"whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to

every man? I have planted, Apollos watered; "but God gave the increase. So then, neither is "he that planteth any thing, neither he that wa"tereth; but God that giveth the increase "."

20. God often difplays his juftice in giving up men to obduracy of heart. But this is alfo reprefented as the effect of his fovereignty. While he "hath mercy on whom he will have mercy, "whom he will he hardeneth v." I do not immediately speak of that hardening which refpects the eternal state, but of that only which has a reference to temporal calamities. This, as we have formerly feen, is the ultimate reafon given for the conduct of the Canaanites, in not making peace with Ifrael. With refpect to the two fons of Eli, we are informed that "they hearkened not unto "the voice of their father, because the LORD "would flay them w." When the Ifraelites applied to Rehoboam for a redress of grievances, he refused it; and the matter is thus accounted for, in the language of inspiration; "Wherefore the

king hearkened not unto the people; for the "cause was from the LORD, that he might per"form his faying, which he spake by Ahijah the "Shilonite unto Jeroboam the fon of Nebat *." In our meditations on the divine influence on the hearts of men, we muft ftill remember that the moral evil of their actions proceeds folely from themselves. But it is evident that the paffages quoted,

ur Cor. iii. 5.-7. 1 Kings xii. 15.

v Rom. ix. 19.

w 1 Sam. ii. 25.

quoted, if they have any meaning at all, exprefs such an operation, on the part of God, as renders the event abfolutely certain. Although the manner of this operation, in its whole compafs, be inconceivable to us, we cannot deny the truth of it, without denying that divine revelation is to be understood according to the ordinary fenfe of language.

It may be observed, laftly, that fome of the moft severe judgments that have ever been inflicted on men, have been exprefsly inflicted for their denial of divine fovereignty. This, as we have feen, was the caufe of the unexampled punishment of Nebuchadnezzar. But he is by no means a fingular inftance. What was it that fo greatly provoked the LORD in the conduct of Korah, Dathan and Abiram? Wherefore did he "make a new thing," by causing "the earth to open her mouth, and fwallow them up," that they fhould" go down quick into the pity?” Was it because they merely found fault with Mofes and Aaron? No. It was because they dared to dispute the divine fovereignty, in choosing these perfons to the offices affigned them. They faid to Mofes and Aaron, "Ye take too much upon

66

66

you, feeing all the congregation are holy every

one of them." What did Moses reply? To"morrow the LORD will fhew who are his, and "who is holy; and will cause him to come "near unto him: even him whom he hath chofen "will he cause to come near unto him "." The LORD

LORD knew that the murmurings of thefe rebels, although immediately directed againft Mofes and Aaron, were ultimately levelled against his own fovereign ordination. Therefore he fays;

"It

"fhall come to pafs, that the man's rod whom I "fhall choofe fhall bloffom: and I will make to "cease from me the murmurings of the children "of Ifracl, whereby they murmur against you a." Sennacherib was only the ax, the faw, the rod and the ftaff in God's hand. This inftrument, however, prefumed to deny the Supreme Agent. The king of Affyria claimed the work as his own. He faid, "By the ftrength of my hand I have "done it, and by my wifdom: for I am prudent." But obferve how his conduct is defcribed by JEHOVAH, and how he determines to punish it. "Shall the ax boaft itfelf againft him that hew"eth therewith? or fhall the faw magnify itself

cr

against him that shaketh it? as if the rod fhould "fhake itfelf against them that lift it up, or as if "the staff should lift up itself, as if it were no "wood. Therefore fhall the LORD, the LORD of "hofts, fend among his fat ones leannefs, and un"der his glory he fhall kindle a burning like the burning of a fire. And the light of Ifrael fhall "be for a fire, and his Holy One for a flame: and "it fhall burn and devour his thorns and his "briers in one day b." He trufted in the ftrength of his army, and this prophecy refers to its fudden and miraculous deftructions. But this was not all his punishment. It is farther expreffed in

this

a Numb. xvii. 5.

b Ifa. X. 15.-17.

e Ifa. xxxvii. 36.

this emphatic language; "Because thy rage against Ime, and thy tumult is come up into mine ears, "therefore will I put my hook in thy nofe, and

66

my bridle in thy lips, and I will turn thee back

by the way that thou cameft." Formerly he was reprefented as a mean inftrument in the hand of the Almighty. Now, because of his refractorinefs, he appears as a wild beaft, bridled and muzzled by his owner, and driven whitherfoever he will.

In a word, the punishment of those who have enjoyed the gospel, feems, in a peculiar manner, to turn on this hinge. The enemies of the King are thofe "who would not that he fhould reign "over them "." All, indeed, who refuse to obey the law, or to fubmit to the gofpel, in whatever way, are the enemies of Chrift. But thofe efpecially deferve this character, who deny the fovereignty of his will. For the right of difpenfing his gifts to whom, and in what manner he pleases, of doing according to his will in heaven and in earth, is that branch of his prerogative which eminently entitles him to the defignation of" King "of kings, and Lord of lords."

From what has been obferved on this fubject, we are taught the reasonableness of fubmitting to the divine will. God is the Supreme Potter, and has an undoubted right to do with the clay as he pleases. Whatever he does, he does it with his

own.

We

d Ifa. xxxvii. 29.

e Luke xix. 27.

We may also perceive the wisdom of this fubmiffion. For "who hath refifted his will." He worketh, and no one can let him.". A finner may fpurn and tofs at divine fovereignty; but it is only as " a wild bull in a net." It is impoffible that he can "flee out of his hand." The preceding illuftrations affure us, that the impotent creature must eventually fubmit. Like the king of Babylon, he may find it neceffary to confefs this attribute, from that conviction which is the fruit of better experience. For God" will do all "his pleasure."

A due attention to divine fovereignty affords confolation under the greateft adverfities. The Chriftian has still reafon to rejoice, that nothing happens to him by chance, or merely by the will of man. He may have reafon to blame himself, or to blame others, as fecondary caufes. But he knows that he must not reft here, left he should feem to reflect on the First Cause. How much foever he may regret any adverse event, he difcerns the propriety of fubmiffion. For he knows that he might as well think of plucking the fun out of the firmament, as of counteracting any of the determinations of that God whofe “coun"fel fhall ftand." The tidings delivered by Samuel to Eli muft have been afflicting beyond conception. Yet this is all his anfwer; "It is the "LORD, let him do what feemeth him good." When Paul declared his intention of going up to Jerufalem, Agabus, by the spirit of prophecy, af

fured

I

f 1 Sam. iii. 18.