the exprefs will of God, that the human nature should be fuch as it is because it acquaints us, that, after the flood, this command was delivered, "be fruitful and multiply."

The doctrine of election and reprobation afferts that, while a small part of mankind was, from eternity, predeftinated to enjoy everlasting happiness in the heavenly world, the greater part by far was also predeftinated, by the fame gracious God, to fuffer everlasting torments in hell fire.

That any man, whofe understanding is not entirely ruined, should believe this doctrine, would be to me a matter of the greatest aftonishment, if I. were not yet more astonished to think, that it is believed by fome who do really venerate their maker. If it doth not carry its own refutation along with it, it must be owned there is little hope of its being refuted. However, I would obferve two things in relation to it. First, that if any one were about to utter the most horrid blafphemy against the ever bleffed God, he would be put to it to invent any thing worse, in kind, than what is contained in this doctrine. Should he take the hint from it to affirm, that God predeftinated all the creatures which he hath made, or in future will make, to fuffer everlafting torments: this would be only a greater degree of the fame kind of blafphemy. In the next place, I would take notice, that, when you fay," although "the great God hath, prior to their exiftence, pre"deftinated

· B

“deflinated and decreed the greatest part of mankind "to fuffer everlasting torments in hell, he is, never"theless, infinitely good and gracious." I have good reafon to think, that your heart recoils, and flatly denies what you utter with your tongue, though you frive hard to believe it. I ask you, seriously, fir, is not such the fact? And do not you impute it to the natural wickedness of your heart? I have no defire that you fhould answer me: but you will not do amifs, perhaps, in delivering your answer to him who made you, and made you what you are ; that you might naturally shudder at this horrid tenet, as you naturally shudder at the most atrocious and shocking crimes.

The doârine of the fatisfaction is this; that Christ died in the room and ftead of finners, fuffering a punishment equivalent to what was due to them, and thereby fatisfied the law and juftice of God. Now what do we understand by these words, punishment, law, juftice? Pain and punishment seem to be very different things. The brute animals fuffer, but are not punished: for then, only, is a being punished, when he suffers for fin charged upon him, Law, in the present cafe, I take it to be an authoritative edict, prefcribing to, and enjoining upon, its own subjects right conduct, and denouncing a penalty against difobedience. Juftice is the fame as righteoufnefs; it is eternal and immutable. Whatever is just and right, is such in its own nature, it was always fuch,

and

and such it must remain for ever. Likewife, whatever is unjust and wrong, is so in itself, eternally and immutably. The great God, who is omniscient, knows all that is right or wrong and he, of his abundant goodness, hath made us capable of the fame knowledge, as far as is needful and proper for us. He hath made us thus capable, in that he hath made us reasonable beings. As fuch, we understand and know, that, to practice obedience to our maker's will, is right. We understand and know, it is right for a child, who has it in his power, to relieve and fupport an aged parent in diftrefs. And if a perfon return evil for good, we understand and know this to be wrong. And whatever it be which reason pronounces, with the fame clearness, to be either just or unjust fuch it is. Every man muft grant this, unless he will grant-he has no reason to think that to be just or unjuft, which yet he does think to be so: I mean every man who allows the existence of juftice and injustice. There was always a righteoufnefs proper for every rational being exifting, or defigned to exift. This the ever bleffed deity faw, and contemplated from everlasting. This is what I understand by eternal and immutable juftice. It is founded on the circumftances and relations of beings. To inftance among ourfelves of the human race:- Should a man be either a father or a fon, his being so related as he is, makes it just and right for him to do what does not belong to a perfon who is without children, or who has loft his parents. So riches, knowledge, wit, and power,

B 2

power, make a certain conduct to be just and right for their several poffeffors, which cannot be right for perfons differently, circumstanced. We have now, I believe, got the true meaning of the terms in queftion. But if law be fuch as hath been faid, how fhall its demands be fatisfied? It is exceeding plain, that they never can otherwife than by a compliance with what is demanded. The law requires of its own subjects this alternative, "obey, or fuffer the penalty." Now, in either cafe, there is compliance, and, confequently fatisfaction. But if they neither oley, nor Jaffer the penalty, there is no compliance, and, confequently, no fatisfaction. It fignifies nothing to say, that fome perfon obeyed in their stead, or fuffered in their ftead. Neither the obedience nor the fuffering of this perfon is what the law demands: each is fomething elfe: it is no compliance, and therefore cannot be fatisfaction. If you were to require one thing of me, and I were to give you another, it could never be faid that I had fatisfied your demand. You, indeed, may be satisfied with fomething different from what you required: you may be changed. But, if the law be changed, it will not be the law which we are confidering. Indeed, it was never fuppofed to be changed.— It should be remembered, however, that nothing can be more extravagant than to affirm any law to be Satisfied, while its demands remain unfatisfied: and that these can only be fatisfied by a compliance with what is demanded: and that, as the obedience and fufferings of Chrift are no fuch compliance with what

the

the law of God demands, (which is the obedience or fuffering of its own fubjects) therefore Chrift hath not fatisfied the law of God, in the room and ftead of finners.

And that justice cannot be fatisfied by the vicarious punishment of an innocent person, is fufficiently evident from this one confideration---that justice absolutely forbids to punish the innocent. This you acknowledge, when you fay (in regard to sickness and pain) that infants would not be punished, if they were not guilty. However, you fay, that as Christ confented to endure punishment, that confent rendered him in justice punishable. Did it then take away his innocence? Did it render him properly criminal? If not; how then could it make him punishable? Will you affirm, that it is in the nature of fuch consent fo to do? And that any one who confents to be punished, is punishable in justice? Sure you will not. But if you do, I must contradict you, and declare, that a being is not punishable on account of his confent, but only on account of his crime. It is really wonderful, that people should imagine justice might be satisfied by what is a violation of justice.

With respect to the doctrine of imputed righteoufness, (viz.) that the righteousness of Christ is imputed to men, so as to become their righteousness ;---I would obferve, that to impute or reckon to me what is not mine, is wrong imputation, or wrong reckoning; it is declaring a thing to be what it is not. Moreover, it