be made worthy of the righteousnes Jesus Christ. St. Paul was spe: q nal justification in the sight of th first co ve mh, “THEOLOGY. O71 ihe same; that which would entitle us to the king- dom of heaven; whereas, St. James was speaking ~ of that which Pwould entitle us to the merits of Christ. There is therefore no contradiction in the language of St. Paul and St. James, for we are justified to the righteousness of Christ by our own faith and wor rls, but to be justified un- to life eternal, the faith and righteousness of Christ alone must be set forth as possessing a claim thereunto. ‘The second covenant isa cov- enant of redemption and mercy, but the first is a covenant of justice,and according to which is ob- tained happiness or misery. Af the last day, when the Lord of light shall come to judge both the quick and the dead, then shall he say to those on his right hand, “Come ye blessed chil- dren of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepa- Pa for yo from pe sy Gane of the world. oh 7 ea ked Ri ye clothed me; tf was sick and ye. visi- ted me; I was in prison and ye came unto me.’ The kindgom of heaven is mine; I have obtain- _ ed it by my righteousness for you, and because ye have done ‘these offices unto me, take the crown which I have purchased with my blood and perfect obedience. As for those who have done me no kindness, neither believed in my name, I have purchased for them no blessings ; let them depart “into everlasting fire prepared for the Devilband his angels.’”?, Thus we per- ‘ceive that in a Christian land, both faith and works are absolutely necessary to entitle ) the merifs of a Redeemer. The situation t € heathen I-yiew in the same light as that of 272 LECTURES ON infants, being deficient in faith and good works on account of their ignorance, and consequent in- ability to perform the duties of a Christian. Good works, if I understand the term correctly, are those works which are agreeable to the word and. will of God, and are productive of good conse- quences to us either here or hereafter; they are the conditions as united with faith, which, if per- formed by us, will entitle us to the merits of our Saviour, but not to heaven. We can in no man- * ner trust our eternal salvation upon our own merits, for our most perfect obedience is corrupt and infirm; it is, however, by those works, though ever so imperfect, if sincere, that we are constituted members of Christ and partakers of his righteousness. ‘These conditions which are necessary to our becoming members of Christ, are such as are capable of being performed by all who live in a Christian land. But I do not — think that the conditions necessary to be fulfilled on our parts are the same to every person. They are, perhaps, the same in nature but not in ex- tent, the same faith and obedience which is ne- cessary to render some persons meet to become members of Christ, may not be sufficient in oth- ers. They who are endewed with only one ta-— lent, are only to improve one, and they who have ten, ten are required ofthem. They who have faith and work righteousness according to the best oftheir ability, will undoubtedly be enti-— tled to the merits of their Redeemer, though some ~ do more and others less. And undou each one will be rewarded according to has done. Faith, as well as all the consequen-— ces thereof, are in our power; every person who _4§ possessed of rational faculties, who live vin a “ Lk "rh. 5 . ~ ¥ a, ié TULOLOGY. © Q73 ~ Christian land, and hears the word of God read © ae expounded, may partake thereof; and the Bid why ‘he does not, is because he makes no his talents in considering the nature and Ce oftthose evidences of the Christian reli- ion Which are set before him. It may be said | that am here denying the use and assistance of _ the Holy” pirif, making our rational faculties fufficient to every purpose without further aid ; bitteth isis, {true. Theinfluence of the Holy Spirit is scessaty in ealling our rational, facul- Y ties tor bglice| ug u pon those spiritual subjects; to ESprark, réad,Jearnand inwardly digest, the sub- stiice of those evidences which are so frequent; p Ty bth to gur consideration. It does not, ver, assome suppose, operate like a flash of ghtning-upon our minds, or, as by way of in- it did in days of old, but excites our ywers to reficetion and roller And - then, by meditation and reflection, we become ‘ coftvinced of the truth of those propositions whi@hthave been, in numerous ways, laid open to | our eetandhes, but which we have never | Hey te Te a subject of particular attention and sstudy.. This excitement is not done by any sen- sible hipulge upon the heart, as was done in the days of the patriarchs and prophet§, but is made | by ordinary means, such as hearing