the law in all its rigour is right, and glorious too, or the Son of God had never died to answer its demands*. Ther. But, Sir, is not what some say, agreeable to Scripture, reason, and experience, viz. that as our enmity against God arises from conceiving him to be our enemy, so we can never be reconciled to him, till we first see and are persuaded, that he loves ust. Paul. With your leave, Sir, I will venture to affirm that this scheme is contrary to Scripture, reason, and the universal ex * If Infidels triumph to see professed Christians advance such absurd and inconsistent schemes, they may do well to remember, that the very spirit of enmity to God and his law, which produces these sad effects among professed Christians, hath led them still further, even to give up divine revelation itself. Perhaps, first, the Arminian spirit wrought in their hearts, and they were, (in their own fancy,) infallibly certain, that it is not just that God should require more of his creatures than they can do, and then damn them for not doing. The next step, they denied the atonement of Christ, and commenced Socinians; for it appeared absolutely incredible, that the Son of God should die to answer the demands of an unjust law. But, lastly, when on further consideration, they find that the Old and New Testaments both join to teach, that cursed is every man that continueth not in all things written in the book of the law to do them, (Deut. xxvii. 26. Gal. iii. 10 ) and find that it is asserted, that Christ was made a curse for us, to redeem us from this very curse, (ver. 13.) even from the wrath to come, (1 Thes. i. 10.) and perceive, that the doctrine of atonement is so universally inwrought into the whole of divine revelation, that it cannot possibly be severed from it; and yet consider, that if Christ died to answer the demands of the law, the law must be supposed to be holy, just, and good, in all its rigour: a point they never can believe. Therefore, to extricate themselves out of all difficulties at once, (bold, daring rebels to God that they be !) notwithstanding all the infallible evidences God has given to its truth, they run the dreadful venture to give up the Bible itself. They had rather turn professed infidels, than own the divine law to be holy, just, and good. And, then, so inconsistent are they, they pretend to make the law of nature their only rule. Not considering that their enmity to the law of nature, the true and real law of nature, hath driven them to this dreadful length. The fool saith in his heart, there is no God. Did mankind really believe that there is a God of infinite glory, they could not but be convinced that they are really under infinite obligations to love him as such with all their hearts; and that the least defect deserves his everlasting wrath. But a fallen world are dead to God, blind to his beauty, and enemies to his law; as all their reasonings, and all their conduct join to prove. So that atheism is the root of all errors; and enmity to God and his law shuts our eyes against the truth, and gives infidelity a reigning power over our hearts. † M. p. 25, 26, 27, 140. perience of all true saints. As to the experience of all true saints, we have that in the plainest language, described by an inspired writer, 2. Cor. iii. 18. We ALL with open face, beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image. A sight of the glory of God is what moves us to love him. Love to God is that image of God we are changed into. The image of God chiefly consists in love, as all own. And this is produced by a sense of God's glory, as the inspired apostle affirms. Besides, this scheme is contrary to the whole tenour of Scripture, which every where teaches, that those who are enemies to God, are actually in a state of condemnation, (John iii. 18.) and of wrath, (ver. 36.) and never can, nor will be received into the divine favour, till they repent and are converted, (Acts iii. 19.) till they turn to God, (Prov. i. 23, 24. Ezek. xxxiii. 11.) and are reconciled to him through Jesus Christ. (2 Cor. v. 20. Luke xiii. 3. 5.) And indeed a true justifying faith comprises all this in its very nature, in its very first act. Besides, if one should be so deluded, as to believe God was reconciled to him while impenitent, and out of Christ, this belief would not, could not bring him to love God. It is true such an one might, like the carnal Israelites at the side of the Red sea, be full of joy and love, arising merely from self-love. A kind of love which has in it nothing of the nature of true love to God; but is consistent with a reigning enmity against him. Ther. But if our enmity against God arises from conceiving him to be our enemy, remove the cause, and the effect will If we view him as our reconciled Father and friend, the occasion of our enmity being removed, our enmity will cease, and we shall naturally love him. cease. Paul. Right, Theron, you say true, if that be the only cause of our enmity, this will effectually remove it. Nor shall we need to be born again, (Johın iii. 3.) or to have any new principle of divine life communicated to us. (John iii. 6. Eph. ii. 5.) But from the principles of nature we may love God thus, (Mat. v. 46.) and the regenerating, sanctifying influences of the Holy Spirit will be whoily needless. The vail need not be taken from our hearts, that we may behold the glory of God, (2 Cor. iii. 18.) Only let God declare that he loves us, and a. a dose. And if he was our enemy before we turned enemies to him, it seems proper and meet he sound teciare himself to be reconciled first. Be sure, as this will put an end to the whole controversy between him and us, and set all things right. And one would think, that the God of peace would not be backward to make such a declaration, in the most explicit manner, to all the human race, and that without the interposition of a mediator, if indeed he became an enemy to the human kind before we turned enemies to him. But if the human kind, without the least provocation, turned enemies first, and without any reason revolted from their rightful Lord and Sovereign, and when God infinitely deserved their highest love, joined in open rebellion with satan, God's avowed foe; and if this, our infinitely unreasonabie enmity, is now the result of the very temper of our whole heart, even of a fixed contrariety of nature to God, his law, and government, which yet are faultless, yea, perfectly holy, just, and good. (Rom. vii. 12. and vi:i. 7.) it is infinitely unreasonable that God should forgive us, till we acknowledge this is the case, and approve his law, by which we stand condemned, in the very bottom of our hearts. (Luke xviii. 