On this principle, every thing that can be done, is moral holiness; and every thing that cannot be done, is sin, or moral evil.

Here we are presented with a picture the most to be dreaded, of any thing which the imagination of man is capable of inventing. Power moving on in front, exhibiting tyrannic majesty in every action; and meagre justice in the rear, obsequiously pronouncing all right! If these things be so, our senses are nothing but mediums of deception; and all our experience has served us no other purpose than to make us more ignorant. Who is there in the world, possessing common sense, that does not dread, and revolt from power, in every instance, where they see it connected with an evil disposition? Are we right, in wishing our enemies weak? We are, and that because their strength being diected by their wicked designs, gives us fear.

But, for the sake of the argument, still further, let it be granted, that God being supreme, had a right to do, because he had the power. And he creates millions of beings, whom he intends for endless torments, and puts his whole design into execution; and this is called supreme goodness. Now we wish to know how a supreme evil could be described? All will grant, that evil is in opposition to good; then an opposite description would be just. To create, with an intention to make eternally happy, and to put that design into execution, would be supreme evil? But, according to the doctrine which we are examining God contains these two characters in himself, having created some for one purpose, and some for the other. It will be of no advantage to the reader to have the absurdity of the above proposition any more exposed,

than enough to have it rejected. We never heard or read any argument to prove the propriety of the disputed proposition. It is a begged proposition, and stands without the least shadow of evidence from scripture or reason; but it requires no great ingenuity to see what the chimera was invented for; without it, the whole plan and scheme of atonement, which we are now examining, would fall, for want of foundation.

There are some of Paul's writings to the Romans, which have been used by divines, to prove the partial plan of salvation true, of which, we think it will be proper to take notice, in this place. Romans ix. 21, 22, has been made great use of, in order to prove, that God made some men vessels of eternal dishonor, and other vessels of eternal glory. The words read as follows: "Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honor, and another unto dishonor? What if God, willing to show his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much long suffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction." "Again, Rom. xi 7th &c. What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh; for but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded (according as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear) unto this day. And David saith, let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumbling block, and a recompense unto them; let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway."

On these passages, and others like them, is built the doctrine of limited salvation, by Jesus Christ, according to the fore-knowledge and predestination of

the Almighty. It is argued, that those who are here called the elect, are those for whom Christ died, and those alone who will finally obtain salvation by him. But why any person should make such a mistake, in reading this chapter, we are at a loss. The salvation of the elect is not argued, in this chapter; but the certainty of the salvation of those who were blinded, and the propriety of believing it, occupies the greatest part of it. Observe the words next to those we have quoted above, verse 11, &c. "I say then, have they stumbled, that they should fall? God forbid but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, to provoke them unto jealousy. Now, if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the di minishing of them, the riches of the Gentiles, how much more their fulness? Again, verse 15th, "For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead? Again, in his argument to the Romans, he endeavors to show them, by the similitude of the branches of olive trees, that they ought to believe that those blinded ones, though broken off through unbelief, would be graffed in again. See verse 24, "For, if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature, into a good olive tree; how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree?" The apostle seems desirous to instruct the Roman church, and argues the point fervently; see verses 25, 26. "For I would not brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, (lest ye should be wise in your own conceits,) that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. And so all Israel

shall be saved; as it is written, there shall come out of Zion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob." Compare the last verse which we have quoted, with Levit. xxvi. 44, 45. "And yet for all that, when they be in the land of their enemies, I will not cast them away, neither will I abhor them, to destroy them utterly, and to break my covenant with them: for I am the Lord their God. But I will for their sakes remember the covenant of their ancestors, whom I brought forth out of the land of Egypt, in the sight of the heathen that I might be their God: I am the Lord." And Isaiah xiv. 25. the Lord shall all the seed of Israel be justified, and shall glory." Many like passages might be quoted, from various parts of the scripture; but, perhaps, the above will suffice for this particular purpose. More, of the like nature, will be noticed in the sequel of this work.

"In

The scriptures have been as much violated, to maintain the doctrine which we are examining as good reason is by supposing God to be so infinitely partial, as he must be, in the eye of reason, in order to be what the doctrine represents him.

We shall now invite the attention of the reader to another system of atonement, which was undoubtedly formed, with a view to shun the absurdities in the former, and to get rid of some of the consequences that were naturally deducible from that idea of the sufferings of Christ. This system supposes, that the atonement by Christ was not intended for the salvation of any part of the human race; that its main end, and solę object, was the glory of the Supreme Being, as manifested in his holy and righteous law. In support of this plan, it is argued, that it is inconsistent, for infinite wisdom and

goodness to prefer an inferior object to a superior one; that all creation, when compared with the Creator, sinks into nothing, bearing no possible proportion to the infinite Jehovah; of course, that God always has his own glory in view, as his supreme object, in all he does.

This plan agrees with the former, in supposing sin to be of infinite magnitude, and deserving of endless punishment; that, as the law of God is infinite, like himself, finite man is infinitely to blame for not fulfilling all its requirements; and that the penalty of the law is endless misery, which misery Christ sustained; not with a view of acquitting the sinner, nor in room and stead of the transgressor, as is supposed in the other plan; but for the honor of divine justice, and the glory of his Father. It is further argued, that by Christ's suffering the penalty of the law, justice is as fully satisfied, as if all mankind had been made miserable for an eternity. And this being the case, it is now just and right for God to acquit as many of the sinful race of Adam, as is consistent with his grand object, which is himself; yet by no means rendering it unjust for God to punish, to all eternity, as many as is necessary, in order for the satisfying of the same grand object.

We first inquire into the propriety of the argument on which this plan of atonement seems to be founded which is, that God always acts for his own infinite and incomprehensible glory; never stooping so low, as to act with an intention for the good of his creatures.

1st. We ask, is God as infinitely glorious as he can be, or not? If it be answered, that he is; then, if his object in all he does, is to augment his own glory, he never has, nor will he ever accomplish his intention.