Ariſtocles to Authades. SIR,

UPON a more mature Conſideration of what you, not long ſince, ſuggeſted to me concerning the Divine Sovereignty, together with what you added upon that Occaſion, relating to the Promiſes of the Goſpel; I beg leave to write a few Lines to you upon this Subject; nothing captious or diſputacious, I aſſure you, but with that ſerious, calm and impartial State of Mind that becomes a Chriſtian, who is above all Things deſirous to know the Truth, in order that he may be governed by it in the purſuit of everlaſting Happineſs.

You may remember, it was your chief Inquiry, as a Teſt of my being a true Chriſtian;—Can you in Sincerity ſubſcribe to the Truth of OUR Doctrine? By which you meant the Doctrine of the Divine Sovereignty, as you had explain'd it: i. e. (if I underſtood you right,) as implying God's eternal, arbitrary and abſolute Determination of the everlaſting Fate of his Creatures, from his own meer Motion, and without any Conſideration of their good or ill Behaviour. To which, I muſt ſtill anſwer; No, good Sir, by no means! For the ſake of the Love of God I cannot!—The Love of Chriſt it ſelf conſtraineth me that I cannot!—For it manifeſtly appears to me infinitely impoſſible to be true, as being utterly contrary to the Divine Attributes; contrary to many plain Texts of Holy Scripture, and contrary to the general Drift and Deſign of the whole Word of God.

It is contrary to the Nature and Attributes of God, becauſe it appears plainly inconſiſtent with the very Notion of his being a Moral Governour of the World: For it repreſents Him as laying his Creatures under a Neceſſity of being what they are, whether good or bad, and ſo leaves no Room for either Virtue or Vice, Praiſe or Blame, Reward or Puniſhment, properly ſpeaking. —Nay, it implies a formed Deſign of laying, by far the greateſt Number of his Creatures, under a Neceſſity of being eternally miſerable, antecedent to any Conſideration of their Demerit: And this, as it is explained by ſome, from a moſt ſelfiſh View of promoting his own Glory, at the Expence of their endleſs and unavoidable Miſery; and in effect, of neceſſitating their being ſinful that they might be miſerable; for he that wills the End, muſt will the Means; and this implies the moſt ſhocking Reflexions imaginable on the Wiſdom, Holineſs, Juſtice and Goodneſs of God, all at once; and no leſs ſevere Reflections upon his Truth; for it imports a manifeſt Double Dealing with them; a ſecret Will inconſiſtent with what he has clearly revealed; ſince he has declared, and that with an Oath, that he earneſtly deſires their Happineſs, when at the ſame Time he ſecretly deſigns their inevitable Ruin.

This Doctrine alſo appears to be evidently contrary to a great many plain Texts of Holy Scripture, which aſſure us in the cleareſt and ſtrongeſt Terms, That GOD is not willing that any ſhould periſh, but that all ſhould come to Repentance. That He would have all Men to be ſaved, and that for this End he ſent his Son into the World, who taſted Death for every Man, and became a Propitiation for the Sins of the whole World, and gave himſelf a Ranſom for all; nay, even for thoſe that by denying the Lord that bought them, bring upon themſelves ſwift Deſtruction. Ezek. 18.29, 32. 2 Pet. 3.9. and 2.1. 1 Tim. 2.4, 6. Heb. 2.9. 1 Job. 2.2. &c. &c.—

And laſtly, it ſeems manifeſtly repugnant to the general Drift of the whole Word of God, (which is plainly to excite our utmoſt Activity in the purſuit of all Holineſs in Heart and Life,) there being nothing that can ſo effectually tend not only to tempt us to entertain hard and unworthy Thoughts of God, but alſo to cut the Sinews of all our Endeavours to repent and return to Him and our Duty, as even the moſt diſtant Surmize, that poſſibly all our Labour may be in vain; ſince, for ought we know, we may be abſolutely excluded from all poſſibility of ſucceeding by a ſovereign and inexorable Decree of Reprobation.

Whereas on the contrary, nothing can ſo effectually tend to put us upon the moſt vigourous Exertion of our ſelves in endeavouring to be Holy as God is Holy, Righteous as He is Righteous, and Merciful as He our Heavenly Father is Merciful, as thoſe moſt amiable Apprehenſions of him, which repreſent him as being, in and through his bleſſed Son Jeſus Chriſt, an univerſal and irreſpective Lover of the Souls which he hath made, and ſincerely and ſolicitouſly deſirous of their Happineſs, in proportion to their ſeveral Capacities, for Chriſt's Sake, without reſpect of Perſons, to grant them all the Aid and Aſſiſtance neceſſary thereunto, ſo far as can conſiſt with his treating them as being what they are, and what he himſelf hath made them, i. e. tho' frail, yet free, ſelf exerting and ſelf-determining Agents; and to make all the tender and merciful Allowances for their Frailty that can conſiſt with the ſincerity of their Obedience, and his Righteouſneſs and Authority in the Government of the World.— And this, I think, is manifeſtly the Idea or Conception of God, which, (agreably to the Light of Nature,) the Holy Scriptures univerſally give us concerning Him.

On which Account if their be any Difficulties from either Reaſon or Scripture, (as to me there appear none, but what by attentive Conſideration may be eaſily ſurmounted.) yet methinks we ſhould be ſtrongly inclined, for God's ſake as well as our own, to get over them; and whatever obſcure Texts there may be that may ſeem to carry a different Sound, to interpret them, (as in fact the Church of God always did in the firſt and pureſt Ages; See Dr, Whitby's Diſcourſe on theſe Subjects, paſſion. and as we do now,) in a Manner conſiſtent with the Divine Attributes, and thoſe many plain Texts that are intirely conſonant to them, and the general Drift of the whole Word of God; being well aſſured that whatever be the Meaning of thoſe few obſcure Texts, they cannot poſſibly mean any thing contrary either to the Light of Nature, or any other Texts of Scripture, or that can tend to diſcourage or diſhearten our utmoſt Endeavours to ſeek and purſue the everlaſting Happineſs of our Souls.—

