diff options
Diffstat (limited to '28401-h')
| -rw-r--r-- | 28401-h/28401-h.htm | 2696 |
1 files changed, 2696 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/28401-h/28401-h.htm b/28401-h/28401-h.htm new file mode 100644 index 0000000..f32cbce --- /dev/null +++ b/28401-h/28401-h.htm @@ -0,0 +1,2696 @@ +<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN" +"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd"> +<html> +<head> +<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content= +"text/html; charset=utf-8"> +<title>Free and Impartial Thoughts, on the Sovereignty of God, +The Doctrines of Election, Reprobation, and Original Sin: Humbly +Addressed to all who Believe and Profess those Doctrines.</title> + +<style type="text/css"> + body {font-family:'Bookman Old Style', 'Book Antiqua', 'Garamond';text-align:justify; margin-left:3em; margin-right:3em} + hr {text-align:center} + p.pn {text-indent:1.5em; margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0} + p.pnn {margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0} + p.pns {text-indent:1.5em; margin-top:0; margin-bottom:1em} + p.pr {text-align:right;margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0} + .sc {font-variant:small-caps} + .ls1 {letter-spacing:0.3em} + .ls2 {letter-spacing:0.1em} + .ls3 {letter-spacing:0.4em} + .ls4 {letter-spacing:0.6em} +</style> +</head> +<body> + + +<pre> + +The Project Gutenberg EBook of Free and Impartial Thoughts, on the +Sovereignty of God, The Doctrines o, by Richard Finch + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + + +Title: Free and Impartial Thoughts, on the Sovereignty of God, The Doctrines of Election, Reprobation, and Original Sin: Humbly Addressed To all who Believe and Profess those DOCTRINES. + +Author: Richard Finch + +Release Date: March 24, 2009 [EBook #28401] + +Language: English + +Character set encoding: UTF-8 + +*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK FREE AND IMPARTIAL THOUGHTS *** + + + + +Produced by Keith G. Richardson + + + + + +</pre> + +<p class="pnn"><a href="#Preface">Preface</a></p> +<p class="pnn"><a href="#Text">Text</a></p> +<div style="text-align:center"> +<p style="font-size:108%;margin-top:4em; margin-bottom:1em"> +<span class="ls1">F<span class="sc">ree</span></span> <i>and</i> +<span class="ls1">I<span class="sc">mpartial</span></span></p> +<p style="font-size:283%;margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0.2em"> +<span class="ls1">THOUGHT</span>S,</p> +<p style="font-size:92%;margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0.8em"> +<span class="ls1">ON THE</span></p> +<p style="font-size:233%;margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0.4em"> +Sovereignty <i>of </i>G<span class="sc">od</span>,</p> +<p style= +"font-size:92%;letter-spacing:0.5em;margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0.8em"> +THE</p> +<p style= +"font-size:208%;letter-spacing:0.6em;margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0.5em"> +DOCTRINES</p> +<p style= +"font-size:88%;letter-spacing:0.5em;margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0.7em"> +OF</p> +<p style="font-size:183%;margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0.7em"> +Election, Reprobation,</p> +<p style= +"font-size:88%;letter-spacing:0.5em;margin-top:0; margin-bottom:1.2em"> +AND</p> +<p style= +"font-size:167%;letter-spacing:0.3em;margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0.7em"> +O<span class="sc">riginal</span> S<span class="sc">in</span>:</p> +<p style="font-size:83%;margin-top:0; margin-bottom:1.5em">Humbly +Addressed</p> +<p style="font-size:113%;margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0.3em">To +all who <span class="ls2">B<span class="sc">elieve</span></span> +and <span class="ls2">P<span class="sc">rofess</span></span> +those</p> +<p style="font-size:125%;margin-top:0; margin-bottom:1em"> +<span class="ls3">DOCTRINE</span>S.</p> +<hr style="width:25em;margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0.15em"> +<hr style="width:25em;margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0.2em"> +<p style="font-size:96%;margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0.5em">The +<span class="ls2">S<span class="sc">econd</span> E<span class= +"sc">dition</span></span>, Corrected and Enlarged.</p> +<hr style="width:25em;margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0.15em"> +<hr style="width:25em;margin-top:0;margin-bottom:1.2em"> +<p style="font-size:108%;margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0.7em"> +<i><span class="ls1">LONDON:</span></i></p> +<p style="font-size:92%;margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0.3em"> +Printed for J. ROBINSON, at the <i>Golden-Lion</i>, in +<i>Ludgate-Street.</i></p> +<hr style="width:7em"> +<p style="font-size:83%;margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0"> +M.DCC.XLV.</p> +<hr style="margin-top:5em;margin-bottom:5em"> +<p style= +"font-size:125%;letter-spacing:0.2em;margin-top:5em; margin-bottom:1em"> +<a name="Preface" id="Preface">THE</a></p> +<p style= +"font-size:267%;letter-spacing:0.6em;margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0.5em"> +PREFACE</p> +</div> +<p class="pns"><i>I Cannot find, upon the most impartial +Retrospection of the Argument, any Reason to alter my Sentiments +concerning it; and as it is a Matter of the greatest Importance, +’tis hoped that those who maintain the Doctrines of</i> Election, +&<i>c. will afford it all the Weight and Consideration it +deserves. But, if there be any among them, who will hear no +Reason or Argument whatever, and are</i> sure, only because they +are sure, <i>I Have</i> little <i>or</i> no Hopes <i>to prevail +with them, to give me a fair Hearing, or to think</i> candidly +<i>and</i> impartially <i>about it. But as there are among them, +some, who no doubt will allow the</i> Possibility <i>of their +being in an Error; to all such I address my self, and beseech +them, as much as possible to lay aside Prejudice and Partiality; +wisely considering, that many of their Fore-fathers maintained +some erroneous Doctrines, with as much Zeal, and Integrity, as +they their Descendants now do the Doctrines of</i> Election, +&<i>c. and yet saw Occasion to renounce them +afterwards.</i></p> +<p class="pns"><i>There is Reason to fear, the just Liberty I +have taken with the</i> Doctrines of Election, &<i>c. may, by +some, be deem’d Blasphemy against</i> G<span class="sc">od</span> +<i>himself; but I am far from intending any such thing. These +Doctrines (I think) on the contrary, are</i> in them selves +<i>nothing better than</i> blasphemous, <i>tho’ the Intentions of +some who maintain them, be ever so devout and sincere: And if an +Impeachment of Doctrines, which, instead of preserving</i> +G<span class="sc">od’s</span> Moral Character, <i>robs him of all +that is dear and valuable, or that can render him lovely and +adorable to Man, be accounted</i> Blasphemy, <i>the Ignorance and +Bigotry of those, who judge after that Manner, ought much to be +lamented. It is a melancholy Truth, that where Prejudice, in +favour of false Principles, has had early and frequent Access to +the Mind, it too often shuts the Ear against Reason and Truth; +and ’tis very hard to persuade such People to enter at all, and +much less impartially, into the Merits of an Argument advanced +against them; nor indeed is the Liberty of Thought on</i> +Religious Subjects, duly inculcated <i>in Religious Assemblies: +For, the</i> Teachers of Christianity, <i>tho’ they are seldom +averse to give us the Compliment of a</i> just Liberty of +thinking for ourselves, <i>are but too apt</i> to set the Terrors +of the Lord in array against Unbelievers; <i>tho’ perhaps</i> +their Dissent <i>may sometimes be only the</i> innocent Effect, +<i>of the best Examination they are able to make. And if there be +any thing worthy of Notice, in what I have advanced, I hereby +intreat all, into whose Hands this Treatise may come, not to be +terrified, by any such popular Arts, from making a thorough +Examination for themselves; on the other hand, I am altogether as +willing to set right, in whatever I may have erred, or been +mistaken.</i></p> +<p class="pns"><i>’Tis well known, the 17th Article of our +own</i> National Church, <i>greatly favours the</i> Doctrines +<i>of</i> Election <i>and</i> Reprobation; <i>and it is also +generally believed, that the</i> Better Part <i>of our Clergy +entirely disapprove these Doctrines, and would very readily +assist in expunging them out of their</i> Creed; <i>which would +render their Consciences much easier, than now they are, or can +be, under a Subscription in a Sense so</i> very qualified +<i>and</i> remote <i>from the</i> natural Intent <i>and</i> +Meaning <i>of the</i> Article.</p> +<p class="pns"><i>Experience makes it evident, that Education is +able to retain Men of the</i> Brightest Understanding, <i>in the +Belief of the</i> Greatest Absurdities. <i>But, that Men of +Learning, Ingenuity and Experience, who have lived perhaps to the +Age of fifty, in the Disbelief of the</i> Doctrines <i>of</i> +Election, &<i>c. should after that sincerely embrace them, is +to me Matter of great Astonishment; yet this I am inform’d is +really the Case, with regard to one of the most ingenious</i> +Divines, <i>our Metropolis has to boast of. One Reason may +perhaps be alledged, for such an unexpected Alteration of +Sentiment</i>, viz. <i>That tho’ we disbelieve these Doctrines, +because they are</i> absurd, <i>yet we hold at the same time, +others</i>, equally repugnant <i>to Reason, and to Common Sense; +and certainly we may as reasonably</i> embrace <i>the one as</i> +retain <i>the other. Besides, with what reasonable Expectation of +Success could such a Man as this sit down to argue with</i> +another <i>of</i> absurd Principles, <i>when</i> he himself +<i>might be so easily abash’d and put to Silence, by an Appeal +to</i> other Principles, <i>of</i> his own, <i>equally absurd and +inexplicable. The best way then, instead of embracing a</i> +fresh, <i>absurd, Principle of Faith, is, to renounce the</i> +old. <i>I would not willingly Offend</i> A<span class= +"sc">ny</span>, <i>by a special Application to</i> particular +Societies <i>and</i> Doctrines: <i>let but every Man make an +honest Application to himself, and the Articles of Faith he +professes, and the Work of Reformation will, I am persuaded, gain +something thereby. And that, not only these Doctrines, but every +other absurd Principle of Faith, which either Ignorance, or +Design, may have introduced into the Christian church, to the</i> +Dishonour <i>of</i> G<span class="sc">od</span>, <i>the</i> +Burthen <i>and</i> Reproach <i>of Human Nature, may be</i> +utterly exploded, <i>is the incessant Wish, and earnest Desire, +of</i></p> +<p style= +"text-align:right;font-size:112%;margin-top:3em; margin-bottom:5em"> +The <span class="ls2">A<span class="sc">uthor</span></span>.</p> +<hr style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0"> +<p style= +"text-align:center;font-size:112%;margin-top:7em; margin-bottom:0.8em"> +<a name="Text" id="Text"><span class="ls1">F<span class= +"sc">ree</span></span> <i>and</i> <span class= +"ls1">I<span class="sc">mpartial</span></span></a></p> +<p style= +"text-align:center;font-size:233%;margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0.5em"> +<span class="ls1">THOUGHT</span>S, &<i>c</i>.</p> +<p class="pns"><i>CHRISTIANITY</i> having been instituted, by its +great Author and Publisher, for the Benefit and Advantage of +Mankind, it is pity we should so greatly differ, concerning what +<i>Genuine Christianity</i> is; if the <i>Holy Bible</i>, as we +generally agree, was designed to lead us to the true Knowledge of +G<span class="sc">od</span>, and to be a standing and perpetual +Rule of <i>Faith</i> and <i>Manners</i> to Men, it must surely +have been greatly corrupted since the primitive Times of the +Gospel, or the <i>Explication</i> of it designedly left to a more +excellent and superior Director: For the seeming Contradictions, +and Multiplicity of obscure Passages, wherewith it abounds, shew +plainly it could never, in its present Condition, be a Rule of +Faith, &<i>c</i>. becoming an all-wise and perfect Being, to +give to rational Creatures. Every <i>good Man, Society</i>, and +<i>State</i>, study Perspicuity in all their <i>Rules, Orders, +and Statutes,</i> dispensed to their <i>Families, Members,</i> +and <i>Subjects:</i> and can we suppose, that He, who is perfect +in Knowledge, would, in the Dispensation of his Laws, take less +care of the everlasting State of his immortal Creature +<i>Man?</i> Yet it is plain, we differ in our Sentiments of +Religion, and greatly too, for want, as I sincerely hope, of the +Knowledge of better Helps, to direct our Inquiries, in Matters, +the true Knowledge whereof, is of so considerable Moment. +Therefore,</p> +<p class="pns">I <span class="sc">intend</span>, in the Course of +this Debate, to descant <i>freely</i>, on the Doctrines of +<i>Divine Sovereignty, Election, Reprobation</i>, and <i>Original +Sin;</i> and also, on the Arguments which some ingenious +Gentlemen have used to support them. But I hope (with regard to +the <i>Authors</i> I may possibly name) to be perfectly decent, +and to treat them with all becoming Respect and Deference, as I +think Men of Integrity, Learning and Abilities deserve; who, +though in some Points they may err, and hold Doctrines in their +own Nature and Tendency altogether subversive of Religion and +Morality, do nevertheless not perceive them to have these +Tendencies, and are therefore by <i>no Means</i> chargeable with +them. Yet, as touching the <i>Doctrines</i> themselves, I shall +presume to speak freely, both in regard to their Nature, and what +appears to me to be their genuine Fruits and Effects.</p> +<p class="pn">I<span class="sc">t</span> is with me an +establish’d Truth, that the mistaken Notion of some <i>learned +Men</i>, concerning the <i>Sovereignty</i> of the <i>Deity</i>, +has given these Doctrines a more favourable Acceptance in the +World, than otherwise they would, or could, ever have met with; +and notwithstanding all the Pains and Arguments these Gentlemen +have bestowed, to reconcile their Doctrines to our common Sense +of <i>Right</i> and <i>Wrong</i>, it is plain, that, at +<i>bottom</i>, this is the grand governing Principle. For, when +their Attempts to reconcile these Doctrines with common Sense and +Equity fail, they have immediate Recourse to G<span class= +"sc">od’s</span> <i>Sovereignty</i>, and even go so far, at least +in Effect, as to deny there is <i>any</i> intrinsick Difference +in Things themselves, as shall be made appear from their most +approved Writers, whenever they are pleased to demand it: But as +this Principle of <i>Sovereignty</i> is most certainly their +strong Hold, I shall therefore endeavour to go to the Depth of +this Argument; and shew, in the first Place, how greatly they +misapprehend the Nature of this <i>Attribute;</i> and, in the +second Place, granting it to be as they say, I shall then shew +the <i>precarious</i> and <i>miserable</i> Condition of all +Mankind, not excepting the Elect themselves, under the Government +of such an arbitrary Being.