the word of God read and expounded, adversity, loss of friends, misfortune and trouble, and sometimes even by prosperity, and many other methods. But if we will not hearken to these ealls, we must condemn ourselves, and not say it was the fault of God, Every man is sometimes moved to a_ ¢onsideration of his future prospects ; ifhe con- Hinues his reflection, he is using the means ne- si LECTURES ON eessary for his faith and holines; but if he rejet these thoughts he is rejecting the offers of the Holy Ghost, and so never becames ainiest eli er in Christ. The means which aren for our belief and conviction : Christianity, are the testimonies his apostles, as also the ae of upon the evidences of th so ‘means. which were enjo were of adifferent nature: “Phe! sirit; te erated through the means of miracle kinds, whereby the sick were restored, per cleansed, the deaf made toh hi ewalk, the bid: to see, and s the dead and be seen in many these calls the minds of spectators 's WéPe more forcibly than theysn george of the present age the Holy’ Spirit - ma way suited to our neé ssitie and ces, and agreeble to the law Nothing uncommon or rniraggl diame” ed for the conviction of our understz cause itis unnecessary. ‘The testi Spirit through the mouths “of the inspi ters, is now ‘sufficient, forif wills 10 these, neither would they. believe ot ; they should arise from the dead ; houg means are now different from w at toa, “wel yet the end is the same, namely, to ca pane $s. to faith andrepentance. And itisin of every man to obey or disobey these calls to life and glory. Unless the faith red in the new covenant, were in some 1 our own, it could not have been a condition the attainment of Christ’s righteousness, for the are no conditions in the new covenant but such. ; — ae gh . x ° THEOLOGY. : 275° vis ‘is able to perform. When we pray, for: . ‘the aeateedae of the Holy Ghost, we in sub- Ay that ourminds may be more frequent- ie! eflect eee the importance and certain- he Ct ian religion, and upon those du- ties which are incumbent upon us; that we may rey medifate the.more upon. our doings and ation with regard to a future state, as niga the ie ae and threatenings of God. By suchas- ‘sistance we are excited to consider, and if we do snot consider when ealled thereunto by any means whatever, the fault is our own, and not *for want of divine calls, or their want of effica- ey 0a the part of God. We pray also that we may sieuellikeneth to resist the temptations of the world, ,the flesh and the Devil. But this strength lies in the maturity of our reflections, for he more we consider the reason, being led thereunto by the Spirit, the more are we led to renounce the world, the fiesh and the Devil. The substance, facrefauck of this prayer is, that the Doly Ghost will continue to exgite us by vari- ‘ous means to meditate more, and thereby fix our minds upon the nature and importance of those subjects, and the evidences which haye been - given concerning the course which we ought to pursue inour Christian warfare ; so that by due reflection we are brought to a knowledge of the truth, and by knowing the truth, are rendered capablevof abiding by it. For, as I have hefore svid, the more that.a man deliberates upon his. actions, the better he is enabled_ to accomplish his end. Thus the strength that we have as re- lating to perseverance in the eause of Christ, con- sists altogether in the frequency aad maturity ef our reflections, and upon this depends our faith, oe vi nea, ; 7 oi ae Se ey Pe nk sats ol r repentance ahd all our Christian virtues. Holy Spirit operates by contin ning to set fore us these all-important subje quently tocier dhe enan sp means. Being thus Pavaliened theo t 7 calls of the Holy: Spirit, we have it in our er to obey these invitations and ee have our faith perfected, or not. Thi ~may attend at the place of public | a be repeatedly called upon by the & pirit e generation and newness of life, still the call can- not save us; to make that call effectual and ductive of good consequences, we must co-ope- rate, we mistunot only shear b ~ Eve : man living in a Christian land has those calls in one way or another, and consequently has privilege of accepting the same. The Heath have not those means, and conseque if it they } receive any calls it must be thr ough 4 » Theology onlys They viene 0 live ir 1 Christian land, and more frequently have ,t! word of God preached to them, have the m«¢ ealls. The supplying us with the means for ¢ _ conversion, and inviting us through ‘those means © , to learn and understand, are works of the Holy — Spirit; the use of those means and their applica- tion to ourselves, are works of our own. Hay- — ing onee believ ed and become sanctified to aho- — ty life, these are