In this Manner I am obliged to think upon this great and important Subject.—But you told me if I could not think with you about the Divine Sovereignty, I need go no further in my Inquiry, there already appears upon me a black Mark, and my Spot is not the Spot of God's Children.—Nay, you did, in effect, tell me, It is impoſſible for me under this miſtake, to be a Subject of God's ſpecial Grace here, or Glory hereafter. See a late Sermon on Exod. 33.19. pag. 33.19. Now this is indeed dreadful! and it may be juſtly ſaid, This is a hard ſaying, who can receive it?—I beſeech you, Sir, can this be right, to paſs ſuch bitter Cenſures upon every one that cannot think preciſely with you in ſome ſpeculative Points, tho' they agree with you both in Heart and Life, in the great practical Matters wherein the Life of all Religion conſiſts?—Is this, can this be conſiſtent with the Spirit of the Goſpel thus to judge one another, and to propagate a Spirit of judging at ſuch a prodigious Rate?— Can any thing be more contrary to Chriſt's Rule, Mat. 7.1. Judge not that ye be not judged, and to St. Paul's whole 14th to the Romans, particularly v. 4. Who art thou that judgeſt another Man's Servant? to his own Maſter he ſtandeth or falleth. And what can this be leſs than a direct Invaſion of his Province, who claims to himſelf alone the Prerogative of knowing and ſearching the Hearts and trying the Reins of the Children of Men?—I do ſincerely profeſs, that after the utmoſt Intenſeneſs of Thought and the moſt ſolicitous Care not to be miſled in my Apprehenſions, I am ſtill under the ſame neceſſity of thinking as I do upon theſe Points, as I am in being perſuaded that I ſee the Sun when I look full upon it on the Meridian in a clear Day: And that I can no more yield my Aſſent to ſome Points of your Doctrine than to this Propoſition, that 2 and 2 are equal to 5.—And yet I would by no means cenſure you as you cenſure me; I will not ſuffer my ſelt to imagine but that your Miſtakes, (great as I apprehend them,) may conſiſt with your being a ſerious Chriſtian.

You aſk me, whether I have a clear Senſe of the Divine Sovereignty in the Buſineſs of our ſpiritual and eternal Salvation?—To which I anſwer, I truſt I have:—But then I muſt confeſs my Notion is widely different from yours.—And in order to think clearly on this Subject, and to give a juſt Solution to what Difficulties may ſeem to ariſe from the Text you mentioned, or any other Texts relating to this Matter, it ſeems to me very neceſſary to diſtinguiſh between the Conſideration of GOD as a Benefactor and as a Judge; and between the Beſtowment of various Talents and Favours upon Men in this Life, which is a State of Probation, and the Retributions to be awarded in the Life to come, according to what Uſe they ſhall have made of them here.—In the one God acts as a Sovereign Lord of his Favours, and in the other as a Righteous Judge of the Behaviour of his Creatures under them.—

I agree, then, that God is intirely ſovereign and arbitrary as a Benefactor in the Diſtribution of his Talents and Favours, both ſpiritual and temporal, as proper Means of Trial and Probation in this World: i. e. the various Abilities, Capacities, Privileges and Advantages He beſtoweth upon Mankind: And he is intirely at Liberty to do what he will with his own; and conſequently to beſtow, not only the good Things of this Life, but eternal Life and Salvation upon his Creatures in what Manner and Meaſure, and upon what Terms He thinks fit; nor is he obliged to give any Account to any one of his Proceedings. But we may always and in all Caſes reſt aſſured of this, that the Judge of all the Earth will do nothing but what is right; and that tho' Clouds and Darkneſs are round about Him, with regard to many of his Diſpenſations here, yet Juſtice and Judgment are always the Habitation of his Throne. Pſ. 97.2.—Not that Things are therefore right meerly becauſe he does them, but He therefore does them becauſe they are right.

Indeed I cannot think it conſiſtent with the Divine Attributes, God's Wiſdom, Holineſs, Juſtice, Goodneſs, &c. to give Being to any of his Intelligent Creatures, without putting them into a Condition, that, (every thing being conſidered in the whole of their Nature and Duration,) would render Being deſirable to them; See Wollaſton's Religion of Nature, p. 200. nor to put them eternally into a Condition that is worſe than not to be, but for their own perſonal Fault or voluntary Miſconduct in Oppoſition to his Will: And if you will weigh Things exactly, I believe you will find your ſelf obliged to think with me in this Matter; unleſs you will go into thoſe two monſtrouſly abſurd Concluſions to which Dr. Twiſſe is reduced, and which he is obliged to maintain as being the Foundations of the whole abſolute Syſtem, viz. That it is better to be eternally miſerable, than not to be; and conſequently, That it may conſiſt with the Juſtice and Goodneſs of God, to inflict exquiſite and eternal Miſery upon innocent Creatures: i. e. upon ſuch as were never capable of formal or actual Sin.—See his Vindiciae Gratioe, Lib. 2. p. 16. De Amiſ. Grat. Digr. 1.—Such are the hopeful Principles on which that fatal Doctrine is founded!—But in truth, methinks I would not wiſh any Cauſe more effectually baffled, than to ſee it reduced to ſuch prodigious Abſurdities as theſe are.

For tho' God is not accountable to his Creatures for any of his Proceedings, yet we muſt conceive, that his own infinite Wiſdom, Holineſs, Juſtice and Goodneſs muſt be a Law to Him from which he cannot vary.— And as I cannot think it conſiſtent with either of them to lay any of his Creatures, (antecedent to any Conſideration of their Behaviour,) under an abſolute Neceſſity of being eventually and irretrievably miſerable; ſo I muſt do Him that Honour as to think, they do oblige Him, in giving them Being, to put them into a Condition that is in the whole better than not to be, and by no means to put them into a worſe Condition than not to be, but in Caſe of their own wilful Diſobedience and final Impenitency: For if you think otherwiſe, you muſt, in effect, ſuppoſe him to will Miſery meerly for Miſery's ſake!— A Thought ſo ſhocking and horrid, that it muſt be forever removed at an infinite Diſtance from that greateſt and beſt of Beings!—But every thing beyond what is juſt ſufficient to render Being deſireable, even to a perfect Creature, however ſo obedient, I take to be Matter of meer ſovereign Goodneſs, in which God may go into what variety He pleaſes: Much more muſt the whole Syſtem of the Goſpel to fallen Man be Matter of meer ſovereign free Grace; and conſequently, in this Diſpenſation of his free Grace in Chriſt to Mankind, He hath Mercy and Compaſſion on whom, in what Manner and Meaſure, and upon what Terms he ſees fit. And none can reaſonably complain, ſo long as his Condition is better than not to be, and it will be intirely his own Fault if he be not in ſome Degree happy; and ſince he ſhall not be accountable for what he never received, and ſhall be treated according to his Conduct in the uſe of the Talent that was committed to his Truſt.