</p> +<p class="pns">To begin with the first. That G<span class= +"sc">od</span> is a <i>Sovereign</i>, we readily allow: But it +will not therefore follow, he is <i>morally capable</i> of doing +any thing, in its <i>own Nature</i>, immoral or unjust. All +religious Debates are allowed to be best determinable by the +divine Attributes; and yet nothing is more common, than to single +out, and lay the greatest Stress on, that Attribute alone, which +appears best to suit our own particular Opinions: which, however +innocent our Intention may be, is, I think, in itself, a very +erroneous and unwarrantable Procedure; for as G<span class= +"sc">od</span> is <i>all-wise</i> and <i>good</i>, as well as +<i>almighty</i> and <i>independent</i>, it is, in the Nature of +Things, impossible (and therefore we should never admit it +possible) he should be capable (in a moral Sense, I mean) of +exerting any one particular Attribute in <i>Opposition</i> to, or +<i>Diminution</i> from, another. A <i>Sovereign</i> he is, nor +can any Creature whatever dispute his <i>unlimited</i> and +<i>uncontroulable</i> Power over his <i>whole Creation</i>. But +Power alone, without Wisdom and Goodness to make a right Use and +Application of it, may be perfect <i>Frenzy</i>, and run into the +greatest Latitude of <i>Folly</i> and <i>Tyranny</i>. It is, if I +may be allowed the Comparison, like a <i>Vessel</i> that has lost +its Helm, continually exposed to the tossing of Winds and Waves. +To talk, therefore, of <i>mere Sovereign Pleasure</i>, without +Regard to the proper Reason or Fitness of Things, so far +operating and bring in the <i>Divine Mind</i> (and which is +nothing more than the Presence and Operation of his own Wisdom) +in order to prefer what, in its own Nature, is <i>best</i>, and +<i>fittest</i> to be done, is excluding from the Deity, those +<i>more</i> blessed and <i>valuable Perfections</i> of +<i>Wisdom</i> and <i>Goodness</i>, and establishing in their +room, and at their Expence, mere Sovereign Power alone. +<i>Physically speaking</i> indeed, we allow G<span class= +"sc">od</span> can do Evil itself; but the moral Perfections of +his Nature, are to us an <i>infallible</i> and <i>unshaken +Security</i>, that he <i>never will</i> do it. <i>Man</i> being +an impotent and fallible Creature, liable, not only to mistake +the true Nature and importance of Things, but when he does +understand his Duty rightly, liable also, thro’ the Prevalence of +<i>Habit</i> and <i>Passion</i>, to be very backward and +defective in performing it, must necessarily be subject to such +Laws, as contain in them Rewards and Punishments, proper to +influence his <i>Hopes</i> and his <i>Fears</i>.</p> +<p class="pns">But as G<span class="sc">od</span>, on the +contrary, is a Being of all possible and infinite Perfections; an +exact Knowledge of what we call <i>Right</i> and <i>Wrong</i>, +<i>Just</i> and <i>Unjust</i>, ever hath, and always will exit in +the <i>Divine Mind</i>, and be to him a perfect, constant, and +invariable Rule of Action, in relation to his Creatures. He that +is <i>infinite</i> in Knowledge, cannot but know, at all Times, +and under the most (to us) difficult and perplex’d Circumstances +of Things, what in its <i>own Nature</i> is <i>best</i>, and +<i>fittest</i> to be done; and, being void of all Bias, +Prejudice, and Passion, cannot but approve of what is +<i>right</i> and <i>best;</i> and being likewise <i>Almighty</i>, +no Power can possibly interrupt, or prevent what he determined to +accomplish: So that it is <i>morally impossible</i>, that +G<span class="sc">od</span> should do an evil Thing, These Truths +are so deducible from each other, and in themselves so evident, +to all unbiassed and inquisitive Minds, that one would wonder to +find Men, of Learning and Integrity, give into the contrary +Sentiments; which, in Effect they do, who hold Doctrines +<i>naturally subversive</i> of these fundamental Truths, as all +certainly do, who depart from the moral Good and Fitness of +Things, and resolve all into <i>mere sovereign Pleasure</i> +alone, <i>independent</i> of Wisdom and Goodness; which must ever +be at hand to <i>cooperate</i> with, and govern the Exertion of, +their favourite Attribute, <i>sovereign Power</i> itself; or, if +they do not expressly affirm this, they do by another Method the +very same thing; and that is, by denying, in Effect, the +<i>intrinsick Difference</i> of Good and Evil, which, according +to them, has no Foundation in the <i>Nature</i> and Relations of +Things, but takes its Rise, only, from the mere Will and +Appointment of the <i>Deity</i>. But if all Things are in +themselves equally Good, where is the Use to <i>appoint</i>, or +the Sense of talking about it? Wisdom and Goodness must, +according to this Notion, be idle and unmeaning Sounds, without +Sense or Service. But alas! the natural Consequence of +maintaining Tenets, so repugnant to common Sense, is seldom less +than running into and embracing other Absurdities, in themselves +equally great with what they are brought to defend, And here, as +some of these Gentlemen are exalted, and I hope deservedly, to +the Dignity of Teachers in the <i>Christian Church</i>, they +will, I hope, permit me to ask them a Question or two, which I +should, on almost any other Occasion, blush to ask any rational +Man, <i>viz</i>. If they do not perceive an intrinsic Beauty and +Excellence in Virtue, as opposed to Vice; independent of all +<i>positive</i> or arbitrary Appointment, tho’ of the +<i>Deity</i> itself; and whether, besides the Commands of +G<span class="sc">od</span>, (which to be sure are of high +Importance, and ought ever to be urged with great Strength and +Energy) they do not also <i>press</i> upon their Hearers, the +Practice of Virtue, and endeavour to recommend, and inforce it on +the Mind, from its <i>own</i> native Charms? But to make this +Matter, still, if possible, more evident; let us suppose the +present excellent Order of Things inverted, and that +G<span class="sc">od</span>, of his own mere Pleasure, had given +Mankind quite contrary Laws, and commanded <i>Rebellion, Murder, +Ingratitude</i>, and all Manner of Intemperance and Debauchery, +instead of their <i>opposite virtues;</i> would the same Fitness, +Beauty, and Propriety, appear to these Gentlemen, as there now +does, in <i>Virtue?</i> If not, from whence the Difference +arises, let them answer.</p> +<p class="pns">As G<span class="sc">od</span> is an infinite Mind +or Spirit, perfectly acquainted, at every Instant of Time, with +whatever <i>hath been, is</i>, or <i>shall be;</i> and all Things +<i>possible to be;</i> ’tis evident, that all possible Relations +of Persons and Things are fully known to him; and that all +<i>moral</i> and <i>divine</i> Obligations, arising from the +Relation we stand in to G<span class="sc">od</span>, and to each +other, did, in their own Nature, <i>previous</i> to actual Law or +Commandment, exist; because the one was in Time, and the other +Eternal; one commenced only (at best) with the <i>Being</i> and +<i>Beginning</i> of Creatures, the other was from all Eternity, +<i>co-existent</i> with the <i>Divine Wisdom</i> itself; and such +an inseparable Concomitant therewith, that, in regard to the +<i>Divine Being</i>, himself, it was absolutely impossible, but +that, on his creating such a Rank of Beings as we are, +<i>moral</i> and <i>religious</i> Obligations must have been +<i>invariably</i> and <i>unalterably</i> the same; and if, as +these Men teach, G<span class="sc">od’s</span> having commanded +the Practice of Virtue, be its peculiar Sanction, and that +<i>alone</i> which distinguishes it from Vice or Evil; then, by +the same or as good an Argument, his commanding Light in the +Beginning, is all the Reason we have for esteeming Light and +Darkness different, (as they really are) the one being the actual +Pretence of a real Body, and the other a mere Name, to signify +its Absence; not that Vice is therefore a mere Name, to signify +the Absence of Virtue, for Comparisons seldom hold good in +<i>every</i> minute Particular; but there is a Parity between the +two Cases, sufficient to justify my bringing in the one, as an +Illustration of the other. There is no Knowledge <i>more +certain</i>, than what Mankind commonly have of Good and Evil; +and he who, in order to serve any private Scheme of Religion, +goes about to depreciate this Knowledge, robs Mankind of all +Truth and Certainty whatever, and in the End subjects his own +darling Schemes to the same Uncertainty; for if we cannot judge +of the Fitness, of plain moral Truth and Duty, neither can we of +any Scheme of Religion; especially such as hang together more by +Art and human Contrivance, than by Reason or Revelation.</p> +<p class="pns">B<span class="sc">eing</span> very desirous to get +all the Information I could, concerning the Matter in Debate; I +have attentively read over Mr. <i>Cole’s</i> Treatise on the +<i>Sovereignty</i> of G<span class="sc">od</span>. I know ’tis +thought an unanswerable Performance; and, so far as it regards +general Christianity, it is worth every Christian’s serious +Notice: But as to the Doctrine it was wrote to support, it leaves +it (in my Judgment) no better than it found it; but is miserably +weak, and defective, as to any Thing that looks like sound +Reason, or true Argument; and amounts to no more than this +<i>poor Assertion, That because G<span class="sc">od</span> is a +Sovereign, he may do what he pleases:</i> And, from the Instances +he brings from Scripture, ’tis plain, that Mr. <i>Cole</i> +himself pays as <i>little</i> Regard to the intrinsick Worth and +Excellence of Things, as is done by many of his Brethren. The +manner in which he has been pleased to give us the Story of +<i>Jacob</i> and <i>Esau</i>, proves the Truth of this +Observation, I have no great Inclination to spend Time in +explaining <i>hard Passages</i> of Scripture, (tho’ if any thing +of that kind can be serviceable, or deem’d excellent, ’tis Mr. +<i>Taylor</i> of <i>Norwich</i> his Book on <i>Original Sin</i>,) +or to trespass on the Reader’s Patience, by throwing one Text of +<i>hard</i> and <i>uncertain</i> Meaning against another; for by +this means the Controversy hath been needlessly prolonged. Where +the Scriptures are <i>plain</i>, <i>positive</i> and +<i>reasonable</i>, their Authority ought to be conscientiously +adhered to: But as this is not always the Case, the <i>next</i> +Thing to knowing what is the <i>true Meaning</i> of any +particular Text of Scripture is, to know what it neither +<i>does</i> nor <i>can</i> possibly mean; in which Case, the +Divine Attributes, and the Nature and Reason, or (if you please) +Fitness of Things, is the best Rule. We <i>cannot</i>, it is +impossible we <i>should</i>, understand the certain determinate +Meaning of any Text of Scripture <i>better</i>, if altogether +<i>so well</i>, as we do <i>know</i> certainly, that +G<span class="sc">od</span> is <i>just</i> and <i>good</i>, and +<i>know</i> also as clearly, what <i>Justice</i> and +<i>Goodness</i> mean, when applied to the <i>Deity</i>, as we do, +when we apply them to <i>ourselves</i>. And this Rule, if duly +observed, would be abundantly sufficient, to set aside many +Interpretations of Scripture, too commonly admitted upon this and +the like Occasions. And, besides this never failing Argument (to +all who attend duly to its Force) it is worth while, just to +remark, that though, as the <i>Bible</i> now stands, there are in +it (as we must acknowledge) some Passages, which (especially at +first sight) seem to favour the Doctrine of <i>Sovereignty</i>, +&c. yet as it is possible, nay sometimes easy, to give them +<i>another interpretation</i>, and the general Scope and Tenor of +the Scripture being agreeable to such an Interpretation, we have +abundantly more Reason to <i>reject</i>, than to <i>admit</i> of +the Sense, in which these Gentlemen are pleased to understand and +expound many Texts of the <i>Bible</i>, relating to this and +other affinitive Points.</p> +<p class="pns">I <span class="sc">would</span> not, as I observed +before, presume to impose on the Reader’s Time and Patience, by +entering unnecessarily into the scriptural Part of the Argument; +yet I must beg Leave, to make now and then an Observation or two +as I go along: And the first Thing that falls in my way is, the +Story of <i>Jacob</i> and <i>Esau</i>, and the Account which Mr. +<i>Cole</i> gives of it. He not only relates the Story, but +assures us, that <i>Jacob’s</i> obtaining the Blessing was of +Divine Appointment, and (what is more extraordinary) that the +<i>Falsehood</i> and <i>Fraud</i> he practised to accomplish it, +was all of G<span class="sc">od’s</span> own immediate Direction; +and this he gives as an Instance of G<span class="sc">od’s</span> +<i>Sovereignty</i>, and proceeding contrary to the moral Fitness +of Things, and the Nature of those Laws he hath given to Man. +That G<span class="sc">od</span> intended <i>Jacob</i> the +<i>Blessing</i>, or preferred him to <i>Esau</i>, I readily +grant; but cannot admit it to be inferred from thence, that the +Means, by which it was, as we reckon, accomplished, were +<i>Divine</i> also: There is a more natural or (at least) more +justifiable way of accounting for the whole Matter. According to +the History, it seems plain, that <i>Rebecca</i> only, and not +her Husband, was privy to this Designation of the <i>Deity:</i> +she had upon Inquiry (when with Child) received such an Assurance +from the L<span class="sc ls2">ord</span>; which might be the +<i>first Cause</i> of her preferring <i>Jacob</i> to <i>Esau</i>, +and which in Time, ’tis probable, grew up into a much greater +Degree of <i>Partiality</i> and <i>Fondness:</i> All this Time +the good Old <i>Patriarch</i>, her Husband, seems to have been +entirely unacquainted with the Affair. And when the Time drew +nigh, in which, according (as some think) to Custom, he was about +to <i>bless</i> his <i>eldest</i> Son, <i>Rebecca</i> then grew +diffident of the Accomplishment of the Promise made in +<i>Jacob’s</i> Behalf, and applied herself to the Means, which +the Text tells us was used on that Occasion. As to the Authority +those Heads of Families had to <i>confer Benefits</i> on their +Offspring, by way of <i>Blessing</i>, though I shall not now much +contend about it, yet give me Leave to make a few Observations. +It don’t appear to me that <i>Isaac</i>, in giving his Blessing, +did so properly or so much bestow it on the <i>Person</i> of +<i>Jacob</i> present, as he did on the <i>Person</i> of +<i>Esau</i> absent; because it is the Intention which ought +principally to be regarded, and <i>Esau</i> undoubtedly was +intended. Again, this way of blessing, if considered in itself as +a mere Tradition, could be <i>no more</i> efficacious, than what +now prevails in some Parts of the <i>Christian Church</i>. All +true Authority of this kind (if any there be) must result from +<i>immediate Inspiration and Command;</i> and whether +<i>Isaac</i> had these Qualifications, while <i>Jacob</i> stood +before him, personating <i>Esau</i>, is a Matter of no small +Doubt and Dispute. He was (’tis evident) much surprised at the +<i>Cheat</i>, put on him by his <i>Wife</i> and <i>Son</i>, and +would doubtless very willingly have given <i>Esau</i> the +Preference, according to his first Intention; but something +<i>supernatural</i> seems now to have seized and satisfied him, +that <i>Jacob</i> was the Person intended; for he cries out, “I +have blessed him, yea and he shall be blessed.” And this latter +Assurance, and the Energy and Satisfaction wherewith the Words +were pronounced, I take <i>rather</i> to have been the <i>true +Blessing</i> than the <i>other</i>. For, as the Reason of +<i>Jacob’s</i> Dissimulation was intirely owing to his Mother’s +Diffidence and Impatience; so, there is no Doubt to be made, but +that the <i>Almighty</i> himself would, had she not interfered, +have brought it about in a manner becoming his <i>Holiness</i>, +and not by <i>Falsehood</i>, <i>Deceit</i>, and +<i>Dissimulation</i>. <i>Religion</i> can never be <i>more</i> +dishonoured, or the Despensations of G<span class="sc">od</span> +to Mankind receive <i>greater</i> Reproach, than when <i>Divine +Purposes</i> are (under G<span class="sc">od’s</span> immediate +Direction) said to be accomplish’d by Methods in themselves +<i>evil</i> and <i>immoral</i>, and altogether opposite to His +Commands. Hath he forbid us Lying, under the <i>Penalty</i> of +<i>Hell-Fire</i>, and shall he himself practise it, or +immediately influence another to do it, for the sake of bringing +to pass some Event, which he could as easily have accomplish’d, +by Methods purely righteous and honourable! And had <i>Jacob</i> +never been prompted, or attempted to obtain the Blessing in the +manner he did attempt it, ’tis more than probable, that +G<span class="sc">od</span>, who removed <i>Isaac’s</i> Surprise, +and caused him to break forth as he did, “I have blessed him, yea +and he shall be blessed,” would never have permitted or impowered +<i>Isaac</i>, to have <i>blessed Esau</i>, in an <i>effectual</i> +manner beyond his Brother: Or if a mere Pronouncing of Words, +when uttered as a Blessing from the Heads of Families, was in +itself an <i>irreversible Blessing</i>, and <i>Isaac</i> had +attempted to bestow it on <i>Esau</i>, G<span class= +"sc">od</span> no doubt would have stayed his Mouth by +<i>Intimations within;</i> as he did, on another Occasion, the +<i>Hand of Abraham</i>, by an Angel without: Provided, I say, it +be allowed, that a <i>formal Blessing</i>, from the Mouth of +<i>Isaac</i>, was necessary to confirm on <i>Jacob</i> those +superior Privileges, which G<span class="sc">od</span> had +designed for him; and that this Interpretation of the Text is +more honourable, and better becoming the Truth and Majesty of the +<i>Divine Being</i>. I appeal not to Reason only, but to Mr. +<i>Cole</i> himself: For whatever Influence Prejudice, or +Enthusiasm, may have on some Minds, there are certain Seasons, +wherein Truth will display itself to the Realm and Understanding +of Mankind, and extort, even from the Mouths of those, who +sometimes oppose her, the most ample Concessions in her Favour. +Take the following as an Instance—<i>Cole’s Sovereignty of +God</i>, Page 41, 2d Edit. “To this also might be added the +strict Injunctions that G<span class="sc">od</span> hath laid upon +the subordinate Dispensers of his Law; as namely, to judge the +People with just Judgment, not to wrest Judgment, nor respect +Persons; yea, he curseth them that pervert Judgment, and will +surely reprove them that accept Persons; and shall mortal Man be +more just than God? will he, under such Penalties, command Men to +do thus, and not do so himself?”