means, which, if persevered in, vil! make ws members of Christ and partakers. d “or his righteousness. . * Regeneration and Stnctifisdtion. at eg Tr Teorrectly understand the Sandals the word ‘Adoption, it implies. as mue _ who were not. legally and naturally er children of God, are edecintth a he offspring and admitted that they _ ‘through his grace and’ love tothe same inheri- ‘tance and rights, as though they had been origi= nally and naturally his: real children, and had ree “mained perfectly innocent from the beginning. ‘To be thus received and adopted as sons of Gov and. members of Christ, certain - conditionsiare. » “required in this world, and which may be. sum- med ve in the word Regenefation. And though & God hath from everlasting ‘determined ‘upon * aihese who s shall be-adopted, ‘yet. it was from a. ‘gerne 7 Phe conditions of acoption, however, same extent in all cases more, ist a. e some and less of others. @Yct the fall peapiencner isequined, is regeneration, in ever ‘y iy ” & awle Te of those who, wotta We become re- d therefore» Sate ely a n ired © ing oj ¢™ of - = ee" oe 278" here oN’. on one. All that is rgd =k i < Baptisin, whereby they are ag be of, Christ’ and adopted as ae ers of and they, dying in their infaney s me tized,,are admitted indesthe hee ce ae receive the inheritance of See i nal. Baptism in mfantss therefore is required (0 their salvation, Ste rege ration, becatise none but th who: rn aga ean inherit life @ternal,” Neverthe! 3 ‘though infants, are perfectly regen by» baptism, to preserve this state in its firs perfection rough life, requires if those whd come ; a change of heart and.afieetions. dults, whether per formed befa: of maturity, then becomés on eration, or rather @n Outward and Cable an inward or spiritual change of heart. baptism aloné can be the means Fi riba to r noneé-but tafants,.. And if, svhen th an maturer “years: they refuse to cpl ih other conditions of the gospel; that once have. saved them now begomes to th none effect, and. consequentlytheir Fah oll is neyer again perfected. ‘That is, their ration becomes imperfect, because they, do continue in the “same state off obedience, Our, plemesent is perfectswhile we continu to abide. y all the orga of the law; but, ‘hen n other — fulfiiing ghest corrupts the whole’ RASS | : former ohedience iff life.’ Gonseq ue: ntly wth + who are.regenérated in.infincy, may afte , become usregoucrate By a 1e@l€ct of additi dutieésWhich tre ré Guired of those who hay totyears of diseretivn and judgment “Bei o* ‘aul “ ie - »” R Py he 8 7 nay eg Pac a oe is i 5 @ nig eg _ 279° ; € are to an “unregenepate state, w consequent- f ly lose Sus geet as members’of Christ. But = * be — you may. ask, have you fot beforeimtimated that. 7 We number of the adepted, like that of the élect, ®can neither be incre’sed nor diminished? ~ To + this let nfe*nswer, that to. be adopted as’ mem- - bersof Christ is different from that adoption by which, we'are finally initiated into the participa- - tiontef eternal glory. Adoption, aecording to the Rey. Charles Buck, is of two kinds, spiridwad- « and glorious. Spiritual adoption is that where- by weare received as members of Christ’s church . in this world, and of which I have been speak- ing; while a glorious adoption is that in which the saints, at their resurrection from the dead, are *« Owned to be the children of God, and then enter into the possession of that inheritance which has been provided for them. They, therefore, who at’ the last day are thus adopted, are those, the ¢ » nuniber*of whom f have considered as not to be increased or diminished. Consequently, thoug the number of real members of Christ in this _ world mayrvat different times be increased or di- - miitished, yet with the finally adopted it is far otherwise, for they aré only those who belofg - to the numberof the elect; while they who are, « ~ spiritually adopted are only such as become saints - w while here, and have the privilege of disobedi-, ente and degeneration. q" _* But though baptism is the only condition,re- we in the regeneration of infants, yet with ~ "i hose*who have come to matureryears it is far otherwise. With them, not dhly additional * * ties: y required, but a radical change of the hear » atid spiritual*affections. We mustistrive to make our’chief pleasure consist imlovingy worshipping - : 2 ‘ a - bad a f me a) = . ¢ : " * ie i. % 280 ¥. Re bd and lobcaingit Creator, in eh ee ; siieere praises fewthe ‘ ch he pas. ‘bestgwed eiiigns in ie lie, a : _ those whichsre eterwal;"afid the ; 2 we dre to his Service here, the hai prepared for dweiling in his pre The purity of heart whith is wrow ? Holy Spirit, and is so necessary to rén: » fovheaven, is what is called ‘Sanetifieat nd. Regeneration is its