GOD is therefore confeſſedly ſovereign and arbitrary in the various Diſtributions of his Talents and Favours to his Creatures, and the ſeveral Conditions in which he places them, as proper Means and Occaſions of Probation.—It is from his meer ſovereign good Pleaſure that he allots to one Creature the Nature and Condition of a Man, to another that of an Angel;—to one Man a healthy, to another a ſickly Conſtitution:—To one Poverty, to another Riches;—to one ſmall Abilities and mean Advantages, to another large Powers and great Opportunities for Learning and Improvement:— To one Man or Number of Men, One Talent, viz. the Light of Nature; to another two Talents, viz. Judaiſm; to another five, viz. Chriſtianity.—In theſe and the like various Diſtributions of Favours, Talents and Circumſtances in this State of Probation, I grant God's Decrees and Allotments are abſolute and perſonal as well as national.—But this is but a temporary and probationary State; whereas in the State of Retribution after this Life, the Condition of Men will be decided for all Eternity, and this, not according to any abſolute Diſpoſition he has already made; not according to what they have received here, but according to what Uſe and Improvement they ſhall have made of what they had received; as is plain from many of our Saviour's Parables and Diſcourſes, and particularly thoſe of the 25th of St. Matthew, as well as many other Texts, and indeed from the whole Bible.—It is therefore manifeſt, that with regard to the future State of our Being, a ſovereign and abſolute Deciſion cannot be ſuppoſed to take Place; and that God's Decrees with regard to that State can imply nothing elſe but his Reſolution to treat all Men according to the Uſe they ſhall have made of his ſeveral Allotments to them in this World: i. e. To render the Good Happy and the Wicked Miſerable; in various Proportions, according to their Behaviour.—

Upon the whole, it ſeems to me, that the right Way of forming a juſt Notion of God's Decrees, is, to judge of them by the Facts as they really are before our Eyes. No Man is in fact laid under an abſolute Neceſſity of being ſinful and miſerable in the whole and Reſult of Things; therefore He never decreed abſolutely that he ſhould be ſo: — And God has in fact, aſſured us, that none ſhall be miſerable at laſt but for their own Fault; it muſt therefore be his Decree, that thoſe that are miſerable at laſt ſhall be ſo only for their own inexcuſable Wickedneſs. As the Righteouſneſs of the righteous ſhall be upon him, ſo the Wickedneſs of the wicked ſhall be upon him. Ezek. 18.20.—There are in fact a great variety of Talents and Privileges beſtowed on Mankind; therefore God, is the ſovereign Lord of his Favours, decreed there ſhould be ſuch a variety;— and he has in fact declared that Good Men, i. e. thoſe that make a good uſe of them will be happy, and the ſlothful, the wicked and impenitent will be miſerable according to the Sentence which he will paſs upon them as the righteous Judge of their Conduct and Behaviour: He therefore decreed that this ſhould be the Reſult of things, viz. That the righteous ſhould be happy and the wicked miſerable.—This is all the Notion that I can have of the Decrees of God: And as I am perſuaded this is the true Senſe of the Holy Scriptures, taken in the whole, and critically read and conſidered, and with which every particular Text that may ſeem to ſound otherwiſe, may eaſily be reconciled; ſo I can't but think that whatever objections may ſeem to lie againſt it from the Fore-knowledge of God, will be ſound to ariſe only from the narrowneſs of our own way of conceiving things, and to conſiſt meerly in darkning Councel by Words without Knowledge.

For ſtrictly and philoſophically ſpeaking, there can be no more Propriety in attributing Preſcience or Foreknowledge to God, than in attributing Repentance to him; becauſe there is neither paſt nor to come, neither fore nor after in him; for theſe Expreſſions imply Succeſſion, which implies Limitation, which cannot be in an infinitely perfect and immutable Being. So that according to philoſophic Verity, they cannot any otherwiſe be aſcribed to God than Repenting, Grieving, Eyes, Ears, Hands and other bodily Parts and Paſſions.—We are therefore to conceive all theſe and the like Expreſſions which are uſed in the Holy Scriptures, as being, (what they are commonly called,) God's ſpeaking of himſelf after the manner of Men; and conſequently that God's Foreknowing and predeſtinating are Terms that are uſed, (like his Repenting,) meerly figuratively and by way of Accommodation to our weak Capacities and our low way of apprehending and conceiving divine Things; and are to be explained after the ſame Manner, viz. That as God's Repenting, (Gen. 6.6. &c.) means not any Change in Him, but only that the Face of his Conduct towards the Old World was, in the Event, as if he had repented he had made it, or as being fitly reſembled, by a Man's repenting of his having made a Thing, when he ſees it needful to deſtroy it: So God's Foreknowing and predeſtinating, (Rom. 8.29. &c.) implies, not any thing fore or after, preceeding or ſucceeding in him, but only that the Event in his Conduct in this or the other Inſtance, is as if he had forſoer or fore determined this or the other Event, or that his infinite Knowledge and unerring Purpoſe, as they appear in the Facts, may be fitly reſembled by the fore-ſight of a wiſe Man who ſhrewdly conjuctures beforehand what will happen in ſuch and ſuch Caſes, and before determines and provides accordingly.