</p> +<p class="pns">T<span class="sc">he</span> Argument is +undoubtedly equally applicable to the Sin of <i>Lying</i>, or +indeed to any Sin whatever; and I appeal to every unprejudiced +Reader, if any Thing more to the Purpose could be urged, against +his own Account of the Affair between <i>Jacob</i> and +<i>Esau</i>, or even against the Doctrine itself, which he writes +his Book to support: and this, in Conjunction with my foregoing +Arguments, may, I hope, be Answer sufficient for the Use they +make of <i>all other</i> parallel Places of Scripture.</p> +<p class="pns">B<span class="sc">y</span> this Concession ’tis +plain, that Justice and Goodness in G<span class="sc">od</span> +are, by this Author, considered the same as in us; how else were +it possible, to understand what the Laws of G<span class= +"sc">od</span> truly mean? <i>Be you perfect, as your Father +which is in Heaven is perfect</i>, is a plain Indication (taking +in the Context) of the moral Perfections of the Divine Nature, in +Part apparent to us, as the Text observes, from his admirable +Bounty in the Creation; <i>He causeth his Sun to rise on the Evil +and on the Good, and sendeth his Rain on the Just and the +Unjust</i>. Though at other Times, when these Gentlemen are hard +pinched with the Iniquity and Injustice of their Doctrines, they +apply for Refuge to the <i>Sovereignty</i> of G<span class= +"sc">od</span>, and give strong Intimations, that <i>Justice</i> +and <i>Goodness</i>, when applied to him, are mere unmeaning +Sounds, which at best signify, what mere Sovereignty pleases to +do, and that when applied to Man, they signify quite another +Thing. And this naturally leads me to the second Thing I proposed +to consider, <i>viz</i>. That allowing the Doctrine of +<i>Election</i> to be, as they say, resolveable into +G<span class="sc">od’s</span> Sovereignty; that G<span class= +"sc">od</span> is just such a Sovereign, as this Doctrine +supposes, and these Gentlemen take him to be; that they have his +Word for their own Election and Salvation; yet even then, there +could be no manner of Certainty as to Religion, no Dependance on +the Promises and Threatnings of the Gospel; and consequently, the +supposed Elect must <i>beat the Air</i>, and run at the same or +as great Uncertainties, as any other Persons whatever, under the +Government of such an arbitrary Being.</p> +<p class="pns">I <span class="sc">have</span>, to avoid Dispute, +proposed this Argument more to the Advantage of the Elect, than I +was strictly obliged to do, by allowing them to be absolutely +certain, that G<span class="sc">od</span> has told them, that +they are his Elect, and that he will give them eternal Life; +which, allowing the Doctrine of <i>Election</i> to be true, is +generally much more than they can prove, either to themselves, or +to others: allowing, I say, the Doctrine of <i>Election</i> to be +clearly revealed in Scripture, there will be this Difficulty +behind, as to the certain Marks of being of that Number. The +Scripture must also as clearly reveal the Marks, as it does the +Doctrine, or we shall not be able to apply with any Certainty to +ourselves. Is believing the Doctrine, &<i>c</i>. and thinking +myself one of this happy Number, a Rule sufficient to abide by? +If so, no Man who has this Faith, concerning the <i>Doctrine</i> +and <i>himself</i>, can ever depart from it. Yet, there have been +many Instances of Persons, zealous in that way, who saw Occasion +afterwards to renounce the Doctrine itself, and with it that +<i>imaginary</i> and <i>ungrounded Conceit</i> of their being, +for no Reason whatever, G<span class="sc">od’s</span> dear +Children and Favourites, and embraced, in its room, the Doctrines +of <i>universal Grace</i> and <i>Free-will;</i> and upon the best +Reasons too, for as without the one, G<span class="sc">od</span> +cannot be just, so without the other, Man, being no Agent, can be +no Subject of Rewards and Punishments. These very Men were before +thought to be elect, by their most spiritual and best judging +Brethren, who pronounced them chosen in <i>Christ</i>, and +unshaken in the Faith; and so indeed they judged concerning +themselves: But the Grace of G<span class="sc">od</span> being +once permitted freely to operate in the Mind, it soon expelled +that Ignorance, and Narrowness of Spirit, which (even in many +well meaning Persons) is the genuine Effect of such narrow +Doctrines. If having this Faith be no certain Mark, because a Man +may depart from it, what Proof have they? surely none: But +allowing them an absolute Certainty, as to themselves, that +G<span class="sc">od</span> hath told them, in Person, that they +are his Elect, it will (on their own darling Principle of +Sovereignty) amount to just nothing at all; because, as a +Sovereign, G<span class="sc">od</span> may promise one thing, and +intend, nay do another, or the contrary; nor can they prove, or +have they the least Assurance, he will not thus deal with them, +without recurring to other Principles, which will hold equally +strong against the Doctrines themselves—To this Dilemma are these +Gentlemen inevitably reduced; they must either give up the +Doctrines, or part with any Security of Dependance on +G<span class="sc">od</span> himself, as to their own Happiness. +It will be <i>in vain</i>, here, to refer to the <i>Goodness of +God</i>, though, on <i>my</i> Principles, the Argument would be +unanswerable; on <i>theirs</i>, it is <i>stark naught</i>, and +avails nothing. And pray observe the <i>double Dealing</i> this +reduces them to; it is something like setting up <i>two Gods</i> +instead of one, or, which is much the same, ascribing to the +<i>eternal, unchangeable Being</i>, an inconsistent and contrary +Conduct. Here is, <i>first</i>, a <i>mere</i> arbitrary Being, +that decrees, or pretends to decree, by mere <i>Sovereign +Pleasure</i> only, the Salvation of the <i>Elect;</i> but, +because such a Being may as well break his Promise as keep it, +here is <i>another</i> to make <i>good</i> the Promise, who +invariably acts according to the moral Fitness of Things: Or, if +you take it the other way, here is, 1<i>st</i>, A Promise made as +a mere <i>Sovereign</i>, undetermined by, and unregardful of, +<i>all</i> moral Obligations; and, 2<i>dly</i>, The Performance +of this Promise is expected, from a Principle of Justice and +Goodness; ever conformable <i>to</i> the moral Reason and Fitness +of Things: And certainly, in either Case, it leaves Things very +precarious; nor can the Promises of such a Being as this (I speak +it with all possible Reverence to the true G<span class= +"sc">od</span> himself) be any thing near so valuable, or fit to +be depended on, as the Engagements of a good and worthy Man. +<a name="p19" id="p19">And whatever these Gentlemen, to put a +more plausible Out-side on their Doctrines</a>, say, concerning +the Freedom and Excellence of that State, wherein our first +Father <i>Adam</i> was created, and the <i>Possibility</i> of his +having remained perfectly innocent, and the Blessings of eternal +Life, which would have been thence derived to <span class= +"sc">all</span> his Posterity, it is plain to me, they generally +believe no such thing; but that, on the contrary, G<span class= +"sc">od</span> absolutely <i>willed</i> and <i>decreed</i> the +<i>Fall of Adam</i>, Mr. <i>Cole</i> himself, their great +Advocate, is far from supposing the Condition of <i>Adam</i> to +have been proper for abiding long in Obedience to the Divine +Command, or that, had he stood, his Posterity would have thence +become <i>impeccable</i> and <i>happy:</i> on the contrary, he +represents <i>Adam’s</i> Condition as a very weak and imperfect +State, by no mean suited to the Temptations, which his Maker knew +he would shortly be exposed to, and overcome with; and all his +Posterity, <i>had they been tried one by one, would</i>, it +seems, <i>have failed as he did</i>, Page 72. If all this does +not amount to something equal to a positive Assertion, that +G<span class="sc">od</span> <i>willed</i> the Fall of Adam, and +in Consequence of it, the Guilt and Desert of eternal Death, +which is said to be thence derived, to <i>all</i> his prosperity, +I do not know what is, or can be equal to it; and indeed all +this, and much more, may easily be resolved into the Doctrine of +G<span class="sc">od’s</span> <i>Sovereignty:</i> and whoever +thinks I have misrepresented their Faith, need only consult their +great apostle Mr. <i>Calvin</i>. But let me further pursue my +Argument, to prove, that tho’ a Man of this <i>Faith</i> has +G<span class="sc">od’s</span> <i>own Word</i> for his Election +and Salvation, he cannot, on this Principle of <i>mere +Sovereignty</i>, reasonably or safely depend on it: My Reason, +which is short and plain, I have already given; because +G<span class="sc">od</span>, as a <i>Sovereign</i>, may do just +what he pleases, <i>keep</i> his Promises, or <i>break</i> them. +There can be no Possibility of evading this Argument, without +coming back to the Goodness of G<span class="sc">od</span>; which +is at once to set aside mere <i>Sovereign</i> Pleasure, and +evidently recurring to the moral Fitness of Things. As much as +these Gentlemen are pleased to despise this moral Fitness, and +superstitiously exalt the mere Will of G<span class= +"sc">od</span> in Opposition thereto; and if the <i>Goodness</i> +of G<span class="sc">od</span> proves, that he <i>cannot</i> +break the Promise he has made to them of eternal Life; it is at +least as strong a Proof to me, that such a good Being <i>could +not</i> possibly make me for eternal Misery, or, which is the +very same Thing, will or decree the Fall of <i>Adam</i>, and pass +the Sentence of eternal Death on all his Posterity; the far +greatest Part of whom he leaves, in this Condition, to perish +everlastingly, and <i>miserable</i> me among the rest!</p> +<p class="pns">A D<span class="sc">ue</span> Survey of the two +Cases, or Conditions, of the Elect and Non-elect, may serve to +set this Matter in a clear Light, G<span class="sc">od</span> +being in himself antecedent to the Existence of all other Beings, +infinitely glorious and happy, could have no Occasion for +Creatures to add to his Blessedness; all that we call +<i>evil</i>, such as Cruelty and Injustice in Man, ever arises +from such a <i>vicious</i> and <i>imperfect</i> State of Mind, as +cannot, for that Reason, possibly belong to <i>Deity</i>. As the +Sources, therefore, whence these Evils arise, cannot be in +G<span class="sc">od</span>; such a Conduct, as these Doctrines +suppose, is also equally impossible to proceed from G<span class= +"sc">od</span>, whose <i>only Intent</i> in creating must be, to +communicate Happiness to his Creatures: Creation infers +Providence, and to bring a sensible rational Being into this +World; and, instead of taking <i>due Care</i> of its Safety and +Happiness, to <i>decree</i> and render it eternally miserable, is +in its <i>own Nature</i>, much worse than making an absolute +Promise of eternal Life to any created being, and +<i>disappointing that Being</i> of its Happiness, whether by +annihilation, or by changing it to another State, or Mode of +Being, no more happy than the present mortal Life; ’tis only a +Breach of Promise, which, in such a <i>Sovereign</i>, is a mere +trifle. We have <i>no natural</i> Right to Immortality, +<i>much</i> less to immortal Happiness; it is the mere Effect of +Divine Bounty—But, being created in a weak, dependent State, and +surrounded with Wants and Infirmities, we <i>have</i> a +<i>natural Right</i> to the Care and Protection of our Maker; and +tho’ we allow, no <i>formal Promise</i> is made on our Behalf, +yet the <i>very act</i> itself, of creating such Beings, and the +Condition we <i>are</i> placed in, contains in it the +<i>Substance</i> of a Promise; and we may be assured, +G<span class="sc">od</span> will have proper Regard to such +Beings. If G<span class="sc">od</span> be gracious enough to +<i>give</i> eternal Life, to which we have not the <i>least</i> +natural Right, can he possibly with-hold that which, from our +Make and Dependance on him, we have just Reason to expect? and +how Much more impossible is it, that he should make us for +everlasting Misery! To make <i>one Man</i> for Damnation, is much +worse, than promising eternal Life to another, and breaking that +Promise; he that does the former, cannot be depended on in the +latter. Methinks, the very Creation itself, and bountiful +Provision therein made, for the Accommodation and Happiness of +Man, might assure us, that (Man being made principally for +another World) a <i>proportionate Care</i> will be taken of his +more important and everlasting Concerns. Which presents me with a +fair Opportunity, of exposing a Notion these Gentlemen hold, or a +Method they have, of interpreting such plain Texts of Scripture, +as are brought to prove G<span class="sc">od’s</span> general +Care and Providence over his whole Creation; in +<i>particular</i>, where <i>David</i> says, “The tender Mercies +of the L<span class="sc ls2">ord</span> are over all his Works:” +This, if you believe them, relates only to this Life; so I think +Mr. <i>Gill</i> says. But what then, Is no Inference thence to be +made? If G<span class="sc">od</span> be thus tender, to provide +Temporals, how <i>much more</i> will he be kind to the Soul, and +provide for <i>that!</i> ’Tis a natural and strong Way of +arguing, and it was our Saviour’s own Method of arguing, as the +most Plain and Conclusive: “Wherefore if G<span class= +"sc">od</span> so cloath the Grass of the Field, &<i>c</i>. +How much more shall he cloath you, &<i>c</i>.” <i>Mat</i>. +vi. 30. The Argument rises in one Case, as much above the other, +as <i>immortal Life</i> is preferable to the present <i>mortal +State;</i> and suppose any of us should sympathise with a near +Friend, under a <i>small Degree</i> of Pain and Affliction, would +not the same Spirit of Friendship and Humanity have a <i>stronger +Sympathy</i>, when Affliction becomes more intense and severe? To +be tender and pitiful in the least and lowest Matters, and +unregardful and cruel in important and everlasting Concerns, is, +with regard to the <i>Divine Being</i>, a moral Impossibility; +’tis <i>beneath</i> human Nature and Prudence, and the Practice +of a good Man; And yet these Doctrines teach this horrible +impiety concerning the great G<span class="sc">od</span> +himself.