adapted her language to some false notions of astrology, which the Israelites had received from the Egyptians. And all that she meant was, that God had peculiarly assisted the Israelites in their battle with Sisera.

SIXTH KEY.-As the Necessitarians build their doctrine upon poetical expressions, so they do upon proverbial sayings. Thus, (p. 88,) Mr. Toplady endeavours to support the doctrine of Absolute Necessity, or of the Calvinian decrees, by these words of our Lord :

"There shall not an hair of your head perish, (Luke xxi. 18,) i. e., before the appointed time."-But this scripture does not prove, that God from all eternity made particular decrees, to appoint that men should shave so many times every week, and that such and such a hair of our head or beard should be spared so long, or should be cut off after having grown just so many days. This text is only a proverbial phrase, like that which is sometimes used among us: "I will not give way to error a hair's breadth." As this expression means only, "I will fully resist error;" so the other only means, "You shall be fully protected:" Therefore to build Calvinian Necessity upon such a scripture, is to render the pillars of Calvinism as contemptible as the hairs which the barber wipes off his razor, when he shaves my mistaken opponent.

SEVENTH KEY.-The word shall frequently implies a kind of necessity, and a forcible authority: Thus, a master says to his arguing servant, "You shall do such a thing: I will make you do it, whether you will or not."-Mr. Toplady avails himself of this idea, to impose his scheme of necessity upon the ignorant. say upon the ignorant, because he quotes again and again passages, where the word shall has absolutely no place in the original. For example,

I

Page 84, 87, 92, he tries to prove, that Christ was "an absolute Necessitarian," by the following texts : I send unto you prophets, &c., and some of them ye SHALL kill, and some of them SHALL ye scourge.-One

of you, &c. SHALL betray me.-Ye all SHALL be offended because of me.-Other sheep I have, which are not of this fold; them also [from a principle of superior kindness, or of remunerative favour] I MUST bring; and they SHALL hear my voice.-I MUST, and they SHALL : What is this but double necessity ?"—In these, and in many such scriptures, the word ye shall kill, &c., in the original is a BARE future tense. And for want of such a tense in English, we are obliged to render the words which are in that tense, by means of the words shall or will. These auxiliary words are often used indiscriminately by our Translators, who might as well, in the preceding texts, have Greek verbs WILL kili-WILI Scourge WILL be offended-WILL hear my voice. rest Calvinism upon such vague proofs, is to rest it upon a defect in the English language, and upon the presumption, that the reader is perfectly unacquainted with the original.

rendered the WILL betrayTherefore, to

EIGHTH KEY.-As Mr. T.'s Scheme partly rests upon a supposition, that his readers are unacquainted with the Greek grammar; so it supposes, that they are perfect strangers to ancient geography.

Hence it is that he says, (p. 89,) "Our Lord knew her [the woman of Samaria] to be one of his elect :-And that she might be converted precisely at the very time appointed, He must needs go through the territory of Samaria. (John iv. 4.)"-Mr. Whitefield builds his peculiar Orthodoxy on the same slender foundations, where he says, "6 Why must Christ needs go through Samaria?-Because there was a woman to be converted there." (See his Works, Vol. iv. p. 356.) Now the plain reason why our Lord went through Samaria was, that he went from Jerusalem to Galilee; and as Samaria lies exactly between Judea and Galilee, he Tust needs go through Samaria, or go a great many miles out of his way. Absurdity itself, therefore, could hardly have framed a more absurd argument.

NINTH KEY.-One of the most common mistakes on

which the Calvinists found their doctrine is, confounding a necessity of consequence with an absolute necessity.A necessity of consequence is the necessary connection, which immediate causes have with their effects, immediate effects with their causes, and unavoidable conse quences with their premises. Thus, if you run a man through the heart with a sword, by necessity of NATURAL consequence he must die: And if you are caught, and convicted of having done it like an assassin, by necessity of LEGAL consequence you must die. Thus again, if hold, that God, from all eternity, absolutely fixed his everlasting wrath upon others, without any respect to their works; by necessity of LOGICAL consequence I must hold, that the former were never children of wrath, and must continue God's pleasant children, while they commit the most atrocious crimes; and that the latter were children of wrath, while they seminally existed, together with the man Christ, in the loins of sinless Adam, before the fall.

