It is true, in some instances, persons are spoken of, not according to what they do, but according to what they profess to do; and, after this manner of speaking, hypocrites are said to seek the Lord and to delight to know his ways, as a nation that did righteousness.* That is, they did those things which are the usual expressions of a delight in God and a desire to seek his face, as if they had been a righteous people: but, as to the things themselves, they are, strictly speaking, spiritual exercises, and are constantly so to be understood throughout the Bible. That manner of seeking God which is practised by hypocrites, will hardly be pretended to be the duty of men in general; and, except in those cases, neither seeking God's face, nor waiting upon him, I believe, are ever used in the scripture for such an attendance on God's worship as a man may practise, and perish notwithstanding it is certain, however, this cannot be said of a "diligently waiting, and seeking of spiritual blessings." To use our external hearing and sight, that we may attain to a spiritual hearing and understanding of divine things, is not "WITHIN THE COMPASS OF A NATURAL MAN." The end of every action determines its nature: to read and hear, therefore, with a true de sire that we may attain to a spiritual hearing and understanding, are themselves spiritual exercises. In this matter I entirely coincide with Mr. Brine, that no unsanctified heart will ever pray to God for grace and holiness; but that this is men's dreadful sin, and justly exposes them to direful vengeance."t If to this should be objected the words of our Lord, that "many will seek to enter in, and shall not be able;" I answer, What is there spoken respects not the present state, but the period when the master of the house is risen up, and hath shut to the door. The case of the man waiting at the pool of Bethesda has often been applied to that of an unconverted sinner attending the preaching of the gospel: but let it be closely considered, whether such an application of the passage be warrantable from the tenor of scripture; and whether the characters to whom it is thus applied are not hereby cherished in a Isa. lviii. 2. Motives to Love and Unity, pp. 36, 37. thought with which they are too apt to flatter themselves; viz. that, for their parts, their hearts are so good, that they would fain repent, and be converted, but cannot, because God is not pleased to bestow these blessings upon them. No one can imagine that I wish to discourage people from reading or hearing the word of God. God's ordinances are the means by which he ordinarily works; and, whatever be their motives, I rejoice to see people give them an attendance. At the same time, I think we should be careful, lest we cherish in them an opinion, that, when they have done this, they are under no farther obligations. By so doing, we shall furnish them with an unwarrantable consolation, and contribute to shield them against the arrows of conviction. PARTICULAR REDEMPTION. I had said, "If it were essential to true, saving faith to claim a personal interest in Christ's death, the objection would be unanswerable." Mr. B. replies, "But he who has faith has a personal interest, whether he can claim it, or not; therefore the objection is equally unanswerable on this ground: for it is making it the duty of all to have that which is an undoubted evidence of a personal interest, whether they have that interest, or not; which appears, to me, very absurd and ridiculous." (p. 90.) Perhaps so: but, if the same spiritual dispositions which are bestowed by the gospel, are required by the law, (which Mr. B. has scarcely attempted to disprove, though he has said so much about it,) there can be nothing absurd or ridiculous in it. The matter entirely rests upon the solution of this question, DOES THE SCRIPTURE REPRESENT ANY THING AS THE DUTY OF MANKIND IN GENERAL, WITH WHICH ETERNAL HAPPINESS IS CONNECTED? I only wish Mr. B. had fairly tried the matter by this criterion, and had been willing to be decided by the issue. There is scarcely a truth in the sacred scriptures capable of a clearer demonstration. This was the ground which Mr. B. declined in his Tenth Letter, (p. 70.) In addition to what was said from pp. 58 to 66 of my former treatise, I shall now only add as follows: I hope Mr. B. will allow that every man ought to love God's law; do his commandments; do righteousness; be of a meek, lowly, pure, and merciful spirit; and bear so much good will, surely, to Christ, as to give a disciple a cup of cold water for his sake; at least, he must allow, he does allow, that men ought not to be offended in him; for he himself confesses, "they ought not to despise, if they cannot embrace him.” (p. 96.) And yet these are all evidences of an interest in Christ and eternal blessedness.