</p> +<p class="pns">To sum up this Argument: That Being who can make a +sensible rational Creature, on <i>Purpose</i> for +<i>Damnation</i>, instead of taking a reasonable Care of it, +which, from its Make and Dependance, it has a Right to expect, as +much as though a formal Promise were made, may, with altogether +as much (<i>nay more</i>) Justice, break its Promises of eternal +Life, <i>made</i> to another Creature of the same Kind; its Claim +not being founded in Nature, but built on Promise. As the former +would be a more cruel and un-justifiable Proceeding than the +latter, he that is capable of doing the one, can have <i>no moral +Perfections</i> in his Nature sufficient to secure the +<i>Elect</i> against his doing the other: and on this <i>wild</i> +and <i>boundless</i> Principle of <i>Sovereignty</i>, it is +possible that, with regard to <i>Religion</i>, Things may be +quite <i>reversed</i> hereafter; the <i>Elect</i>, as they are +called, made <i>miserable</i>, and the <i>Non-elect, happy</i>. I +think we may challenge the whole World, to shew on this mad +Principle the contrary; and why, as well as any thing else, such +an Economy may not be resolved into <i>Sovereign Pleasure</i>. If +G<span class="sc">od</span> to <i>Isaac</i> conveyed such errant +Falshoods, by the Instrumentality of <i>Jacob’s Mouth</i>, <i>Why +not</i> make the same <i>deceitful Use</i> of the <i>Bible</i>, +or even of his own immediate Word, in regard to the Elect? If +G<span class="sc">od</span>, as Mr. <i>Gill</i> (I think) +observes, has two Wills, “One publick Will of Command, and +another of Intention, which is private;” Why, with regard to the +<i>Elect</i>, may he not promise one thing, and intend, nay +resolve on another? One would think it impossible, for any +understanding Man to judge thus of his Creator, that it is +possible he should command one Thing under the <i>severest +Penalties</i>, and at the <i>same Time</i> not only <i>will</i> +and <i>intend</i>, but irresistibly and secretly work to +accomplish just the contrary, and (what is amazing beyond Belief) +after all punish severely the Creatures concerned, whom he +actuates to bring his secret Purposes to pass: If there can be +such a thing as arbitrary Power and tyrannical Government, in the +very worst Sense of all, here it is. And here certainly is all +the <i>Phrensy</i>, <i>Folly</i>, and <i>Tyranny</i>, which, I +told you in the Beginning, the Government of such an arbitrary +Being (as these Gentlemen represent the Deity to be) must ever be +liable to.</p> +<p class="pns">It is evident, that as worthy Sentiments of +G<span class="sc">od</span> and of Religion, better the Mind, and +improve the Understanding; so do weak and superstitious +Principles corrupt the intellectual Faculty, and render the Soul +more blind and inhuman, than it is in its natural State, +unassisted and unimproved by Divine Grace. I have the rather made +choice of this Argument, not only because I have never seen it +urged before, but because I think it more nearly affects Men of +this Faith, than any I have hitherto met with. I may be mistaken; +but while it has such weight with me, I cannot but earnestly +recommend it to the serious and impartial Consideration of all +who profess this Faith, more especially those who preach it +publickly to the World; whose Acknowledgment of what I take to be +Truth, or friendly Animadversions thereon, will be Matter of no +small Satisfaction to me: But I must here enjoin one Caution, +<i>viz</i>. that it will be a absolutely in vain to produce Texts +of Scripture, till this Point is better settled between us. In +the Art of evading Scripture Proofs, I allow these Gentlemen to +be very skilful and expert; nor can I help believing, that a +small Part of the Penetration and Dexterity, usually exercised on +these Occasions, would, in Men of contrary Principles, or even in +themselves, could they be persuaded to think differently, be +abundantly sufficient to overthrow even the Doctrines themselves: +They have a peculiar Talent, at misunderstanding; and perverting +the plainest Text, and rendering those which are difficult and +obscure in their literal Sense, with much Boldness, and without +Hesitation; they stumble in a plain Path at Noon-Day, and walk +carelessly at Midnight amongst Rock, and upon the most dangerous +Precipices. And here I might safely rest the Argument, and make a +final End of it. <i>Sovereignty</i>, such an one as they contend +for, once proved, any thing whatever may be allowed to follow, +and all Disputations will be utterly in vain. Allow but the +<i>Roman Church</i> its <i>Infallibility</i>, and the Truth of +other Doctrines will unavoidably follow. Till these Gentlemen, I +say, set my main Principles aside, all the Scripture in the World +will be nothing to their Purpose. Not but in the main the +<i>Bible</i> is against them; for the Scriptures <i>reveal</i> +G<span class="sc">od’s</span> Being and Attributes <i>more +clearly</i> than they do most Points of Doctrine: the Reason is, +because the Doctrines commonly embraced, are in themselves <i>not +so plain</i> to Reason, as the Being and Attributes of +G<span class="sc">od</span>; the latter being generally +acknowledged in all Christian Churches, tho’ at the same Time +they widely differ about particular Doctrines, some of which have +no doubt been greatly corrupted in passing through <i>various +Hands</i> and Translations: and I have been informed, by much +better Judges than I pretend to be, that the <i>New +Testament</i>, even in these very Doctrines I have been +contending against, has, by <i>some Partiality</i> or +<i>Neglect</i>, been made to speak more roundly in their Favour, +than the original <i>Greek</i>, or best Copies, will support; and +that, in some Places, the Meaning of the Original is inverted in +the Translation. The Scripture not only revealing to us the +<i>Being</i> and <i>Attributes</i> of G<span class= +"sc">od</span>, <i>more clearly</i> than it does many Doctrines, +and that Fundamental of all true Religion being also in itself +perfectly agreeable to the Light of Nature; ’tis evident, we are +bound to reject the most positive Text of Scripture militating +against this everlasting and fundamental Truth: and rather than +part with this, we had much better suppose the Writer, as to +disputable Points, to have been mistaken at the first, or the +true Meaning corrupted by others. The Translators are allowed to +have been fallible Men, and ’tis very probable some Errors might +creep in at that Door: But it will not so easily be granted, that +the <i>inspired Writers</i> could mistake, nor would I suppose +it, unless in <i>very extraordinary Cases</i>, where either +<i>that</i> or something <i>worse</i> must be supposed; and such +a Supposition will, I am sure; much better become us, than to +imagine it possible for G<span class="sc">od</span> to make a +Revelation of his Will to Man, which shall upon Examination be +found <i>contrary</i> to his Being and Goodness, as well as +expressly contrary to other <i>plain Parts</i> of this +Revelation, Tho’ the Argument, I say, might be safely rested +here, yet as there are some well meaning Persons, who believe +that <i>Adam</i> was made upright, and furnished with a Stock of +Strength and Understanding, sufficient to <i>preserve</i> his +Innocence; that G<span class="sc">od</span> made a Covenant with +him, as our <i>Federal</i> or <i>Representative Head</i>, wherein +it was stipulated, that if he continued upright, during the Time +of Probation allotted, <i>all</i> his Posterity should be <i>for +ever</i> happy; but that if he fell, <i>all</i> should be +<i>subject</i> to everlasting Misery, as the counter Part of the +Covenant; and he falling, the Restoration of his fallen Race +should be intirely owing to the good Pleasure of G<span class= +"sc">od</span>, who might <i>redeem all</i> or only <i>a +Part</i>, and leave the rest to perish in the State wherein he +found them, and in which <i>Adam</i> had involved them by his +Transgression: This they call <i>Preterition</i>, or a <i>Passing +by</i>, which sounds a little better than that harsh Word +<i>Reprobation</i>, tho’ in reality no better at all: And on this +first Transgression <i>some</i> found the Doctrine of +<i>Election</i>, and others that of <i>Infant-Baptism</i>, as an +Expedient to wash away this original Guilt; and it must be owned, +the Virtue of the Remedy is admirably well suited to the +Malignity of the Disease. I shall, for their sakes, inspect a +little farther into the Affair; to me it appears unreasonable, +and therefore improbable, that G<span class="sc">od</span> should +make with <i>Adam</i> any such Covenant or Agreement, or suffer +the eternal State of all Mankind to hang upon the single Thread +of <i>one Man’s</i> Behaviour, and who too (it seems) +G<span class="sc">od</span> knew would swerve from his Obedience: +besides, in all equitable Covenants, <i>every Party</i> concerned +has a Right to be consulted, nor can they be justly included to +their own Detriment, without Consent first obtained, (especially +if the Thing covenanted for, has an immediate, or may have a very +fatal, tho’ very remote, Tendency, to make <i>wretched</i> and +<i>unhappy</i>) which, in this Case, with regard to the Unborn, +could not possibly be had. I am sensible the Gentlemen against +whom I am arguing (especially Mr. <i>Gill</i>) have many pretty +Inventions, to justify such a Conduct in the Divine Being, such +as producing parallel Instances, drawn from the allowed Practice +of Men, and Usage of the State; in particular, the Law relating +to <i>High-Treason</i>, whereby a <i>Rebel’s</i> immediate +Descendants are <i>deprived</i> of inheriting their Father’s +Estate, with others of a like Kind; to all which, what I am about +to offer may, I hope, be a sufficient Answer: The two Cases +differ so widely, that it will be no easy Undertaking to make any +Thing of this Instance in their Favour; and ’tis very surprising, +to find Men of the brightest Intellects, so weak as to argue and +infer, from the Laws of <i>Fallible Men</i>, to the Laws of an +<i>Infallible</i> and <i>Holy Being:</i> The Inference ought +rather to be just the Reverse; for such Institutions as Men, in +this weak and imperfect State, may think convenient for their own +Sakes, and the Good of Society, to establish and ordain, can be +<i>no Rule</i> to him, whose Infinite Wisdom and Almighty Power +set him <i>far above</i> all such Necessity. Nor, again, does +this Case come up to the Matter in Dispute: It is true, that the +Heir of a convict Rebel <i>cannot</i>, according to our Laws, +inherit his Father’s Estate; but what then, does it deprive him +of any thing that was his own before? No; the Law convicts the +Rebel, while <i>in Possession</i> of his Estate, which it +considers as his <i>own Property</i>, and which therefore it +justly takes away for his <i>own Offence</i>. Perhaps, in Cases +of Hereditary Possessions, it may seem a little hard, because it +prevents the <i>next</i> Heir from inheriting; but if there be +any Evil or Imperfection in this, we must excuse it, for the Sake +of the Intent, which might be for the general Good, the more +effectually to deter Men from <i>treasonable Conspiracies</i> +against their Prince, whereby the Happiness of Society hath been +often greatly disturbed, and whole Kingdoms and Countries +depopulated: but in this Case, it is not strictly the Heir’s, +till he comes into Possession; for the Law, by which he may +possess hereafter, may be considered as having in it this +<i>particular</i> Exception, as to the Crime of +<i>High-Treason</i>, which, whenever it <i>occurs</i> as to the +<i>Parent</i>, renders the Son incapable, &<i>c</i>. With +regard to our Laws, we may, in some Sense, be said to make them +ourselves, by our Representatives, whom we constitute for that +End: and ’tis besides very probable, that some great Men, who +formerly possessed Estates, and settled them on the Male Heirs in +their Families, from one Generation to another, might help to +make this very Law itself concerning Treason, and consequently +they could not but acquiesce with this <i>very Exception</i> to +the Right of Inheritance in their Posterity. But if it be still +said to be unjust, though necessary, ’tis no Argument; for it +<i>cannot</i> be unjust and necessary too: the Law, in this Case, +ought rather (with Submission) so far as it unjustly affects a +Man’s Children, to be alter’d; and if it robs us of the Security, +which arises from deterring the Parent, on Account of the Evils +which shall afterwards befall his Child, ’tis easy to remedy +this, by laying an <i>additional Punishment</i> on the Traitor +himself; which, as <i>Self</i> is much nearest to us all, might +better prevent the Sin of Rebellion, If the present Law be just +in itself, there can be no Objection to it; if it be unjust, +<i>no Argument</i> of any Weight can be drawn from it, in regard +to the <i>Divine Being;</i> who is holy, wise, and true, and so +are all his Appointments concerning the Children of Men.</p> +<p class="pns">To bring this kind of Reasoning of theirs up to +the Point, they should have produced a Law, which subjected the +Son (for the Father’s Offence) to the <i>same corporal</i> +Punishment with the Father, and then also they must have proved +such a Law to be just and good. But, as these Gentlemen are so +fond of bringing Instances from the <i>Practice of Men</i> in +this frail State, in Justification of their own Doctrine, I shall +present them with one or two of my own. <i>Murder</i> has +sometimes been committed under such Circumstances, that though +the Murderer has been arraigned, there hath been no room to +condemn him, all Circumstances having concurred, in the Eye of +the Law, to acquit him; <i>will the Almighty therefore acquit +him?</i> Again, on the other hand, in the Case of Murder, things +have so fallen out, as to make an innocent Person look like the +Murderer, in the Eye of the Law or Court, which has therefore +sometimes proceeded to Death itself; <i>is this Man therefore +guilty before God?</i> I have put these two Cases, purely to shew +the Absurdity of such kind of Arguments: and I hope they will +consider better of it, and advance them no farther.</p> +<p class="pns">I<span class="sc">f</span> there was such a +Covenant between G<span class="sc">od</span> and Adam, ’tis +strange <i>no Notice</i> should be taken of it in the Law given +to <i>Adam</i>, as laid down in the <i>Bible</i>, and where, of +all Places, we have most Reason to expect it—this must surely +have been the fittest Place for its Insertion—Nor is it only +absent here, for there is no positive Account of any such +Covenant in all the <i>Old Testament</i>. Besides, when the Law +was given, and threatening (in Case of Disobedience) pronounced +on <i>Adam</i>, ’twas <i>merely personal</i>—<i>In the Day</i> +thou <i>eatest thereof</i>, thou <i>shalt surely die</i>. And +when <i>Adam</i> and <i>Eve</i> had broke the Command, and +G<span class="sc">od</span> descended to judge them for it, their +Sentences were <i>personal</i> and <i>particular</i>, and no +reproaching <i>Adam</i> on the Account of Evils to be thence +brought on his Posterity, and <i>much less</i> of eternal +Damnation. The <i>Jews</i> indeed, many of whom were weak enough +to embrace any Absurdity at all, had by some Means contracted a +Notion, not altogether unlike this of <i>original Sin</i>, +probably from a Misunderstanding of the second Commandment, which +speaks of “visiting the Iniquity of the Father upon the Children, +&<i>c</i>.” But ’tis highly worthy of our Notice, that +G<span class="sc">od</span> himself was <i>greatly displeased</i> +with their having imbibed this Notion, and commanded the Prophet +<i>Ezekiel</i> to refute it at large; the Substance of which I +cannot avoid setting down, it being so full to my Purpose. The +Prophet introduces it thus, <i>Ezek</i>, xviii. 