favour Calvinian Reprobation. Such passages are produced in the following pages : St. 1 ARG. XXXIX. (P. 19.) After transcribing Rom ix. 20—23, Mr. Toplady says, “Now are these the words of scripture, or are they not? If not, prove the forgery. If they be, you cannot fight against Repro bation, without fighting against God."—Far from fighting against scripture-reprobation, we maintain, as § Paul does in Romix-(1.) That God has an absolute right gratuitously to call whom he pleases to either of his two grand covenants of peculiarity, (Judaism and Christianity,) and gratuitously to reprobate whom he will, from the blessings peculiar to these covenants; leaving as many nations and individuals as he thinks fit, under the general blessings of the gracious covenants which he made with reprieved Adam, and with spared Noah. (2.) We assert, that God has an indu bitable right judicially to reprobate obstinate unbe lievers under all the dispensations of his grace, and to appoint, that, (as stubborn unbelievers) they shall be vessels of wrath fitted for destruction' by their own unbelief, and not by God's free wrath. This is all the reprobation which St. Paul contends for in Rom. ix. (See Scales, Vol. iii. Sect. xi. where Mr. T.'s objection is answered at large.) Therefore, with one hand, we defend scripture reprobation and with the other, we attack Calvinian reprobation; maintaining that the scripture reprobation of grace, and of justice, are as different from Calvinian, damning reprobation, as appointing a soldier to continue a soldier and to be a captain, or a wilful deserter to be shot, is different from appointing a soldier necessarily to desert, that he may be unavoidably shot for desertion,ut Having thus vindicated the godly reprobation main tained by St. Paul, from the misapprehensions of Mr. Toplady, we point at all the passages which we have produced in the Scripture Scales, in defence of the Doctrines of Justice, the CONDITIONALITY of the reward of the inheritance, and the FREEDOM of the will; and, retorting Mr. T.'s argument, we say, "Now, are these the words of scripture, or are they not? If not, prove the forgery. If they be, you cannot fight against [the conditional] reprobation, [which we defend,] without fighting against God." You cannot fight for Calvinian reprobation without fighting for free wrath and the evil-principled deity worshipped by the Manichees. ARG. XL. (P. 51.)-Mr. T. supports absolute reprobation by quoting 1 Sam. ii. 25: They [the sons of Eli] hearkened not to the voice of their father, because the Lord would slay them.' (1 Sam. ii. 25.)-Here we are given to understand, that by the decree of the means, the Lord secured the disobedience of these wicked men, in order to accomplish his decree of the end, that is, their absolute destruction. To this truly Calvinian insinuation we answer, (1.) The sons of Eli, who had turned the tabernacle into a house of ill fame, and a den of thieves, had personally deserved a judicial reprobation; God therefore could justly give them up to a reprobate mind, in consequence of their personal, avoidable, repeated and aggravated crimes. (2.) The word "killing" does not here neces sarily imply eternal damnation. The Lord killed, by a lion, the man of God from Judah, for having stopped in Bethel :-He killed Nadab and Abihu for offering strange fire-He killed the child of David and Bathsheba-He killed many of the Corinthians, for their irreverent partaking of the Lord's Supper :-But the 'sin unto [bodily] death' is not the sin unto eternal death. For St. Paul informs us, that the body is sometimes given up to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord. (1 Cor. v. 5.)-(3.) The Hebrew particle, which is rendered in our translation because,' means also therefore :" And so our translators themselves have rendered it after St. Paul, and the Septuagint, (Ps. cxvi.10,) ' I believed, ", and therefore will I speak ;' See 2 Cor. iv. 13. If they had done their part as well in translating the verse quoted by Mr. Toplady, the doctrines of free wrath would have gone propless; 6 and we should have had these edifying words: "They [the sons of Eli] hearkened not to the voice of their father; and THEREFORE the Lord would slay them.' Thus the voluntary sin of free agents would be repre sented as the cause of their deserved reprobation; and not their undeserved reprobation, as the cause of their necessary sin. See Sect. II. ARG. XLI. (P. 51.)