If therefore we would ſpeak with ſtrict Propriety concerning God in reference to this Matter, we muſt not ſay that he fore-knows or fore-ordains, but that he knows and ordains, or appoints; i. e. That by one ſingle Act, one infinite all comprehending View, (to which all Things, that with reſpect to our narrow limited Minds, are paſt, preſent or to come, are equally and at once preſent,) he ſees and knows, approves or diſapproves his Creatures as being what they really are, and appoints, orders and conducts towards them accordingly.—For, as it cannot be but that God's Knowledge muſt be abſolutely perfect, He muſt therefore fore-ſee, or rather ſee every thing certainly as being what it is; neceſſary Events as being neceſſary, and contingent as being ſuch, and the Actions of ſuch as he has made free Agents as being free; but the Certainty, before it is, that any Thing will be, does no more infer the Neceſſity of it, than the certainty of it when it is, implies its being a neceſſary Event. For if ſo, every thing would be equally neceſſary, and nothing could poſſibly have been otherwiſe than it is: But to ſay this, is abſurd; becauſe we are intuitively certain that we have, (and therefore God has given us,) ſelf-exerting, and ſelf-determining Powers, and conſequently that our Actions, and the Events of them do immediately depend on our own Wills, which is the Reaſon why we blame out ſelves when we do amiſs, as knowing we might have done otherwiſe. Wheareas if we ſuppoſe our Actions immediately depending on the Will of God, we muſt ſuppoſe them neceſſary as to us, and conſequently that we are not to blame for them, being not properly Agents but acted and neceſſitated in what we do; which is abſurd, as it makes God the Author of our Sins, and is inconſiſtent with the very Being of Virtue or Vice, of Praiſe or Blame, and of moral Agency or moral Government.—Since therefore we know that theſe Things are not, and cannot be ſo in themſelves, we are ſure they cannot be known or willed to be ſuch by Almighty God.—

As therefore God has thus plainly diſcovered his Decrees to be ſuch as the Facts in Conjunction with his Attributes and reveal'd Religion declare them to be, and he can have no ſecret Reſerves inconſiſtent with them; ſo I conceive that his great End in giving Being to his Creatures,, and in all his various Diſpenſations towards them muſt have been, (not any Self-Views;—not to ſerve himſelf of them, or to add any thing to his own Happineſs, for he is infinitely Self-ſufficient for that, independant on any of his Creatures, but) that they might be happy in proportion to their ſeveral Capacities, Talents and Improvements, in conſequence of their chearful Submiſſion to his Sovereign Allotments, and ſincere and faithful Obedience to all his holy and righteous Laws: Only with this Reſerve, that in Caſe of their final Obſtinacy and Diſobedience, they ſhould be miſerable in proportion to the ſeveral Degrees of their Wickedneſs, for the Terror of others, and to ſupport the Honour of his Laws and Authority in the Government of the World.—This, I ſay, is the only way of thinking I can find any Reaſon for on this Subject.

Now againſt all this, you only deſired me to read the 9th of Romans ſeriouſly and prayerfully.—To which I anſwer, I have very often read that Chapter ſeriouſly and prayerfully, and I will add, carefully too; (for we muſt not expect our Prayers to be heard, unleſs we uſe great Care, Diligence and Exactneſs, as well as Seriouſneſs in the ſearch of Truth)—And after all, I cannot find one Syllable in it relating to the future, eternal Condition of particular Perſons, it being only a Vindication of God's Sovereignty in dealing with whole Nations of Men, and particularly in electing the Jews at firſt, and rejecting them now, and calling the Gentiles to be his peculiar People, to enjoy peculiar Talents and Favours in this World.— And I can't but think a little Attention, without prejudice in favour of preconceived human Schemes, muſt ſatisfy any conſiderate Perſon that this is really the Caſe.—Pray read and conſider carefully what Dr. Whitby on the Five Points, and in his Annotations, and Dr. Clarke in the 15th of his 18 Sermons, publiſhed in his Life-time, have written upon this Chapter, and what he ſays upon all other Texts relating to this Subject in his Poſthumous Sermons See alſo a late Eſſay for a New Tranſlation of the Bible..

The Jews conceited that they alone were, and were forever to continue the peculiar People of God, and that they alone were to enjoy the Benefits of the Meſiah's Kingdom: They could not therefore brook it to think that their Nation muſt now be rejected and the Gentiles called; this was a great Stumbling-block to them.— Now this is the Difficulty that St. Paul is here about to obviate: which he does by ſhewing, 1ſt. That God is meerly ſovereign and arbitrary in the various Diſtributions of his Favours, and in chuſing and rejecting whom he pleaſes with regard to the Privileges of being his peculiar People; and 2dly. That however, he was now very juſt in rejecting them, and leaving them to the hardneſs of their Hearts, as he did Pharaoh.

He argues in the firſt Place, that they could not reaſonably complain, becauſe God is ſovereign and arbitrary in chuſing whom he will to be his peculiar People:—He was ſo at firſt in chuſing the Seed of Abraham, Iſaac and Jacob, to enjoy the great Talent of Revealed Religion, and the Promiſe of the Meſiah, and in rejecting that of Iſhmael and Eſau from that Privilege, tho' they were not deſtitute of a good Talent in enjoying the leſſer Advantage of the Light of Nature; and ſo he was now in rejecting the Jews for a Time, and calling the Gentiles to the yet greater and ineſtimable Talent of the Goſpel.—I ſay of theſe Diſpenſations of Providence St. Paul is manifeſtly to be underſtood.— For it is evident that thoſe Inſtances he alledges of Jacob and Eſau, and of Iſaac and Iſhmael, cannot be underſtood of the Perſons themſelves, (much leſs of their eternal State,) but of the Nations to deſcend from them, as will plainly appear if you look into the Texts in Geneſis from whence they are quoted.—Thus, as it was ſaid of Iſhmael, Gen. 17.20. Twelve Princes ſhall be begot, and I will make him a great Nation; ſo of Jacob and Eſau, it was ſaid to Rebecca, Gen. 25.23. Two Nations are in thy Womb, two manner of People ſhall be ſeparated from thy Bowels, the one People ſhall be ſtronger than the other People, and the elder ſhall ſerve the younger; which ſays the Apoſtle, was ſaid that the Purpoſe of God according to Election might ſtand. v. 11, 12. So that this muſt be an Election of People and not of particular Perſons, for it never was fact in the Perſons themſelves.

And the next Words, Jacob have I loved and Eſau have I hated, quoted from Mal. 1.2, 3. are manifeſtly to be underſtood, not of the Perſons, but of the Nations; for the Words are, I loved Jacob and hated Eſau, and laid his Mountains and Heritage waſte for the Dragon of the Wilderneſs; whereas Edom ſaith, we are impoveriſhed, &c. all which is evidently ſpoken of the People, and with regard to their Condition in this World.—Where, by the way, neither is God's Hatred of Eſau to be underſtood to imply abſolute Hatred, (for he had a good Bleſſing,) but only a leſs degree of Love; according to a known Figure of Speech in the Hebrew Language, whereby that is frequently ſpoken abſolutely which is meant comparatively. In the ſame Senſe, Chriſt ſays, Luk. 14.26. He that hateth not Father and Mother, &c. cannot be my Diſciple: Where ſurely he cannot be underſtood to mean abſolute Hatred, but only a leſs degree of Love; and ſo he explains himſelf, Mat. 10.37. by ſaying, He that loveth Father or Mother more than me, is not worthy of me.—So that God's hating Eſau only means that he loved him, (i. e. the People deſcending from him,) leſs than Jacob, i. e. the People deſcending from him, and beſtowed leſs Talents and Privileges on the one than on the other.