2. <i>What mean +ye, that use this Proverb in Israel, The Fathers have eaten sour +Grapes, and the Children Teeth are set on edge?</i> Ver. 4. +<i>Behold all Souls are mine, as the Soul of the Father, so also +the Soul of the Son is mine: the Soul that sinneth, it shall +die</i>. The Prophet then, from <i>ver</i>. 5. to 19. puts the +<i>two Cases</i> of a <i>righteous Man’s</i> having a <i>wicked +Son</i>, and a <i>wicked Man’s</i> having a <i>righteous Son</i>, +in order to shew, that neither is the one <i>better</i> for his +Father’s Uprightness, nor the other at all <i>worse</i> for his +Father’s Wickedness; but that all is, as it should be, placed to +the Account of their own <i>Merits</i> or <i>Demerits</i>. Ver. +20. <i>The Soul that sinneth, it shall die: the Son shall not +bear the Iniquity of the Father, neither shall the Father bear +the Iniquity of the Son; the Righteousness of the Righteous shall +be upon him, and the Wickedness of the Wicked shall be upon +him</i>. Ver. 23. <i>Have I any Pleasure at all that the Wicked +should die? saith the Lord God: and not that he should return +from his Ways and live?</i> Ver. 25. <i>Yet ye say, the Way of +the Lord is unequal. Hear now, O House of Israel, Is not my Way +equal? are not your Ways unequal?</i> Ver. 32. <i>For I have no +Pleasure in the Death of him that dieth, saith the Lord God: +wherefore turn your selves and live ye</i>.</p> +<p class="pn">W<span class="sc">ords</span> more positive against +this Doctrine cannot be laid together. <i>Justice</i> and +<i>Equity</i> are here, by the Almighty himself, consider’d as +the <i>very same</i>, both in G<span class="sc">od</span> and +Man; and the same Justice and Equity, which <i>He commands</i> us +to make the Rule of <i>our Actions</i>, ’tis evident <i>He +here</i> makes the Rule of his <i>own</i>. He blames them for +their false Principles, their Ignorance and Bigotry, and is not a +little offended, because they thought him capable of acing in so +evil and unrighteous a Manner, as that would be, of <i>punishing +the Child for the Parent’s Offence;</i> and strongly and solemnly +assures them, he will do no such Thing. And as Justice and Equity +would not bear it then, it is plain that, G<span class= +"sc">od</span> could never take any such cruel and disreputable +Measures, either in the Beginning, or at any time afterwards; +because, to act thus at the Creation of Man, and disdain the +Imputation with Indignation afterwards, argues a strange +Inconsistency in the Conduct of G<span class="sc">od</span> +towards Men; but the Truth is, the same Reasons which made him +abhor the Imputation afterwards, could not but infallibly prevent +his making any such unrighteous Covenant in the Beginning. What +would you think of a Man, who is a Villain to-day, and boasts +much of his great Honesty tomorrow? The <i>Appearance</i> of +<i>Christ</i> in the Flesh was, we are told by these Gentlemen, +on Account of <i>Adam’s</i> Transgression, without which it would +have been, they say, wholly superfluous. But the Expediency or +End of <i>Christ’s</i> coming, may be resolved into the <i>Love +of</i> G<span class="sc">od</span>, on the <i>one hand;</i> +pitying the Ignorance and Folly of Mankind, on the <i>other:</i> +and whether this State was the Effect of <i>Adam’s</i> Sin, or of +their <i>own</i> personal Demerits, it makes <i>no Difference</i> +in this Case. Whoever looks carefully into the Evangelists, will +find abundant Reason to disapprove and condemn this Doctrine of +<i>Original Sin</i>, and of <i>Christ’s</i> coming into the World +on <i>that Account only</i>. Our Saviour, had this been the Case, +would either have plainly express’d, or have given some strong +Intimations concerning it: Yet no such thing appears; but the +contrary, to a <i>Demonstration</i>, from no less than two +Passages of Scripture, recorded by St. <i>Mark</i>, (ix. 36.) +When the Disciples had been privately contending for Preheminence +above each other, our Saviour, to rebuke this aspiring Spirit, +sets before them, as a Pattern of Simplicity and Innocence, a +little Child; which must have been very absurd, according to the +Notion of <i>Original Sin:</i> The second is <i>Mark</i> x. +<i>ver</i>. 13. 14. 15. 16. where <i>Christ</i> assures his +Disciples, that, in order to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven, +they <i>must become as little Children</i>. And in St. +<i>Matthew</i> (xviii. <i>ver</i>. 3.) this very thing is, if +possible, more <i>Strongly</i> and <i>Emphatically</i> express’d. +Which Declarations, had there been such a Thing as the Guilt of +Original Sin, <i>subjecting Children to</i> G<span class= +"sc">od’s</span> <i>Wrath and Displeasure</i>, would have been +ungrounded, and erroneous in a high Degree; for if they were to +become like such a little Child, as a necessary and fit Condition +for Heaven, the Condition of Infants <i>must also</i> be suitable +to that Blessed Place—<i>Suffer little Children to come unto me, +and forbid them not, for of such is the Kingdom of Heaven</i>. +The Word S<span class="sc">uch</span>, is a general Term, equally +applicable to all Infants whatever: it shews their Innocence, and +how acceptable they are to the Almighty; and, consequently, +demonstrates the Doctrine of <i>Original Sin</i> to be Spurious +and Erroneous: as is also the Practice of <i>Infant Baptism</i>, +in Support of which, this very Text is wisely alledged; whereas +the Text itself assures us, that Children are <i>already</i>, by +Nature, in that <i>same State</i> of Innocence, which +<i>Baptism</i> is design’d to procure them: and how vain the +Ceremony, under such a Circumstance, must be, is <i>too +evident</i> to need Explaining.</p> +<p class="pns">B<span class="sc">ut</span> suppose there was such +a Covenant, our Condition, in point of Innocence, is just the +same as it would be without it; we could have no manner of +Concern with <i>Adam’s</i> Transgression: and our Innocence in +either Case being <i>exactly</i> the same, G<span class= +"sc">od</span> cannot but look upon us (in our natural State, +before we commit Sin) as Creatures that never did any thing to +offend him, and consequently be gracious and kind to us; for to +leave us in this State, to suffer everlasting Torment, is worse +than a Breach of Promise made to the Elect; and if we are as +innocent, as tho’ no such Covenant had ever been made, +G<span class="sc">od</span> cannot but regard us accordingly: and +this proves that such a Covenant could never be made, because to +no good or valuable End.</p> +<p class="pns">I <span class="sc">am</span> fearful of swelling +this Pamphlet, beyond its intended Bounds; yet so fast do my +Thoughts, on this Subject, multiply and enlarge themselves, that +I must beg Leave to Say a small Matter, concerning that +<i>Propensity to Evil</i>, which we are told is derived from +<i>Adam</i>, as a Fruit and Proof of his first and original +Offence. If <i>Adam</i>’s Sin had this Influence on his +Posterity; as the Act, which produced it, was <i>one</i> and the +<i>same;</i> and all his Posterity standing in the same Relation +to him, as their Federal Head; ’tis evident, in this View of the +Matter, that <i>this</i> Bias to Evil, must in <i>all</i> be +<i>uniform</i> and <i>alike:</i> but the contrary seems +demonstrable, from undoubted and incontestable Experience; some +Children having <i>much stronger Propensities to Evil</i>, than +others: And if Part of this can be resolved into something +besides the <i>Influence</i> of <i>Adam’s first +Transgression</i>, and <i>subsequent</i> to the <i>Fall;</i> it +lies (I think) on our Adversaries to shew clearly, why every +Propensity to Sin, may not likewise be resolved into something +besides, and <i>subsequent</i> to, this <i>original +Transgression</i>. But allowing we are born into the World, with +this <i>Propensity to Evil</i>, and that we derive it from +<i>Adam’s</i> Sin; yet if G<span class="sc">od</span> be +<i>merciful</i>, he could never leave us in this deplorable +Condition; nor would his <i>Impartiality</i> admit of +<i>redeeming</i> the one Part of Mankind in a mere arbitrary +Manner, and <i>leaving</i> the other <i>to perish</i>. Nor can +much Righteousness be expected from the <i>Justice</i> of that +Being, whose Mercy can be an idle and unconcerned Spectator, in +so very moving, piteous, and Miserable a Circumstance. As to +<i>Adam’s</i> Posterity, where is the Difference to them, whether +their present weak and despoiled Condition (as these Men deem it) +be the immediate Work of <i>Creation</i> itself, or the +<i>Effect</i> of <i>Adam’s Sin</i>, and Abuse of his intellectual +Powers. We are what we are by <i>Necessity</i>, strict +<i>Necessity:</i> and though it may be called <i>moral +Necessity</i>, in order to palliate and distinguish it from that +which is natural; it operates on us, to all Intents and Purposes, +equally the same; and the giving it a milder Name, looks like a +sophistical Artifice. If Man’s Nature be impaired by the Act of +another, G<span class="sc">od</span>, as a <i>just</i> and +<i>good</i> Being, will either abate of the Rigour of his +original Law, or replenish and restore our decayed Powers.</p> +<p class="pns">T<span class="sc">he</span> <i>same Goodness</i> +(if these Gentlemen will allow it was <i>Goodness</i>) which +prompted the Almighty to make Man such an excellent and blessed +Creature in the Beginning, must also prevail with him, to look +even on <i>Adam</i> himself with an Eye of Pity and Compassion, +after he had sinned; and much more must he be inclined to provide +for the <i>Restoration</i> of his Off-spring, who themselves had +not <i>actually</i> sinned, but yet had their Natures impaired by +the <i>Fall</i>. Besides, if Man was first enslaved by the Devil, +not of <i>Force</i>, but by <i>Fraud</i> and <i>Temptation;</i> +and J<span class="sc ls2">esus</span> C<span class= +"sc ls2">hrist</span> be a kind of <i>Chieftain</i>, set up +against Antichrist; his Method of <i>Recovery</i> must be as +extensive as the <i>Fall</i>—Why does he save some? but as they +are Objects of Mercy, and to recover, with a just Indignation, +Souls, originally G<span class="sc">od’s</span> own, out of the +Hand of an Usurper, Tyrant, and Destroyer. How can these Reasons +operate as to a Part, and have no Influence as to the Remainder? +The more I reflect upon the Doctrine, and view it in every light, +the more terrifying and deformed it appears: and there is no +Argument, short of God’s <i>Sovereignty</i>, that will relieve +the Difficulty; which admitted, will bring on and multiply ten +thousand greater Evils.</p> +<p class="pns">I<span class="sc">t</span> may here be proper to +take notice of a new Argument, urged in its full Strength, and +with all the Advantage of Rhetorick and Eloquence, by the most +ingenious Dr. <i>I—c W—s</i>, in a Book intituled, <i>The Ruin +and Recovery of Mankind;</i> &<i>c</i>. We are there told, +that this <i>covenant</i> seems to have been, evidently, +calculated for the best; because <i>Adam</i>, in that State of +Understanding and Innocence, was more likely to stand, and +maintain his Innocence, than any of his Posterity, especially +when he consider’d himself as acting for <i>all</i> his +Posterity; with which the Doctor supposes him to have been fully +and strongly apprised; as indeed he ought, had the Case been as +the Doctor believes. This Argument I take him to have mistaken +both ways, <i>viz</i>. by extolling <i>Adam’s</i> Condition, on +the one hand, beyond what in reality it ever was, and setting +that of his Posterity much lower than it really is: and these +Errors are productive of many others. <i>Adam</i> is supposed to +have been without any Pain, or Uneasiness, and that he would so +have remained, during his Innocence: But after C<span class= +"sc ls2">hrist</span> has removed the Curse, and taken away the +Sin of his own <i>Chosen</i> Children, bodily Pains and outward +Afflictions are sometimes their Lot, why might not Man, in his +original State of Innocence, be subject, in some Degree, to Pain +and Disease? if <i>Creation</i> were inconsistent with such a +mixt Dispensation of Good and Evil, why not <i>Redemption?</i> If +G<span class="sc">od</span>, for the Exercise of Man’s Fidelity, +placed him where he was exposed to the Evil and Danger of +Temptation; why not suffer his Patience to be exercised, at some +Seasons, by Pain and Inquietude? To return to this +<i>Covenant</i>, could it be proved to have been as the Doctor +imagines, I see not what could be gained by it: because it would +be trifling to a considerable Degree. And all the Arguments, used +by <i>Milton</i>, in his third Book of <i>Paradise Lost</i>, to +shew the Absurdity of that Doctrine, which considers <i>Adam</i> +as <i>acting</i>, or rather as <i>being acted, by Necessity</i>, +in that Situation of Paradise, would be equally applicable to all +the Elect, under the absolute Slavery of the <i>Fall</i>.</p> +<p class="pns">W<span class="sc">here</span> is the Use of +<i>Reason</i>, or <i>Moral Agency</i>, in Man, if another be +substituted to act in his Stead, and not he himself? Man, being +made a <i>free</i> and <i>moral</i> Agent, has Power to act for +himself, and can be accountable for no body’s Crimes but his own. +The <i>Consciousness</i> of being a Sinner, belongs only to him, +that <i>actually</i> sinneth, or omitteth his Duty. Enthusiasm +indeed, which, in its highest Stages, is a kind of spiritual +Madness, may have on some Minds a quite different Effect; and the +Poor Soul, that is subject to this gloomy and tyrannical +Principle, may conceit strange things; it may at one Time imagine +itself under the Guilt of <i>Adam’s</i> Sin, which it never +committed; and fancy itself a Saint in J<span class= +"sc ls2">esus</span> C<span class="sc ls2">hrist</span> (and what +not) at another: it is a mad Principle, fruitful of false +Doctrines, Chimeras, and Monsters. It matters not whether (as in +the Case of <i>Natural Madness</i>) the Reason be lost, or +whether (as in that of <i>Enthusiasm</i>) it be over-power’d, and +brought into subjection to False Principles. The Effect is the +same; and between Powers that are suffered to lie dormant, and no +Powers at all, there is here no material Distinction to be made. +Again, this Notion of <i>Adam’s</i> being more likely to stand +than his Posterity, is a mere Fallacy: it supposes a Difference +of State, and Rectitude of Mind, between him and us; which, if +true, will likewise suppose, that our State being more weak and +defenceless than his, the Task or Duty, assigned us, must be +proportionate to our different and inferior Abilities. If +<i>Adam</i> was put into this State, as <i>The Ruin and +Recovery</i> seems to suppose, from a Motive of Love in +G<span class="sc">od</span>, to his Creatures, in order to +prevent the Misery of the Human Race; the same Love cannot fail +to commiserate the Case, and to provide an effectual Remedy for +all such as are included in the Covenant. <i>Adam’s</i> Motive to +Obedience must (we are told) have been greatly strengthened by +this Consideration, That on <i>Him</i> depended the Happiness, +not of <i>himself</i> only, but of <i>all his Posterity</i>. But, +I believe, Experience will tell us, that if the Consideration of +a Man’s own Future State, placed in the strongest Light (as this +Book supposes before <i>Adam</i>) be not sufficient to move to +Obedience, a Regard to others will seldom have any considerable +Influence: Such a Covenant enter’d into, or rather arbitrarily +imposed on <i>Adam</i> by his Maker, could not fail to awaken, in +so holy and knowing a Creature, some very uneasy and disquieting +Suspicions. This Covenant, and <i>Partial Election</i> thence +following after the <i>Fall</i>, will, if rightly considered, +appear very iniquitous and oppressive: because it makes no proper +Difference between the <i>Righteous</i> and the <i>Wicked</i>. If +<i>Adam</i> had been considered as a private Person only; and +<i>all his Posterity</i> left to stand or fall, by their own +Merits or Demerits; some of those, whom this Doctrine adjudges to +everlasting Condemnation, would doubtless have been so +<i>wise</i> and <i>happy</i>, as to have pleased G<span class= +"sc">od</span> in their Generation; while others, on the +contrary, would have sinned, and transgressed his Laws. The State +of the latter is, you see, the same as it would have been, upon +the vulgar Notion of <i>Adam’s Sin;</i> or rather the Guilt of it +being, in virtue of this Covenant, imputed to them: The other and +better Part, in virtue of this Doctrine, are miserable, and must +therefore have abundant and bitter Cause of Complaint against the +Doctrine itself. I therefore think it was impossible, such a +Covenant should ever be proposed to <i>Adam;</i> a Covenant +which, if ratified, tended only to make those wretched and +miserable, who without it, had they been left to shift for +themselves, would have used their Liberty and Rational Powers +aright, and have pleased and obtained G<span class= +"sc">od’s</span> Favour thereby. To talk of its being of general +Service, can never be of sufficient Authority to silence this +Argument. No <i>private Injuries</i> can be excused to +<i>innocent Sufferers</i> (and much less that of <i>eternal +Torment</i>) on the Score of general Good; what is it to them, +whether <i>they only</i>, or <i>all Mankind</i> suffer. If +<i>Adam</i> had stood, these very Men, (who would, had they been +left to their Liberty, have proved obedient) would have been in +no wise bettered; as he failed, Misery came on those, who would +otherwise have been happy. As to those who would, in the Course +of their Liberty, have sinned; this Covenant, had <i>Adam</i> +stood, would (’tis true) have saved them from the Sentence of +<i>Condemnation</i>. Take it again the other way: <i>Adam’s +Fall</i> could make no Alteration in the State of those who, +without it, would have been Sinners; such as would have proved +virtuous and happy, are hereby made miserable. These are, or must +have been the Consequences of such a Covenant strictly observed; +and the Wisdom and Equity of all Covenants must be judged of, by +comparing the good and evil Consequences, necessarily resulting +from them. All the Good such a Covenant could possibly pretend +to, had it been kept, was, the saving from Wrath such as, without +it, would, as free Beings, have sinned; and if, for their Sakes, +and to prevent the Evil that might otherwise befall them, such a +Covenant was worthy of G<span class="sc">od</span> to make with +Man, a Day of Grace and Salvation, extended for their Recovery, +after they might have transgressed, would have been equally +worthy of G<span class="sc">od</span>; and we need not recur to +such Fictions and Chimeras. One would think it incumbent on all +Legislators, to consider well the Consequences of every Law they +enact; for the preferring a Law, whose Consequences can at best +be of no Service, and will probably in the main Event of Things +be more evil and pernicious than otherwise, would be preferring +Evil to Good; in as great Proportion as the Evil might exceed the +Good: and how such a Constitution could be better for Mankind, I +do not understand. I am sorry any body, especially the Author of +<i>The Ruin and Recovery</i>, should imbibe and defend such +erroneous Opinions, and this too, in Opposition to other and +nobler Sentiments of his own, elsewhere delivered.</p> +<p class="pns">B<span class="sc">ut</span>, thus it is to be +enslaved to the mere Letter of the <i>Bible</i>, under a Notion +of doing it <i>just Honour</i>, when, on the contrary, ’tis the +ready way to <i>dishonour</i> and <i>lessen</i> its +Authority.</p> +<p class="pns">T<span class="sc">he</span> Pains which Infants +suffer, and the many Miseries to which they are exposed, are, by +this Gentleman, consider’d as so many Arguments of the Guilt of +<i>Original Sin</i>. He thinks that, without such a Supposition, +the <i>Justice</i> of G<span class="sc">od</span> cannot be +vindicated. [I wish he would stick true to that Argument.] We +must, he thinks, suppose one of these two Things: either, <i>That +G<span class="sc">od</span> punishes them without all Cause or +Reason</i>, or, <i>That they are under the Curse and Condemnation +of</i> Adam’<i>s Sin:</i> and the latter is, in his Opinion, the +best Sentiment. But I am of a contrary Opinion, and think that in +either Case, the <i>Injustice</i> is the same. He <i>allows</i> +it in the <i>one Case;</i> and I hope it is <i>proved</i> in the +other: and really the Picture which this Gentleman has drawn of +our young Innocents, is very dreadful and terrifying. If all the +<i>Evils</i> that befall them in this Life, and <i>Eternal +Damnation</i> afterwards, be no more than a <i>just</i> +Punishment for their <i>Sins</i>, our <i>Saviour</i> must surely +have been <i>greatly out</i>, in the Encomiums he bestows on +their <i>Innocence</i>, as I observed before; or, the Kingdom of +Heaven, instead of being design’d for <i>upright holy Souls</i>, +may be a Receptacle for the worst of human Race.</p> +<p class="pns">T<span class="sc">he</span> Brute Creation undergo +Pain and Affliction; is <i>Adam’s</i> Sin, therefore, imputed to +them? If not, and they sometimes suffer by Pain and Abuse, why +may not Infants do the same? The Miseries of the human Race, +reckon’d up and aggravated thro’ so many elaborate Pages, cannot +all of them be supposed to belong to the <i>Original +Constitution</i> of Things, but might be partly owing to the +Effect of Time and Accident, as well as to the Folly and +Wickedness of particular Persons and Nations. This Objection, +drawn from the Sufferings of Brute Animals, the Doctor endeavours +to answer: I wonder <i>Adam</i> is not considered (for the sake +of putting an End to the Difficulty) as their Federal Head. He +thinks, however, that Brutes must be some way or other included +in the <i>Curse;</i> and may be punished, as Man’s Property: But +has Man, because they are his Property, a Right to grieve and +afflict them? They were bestowed as a Blessing, for reasonable +Service and Delight, not for cruel Treatment and Abuse. The +Doctor’s Rule of Faith will tell him, <i>A merciful Man will be +merciful to his Beast</i>. If their being Man’s Property will not +justify him in abusing or cruelly handling them; it can be no +Reason or Argument, why another should do it, even the Almighty +himself. Consider Beasts, then, as G<span class="sc">od’s</span> +own Property; will that render it a whit more equitable? No: This +the Doctor himself, in the Case of Infants, allows would be +cruel, and contrary to the Divine Justice and Goodness: and the +Argument is the same as to Brutes. But the Doctor, sensible of +the Weakness of this Argument, has recourse to another, which I +believe will always be admired as a standing Mark of +<i>extraordinary Invention</i>, to get rid of difficult and +perplexing Questions. Brutes may, it seems, contrary to common +Experience, have Sensations <i>less Quick</i> and <i>Painful</i> +than ours. I wonder he allows them any Sensation at all; nay, +’tis doubtful if he does allow it. Noise, or Crying out, in them, +is, it seems, no Mark of Pain, because some Brutes, under the +same Circumstance, remain quiet and still. But will the Doctor +say, they have therefore no painful Sensations? Are there no +Marks of Pain besides those of crying aloud? Did the Doctor never +know a Man sometimes bear a pretty deal of Pain without crying +out at all; and give many external Tokens of Pain, at another +Time? Did he never perceive a <i>gaul’d Horse</i> wince, upon the +most gentle Approach of the Hand; and discover Signs of the +greatest Fear, and most <i>exquisite Pains?</i> Do not some +Brutes take as much Pains to avoid the Discipline of the Whip, as +tho’ their Sensations were the same as ours? I am ashamed to +waste Time upon such a Subject; tho’ I hope to be pardoned for +following so great a Man in his own Method of arguing. He perhaps +may continue of the same Mind, and there may be no Hopes of +Convincement, till Brutes are taught to speak. By this new Way of +Reasoning, the Ground we tread upon, and every Thing around us, +hitherto thought Inanimate, may be full of Cogitation. If +affording the common Marks of Sensation, be no Proof, that Brutes +have it in a common Degree, Wanting the common Marks of +Intelligence, can be no Proof that a Stock or a Stone has it not. +If I mistake not, Bishop <i>Berkley</i> has furnished the World +with something equally instructive and philosophical, in relation +to the Existence of Matter; which, he endeavours to prove +<i>not</i> to be a <i>real</i>, but an <i>ideal</i> and +<i>imaginary Being</i>. I shall leave others to guess, in what +Condition those must be, who think and reason after this +extraordinary Manner. But the Doctor has yet another Argument in +reserve, to vindicate G<span class="sc">od’s</span> +Justice—<i>Tho’ Brutes suffer, yet they may</i> it seems <i>have +upon the whole more Pleasure than Pain</i>. But do not some +Brutes partake very deeply of the former, in this Life; will the +Doctor therefore suppose a Future State for them, by way of +Compensation? But this Argument ruins the whole Affair, and may +be turned against the Doctor himself, in the Case of Infants, who +may be made ample Amends in a future State, for the Evils +sustained here, which Evils may have other Causes besides +<i>Original Sin;</i> for here again, as in the Case of a +Propensity to Evil, Pain in Infants, if inflicted because of +<i>Adam’s Sin</i>, must in <i>all</i> be <i>uniform</i> and +<i>alike</i>. But the Fact being quite otherwise, some of this +Pain and Evil must be resolved into <i>other Causes;</i> and if +<i>some</i>, why not <i>all?</i> I grant indeed, that <i>Adam</i> +himself might have so far corrupted his Nature, as to render him +more liable to Pain, than in a State of true Innocence he might +have been, and that therefore he might be instrumental to +propagate the Seeds of several Diseases, to his Posterity: But +had he never done this, his Successors might have done it; and +<i>every Age</i> has, perhaps, by Intemperance and +Lasciviousness, been adding to the common Stock of human Diseases +and Calamities: Propensities to Vice might also be propagated in +the same Way, and that, and nothing besides, can (I think) +account so well for their great and infinite Variety. The Doctor, +with the rest of his Brethren, are perpetually urging those +common-place Arguments, drawn from the Practice of Men; which in +the general I have answer’d already: and, had I proper Leisure, +it would be no difficult Matter to give a clear and distinct +Answer to every one of them: And these very Gentlemen would, on +other Occasions, had they no favourite Point to carry, reject +such Reasoning with all the Contempt, and Indignation, it +deserves. It is with some Reluctance, I find myself obliged to +disapprove the Sentiments of such wise and worthy Grey Hairs, to +whom the World hath been long and deeply indebted for his many +excellent Services, both from the Pen and the Pulpit. I have read +over Mr. <i>J—s</i>’s Book, in Answer to Taylor’s <i>Free and +Candid Examination;</i> and tho’ I have no personal Knowledge of +that ingenious Gentleman, yet I hope he will permit me to say, +’Tis pity, great pity, that fine Talents (pardon the Expression) +should be prostituted in the Defence of such an unholy and +incongruous System of Religion. Superior Degrees of Learning and +Knowledge are, in themselves, most excellent Things, and +eminently serviceable, when rightly applied to the Honour and +Defence of Truth: But, like a two edged Sword, they cut both +ways, and are also too frequently employed in the Propagation of +Error.</p> +<p class="pns">W<span class="sc">hile</span> I am thus rendering +<i>human Learning</i>, its just Tribute of Praise, <i>Truth</i> +requires, that I should be free to detect those little Arts, so +often practised to deceive the Unwary, and misguide Mankind. As I +am fully persuaded, the Generality of those Writers; who stick by +this <i>Covenant</i>, and endeavour to vindicate the Honour, +Justice, and Goodness of G<span class="sc">od</span> therein, do +it <i>only</i> for Decency sake, <i>and to put</i> (<a href= +"#p19">as I observed</a>) <i>a more plausible Outside on their +Doctrines;</i> I think it incumbent on me to <i>detect</i> this +<i>equivocal</i> Way of Writing, and shew, that while the Doctor +is endeavouring to persuade you he <i>does not</i> believe these +Doctrines in their most <i>harsh</i> and <i>severe</i> Sense, +there is Reason to suspect he does notwithstanding, +<i>secretly</i> and <i>strongly</i>, believe them in that <i>very +Sense:</i> nay, he seems to resolve <i>them</i> very artfully +into the <i>Sovereignty</i> and <i>Majesty of God</i>. Any Man, +who reads the Book, may perceive, how greatly the Doctor is +<i>put to it</i> for <i>Arguments</i>, to answer +<i>Objections;</i> and he himself knows it to be impossible to +make any tolerable or reasonable Defence, of such unreasonable +and unaccountable Doctrines: and therefore, lest his <i>own +People</i> should, from some Expressions, which, at first sight, +might look as though he was arguing merely upon a Principle of +<i>moral Fitness</i>, suspect his Sincerity, he has (Second +Edition, <i>Page</i> 274) given strong Intimations of his Faith, +as follows:</p> +<p class="pns">“The Doctrine of <i>Reprobation</i>, in the most +<i>severe</i> and <i>absolute</i> Sense of it, stands in such a +direct Contradiction to all our Notions of Kindness and Love to +others, in which the <i>blessed God</i> is set forth as our +Example, that our Reason cannot tell how to receive it; yet if it +were never so true, and never so plainly revealed in Scripture, +it would only be a Doctrine which would require our humble +Assent, and silent Submission to it; with awful Reverence of the +Majesty and Sovereignty of the great G<span class="sc">od</span>, +&<i>c</i>.”</p> +<p class="pns">T<span class="sc">his</span> proves, I think +clearly, on what Authority the Doctor himself believes these +<i>Doctrines;</i> and whoever knows, how <i>common</i> it is for +Men of <i>this</i> Faith, to make a specious Shew of reasoning +with others on a Principle of moral Fitness, and among +themselves, without Scruple, resolving all into mere +<i>Sovereignty</i>, will not think I have been too forward or +severe in my Observation. I <i>humbly</i> presume, what I have +offer’d against this Notion of <i>God’s Sovereignty</i>, is a +plain Confutation of the Doctor; and I here, with all due +Submission, invite <i>him</i>, or any of his <i>Brethren</i>, to +defend <i>the Doctrines;</i> and <i>this Quotation</i>, against +me. If they <i>do really</i> resolve these Doctrines into +<i>God’s Sovereignty</i>, let them speak it out plainly; if they +<i>do not</i> believe them in this Sense, let them speak that out +plainly too; that we may clearly understand, in what +<i>determinate Sense</i>, they do believe them.</p> +<p class="pns">T<span class="sc">he</span> Doctor has taken a +great deal of Pains to make the World believe, that C<span class= +"sc ls2">hrist</span> died for all Men, when it does not appear, +that he himself believes any such thing. Hear him, <i>Page</i> +89, “And methinks, when I take my justest Survey of this lower +World, with all the Inhabitants of it, I can look upon it no +otherwise, than as a huge and magnificent Structure in Ruins, and +turned into a Prison, and a Lazar-house, or Hospital; wherein lie +Millions of Criminals, and Rebels against their Creator, under +Condemnation to Misery and Death, who are at the same time sick +of a mortal Distemper, and disorder’d in their Minds, even to +Distraction: Hence proceed those infinite Follies, which are +continually practised here; and the righteous Anger of an +offended G<span class="sc">od</span> is visible in ten thousand +Instances: yet there are Proclamations of Divine Grace, Health, +and Life, sounding amongst them; either with a louder Voice, or +in gentler Whispers, though very few of them take any Notice +thereof. But of this great Prison, this Infirmary, there is here +and there one who is called powerfully, by Divine Grace, and +attends to the Office of Reconciliation, and complies with the +Proposals of Peace; his Sins are pardoned, he is healed of his +worst Distemper; and tho’, his Body is appointed to go down to +the Dust, for a Season, yet his Soul is taken upwards to a Region +of Blessedness; while the Bulk of these miserable and guilty +Inhabitants, perish in their own wilful Madness and by the just +Executions of Divine Anger.”