commencement. Regenera- tion is the change which is wrought from an ‘un holy and unsanctified state, to_a state of t ousness and sanctification. This Bae ck dual in its progress, and cannot be acqi some suppose, in a moment; but require _ tation and an holy practice, whereby we are en-_ abled to ipa more and more perfett ea , a continue religious course of life. Our _ must be ed to the worship of God must learn to make such our pleasu i light’ here, in order that we may hereafter. The pleasures of time and s have no place in our: hearts, but we mus fix ve te upan things spir itual, Our thor which are so prone to ahd a , trary to the suggestions of Th 35) ory. attached to the delusive’ vani vf this worl as ' must be made to harmonize wi o image wethave lost. The co digion wi fore*the fall was such as it oul pilre, holy, and uncorrupted with t the human and digine vigelleet aoineided “each other in theirj oys, and i in theip abhorrénce 5 to singin their d ositions, and affettions § to @that union with and conformity the ima ; gat Make? Ww ee lost wong a S * . ee ” ee 7 He me: > ” < ; é ¥ " be s es - ot & THEOLOGY. w 231. be. a“ at » . eg re k . : A i} # 4 » guity, and it must be in a Measure restored be~ fore we can be truly meet for heaven. an Was said i ve been created in the image of God, not only because his nature was similar but be= ‘eause his spirit and disposition were like the” eo spirit of God. This divine spirit. is altogether pure and holy, free from every CO raihids, and averse to sin; consequently while we arestaint- ed with impurity and corrupticn, with sinful.af. fections and unhallowed desires, we cannot dwel with God; for sin is contrary to Mis nature. We must therefore be changed, rénewed in our _ hearts and inclinations, and again made ina mea- sure like unto God, before we can be meet for the kingdom of heaven. This change, so necessary in becominga mem- ber of Christ, and which is more commonly call- ed regeneration, is to be wrought by the influ- ence of the Holy Spirit, in union with our own endeavours, and through the medium of our ra- tional powers, whereby the spirit of man. is again made to unite with the Spirit of God, and qualified for his presence. Without this change, what would man do in heaven, even if admitted there; a being whose mind is darkened by the elouds of a corrupt disposition, an evil disposi- tion also as regards our natural desiresand world- ly affections? What could a sinful being like man, unrenewed in the spirit of his mind, do in the presence of a God who chargeth his angels with folly? The prophets, apostles, martyrs, . and spirits of just men made perfect would be no” company for him. The worship of the Most ~ High God with him would*be cold and lifeless. _ Heaven would be no heaven with him. Our... omainds, therefore, must bebrought to harmonize: « e > di- tae : S- “© Pi 282 2” TURE sen | io ¥ . : : betome:cha ctice of Pe Sad) imimorali ‘othe. re virtue is not -Tegener doall this from worldly with the ie ven and es we whi we arejealculating ae . peme in eek tasted -her motives. “Reg ae ‘is an internal tee ; oe consist in an outward profes app oF ia e practice of religious duties, for evena Deist ay attend the ordinances of God, and lead, as far as regards his external appearance, a moral and Baber life, and be a useful member of socie- ty, and yet without the least spark of religion or or piety.. Hemay do all this from his desire maining of a respectable character among man- kind. But regeneration is not only a change of life and conversation, but a change of motives also. He who is regenerated leads a religious and moral life from love and gratitude to God, from faith in his name and his promises, from the pleasure which he derives from sineere de- votion, and the hope of life eternal. The effects upon his external conduct may in some measure be the same as often arises from selfishness and the desire of popularity. It is not outward bes haviour, therefore, which constitutes sanctifica- — tion, but the purity of those motives from which Ly his external life arises. Good-works are no more than the effects of Sanctification, and is the only sign which we have of it, by which K commonly understand the heart, as we learn a “tree by its fruits. But it is not an infallible si repay belons ip remarked, but may ari i ott rinciples. @ A false pro A as, it peg 45 rendered ty Gul d & a 1 THEOLOGY. 283 Spirit, and which sanctification is commonly dis- tinguished from a false profession, by peculiar _ reverence for the Supreme Being, regard for his word, resignation to his will, a firm confidence in the merits of his Redeemer, “and is nothing else, (says Archbishop Usher,) than for a man to be brought to an entire resignation of his will to the will of God, and to live in the offering up of his soul continually in the flames of love, and as a whole burnt offering unto Christ.”