It is therefore, only with reſpect to the Beſtowment of certain ſpecial Privileges and Talents in this Life, that St. Paul is to be underſtood when he ſays, v. 16. See Dr. Whitby in loc. It is not of him that willeth, [for Abraham wiſhed, O that Iſhmael might live,] nor of him that runneth, [for Eſau ran to fetch the Veniſon that he might obtain the Bleſſing,] but of God that ſheweth mercy, who therefore in the ſovereign Beſtowment of his peculiar Favours, hath Mercy on whom he will have Mercy and hath Compaſſion on whom he will have Compaſſion. For here Juſtice hath nothing to do, and there can be no Unrighteouſneſs in him. And with reſpect to theſe various arbitrary Diſtributions and Allotments, it may juſtly be anſwered to any one that is tempted to find Fault, as the Jews did, who art thou, O Man, that replieſt againſt God? Shall the Thing formed ſay to him that formed it, why haſt thou made me thus? Hath not the Potter power over the Clay, to make of the ſame Lump, one Veſſel to Honour, and another to Diſhonour?— Where yet it muſt be obſerved, that Veſſels made to diſhonourable, i. e. to leſs honourable Services, have, however, ſome Degree, ſome Intereſt in their Maker's and Owner's Love and Favour.—But all this has nothing to do with the Diſtributions of the Life to come; there Juſtice alone takes Place, which conſiſts in the exact and equitable Rewards and Puniſhments to Men, according to their good or ill Conduct in the Uſe of the ſeveral Talents arbitrarily committed to them in this Life.

But you will perhaps ſay, Is not the Example of Pharaoh to be underſtood of the Diſtributions of the Life to come?—I anſwer, No.—For St. Paul was as well concerned, as I ſaid, in the ſecond Place, to vindicate the Juſtice of God in rejecting the Jews, as his Sovereignty in freely beſtowing his Goſpel Favours upon the Gentiles.— To this Purpoſe, therefore, it is, that he alledges the Example of Pharaoh, that he might juſtify God's Dealings in rejecting the Jews, and juſtly hardening their Hearts, i. e. leaving them to the Hardneſs of their Hearts in rejecting Chriſt, as he had juſtly hardened Pharaoh's Heart, i. e. left him to the hardneſs of his Heart, in reſiſting the Force of the Miracles he had wrought for his Conviction, and to ſhew that God might juſtly make the Jews Monuments of his Wrath in cutting them off from being a People, for their obſtinate rejecting of Chriſt, as he had made Pharaoh a Monument of his Wrath in the Eyes of the World, for his Obſtinacy in hardening his Heart againſt the Means uſed for his Conviction.—

I interpret God's hardening Pharaoh's Heart, not of any actual Efficiency of his, (for this ſeems needleſs in it ſelf, as well as inconſiſtent with his Attributes,) but, either of God's doing that, (e. g. his removing the Plagues,) from whence he took Occaſion to harden his Heart; or his leaving him to the hardneſs of his Heart.—In this Senſe it is ſaid in 2 Sam. 24.1. God moved David to number Iſrael, which, in 1 Chron. 21.1. is called Satan's provoking him to number them. That Expreſſion therefore can only mean God's leaving or permitting Satan to tempt him; and this in the ſame Senſe as it is ſaid of Joſeph in Priſon, Gen. 39.22. That whatſoever they did there, he was the doer of it. Not that he actually did it; but that it was done with his Permiſſion, and under his Eye and Superintendecy.—

And that Expreſſion, v. 17. For this Cauſe have I raiſed thee up, &c. does not mean, for this Cauſe have I given thee Being; but for this Cauſe have I made thee to ſtand, as the Hebrew Word imports, i. e. for this Cauſe have I ſupported or ſubſiſted thee, and prolonged thy Life through one Plague after another, that I might, for thy Obſtinacy and Perverſeneſs, make thee an illuſtrious Example of my Vengeance to all the Earth.

And laſtly, Whom he will he hardneth, v. 18. does not mean of all that he hath given Being to, whem he will he hardens in their Sins, that he may render them eternally miſerable; but, of thoſe who for their perſonal Diſobedience, Obſtinacy and Impenitency, deſerve to be finally abandoned, whom he will he leaves to the hardneſs of their Hearts, and makes uſe of them as Monuments of his Wrath for the Terror of others as he did Pharaoh, and was now determined to leave the Jews for their Obſtinacy and Wickedneſs, in rejecting and crucifying Chriſt.—Thus I am obliged to interpret the 9th of Romans:—And that this is the only right Interpretation, is further evident from the Texts in Hoſea and Iſaiah, which the Apoſtle quotes in Confirmation of the Argument v. 25, 27, 29. and from the Concluſion of the whole v. 30. and 31. From whence it is manifeſt, that the Queſtion is wholly between the Jews and Gentiles as a People in this preſent State, and conſequently, that his whole Diſcourſe has nothing to do with any abſolute Decrees of God, with regard to the perſonal and eternal Condition of Men.

What I have ſaid upon this Text may be applied to the Solution of whatever Difficulties may ſeem to ariſe from other Texts; ſuch as that Expreſſion, Eph. 1.4. of God's chuſing them in Chriſt before the Foundation of the World:—The meaning of which muſt be this:— That whereas the Jews had been wont to conceit themſelves the only peculiar People, to enjoy the Benefit of the Meſſiah; he would have them to know that they might not arrogate that Privilege to themſelves alone, but that God had choſen or deſigned the Gentiles as well as them to enjoy the Bleſſings of the Meſſiah's Kingdom; and that even before the Foundation of the World, that they might be holy or ſanctified to God in him, to lead holy and vertuous Lives here, and ſo be happy forever hereafter.—For it may be truly ſaid of all baptized Chriſtians, (being by that Ordinance taken out of the Firſt Adam and grafted into the Body of Chriſt, the ſecond Adam, and ſo taken into the Family and Houſhold of God,) that they are predeſtinated to the Adoption of Children, v. 5. and that they are choſen in Chriſt, to enjoy the ineſtimable Talent of the Goſpel, that by that heavenly Diſpenſation they might learn to be holy in all Manner of Converſation.—And accordingly all that are baptized, and ſo born of Water and the Spirit, being ſaved by the Waſhing of Regeneration and the renewing of the Holy Ghoſt, (Joh. 3.5. Tit. 3.5.) are to be conſidered as belonging to the Kingdom of Heaven, tho' they are at preſent in a State of Probation. But their final and everlaſting Poſſeſſion of the heavenly Inheritance provided for them, depends upon their final perſeverance in Obedience, for if, after all, they draw back, God's Soul ſhall have no pleaſure in them. Heb. 10.38.