</p> +<p class="pns">As I have hitherto troubled the Reader with little +Quotation, and it being now so necessary to let us into the +<i>true Spirit</i> of the Doctor’s Belief, notwithstanding any +seeming Appearance to the contrary, I hope to be pardoned. You +perceive here, that <span class="sc">all</span> are called, but +the <i>greatest Part</i>, in such a weak and imperfect Manner, +that is out of <i>their Power</i> to embrace the Call, and so +they perish as <i>unavoidably</i> and <i>unjustly</i>, as though +no such Call were extended. The Distinction, which is here made +between moral and natural Necessity, the Doctor thinks sufficient +to silence all Objections, <i>Page</i> 285. I have endeavour’d to +shew the contrary, and I hope with better Success. Again, what +the Doctor observes, <i>Page</i> 245, is worthy of +Notice,—“Though there must be a <i>very good Sense</i>, in which +<i>Christ</i> may be said to die for all Men, because the +Scripture uses this Language; yet it does not follow, that the +Doctrine of Universal Redemption is found there: I cannot find +that Scripture once asserts that <i>Christ</i> redeemed all Men, +or <i>died</i> to redeem them all.”</p> +<p class="pns">T<span class="sc">his</span> is, I think, +manifestly a <i>Contradiction</i>, and the Doctor, it seems, +believes it, only because the Scripture, as he thinks, reveals +it. Where is the Difference between <i>dying to save all Men</i>, +and, <i>dying to redeem all Men?</i> And yet <i>Jesus Christ</i>, +it seems, did the one, but not the other. According to him (the +Doctor) the Scripture assures us, that is, the Word of +G<span class="sc">od</span> assures us, <span class= +"sc">both</span> that <i>Christ did</i>, and that he <i>did +not</i> <span class="sc">die</span> to redeem all Mankind; which +is a flat Contradiction. In what good Sense, I should be glad to +know, could <i>Christ</i> be said to <i>die</i> for <i>all +Men</i>, when G<span class="sc">od</span> purposely, and +peremptorily, <i>with-holds</i> proper Assistances to restore the +<i>greatest Part?</i> If this be to die for <i>all Men</i>, it is +certainly not in a good, but in a very bad Sense. But, perhaps, +the <i>Doctor</i> means, <i>that Man, consider’d in his primitive +Rectitude, has Power sufficient to obey the Gospel as proposed to +Sinners, and that</i> Adam’s <i>Posterity, consider’d as fallen +in him, are under the same Obligation to keep the Law, as</i> +Adam <i>was</i>. But of this I have already taken due Notice, and +therefore I need only put the Doctor in mind of a few Words of +his, drop’d <i>Page</i> 340, in his <i>Consideration of the State +of dying Infants</i>. He thinks, “it would be by no Means +agreeable, to have them condemned to a wretched Resurrection and +eternal Misery, only because they were born of <i>Adam</i>, the +original Transgressor.” This is a rational Sentiment, and I wish +it were well improved; for it is better to suppose them entering +on a new State of Trial, or downright Annihilation to be their +Portion: But what Havock does this Concession make with the +Doctor’s other Doctrines, of <i>Christ’s dying for all Men in a +good Sense, of considering us in point of Obligation to keep the +Law inviolable, the same as Adam was before his Fall;</i> of +G<span class="sc">od</span>’s either granting <i>no Aids</i> to +enable us to <i>do this</i>, or <span class="sc">such</span> +<i>as are too weak and insufficient to enable us thereto!</i> We +are, he allows, <i>under a moral Incapacity to keep the Law</i>, +but not a <i>natural</i> Incapacity, and therefore G<span class= +"sc">od</span> may justly exact our Obedience. But pray consider, +if both a <i>moral</i> and <i>natural</i> Ability be requisite to +keep G<span class="sc">od</span>’s Laws, what signifies which of +these is wanting, when we may as well be without <i>both</i>, as +without <i>either</i>. It signifies little, what Epithets we +bestow on the Word <i>Necessity</i>. Wherever it prevails; and +whether it be <i>moral</i> or <i>natural</i>, if it is not +<i>self-caused</i>, but comes on Man, either by the immediate +Decree of Heaven, or by the <i>Act of another</i>, it is +<i>Necessity</i>, <i>irresistible Necessity</i>, and no +Distinction can palliate it.</p> +<p class="pns">I <span class="sc">allow</span> indeed, when Man +is created upright, and furnished with sufficient Understanding +and Ability to please the Almighty; and yet, <i>abusing</i> his +Liberty, becomes at length so enslaved to his Passions and +Appetites, as to fall into this <i>moral Debility</i>, the Law of +G<span class="sc">od</span> is still his Duty to observe: On the +other hand, allowing Mankind to have lost their <i>moral +Ability</i> to practise Virtue in the Fall of <i>Adam</i>, and +that G<span class="sc">od</span>, taking Pity upon Man, grants +him sufficient <i>Light</i>, to discern his State, and sufficient +<i>Power</i>, to obtain Redemption from it, this Man is also +under the <i>same Obligation</i> to keep the Law of G<span class= +"sc">od</span>, as though his moral Powers had never sustained +any <i>Decay</i> or <i>Loss</i> in <i>Adam;</i> and I dare +affirm, that in <i>no</i> other Sense, can Man be accountable for +the Pravity of his Will. And let the Doctor observe this,—If it +would be unsuitable to the Mercy of G<span class="sc">od</span>, +in the Case of Infants not committing actual Sin, to punish them +eternally, <i>only because they were born of this first +Transgressor</i>, would it not be equally unkind, to leave such +as arrive at mature Age, under the Power of those <i>restless</i> +and <i>irresistable</i> Propensities to Evil, derived from +<i>Adam</i>, and to punish <i>them</i> eternally, only because +these Propensities, derived in virtue of being born of the first +Transgressor, constantly, and <i>in spite</i> of any thing we are +able, considered in a moral and natural Sense, to do to the +contrary, produce <i>Vice</i> and <i>immorality?</i> <i>All</i> +evil Actions, consequent upon this Propensity, are, in fact, as +necessary and unavoidable to us, as the Propensity itself, +<i>Where</i> then, in point of Innocence, can the Difference be, +<i>between</i> having imputed Guilt and this Propensity, in Time +of Infancy, and living long enough in this World, to feel, and +shew to others, its arbitrary Effects, in producing Vice and +Impiety whether we will or no? and where then is the Reason, for +such very different Treatment of Infants and adult Persons? I +must observe one Thing—The Doctor and his Brethren, as they make +the Work of Salvation, a very easy and agreeable Thing to the +Elect, on the one hand; so they assign the poor Sinner a very +<i>hard Task</i>, on the other: <i>He that offends in one Point +is</i>, they say, <i>guilty of breaking the whole Law</i>. Here +is a <i>plain Instance</i> of taking <i>Scripture</i> in a +literal Sense, when it can by no Means be so understood. +According to this, a Man, that only <i>steals</i>, may be said to +commit Murder, and be <i>punished</i> as a Murderer as well as a +Thief; though we know he has not committed it.</p> +<p class="pns">I<span class="sc">n</span> the main, we may +conscientiously observe and keep G<span class="sc">od’s</span> +Laws, and yet in Time of <i>Temptation</i> and <i>Weakness</i> +fall into some Evil, will, G<span class="sc">od</span> therefore +<i>consider</i> and <i>punish</i> us as those who live in the +daily Breach and Contempt of all his Laws? No! For, on the +contrary, G<span class="sc">od</span> ever waits to be gracious +to all such, as through Inadvertence fall into Sin, and are +willing to forsake it. The View and Intent of our Apostle, in +these Words, seems to be of very <i>easy</i> and <i>plain</i> +Signification: There was in those early Times, as appears from +our Saviour’s frequently reproving the Hypocrisy of that +Generation, a Sort of People, who appeared zealous in the +Externals of Religion, while at the same Time they neglected +Things of far <i>greater Moment:</i> <i>Woe unto you Scribes and +Pharisees, ye pay Tithe of Mint and Cummin; and have omitted the +weightier Matters of the Law:</i> Mat. xxiii. <i>ver</i>. 23. +They daringly violated G<span class="sc">od’s</span> Laws in some +of the most material and important Instances, and complied with +others in a mere formal ostentatious Way; and were therefore +guilty, in the Divine View, of the Breach of the <i>whole +Law;</i> for <i>mere Obedience</i> upon improper Motives to a +<i>Part</i> of the Law, while at the same Time they allow’d +themselves in the <i>known</i> and <i>deliberate</i> Violation of +<i>more weighty</i> Commands, was no true or proper Obedience at +all: and, in this Sense, the <i>Jewish</i> Sacrifices of the Law, +though commanded by the highest Authority, were always esteemed +an Abomination; and the Christian Religion as well as the Law, is +certainly liable to Abuses of the same Kind, from Men of +hypocritical and corrupt Minds, whom therefore this Doctrine of +the Apostle <i>effectually</i> and <i>peculiarly</i> regards and +reproves: and I appeal to all, if this Construction of the Sacred +Text be not more agreeable to Reason and Common Sense, than that +which the Doctor has thought fit and convenient to bestow +thereon. I beseech the Doctor to consider how, according to his +Principles, this Covenant could be proposed to <i>Adam</i>, out +of a kind and beneficent intention in the Creator, when God knew, +in the first Place, that <i>Adam</i> would not keep it, and +determined, in the second Place, upon the Breach of it, to leave +the Bulk of Mankind to perish everlastingly, without Mercy, +without sufficient or suitable Means of Redemption; and what a +<i>cruel Joke</i>, upon the <i>Calvinistical Scheme</i>, of +G<span class="sc">od’s</span> willing the <i>Fall</i>, was here +put upon <i>Adam</i>, and all his Posterity!</p> +<p class="pns">To talk as some do, of our existing in <i>Adam</i> +at the Time of his Transgression, is very absurd, when, as +<i>intelligent</i> and <i>free Creatures</i>, it is evident, we +did not exist at all. <i>Sin is a Transgression of some Law, +which we have at the same time Power to keep</i>. G<span class= +"sc">od</span> never requires Impossibilities. He that made Man, +knows best what he is capable of and hath undoubtedly taken care +to proportion the <i>Duties</i> he requires of Man, to the +<i>Powers</i> he hath bestowed on him. The contrary would be very +hard dealing indeed—If a Law be dispensed to me, I must in the +first Place have Understanding sufficient to judge of its +Authority, and the Obligations it lays me under; and, in the +second Place, I must also have Power to keep it, otherwise it can +never be a Law suitable to me; and a Man’s <i>Age</i>, +<i>Complexion</i>, <i>Stature</i>, and <i>Circumstances</i>, are +as just Causes for Damnation, as the Breach of a Law which lies +beyond the Reach of his Knowledge and Abilities. But supposing, +in the last Place, that G<span class="sc">od</span> did make such +a Covenant with <i>Adam</i>, &<i>c</i>. (though I think I +have shewn it to be impossible) let us see how the Doctrines of +<i>Election</i> and <i>Preterition</i> will turn out <i>then</i>. +I have already endeavoured to make it appear, that G<span class= +"sc">od</span> does not act in that arbitrary Manner, which these +Gentlemen teach; that though he is indeed governed by no Law +without, or accountable to any for what he is pleased to do, yet +his own Rectitude of Mind, is to him an invariable Rule of +Righteousness, equally secure to all Intents and Purposes of a +written Law without: and this argues the adorable and +incomparable Excellency of his Being who, though by Nature he is +infinitely above all Power and Authority whatever, yet his moral +Perfections continually prompt him to promote the Happiness of +the meanest of his Creatures. It was <i>sovereign Goodness</i> +(rather than <i>sovereign Pleasure</i>) which prompted the +Almighty to create Man, in order to communicate Happiness to him; +and if <i>Adam’s</i> Posterity might be said to fall in him, yet +G<span class="sc">od</span> must at least look on them in a more +favourable Manner, than if they had actually sinned themselves; +and consequently it could never suit with his Goodness to punish +eternally <i>any one</i> under this Circumstance, without +<i>first giving</i> him an Opportunity of recovering from his +lapsed State; nor could he ordain the Means on Purpose to <i>save +some</i> by <i>electing Grace</i>, without <i>saving all</i>. +G<span class="sc">od</span> does nothing without sufficient +Reason: he could save none under this Circumstance, but as they +were <i>in themselves</i> Objects of his Pity and Mercy; and if +ever there was an Object of Mercy, here it is, an immortal Soul +condemned, for the Fault of <i>another</i>, which it could by no +Means hinder or prevent, to suffer eternal Torment. There is +something greatly moving in such an Object as this; and as <i>all +Adam’s</i> Posterity were equally involved in his Guilt, all are +Objects of Mercy <i>precisely the same</i>, and therefore there +is not the least Ground for the Difference which we are told is +made by Election; because ’tis making a <i>Distinction</i> where +there is <i>no Difference</i>. Here is the Race of <i>Adam</i>, +considered as <i>equally</i> fallen in him, divided into two very +unequal Parts (equally in themselves, and altogether Objects of +Mercy, if such an Object can be) by the Almighty himself. The +smaller Number he is at all Events determined to save, and to +destroy the greater Number.</p> +<p class="pns">In answer to this, I expect to hear that common, +but <i>weak</i> Argument, drawn from an <i>earthly Prince</i>, +his extending Pardon to <i>one</i> Criminal, and leaving +<i>another</i> to undergo the Execution of his Sentence. But this +is of the same <i>fallacious Kind</i>, as that drawn from the +Case of <i>Rebellion</i>, and shews how <i>very hard</i> the +Patrons of this Doctrine are put to it for Arguments. Two Men, +condemned for one Crime, may not be equally wicked, and +consequently <i>one</i> may better deserve Pity than the +<i>other</i>, and to extend it, is in itself a rational and +worthy Distinction, made between two <i>such Criminals</i>. Let +us suppose, in order to illustrate the Argument, that a Man is +<i>compelled</i>, by Thieves, to go out on the Highway, where he +plunders, and is at length, with the rest, brought to Justice; +his Sentence would doubtless be the <i>same</i> as theirs: But +when he is consider’d, as having acted not by Choice, but <i>by +Necessity</i>, he must needs be an Object of Pity. Nay, mere +Justice itself will plead strongly in his Favour. Apply this (so +far as it belongs) to the Doctrine of <i>Original Sin;</i> which +if it makes Men Sinners <i>at all</i>, it must be <i>by +Necessity</i>, there being no <i>Possibility</i> for us to +prevent it; which is equal to the greatest Constraint that can be +produced or imagined, and consequently <i>all Men</i> must, under +this Consideration, be <i>at worst</i> suitable Objects of Mercy. +Besides, the Weakness of this Argument will plainly appear, upon +considering, with respect to <i>earthly Princes</i>, that where +the Equity of making a <i>due Distinction</i> between one +<i>Criminal</i> and another, is not the Reason, why <i>one is +pardoned</i>, and the other <i>left to suffer;</i> it +<i>always</i> arises either from <i>Caprice</i>, <i>Interest</i>, +<i>Solicitation</i>, or from <i>Misrepresentation</i> of Facts to +M<span class="sc">onarchs</span>; who, too often, <i>see</i> and +<i>hear</i> through <i>others</i>, that are not always duly +conscientious, to preserve inviolable the Trust reposed in them; +and whether such Reasoning as this, can possibly affect the +<i>Almighty</i>, any Man of common Understanding may easily +judge.