ing, that the terms relating to this subject do not occur in the epistle to the Hebrews, which was not composed for the gentile converts. It may however be observed in reply, that this cannot be said of the first epistle of Peter, which is addressed to the Jews of the dispersion, παρεπιδήμοις διασπορᾶς, who are said to be " elect according to the fore' nowledge of God the Father." The epistle addressed to the Hebrews, on the other hand, is understood to have had one distinct object, namely that of dissuading the converted Jews from returning to the religion of Moses, which required only that the character and office of Jesus should be magnified to the Jews.

The true doctrine of predestination must chiefly be collected from the remarkable passage in the eighth chapter of the epistle to the Romans-" whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the first-born among many brethren. Moreover, whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: whom he justified, them he also glorified." In paraphrasing these words the two commentators appear not to have observed, that their application is in the verse immediately preceding limited to them that love God," as "the called according to his purpose;" and that therefore they cannot be understood to signify any

collective calling, which must comprehend many, who do not truly love God. The interpretation of the passage itself is also embarrassed by a considerable difficulty, when it is referred to a collective calling, for the commentators have found themselves compelled to interpret the words justify and glorify, as relating only to a conditional purpose of God, whereas the preceding words foreknow, predestinate, and call, are admitted to be absolute and unconditional. The words justify and glorify could not be applied unconditionally to collective bodies of men, many individuals of whom are conceived to be unworthy. It therefore became necessary to introduce the condition of obedience, and thus to give one interpretation, which is unqualified and unconditional, to terms which precede in the sentence, and another, which is only conditional, to those which follow, though all the five are in the text simply enunciated. Nor are these all the objections, which may be urged against this interpretation, for it deprives the word foreknow of its proper signification, and refers it solely to the intention of God. Whom, it says, God did foreknow, with an intention to make them his peculiar church and people, he determined should be conformed to the image of his son. In this paraphrase the word implies no knowledge, except of the mere purpose of calling the gentiles, nothing directly relating to the persons who were to be called;

and the passage of the epistle would signify only that, whom God did intend to predestinate, he did also actually predestinate. But we do not require the authority of an apostle for assuring us, that God did execute that which he had purposed. And it is moreover particularly deserving of attention, that the commentators, who maintain this opinion of an outward and collective calling, are yet compelled to abandon this interpretation of the passage in regard to the terms justify and glorify, by referring these to the conduct of individuals. These terms were too precise for their management.

Whitby has justly remarked on this passage, that the words know and foreknow, in the language of the scriptures, import a knowledge joined with approbation and affection. In the gospel by Matthew, ch. 7. v. 23. we find these words; ; "then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me ye that work ini. quity." In that by John, ch. 10. v. 14. " I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine." apostle, in the first ch. 8. v. 3. "love of him." In the ch. 4. v. 9. he says, "but now after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God." In the second epistle to Timothy, ch. 2. v. 19. he says, "the Lord knoweth them that are his." The word foreknow

"If any man," says the epistle to the Corinthians, God, the same is known epistle to the Galatians,

is also used with a correspondent application in the epistle to the Romans itself. "God," says

the apostle, ch. 11. v. 2. " hath not cast away his people, which he foreknew ;" and the succeeding verses show, that the word there relates to that still subsisting fidelity, with which seven thousand men refused to bow the knee to Baal. Locke indeed himself has, in his paraphrase, added to the word "an intention of kindness," but we cannot understand any moral approbation of the whole gentile world, so that the intention, in his interpretation, could relate only to the purpose of God, as has been already stated, and consequently be liable to the same objection of reducing the passage to a mere statement of this proposition, that God did execute that which he had proposed.

The foreknowledge then, mentioned in the eighth chapter of the epistle to the Romans, may consistently be understood to mean a foreknowledge of the dispositions of certain individuals, which would render them fit objects of the merciful determinations of God. The predestination mentioned by the apostle is thus not extended to collective bodies of men, outwardly consstituting the christian church, yet in many instances disregarding and violating the duties prescribed by their religious profesfession; but is limited to those persons, who, in the foreknowledge of God, should be deemed by him qualified to be admitted to the

mercies prepared for the sincere followers of Christ.

That God in his prescience should have determined the future condition of every individual, according as he foreknew the qualities and conduct of each, agrees with those passages of the scriptures, which ascribe to the antecedent appointment of God the decision of the future happiness or misery of every man ; and also to those others, which assure us, that he is willing that all men should be saved, and consequently preclude the supposition, that the offer of salvation was, in his counsels, limited to a small number selected from the rest of mankind. The determination of God being understood to rest upon a foreknowledge of the qualities of the individual, and sufficient assistance being also understood to be offered to every man, the divine purposes are not arbitrary and irrespective, but differ from the determinations of an equitable and merciful judge, only inasmuch as these have been anticipated by the divine foreknowledge.

This interpretation of the doctrine of predestination is indeed embarrassed by the difficulty of reconciling the foreknowledge of God with the freedom of human actions. This difficulty * the socinians removed by denying the foreknowledge of God, and holding that God had only

D

* Burnet on the 39 Articles, art. 17.