It may be added here, that the Word Choſen, when ſet in Contradiſtinction to thoſe that are called, (as in Mat. 20.16. Many are called, but few choſen,) ſignifies thoſe that are approved good Men, who comply with the Call of the Goſpel.—So that the Senſe of thoſe Words, is, that, tho' there were many that, at that Time, were called to the Knowledge of the Goſpel, yet there were comparatively but few that did comply with the Call, ſo as, in Heart and Life to conform to it, and thereby become ſuch as God approves of and delights in.—And the obſtinately unbelieving and diſobedient are called Reprobate, as being diſapproved and rejected of God, for their Diſobedience and obſtinate perſiſting in their Rebellion and Impenitency.—For other Texts ſee Whithy, Clarke and Clagget, and the Eſſay abovementioned.

Thus I have given you a ſhort Sketch of my Manner of thinking upon this Subject, whereof this is the Sum, viz. That in the Diſtribution of Talents and Favours in this State of Probation, the Sovereignty of God as a Benefactor does truly take Place; but in the future Diſtributions of Rewards and Puniſhments, abſolute Sovereignty is intirely out of the Queſtion.—As a Judge deciding the eternal Condition of Men, God never once repreſents himſelf as arbitrary, but every where, as proceeding according to Equity, without reſpect of Perſons; not treating Men according to any abſolute Diſpoſition he hath already made, but in exact proportion to their own Conduct in the uſe of the Talents committed to their Truſt.

And I would wiſh it to be ſeriouſly conſidered, that it was the wicked Servant, (Mat. 25.24. compared with Luk. 19.22.) who repreſented his Lord, (as many have lately done among us in theſe Times,) as reaping where he never ſowed, and gathering where he had not ſtrowed, i. e. (like Pharaoh, requiring Brick without Straw,) requiring of his Creatures Things as impoſſible for them to do, as it is to create a World, and damning them to all Eternity for not performing them.—Let it alſo be remembered, that in the Parable of the Labourers, Mat. 20.15. where God is repreſented as making that Anſwer, Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with my own? which you built ſo much upon, he does not mean to vindicate his Conduct as a Judge, as tho' in that Capacity he might arbitrarily reward or not reward as He pleaſed, (for he did exactly reward according to Stipulation,) but as a Benefactor at firſt, in granting the Favour and making the Stipulation upon what Terms he thought fit, in which he is confeſſedly arbitrary.—

In ſhort, the 25th of St. Matthew, and all ſuch Texts of Scripture as repreſent God as a Judge rewarding and puniſhing, have not, as far as I can ſee, any Place at all in your Syſtem of Divinity.—But in truth, I cannot think of a greater Diſhonour that can be done to Almighty God, than to repreſent him as arbitrary conſidered as a Governour and a Judge, when he has taken abundant Care throughout the whole Scripture, from the Beginning of Geneſis to the End of the Revelation, to repreſent himſelf, not as an arbitrary, but as a moral Governour of the World; proceeding upon Stipulations with his Reaſonable Creatures;—treating them, not as Machines or Stocks and Stones, but as Rational and Moral Agents, ſuch as he hath made them; beſtowing Means and Aſſiſtances, and uſing Arguments, Motives and Perſuaſions with them, ſuch as Promiſes, Threatnings, Examples, and the like; and rewarding or puniſhing them according as they ſhall be found to have conducted themſelves.—Such is the Notion or Conception that I am obliged to entertain of Almighty God, and with which every Thing in the Scriptures, I think, is clearly conſiſtent.

But now in Conſequence of that ſtrange, unnatural and unſcriptural Notion of the Almighty, which your Doctrine ſeems to imply, you appear to me, in effect, to fly in the Face of the whole Scriptures, by denying the Being of any Promiſes at all, as being inconſiſtent with the Divine Sovereignty.—I confeſs, you, and thoſe on your Side, are herein conſiſtent enough with your ſelves; for ſuppoſing a meer ſovereign abſolute and arbitrary Deciſion of the eternal Fate of Mankind, antecedent to, or without any Conſideration of their perſonal Behaviour, it is plain that all Stipulations, Promiſes, Threatenings, &c. are but a meer Farce, and can have no ſerious Meaning in them.—But then do but conſider what you are doing; for if you deny the Being of any Promiſes conſiſtent with the Sovereignty of God, you do in Effect, deſtroy the very Being of the New Covenant, and, by Conſequence, the whole Deſign and Purport of all reveal'd Religion; which is likewiſe the ſad Havock that Mr. Whitefield has made of Chriſtianity, in his Piece againſt the whole Duty of Man.

This, Sir, I confeſs, is a heavy Charge, and nothing grieves me more than that a Gentleman of your Character and Station has given the Occaſion.—Indeed you was then only undertaking to prove that there are no Promiſes in Scripture to the Unregenerate, [meaning by the Unregenerate, thoſe, (whether baptized or not,) who are under the Dominion and Guilt of Sin.]—But pray how did you prove it?—Why, by this Argument, (they were your own Words,) That if God had bound himſelf by his Promiſe to any of his Creatures, [i. e. good or bad,] he is no more at perfect Liberty either to grant or withold the promiſed Bleſſing as may pleaſe him.—Now ſurely if this Argument proves any thing, it proves that no Promiſe at all, to good or bad, is conſiſtent with the Divine Sovereignty; and then where is there any Place for any New Covenant, or indeed Old either?—And if the Caſe be ſo, away with the Bible ſure enough!—It is indeed a ſeal'd Book, a dead Letter, and an old Almanack, as ſome People have of late preſumed to call it.— In ſhort, if the Caſe be thus, it can be nothing better than a meer Impoſture, and muſt be utterly a ſenſleſs and unmeaning Thing.—Which, by the Way, is agreeable enough to Mr. Whitefield's Doctrine, That no Words, (and conſequently, not the Scriptures,) can teach what it is to be a true Chriſtian, any more than what it is to ſee, or what Light and Colours are to a Man born blind.—See London Magazine, for 1739.