13.) Nor, till we do this, can we possibly look to God through Jesus Christ for pardon, as absolutely of mere free grace. Without which, the Righteous Monarch of the universe has declared we never shall be forgiven. (Rom. iii. 24. Mark xvi. 16.) But how contrary to reason is it, to suppose that God became enemy to the human kind first, and that all our enmity arises from conceiving him to be our enemy, as though some fault were originally on God's side, before we revolted from him. And so, if he would now but become our friend, and love us, we should love him without any more ado. What need then of the death of his Son? Or what need of the sanctifying influences of his Spirit? If he was our enemy first, he may well, without a mediator, declare himself reconciled. And this will put an end to the whole controversy. A shocking scheme of religion this! But, shocking as it is, and as reluctant as you may be to own it in this shocking dress, yet you must, my Theron, adhere to it, if you would be consistent with yourself, or else give up your darling point. For if we are enemies to God in the temper of our minds, previous to one thought of his being our enemy, a persuasion of his love, it is self-evident, will never reconcile us to him. Ther. Understand me right. If we were to love God primarily and chiefly for his own excellencies, a mere persuasion of his love to us, I own, would not be sufficient to bring us to this. But you are sensible, Sir, that many look on this notion of loving God for himself, as a mere chimera. What makes God appear lovely to us, is a belief, an assured persuasion, that our sins are blotted out; and that God is our rereconciled Father and friend, and altogether love to us*. Paul. But what warrant has a Christless sinner, while an enemy to God, to believe that his sins are blotted out? or if he does believe so, and is ravished with his delusion, how can you prove this ravishment is of the nature of true holiness? The devil can thus delude and ravish a poor sinner. But has satan power to beget divine grace, and real holiness in the heart? Ther. But if the word of God is full on my side, this must determine the point. Paul. Amen! I join issue here, with all my heart. Nor shall any other writings ever determine, for me, any of the doctrines of religion. Ther. It is expressly written, as the experience of all the saints in the apostolic age, in 1 John iv. 16,—We have known and believed the love that God hath to us. And it follows, in ver. 19-We love him because he first loved us. In these two verses our whole sceheme is expressed in the plainest manner. Paul. Yes, and it is as expressly written in James ii. 21, Was not our father Abraham justified by works? And it is added, with respect to all good men, ver. 24,-Ye see then, how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. And in these two verses our whole scheme, say the Arminians, is expressed in the plainest manner. Ther. We are not to be carried away by the mere sound of words in a single text of Scripture or two, to notions contrary to the whole tenour of the sacred volume. This is M. P. the way of heretics, who thus wrest the Scriptures to their own destruction. (2 Pet. iii. 16.) We are rather, by viewing the context, and comparing Scripture with Scripture, to search for the true meaning of the inspired writer. My dear Aspasio has set those words of St. James in their proper light, and proved that they are not at all to the purpose of the Arminians. (Vol. I. p. 268.) And indeed, I wonder how men that ever saw their own righteousness to be as filthy rags, should ever think of perverting the apostle's words to a meaning, it is plain, he never intended. Paul. You speak well, my dear Theron, and I wonder how men, who are daily "with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, and are changed into the same image from glory to glory, as by the spirit of the Lord," should ever think of putting such a sense on those words of St. John. A sense, it is plain, he never intended, neither came it into his heart. Indeed, I hope some men's hearts are more orthodox than their heads. However, let that be as it will; for it does not belong to you nor me to judge the state of men's souls: God only knows their hearts. With God we leave them. Yet their notions of religion we may examine, compare with Scripture, and pass judgment upon. Here we have a good right to judge. Wherefore, let us, observing the rules of interpreting Scripture, which you have hinted, rules which all parties must allow to be good : let us, I say, impartially examine those words of the apostle, in 1 John iv. 16. 19. which you just now referred to, as clearly expressing your whole scheme. Here, my dear Theron, here is the Bible; take it, and read the Epistle through; and when you have done, tell me who are they, what is the character of the men who use this confident language! "We have known and believed the love that God hath to us." Were they saints or sinners? Did they know they were the chilof God, or were they doubtful? Did they know they were in a good estate by being conscious of sanctifying operations in their own breasts? Ther. I have read the epistle; I grant they knew they were the children of God, and heirs of eternal glory. They did not merely hope this was the case; but they were certain of it. |