Now these three strong necessities of consequence do not amount to one grain of Calvinian, Absolute Necessity; because, though the above-mentioned effects and consequences necessarily follow from their causes and premises, yet those causes and premises are not absolutely necessary. To be more plain: Though a man, whom you run through the heart to rob him without opposition, must die; and though you must suffer as a murderer for your crime; yet this double necessity does not prove, that you were absolutely necessitated to go on the highway, and to murder the man.- -Again : Though you must (indirectly at least) propagate the most detestable errors of Manes, (i. e., the worship of a double-principled Deity,) if you preach a God made up of absolute, everlasting love to some, and of absolute everlasting wrath to others; yet you are not necessitated to do this black work; because you are by no means necessitated to embrace and propagate this black principle of Calvin.-Once more; by necessity of consequence, a weak man who drinks to excess is drunk; yet his drunkenness is not Calvinistically necessary; because, though the man cannot help being drunk if he

drinks to excess, yet he can help drinking to excess : Or, to speak in general terms, though he cannot prevent the effect, when he has admitted the cause; yet he can prevent the effect, by not admitting the cause. However, Mr Toplady, without adverting to this obvious and important distinction, takes it for granted, that his readers will subscribe to his doctrine of absolute Necessity, because a variety of scriptures assert such necessity of consequence as I have just explained. Take the following instances:

P. 83. "How can ye escape the damnation of hell ?" These words of Christ do not prove Calvinian Reprobation and Absolute Necessity; but only, that those who will obstinately go on in sin, shall (by necessity of consequence) infallibly meet with the damnation of hell.— (P. 91.)" If the Son shall make you free, [and he shall make us free, if we will continue in his word,] ye shall [by necessity of consequence] be free indeed."—Again, (p. 92,)" Why do ye not understand my speech? Even because [whilst you hug your prejudices] ye cannot hear my word" [with the least degree of candour.] This passage does not prove Calvinian necessity; it declares only, that while the Jews were biassed by the love of honour, rather than by the love of truth, by necessity of consequence, they could not candidly hear, and cordially receive Christ's humbling doctrine. Thus he said to them, 'How can ye believe, who receive honour one of another?' Ibid. "He that is of God heareth God's words; ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.”— Here is no Calvinism, but only a plain declaration, that by necessity of consequence no man can serve two masters; no man can gladly receive the truths of God, who gladly receives the lies of Satan.-(Ibid.) "Ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep." you eagerly follow the prince of darkness: The works your father, the devil, ye will* do; and therefore by

of

6

That is,

* Our Lord when he spake these words, did not use a bare future, Tomoere,which Mr. T. would perhaps have triumphantly translated, e SHALL do; putting the word SHALL in large capitals; but BELETE WOLELV, a phrase this, which is peculiarly expressive of the chstinate choice of the free willing Jews.

necessity of consequence, ye cannot do the works of God; ye cannot follow me ;-ye cannot rank among my sheep. Again :

P. 93. "I give my sheep eternal life, and they shall never perish. (John x. 28.)—i. e. Their salvation is necessary and cannot be hindered."-True: It is necessary, but it is only so by necessity of consequence; for damnation follows unbelief and disobedience, as punishment does sin; and eternal salvation follows faith and obedience, as rewards follow good works. But this no more proves, that God necessitates men to siu or to obey, than hanging a deserter, and rewarding a courageous soldier, prove that the former was absolutely necessitated to desert, and the latter to play the hero.-Once

more:

P. 94. "I will pray the Father and he shall give you another Comforter,-whom the world CANNOT receive" [as a comforter without a proper preparation.] Now this no more proves, that the world cannot absolutely receive the Comforter, than my asserting, that Mr. Toplady could not take a degree at the University, before he had learned grammar, proves that he was for ever absolutely debarred from that literary honour. If the reader be pleased to advert to this distinction, between necessity of consequence and absolute necessity, he will be able to steer safe through a thousand Calvinian rocks.

TENTH KEY.-The preceding remarks lead us to the detection of another capital mistake of the orthodox, so called. They perpetually confound natural Necessity with what may (improperly speaking) be called moral Necessity. By natural Necessity, infants are born naked, and colts are foaled with a coat on; men have two legs, horses four, and some insects sixteen. And by moral Necessity, servants are bound to obey their masters, children their parents, and subjects their king. Now can any thing be more unreasonable than to infer that servants can no more help obeying their masters, than children can help being born with two hands?--Is it not absurd thus to confound natural and moral