But I will appeal to any Man of Common Senſe, that reads the Bible carefully, whether it be not full of many exceeding great and precious Promiſes, as St. Peter calls them? 2.1.4. and whether it be not manifeſtly the Deſign and Tendency of the whole Scripture, from the Beginning to the End, to inculcate theſe two Points? viz. 1ſt. To put Mankind upon the moſt vigorous Activity in ſeeking and purſuing their everlaſting Happineſs; and 2dly. To aſcertain Succeſs to them in ſo doing.—Is it not one of the firſt Things you read in Geneſis, after the Fall (4.7.) If thou doſt well, ſhalt thou not be accepted? And the laſt in Revelations, (22.14.) Bleſſed are they that do his Commandments, that they may have a RIGHT to the Tree of Life, and may enter in through the Gate into the City; and whoſoever will let him come and take of the Water of Life freely.—

Pray, Sir, let me aſk you,—are there Promiſes, or are there not?—If you ſay there are not, as your Argument ſeems plainly to import, I muſt think we are laid under a Neceſſity of being deceived; for ſurely no Words can expreſs Promiſes, if thoſe of the Scripture do not; they are certainly expreſſed juſt as they would be if God had deſigned we ſhould underſtand them ſo.—If you allow there are Promiſes, pray where is the Abſurdity in ſuppoſing, nay, what elſe can be made of them, but that God deſigned to paſs over a Right, at leaſt a conditional Right to his Creatures, of what he promiſes them?— I own the Matter of the Promiſes is Matter of meer ſovereign free Grace: Nay, it is Matter of meer ſovereign Grace that God has in his bleſſed Son given us any Promiſes at all:—But ſurely notwithſtanding this, when he has been graciouſly pleaſed to grant us theſe precious Promiſes, it muſt have been his Deſign to paſs over a Right to us of the Bleſſings promiſed; to which we could have had no Right but upon the Score of his meer Grace in Chriſt.—Which Right therefore he has granted us, (I allow,) not to plead in the Virtue of any thing we can do, but meerly in the Virtue of what Chriſt hath done for us, in whom alone it is that all the Promiſes are Yea and Amen. 2 Cor, 1.20.

In his Right therefore we muſt plead, who has purchaſed this Benefit for us, and not in the Virtue or Merit of any thing we do, which we can only humbly conſider as meer Qualifications neceſſary to render us capable of receiving what God in Chriſt hath freely promiſed.—So that what we do muſt be conſidered, not in the aſſuming and challenging way that you repreſented in order to ridicule our Doctrine, and as all that was, in every Inſtance poſſible to be done, but as what, according to the merciful Terms of the New Covenant, God is graciouſly pleaſed in Chriſt to expect from ſuch frail and imperfect Creatures as we are, with all our Temptations and Infirmities about us.—It was therefore very unjuſt for you to put Things in ſuch a ridiculous Light as you did, to talk of owing, claiming, challenging, &c.— Nobody ever dreamt of uſing ſuch Language to God, which could not become an Angel, much leſs a fallen ſinful Creature, when the Matter, and indeed the very Being of the Promiſes is Matter of free Grace.—Conſider Things in this Light, and then what Senſe is there in your Categoric Syllogiſm, and all your other Reaſonings on this Subject?

But ſtill you inſiſt upon it that there is no Promiſe to the unregenerate.—Now as to this, I grant there is nothing promiſed to the obſtinate Sinner, perſiſting wilfully and unrelentingly in his Sin and Rebellion, that hates to be reformed, and caſts God's Words behind his Back.— But tho' there is nothing promiſed to him, continuing in that Condition, yet it does by no means follow but that the Promiſe is made to him upon Condition of his repenting and returning to his Duty for the Time to come.—Yea, but you will ſay, he can't repent and turn to God.—I allow he cannot truly repent of himſelf without God's Help.— But then what I inſiſt upon, is. That God has promiſed to hear and help him by his bleſſed Spirit, if he earneſtly prays and ſtrives in ſuch a Manner as may be expected from ſuch a frail Creature as he is. Tell me, is there no Medium between an obſtinate relentleſs Sinner, and one that is throughly regenerate, in your Senſe of the Word, i. e, that has gained the Maſtery of his Luſts, and is univerſally in Heart and Life devoted to God in Jeſus Chriſt?—May not one who is not yet thus intirely devoted to God, be brought by the Aſſiſtance of Common Grace, (abſolutely given in Chriſt to all,) to be ſerious and really ſolicitous for Salvation, ſo as being deeply ſenſible of his own Guilt and Weakneſs, earneſtly to cry to God for Help, and to ſtrive in earneſt that he may be qualified for God's Help?—To me it is plain this may be the Caſe of one not yet throughly converted from Sin to God.

Now this is the Man to whom I ſay the Promiſes of divine efficacious Aid or ſpecial Grace do belong: This is he who hath, to whom ſhall be given, in our Saviour's Senſe, Mat. 25, 29 —And I am under an invincible Neceſſity of underſtanding Mat. 7.7, 11, 28. Luk. 11.13. &c. as belonging to ſuch as he.—Can any one be ſo abſurd as to interpret theſe Promiſes thus?—You that have already received the ſpecial Grace of God, aſk and ye ſhall receive:—You who have already found Mercy, ſeek and ye ſhall find:—You to whom the Gate of Mercy is already opened, and are already got within it, knock and it ſhall be opened;—You who have already got Reſt, come to me and I will give you Reſt, &c.— Is not this making perfect Nonſenſe of the precious Promiſes of God?—To me it ſeems nothing can be more ſo:— And yet this muſt be your own Interpretation, if you deny their being made even to the unregenerate, i. e. to ſuch as, being deeply ſenſible of their Guilt and Pollution, and utter Inability to help themſelves, are ſo ſeriouſly concerned to become renewed in the Spirit of their Minds, as to aſk, ſeek, knock and ſtrive that they may obtain the Grace of God.