? Hav- ing our minds united with God, and filled with heavenly dispositions and affections, weare then, through justification, in Christ Jesus, whereby we obtain remission of our sins, and a title to the kingdom of heaven, well fitted to enter into life eternal. We can then unite with the angelic host which guard his throne, in singing praises and thanksgivings unto the Lamb, forever enjoy- ing those pleasures which are laid up for those who do his will upon the earth. But, asI have before said, between a life of real sanctification and nature there is a vast’ difference; a great change is to be wrought. The natural man, “the carnal mind, is enmity to God,’ and the imaginations of the heart are only evil continu- ally. The bistory of mankind confirms the as- sertion ; for while they are ever considering themselves as fast hastening towards the stand- ard of perfection, they remain at an immeasura- ble distance from it. Wars and fighting still find place among mankind, and, in spite of every Warning, so great is the corruption of human na- ture that man is ever pursuing the path ofwick- edness and vice, in preference to the’straight and narrow way which leadeth unto life. There is in Y ‘ - eye ¥*. and read ‘through far better motives. Conse- 284 LECT our nature a reluctance: BRE yo Br ligious duties, and. the worship of e od 1 see en it were burthensome and constra iF ous and impartial study ord. o the history of man it general wild rfa us ‘° behold him as y far oo ] righteousness, ta ‘onl to iniquity y sparks to fly upward. A change, there- Pi must be wrought before we can be prepa- red to enter the kingdom of heaven. This change. is brought about by the influence of the: ery Spirit upon our reasoning faculties, and 2 sh fected inthe following order: Fist adis eating our natural pr ejudices; ‘alow i ineli- ning us to meditate upon the beauties of religion and virtue, and to do this without prejudice or partiality ; and thirdly, by indueing us into a resolution to act and persevere in the prenges of Christ. The means by which we are led to this pro- cess of regeneration, are the hearing and read- of the word of God ina sufficient degree toraise in our minds a further desire or euriosity to un- derstand what the chief principles of Christiani- ty are. In order to understand any system of — philosophy or religion perfeétly, we must deavor to pursue our studies in a way whie free from the prejudices of habit and education Consequently, even though our first motive for studying the nature of the Christign reli a no better than that of curiosity or e omer place talk, yet it may finally lead us to meditate quently, the reading of the scriptures ought te be encouraged in every place. And it-wiall fre- as uf ‘ pA * ’ - ce * Fa THEOLOGY. 288. oe quently be found that they who have experien- ced regeneration, have had the foundation laid: upon mere curiosity, and were influenced to com- mence their ar upon the nature of the Christian religion merely froma desire of being capable of conversing freely upon those points when opportunity offered; and perhaps even from no better motives than those of the Deist, that they may be enabled to refute the doctrines taught in the word of God. And after having read and studied fora while from these motives, they begingto be convinced that their first opin- ions were false, and therefore now read without prejudice, and thus become convinced and bro’t to a full change of their lives and principles. This change is more gradual in some than in o- thers, and is sometimes so slow that it becomes altogether imperceptible. Some have entertain- ed an idea that conversion or regeneration is a mysterious effect, produced by .a sensible im- pulse upon our hearts, or even upon our bodies by the Holy Spirit, striking many as it were like a flash of lighting, whereby they are changed in aninstant, and can tell the place and minute of their regeneration. If there are any such con- versions in the present age, I know nothing of them, and consequently cannot believe in them. That persons may, through animal feeling and sympathy, be sensibly affected upon particular occasions, I doubt not, but such is not regenera- tion. It may be the means of leading persons to meditate, to consider and reflect upon their situations, and by this means to a future change and regeneration, as this is gradual. To be thus changed, is, in the janguage of the New Testa-- , ¥ LJ age. ¢ amen ‘< gi ment, to be born again, to light, whereas by nature w “ ness. By persevering in thi ‘become entitled to the merits viour, and by his mer to the ki ng ; pits |e Lc ; vit ea Nc9lsZvcod On