-Mr. T. tries to prove absolute reprobation by quoting these words of our Lord, 'Thou Capernaum, which art exalted to heaven, shalt be brought down to hell; for if the mighty works, which have been done in thee, had been done in Sodom, it would [or might] have remained unto this day.' This passage, if I am not mistaken, is nothing but a strong expostulation and reproof, admirably calculated to shame the unbelief, and alarm the fears of the Capernaites. Suppose I had an enemy, whose obstinate hatred had resisted for years the constant tokens of my love; and suppose I said to him, "Your obduracy is astonishing; if I had shewn to the fiercest tyger the kindness which I have shewn you, I could have melted the savage beast into love;" would it be right, from such a figurative supposition, to conclude that I absolutely believed I could have tamed the fiercest tiger? But this passage, taken in a literal sense, far from proving the absolute reprobation of Sodom, demonstrates that Sodom was never reprobated in the Calvinian sense of the word: For if it had been absolutely reprobated from all eternity, no works done in her by Christ and his apostles, could have overcome her unbelief. But our Lord observes, that her strong un. belief could have been overcome by the extraordinary means of faith, which could not conquer the unbelief of Capernaum. Mr. T. goes on : ARG. XLII. (Ibid.)—" But though God knew, the citizens of Sodom would [or might] have reformed their conduct, had his providence made use of effectual [Mr. T. should say of every effectual] means to that end; still these effectual [Mr. T. should say, all these extraordinary and peculiar] means were not vouchsafed."-True: Because according to the election of grace, God uses more means and more powerful means to convert some cities, than he does to convert others : Witness the case of Nineveh, compared with that of Jericho. This is strongly maintained in my Essay on the Partial Reprobation of Distinguishing Grace, where this very passage is produced. But still we affirm two things :—(1.) God always uses means sufficient to demonstrate, that his goodness, patience, and mercy, are over all his works, (though in different degrees,) and to testify that he is unwilling that sinners should die; unless they have first obstinately, and without necessity, refused to work out their own eternal salvation' with the talent of temporary salvation, which is given to all, for the sake of him whose saving grace has appeared to all men,' and who fenlightens [in various degrees] every man that comes into the world.'-(2.) As the men of Sodom were not absolutely lost, though they had but one talent of means, no more were the men of Capernaum absolutely saved, though God favoured them with so many more talents of means, than he did the men of Sodom. Hence it appears that Mr. T. has run upon the point of his own sword; the passage which he appeals to proving, that God does not work so irresistibly upon either Jews or Gentiles, as to secure his absolute Approbation of some, and his absolute Reprobation of others. 20 ARGUMENT XLIII. (Page 52.)-Mr. T., to prop up Calvinian Reprobation, quotes these words of Christ, Fill ye up the measure of your fathers,' (Matt, xxiii. 32,) and he takes care to produce the words Fill ye up,' in capitals; as if he would give us to understand, that Christ is extremely busy in getting reprobates to sin and be damned. For my part, as I believe that Christ never preached up sin and wickedness, I am persuaded that this expression is nothing but a strong, ironical reproof of sin, like that in the Revelation, 'Let him that is unjust, be unjust still ;'-or that in the gospel,Sleep on now, and take your rest;' ARGUMENT XLIV. (Page 52.)-Mr. T., still pleading for the horrible decree" of Calvinian Reprobation, says, "St. Matthew, if possible, expresses it still more strongly It is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven; but to them it is not given.' (Matt. xiii. 11.)”—I answer, (1.) If, by the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven,' you understand the mys teries of Christianity, it is absurd to say, that all who are not blessed with the knowledge of these mysteries are Calvinistically reprobated. This I demonstrate by verses 16, 17, and by the parallel place in St. Luke: 6 All things are delivered to me of my Father; and no man knoweth who the Son is, but the Father; and who the Father is, but the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal him. [That is, the mystery of a relative personality of Father and Son in the Godhead has not been expressly revealed to others, as I choose to reveal it to you, my Christian friends ] And, [to shew that this was his meaning] he turned him unto his disciples, and said privately, Blessed are the eyes which い |