For God's ſake, dear Sir, let us take Care that we do not, from a violent Attachment to any preconceived human Schemes, pervert the plaineſt and moſt obvious Declarations and Promiſes of the Goſpel.—To me it is manifeſt, that this is what thoſe on your Side really do; and that your whole Syſtem, where it is peculiar, is not founded on the Holy Scripture, (taken in the whole, and critically read and conſidered,) but on the empty Cob-webs of Scholaſtical Metaphyſics, (vain Philoſophy, Science falſly ſo called,) together with ſome few obſcure Texts, not rightly underſtood, for want of a critical Skill in the ancient Languages, and the Notions and Controverſies of thoſe Times, and for want of an exact Attention to the Scope and Argument of the Sacred Writers: In conſequence of which you manifeſtly torture the plaineſt Texts, to make them ſpeak your Senſe, and ſo corrupt the plainneſs and ſimplicity of the Goſpel, and in effect make it a meer unintelligible Riddle.—

For my part, I cannot for my Life help interpreting thoſe and the like Promiſes in this plain, eaſy and obvious Manner:— You that have not yet received the Grace of God for the thorough Renovation of your Souls, aſk and ye ſhall receive:—You that have not yet found Mercy, ſeek and ye ſhall find:—You to whom the Gate of Mercy is not yet opened, knock and it ſhall be opened:—You who are weary and heavy laden, under a deep and pungent Senſe of the Power and Guilt of Sin, and can find no Reſt, (as none can be had any other way,) Come to me and I will give you reſt, i. e. Take my Yoke upon you, [my Doctrines to believe, and my Laws to obey,] and learn of me, [follow my Example] and ye ſhall find reſt for your Souls.—And laſtly, you who are deeply ſenſible of your Weakneſs and great Need of the Help of God's holy Spirit, aſk, for he will give his holy Spirit to them that aſk him; i. e. to them that ſtrive as well as ſeek, and watch as well as pray.— Thus, I ſay, I am neceſſitated to underſtand theſe precious Promiſes, and in faithfulneſs to our great Lord and Maſter, and to the Souls which he hath made and redeemed, I am obliged thus plainly to interpret and inculcate them—

There were ſeveral other Paſſages in your Diſcourſe that appeared to me very exceptionable; but I have done, and will only conclude with my earneſt Prayer to God, That he will open our Eyes, that we may underſtand the wondrous Things of his Law; That what we ſee not he would teach us, and lead us into all neceſſary Truth and Duty!—And let us earneſtly beg that however we may differ in our Speculations in ſome Points, we may not ſuffer any thing to tempt us to a Spirit of Alienation and Uncharitableneſs; but that unitedly following the Things that make for Peace and true Holineſs here, we may at length meet together in that bleſſed World where Peace and Holineſs ſhall be conſummated in unſpeakable and everlaſting Happineſs!—Accordingly I remain, Sir,

your real Friend and very humble Servant Ariſtocles. September the 10th. 1744.

POSTSCRIPT.

I Shall not be ſo unkind to you as to publiſh your Anſwer, which conſiſted of but few Words, it being no ways fit for public View; but ſhall only ſubjoin the Subſtance of my Reply by way of Poſtſcript, to rectify Miſtakes, that no Uneaſineſs or Uncharitableneſs might ſubſiſt between us on that Account.

One Miſtake is, that you ſeem to apprehend it my Deſign to enter into a formal Controverſy with you on theſe Subjects, by your Expreſſion of a Duel with me:— Indeed, Sir, if you thought ſo, you was really miſtaken, for I aſſured you then, that it was with no diſputacious Temper or Deſign that I wrote what I did; and I now aſſure you, that my main Deſign was, that you might, if poſſible, be made ſenſible that moſt of the Occaſions of your uncharitable Diſpoſitions towards us, were really owing to your not rightly apprehending what our Doctrine truly is: And I hoped if I could lead you into a right underſtanding of our manner of explaining the Divine Sovereignty and the Promiſes of the Goſpel, as conſiſtent therewith, you would drop thoſe dark Thoughts you entertained of us, or at leaſt have ſome Charity for us, tho' you could not altogether think with us, as we have for you, tho' we cannot intirely think with you: For really there is nothing grieves me ſo much as that ſo bitter and uncharitable a Temper ſhould ſubſiſt and be propagated among Chriſtians.—

I might remark upon ſeveral Paſſages in your Letter; but there is one I cannot be content to paſs by, and that is, your Expreſſion of being ſanctified in the Womb, wherein I ſuppoſe you allude to the like Expreſſion in Jer. 1.5. which you ſeem to underſtand of the real inherent Sanctification of the Spirit; whereas it is manifeſt, that God is not there ſpeaking of real, but only of relative Sanctification, and that all he means, is, that he had in his holy Purpoſe ſet him apart, devoted or conſecrated him to that ſacred Office of a Prophet, to which he was now calling him.

Another Miſtake you labour under, is in apprehending that I aim at undermining ſome of the Soul-humbling Doctrines of the Goſpel.—To which I anſwer, No, Sir, God forbid!—I firmly believe it to be the great Deſign of the Goſpel to humble the Souls of Men, and to ſubdue their perverſe Wills, and reduce them to an intire Union with the Will of God, to ſubmit to all his ſovereign Appointments, and to take him in his own Way, and be content to be ſaved upon his Terms.—This is plain from the whole Run of my Letter, and intirely conſiſtent with it.—I muſt therefore beg leave to ſuſpect that you did not read it with ſufficient Candor and Attention, which I would yet wiſh you to do, rather than to perſiſt in ſo hard an Opinion of me, for which I cannot be ſenſible I have given you any juſt Occaſion.

But if you cannot think me altogether right in my Notion of the Sovereignty and Promiſes of God, I beg you will not conſider me as an Oppoſer of the Word of God, (as your Letter ſeems to imply;) for I am ſure I oppoſe nothing, but rejoice in every thing, that, (agreeable to the Inſtructions of the Goſpel,) can tend to the everlaſting Happineſs of the Souls of Men.

And if after all our well-meant Inquiries, we cannot attain to think alike here in this dark and infirm State, let us however put the beſt Conſtruction we can on each other's Conduct, and, as I ſaid, hope at length to meet together in that happy State before us, where all Darkneſs and Prejudice ſhall be forever done away, and nothing but God and Truth and Love ſhall forever reign!—