* Mr. B. farther objects, that I "make faith warrantable and incumbent, where there is an impossibility." (p. 90.) Well: whenever Mr. B. can find a man, or a body of men, whose salvation he can be assured is impossible; he is welcome, from me, to assure them they have no warrant, and are under no obligation, to believe in Christ. In some sense, the salvation of every sinner is possible: as no one knows what will be his end, every man, while in the land of the living, is in the field of hope. And that was all I meant by possibility, in pp. 133, 134. Mr. B. allows, that, "inasmuch as we know not who are, and who are not the elect, it is the duty of every one, where the gospel of salvation comes, to be concerned, seek, inquire," &c. (p. 88.) But what solid reason can be given for the consistency of this, which will not equally apply to the other? If it be said, These are things expressly commanded; I answer, This is allowing, that, if faith in Christ is expressly commanded, it may be consistent with the subject in question: which is giving up the point. But farther: Though I admit that the salvation of some men is impossible, it is certain that they will perish; yet I conceive it is not such a kind of impossibility as to render exhortations to believe in Christ inconsistent. It is no otherwise impossible for them to be saved, than it was for Sihon, king of the Amorites, to have enjoyed the blessings of a peace with Israel. If there is an infinite worth and fulness in the sufferings of Christ, in themselves considered;-if the particularity of redemption does not consist in any want of sufficiency in the death of Christ, but in God's sovereign purpose to render it effectual to the salvation of some men, and not of others; and in Christ's being the covenant-head and representative of some men, and not of others;-then the matter must be supposed to rest upon the same footing with all the rest of the * Psa. cxix. 165. Rev. xxii. 14. 1 John ii. 29. Matt. v. 3-9. Mark 41. Matt. xi. 6. divine purposes. And, as it was the duty of Sihon to have accepted the message of peace, and to have trusted in the goodness of him by whose order it was sent him, notwithstanding the purpose of God concerning him; so it may be the duty of every sinner to accept of the message of peace which is sent him by the preaching of the gospel, and trust in Christ for the salvation of his soul. Objections equally plausible might be made to that case, as to this. One might say, 'What end could be answered by a message of peace being sent? Peace was not ordained for him, but destruction; and his country was previously assigned to Israel for a possession: for him, therefore, to have received the message of peace, and trusted in the goodness of the God of Israel, would have been trusting in an impossibility.' If told, the purposes of God are a great deep, which we cannot fathom; that, if we knew the whole system, we should see it otherwise; that there was no natural impossibility in the affair, no such impossibility as to cause any inconsistency in it; and that, in the present state, we must take the revealed, and not the secret, will of God for the rule of our duty; he might have replied, like Mr. B. "True; but God's secret will is the rule of his conduct to us; and surely he has not decreed, by giving Sihon up to hardness of heart, to leave him destitute of a right spirit, and then punish him for the want of it: this would be cruel and shocking!" (p. 88.) After all that Mr. B. has said, it is evident, from the above manner of speaking, that he does, in fact, make the decrees of God rules of human action; and herein lies a considerable part of the difference between us. We believe the doctrine of divine predestination as fully as he does, but dare not apply it to such purposes. SECTION XI. REPLY TO MR. B'S THIRTEENTH LETTER, ON THE TENDENCY OF THESE PRINCIPLES TO ESTABLISH THE DOCTRINES OF HUMAN DEPRAVITY, DIVINE GRACE, THE WORK OF THE SPIRIT; &c. I HAD observed, that the sentiment I opposed, as well as that which I attempted to establish, "represented man as utterly unable to do things SPIRITUALLY GOOD; but then it made THAT inability to be no part of his depravity, but altogether innocent in its nature." Mr. B. quotes this passage; not, however, as I wrote it, but very differently, in sense as well as in words, and then finds fault with that which he himself had inserted. (p. 96.) I never imagined that he would maintain men's aversion from all "moral good" to be innocent, nor even their aversion from spiritual things; though I did not suppose he would have allowed that aversion to make any part of their inability. Mr. B. complains of being injured, in that he is represented as maintaining the inability of man to things spiritually good to be altogether innocent. What I affirmed was, that "the sentiment, when it spake consistently with itself, did so." I think so still; for it appears, to me, an inconsistency for a man to be "both naturally and morally unable" to come to Christ. Something has been said upon this subject already, in the note, p. 204. but, as this is a subject on which Mr. B. frequently insists, let us examine it more particularly. In the first place: Supposing men's ability to do things spiritually good to be partly natural, and partly moral; then, after all, it must follow, that they are, in part, to blame for their non-compliance with those things; and so, consequently, the contrary must, in part, have been their duty. That this sentiment follows from the position of Mr. B. is certain; but whose cause it will subserve, I cannot tell it seems to suit |