</p> +<p class="pns">But let them apply my Argument on the +<i>Sovereignty of</i> G<span class="sc">od</span> against the +<i>Certainty</i> of their Election, and I believe they will find +but little Reason to boast of their Doctrine of electing Grace. +They tell us indeed, that this Doctrine of theirs, makes the +Death of <i>Christ</i> of more Effect than ours, because it +secures the Salvation of <i>some</i>. But I have proved there can +be no Security in it; and surely that Doctrine, which <i>puts +all</i> into a Capacity of Salvation, must be better, than that, +which leaves <i>almost every Man</i> to perish; and if it was +better to save a few, than to save none in this arbitrary Manner, +it must still have been better and more to the Glory of +<i>Christ</i>, arbitrarily to have saved all Mankind. They say +also, that their Doctrine of Election is a much better Ground for +Love and good Works, than is that of <i>free Grace</i>. But the +contrary is apparent, because whoever thinks rightly, cannot be +without this disquieting Thought.—If G<span class="sc">od</span>, +in a mere arbitrary Manner, and without any Regard to previous +Fitness, has chosen me, and rejected another; how do I know but +his Mind may change hereafter, or that he may not reverse this +Decree? or if <i>unconditional Election</i> be the true Doctrine +of the Gospel, and Man is <i>equally dear</i> and acceptable to +G<span class="sc">od</span> <i>without</i>, as he is <i>with</i>, +good Works, what Inducement can such a Person have to please +G<span class="sc">od</span> that Way, when he is already as well +pleased without them? If Election is founded upon an +<i>unconditional Decree</i>, the natural Inference (in all such +as believe the Doctrine, and themselves to be of the Elect) must +be this—If I am of the Number of the Elect, nothing can frustrate +my Happiness; I may gratify my favourite Passions, and wallow in +all Kinds of Wickedness, Luxury and Sensuality, and be equally +acceptable to the Almighty, as was <i>David</i> in the Sins of +Murder and Adultery: On the contrary, if I am not of that Number +which shall be saved, all my Pains and Obedience will never +procure me Acceptance with G<span class="sc">od</span>, and +therefore I <i>will seek</i> all possible Gratifications in this +Life, seeing it is the only Time and Place wherein I can obtain +any Thing like Happiness; nor can the Liberty I take here +increase my Misery hereafter, the <i>precise Degree</i> of +<i>that</i> being fixed along with the Decree of my Damnation: +Though this Persuasion of being set apart for everlasting +Torment, has more often the Effects of Desperation and +<i>Self-Murder;</i> and indeed the two Extremes of +<i>Presumption</i> and <i>Despair</i>, are the natural Brood and +Offspring of these Doctrines, as the reverend and learned Dr. +<i>Trapp</i> has abundantly evinced, in his excellent Discourse, +<i>against the Folly, Sin, and Danger of being righteous over +much</i>. Hypocrisy and Persecution are also the genuine +Offspring of this Faith; and <i>whenever</i> it has been tried, +Persecution has grown up to a considerable Maturity: for as they +pretend to know the Marks of elect and reprobate Men, what can be +more natural, than for those, who apprehend themselves to be the +<i>former</i>, to persecute and take Vengeance on the +<i>latter</i>. Hath not G<span class="sc">od</span>, by his own +Decree of Damnation, set them an Example? and if he has set a +Mark on the Reprobate, they (the Elect) may very reasonably, in +Imitation of the <i>Divine Conduct</i>, endeavour to make them as +wretched as possible here in this Life, and <i>who shall lay any +Thing to the Charge of G<span class="sc">od’s</span> Elect?</i> I +am now shewing, what are the genuine Effects of this Doctrine, +not charging Consequences on such as neither do <i>see</i> nor +<i>approve</i> of them: there is great Difference in the Conduct +of Men of this Principle; and its natural Effects are, by other +Things intervening, often prevented, the chief of which may, I +believe, be Want of Power and Opportunity; for tho’ many, when +out of Power, might be apt to say (as <i>Hazael</i> did) <i>what +is thy Servant a Dog, that he should do this Evil?</i> yet they +would perhaps be in some Danger of behaving as that great Man +did, when he came to be tried. Some again, who tho’ they profess +the Doctrine, are yet (I doubt not) often under the Influence of +G<span class="sc">od’s</span> <i>Grace</i>, which, as it tends to +humble the Soul, and render it more loving and humane than +before, naturally prevents the Spirit of Persecution from taking +such deep Root as otherwise it might. And here, though I do not +pretend to be a <i>nice Judge</i> of the spiritual Part of +Religion, yet I have heard such as have been accounted Men of the +best Experience say, that when the Grace of G<span class= +"sc">od</span> operates on the Soul, the ardent Love of Mankind +is <i>inseparable therewith</i>. If then the better Sort of +those, who profess this Doctrine, are ever sensible of this +<i>most agreeable</i> and humbling Operation in the Soul, I ask +them, if it does not <i>naturally distend</i> and enlarge their +Wishes, in Behalf of all Mankind? and if this Spirit of Love be +the genuine Effect of the Operation of G<span class= +"sc">od’s</span> Grace, what shall be said of that ineffable and +immense Fountain of Grace and Goodness, from whence it proceeds? +But, on the other hand, it has been observed, that among mere +<i>enthusiastick and traditional Believers</i>, of the Doctrine +of Election, their Hypocrisy, Deceit and Dissimulation has +overtop’d that of all the World besides, even beyond what human +Nature could be thought capable of, in its most wicked and +corrupt State; in short, they seem to have made the Deceit of +<i>Jacob</i>, and all other parallel Places of Scripture, that +furnish the worst Part of the Lives of good Men, a <i>standing +Rule</i> of Behaviour—What a blessed Company has the +L<span class="sc ls2">ord</span> set apart for himself!</p> +<p class="pns">T<span class="sc">he</span> <i>Foreknowledge</i> +of G<span class="sc">od</span> is supposed, by some, to belong to +the Argument of <i>Predestination;</i> but I think it wholly +beside my present Purpose, to enter circumstantially into it, for +<i>this Reason</i>—If, Whatever G<span class="sc">od</span> +<i>foreknows</i>, he must also of Necessity <i>foreordain;</i> it +is manifestly using <i>Foreknowledge</i> and <i>Ordination</i> to +signify just the <i>same Thing</i>, and, <i>in this Light</i>, +every Argument against <i>Fore-ordination</i>, must be equally +strong against <i>Foreknowledge</i>, so far as it affects the +Doctrines under Consideration; and when these Gentlemen can shew +the contrary, or are willing to enter into the Consideration of +the <i>Divine Foreknowledge</i>, either <i>separate from</i>, or +<i>connected with</i>, the Doctrine of <i>Fore-ordination</i>, I +shall always be ready to receive Information.</p> +<p class="pns">T<span class="sc">his</span> Doctrine of electing +Grace, they exalt as an <i>incomprehensible Mystery;</i> so do +the Papists, with as good Reason, that of +<i>Transubstantiation;</i> for neither of them are Mysteries, or +incomprehensible, but <i>palpable Errors</i>, whose Absurdity we +do <i>easily and fully comprehend;</i> nor will the stale Art of +playing on the Word <i>Mystery</i> amuse us any longer. Another +strange Argument, which these Men make use of, in order to set +aside some Passages of Scripture, which are positive and express +against them, is this, <i>that if God wills the Salvation of all +Men, all must be saved, otherwise we may be said to conquer the +Will and Grace of God</i>. To which the Answer is very easy—Man +is made a <i>free Creature</i>, and therefore G<span class= +"sc">od</span> deals with him as such; because to make him free, +and then arbitrarily <i>overrule</i> his Freedom, would be making +him free to <i>no Purpose</i>. The Will of G<span class= +"sc">od</span> is sometimes <i>positive</i>, and sometimes +<i>conditional</i>. He gives Laws, commands us to keep them, and +promises eternal Life to those who obey; nor can we suppose he +commands us to obey, without willing our Obedience. We may indeed +<i>resist</i> the Operations of his Grace: but to talk of +<i>conquering</i> G<span class="sc">od</span>, is Nonsense. He +has made us free Creatures; he wills our Salvation, and has +granted us such Aids as are sufficient, if we use them aright, to +bring us to Happiness: This Conduct in the Divine Being, is not +only reasonable in itself, but <i>perfectly agreeable</i> to many +<i>plain</i> and <i>express</i> Parts of Scripture. The +<i>Weeping</i> and <i>Lamentation</i> of <i>Christ</i> over +<i>Jerusalem</i>, is a strong Proof of it: <i>How often would I +have gathered thee, as a Hen gathereth her Chickens under her +Wings; but thou wouldest not!</i> Here was all done, that was fit +and convenient to reclaim free Beings; not only proper Aids +offer’d, but offer’d in the <i>most tender</i> and affectionate +Manner, as is evident from the Comparison of the Hen, +&<i>c</i>. and by the Words <i>how often</i>, is set forth +the <i>great Patience and longsuffering of God:</i> And +notwithstanding all this, they resisted to their own Destruction. +G<span class="sc">od</span> <i>willed</i>, or would have saved +her, but she was stubborn and rebellious, and would not accept of +Salvation; did she therefore <i>conquer</i> the Almighty? Suppose +my Father gives me a good Education, a good Employment, and a +competent Portion in Money, and, besides all, is continually at +hand, ready further to advise and assist me, whenever it may be +necessary; yet I am obstinate and disobedient, and, by pursuing +evil Courses, fall into Poverty, Contempt, and Ruin: I may indeed +be said to <i>resist</i>, but in no <i>good Sense</i> to +<i>conquer</i> my Father. Besides, according to this absurd Way +of arguing, if G<span class="sc">od</span> does all in Believers, +his Laws are to be <i>kept</i> by himself; with what Propriety +then can they be said to be given to Man? He to whom the Law is +given is to keep it, not the Being who gives it.</p> +<p class="pns">I <span class="sc">might</span> here, very +naturally, speak concerning the Sacrifice of <i>Christ’s +Death</i>, and <i>his Righteousness</i> imputed to us; but I +shall not now discuss it fully, only a few Remarks may not be +impertinent or useless. These two Points appear to me to be much +misunderstood; <i>Sin</i> is said to be infinite, because +committed against an infinite G<span class="sc">od</span>; and +that therefore nothing but an infinite Being can satisfy the +Justice of G<span class="sc">od</span> for it: A fine Story +indeed, for Men to amuse us with, who pretend to believe in +<i>only one</i> G<span class="sc">od</span>: Here is <i>one</i> +infinite Being, to be satisfied for Sin; and <i>another</i>, to +satisfy him. And, what is still as bad or worse, it supposes, +that an infinite Being may, for a certain Season, suffer or +undergo a Diminution of its Happiness; which, in an infinite and +unchangeable Being, I take to be impossible. Was it then +<i>only</i> the Person, or <i>rational Soul</i> of <i>Jesus +Christ</i>, that suffered, being upheld under it, by the infinite +Being himself? If so, what is become of the infinite Being, that +was to <i>suffer</i> for Sin; for does G<span class= +"sc">od</span> make Satisfaction to himself? ’Till these +Gentlemen either renounce, or better explain this Matter, they +will, I hope, think very favourably of all who deal in absurd +Schemes of Faith.</p> +<p class="pns">T<span class="sc">he</span> Thing productive of +these Absurdities, is a <i>wrong Notion</i> of Sin, and of the +Justice of G<span class="sc">od</span>: Sin, they say, is +infinite, because <i>committed against an infinite G<span class= +"sc">od</span></i>. It is doubtless sometimes a great Aggravation +of it, that it is committed against G<span class="sc">od</span>; +but it is not so much his <i>Greatness</i>, as our abusing his +<i>Goodness</i>, that aggravates the Crime: As may appear from +this short Observation, That any Favour, disinterestedly done, by +a Person of the meanest Rank in Life, lays the Receiver under the +same Obligation, as though it were granted by the greatest Man +upon Earth: It is the Motive and the Action, put together, that +gives it its proper Value to the Receiver. G<span class= +"sc">od’s</span> Authority may add some kind of Sanction but no +Alteration of outward Circumstances, in him who confers a +Benefit, can ever after change the Nature of the Action, or the +Obligations resulting from it.</p> +<p class="pns">A<span class="sc">nd</span>, when we consider, on +the other hand, that Sin is committed by a frail finite Being, +very often in its unguarded Moments, prompted by Passion and +Appetite, and surrounded with the most powerful Temptations; this +proves more strongly, that it cannot be infinite. By the +<i>Justice</i> of G<span class="sc">od</span>, is not meant, that +he cannot forgive Sin without Satisfaction, but that he +<i>will</i> not punish the Innocent; He proposes himself as a +Pattern for our Imitation, and bids us <i>forgive our offending +Brethren, if they repent and desire Forgiveness:</i> and he +himself will therefore forgive on the same Terms; for unless Sin +becomes so enormous, as to make Punishment necessary, +<i>Repentance</i> and <i>Amendment</i> is all that G<span class= +"sc">od</span> expects. The Gospel is proposed to Sinners, on +these Terms; and as to the Death of C<span class= +"sc ls2">hrist</span>, it were unreasonable to think, he laid +down his Life by way of Satisfaction to Offended Justice, in the +Manner these Gentlemen understand it; but in Testimony of the +Truth of his Doctrines, and Confirmation of G<span class= +"sc">od’s</span> <i>great Love</i> to the World. This was the +Cause of C<span class="sc">hrist’s</span> Coming in the Flesh. +G<span class="sc">od</span> so loved the World, that he sent +C<span class="sc ls2">hrist</span> to save it, by such Preaching +and Miracles, and other internal Aids, &<i>c</i>. as were in +themselves sufficient to beget Faith in such as gave a proper +Attention; such a Faith, in the Soul, as was productive of +Morality and Virtue in Practice. It was an <i>original Act</i> of +Grace and Goodness in G<span class="sc">od</span>, to send +C<span class="sc ls2">hrist</span> into the World, to save +Sinners, and not (as some superstitiously teach) a mere +Compliance in G<span class="sc">od</span> the Father (and that, +not without full Satisfaction first made) to the <i>voluntary</i> +and <i>merciful</i> Intercession of C<span class= +"sc ls2">hrist</span> the Son. For then our Salvation would be +<i>owing only</i> to the Love of C<span class= +"sc ls2">hrist</span>, and not <i>at all</i> to G<span class= +"sc">od</span>’s Love, who is here considered as a +<i>rigorous</i> and <i>unrelenting Creditor</i>, that will not +release the Debtor, until full Satisfaction be made; so that +C<span class="sc ls2">hrist</span> becomes our Creditor, and +G<span class="sc">od</span> has no farther Demand: and what Need +then can there be of Intercession to G<span class="sc">od</span> +on our Behalf, when the Debt is already paid, and full +Satisfaction made? C<span class="sc">hrist’s</span> coming into +the World was <i>entirely owing</i> to the Father’s Mercy. His +Doctrine, Miracles, &<i>c</i>. were what he had in Commission +from G<span class="sc">od</span>, as a Means to instruct and make +the World happy; it is he who, instead of being averse to forgive +frail Man his Offences, has through J<span class= +"sc ls2">esus</span> <i>proclaimed Pardon</i> to <i>all</i>, on +Condition of Repentance and Amendment; and thro’ the Love of +G<span class="sc">od</span> it was also, that C<span class= +"sc ls2">hrist</span> was appointed a Mediator for sinful Man: So +that the whole Affair arose from G<span class="sc">od’s</span> +own Mercy.</p> +<p class="pns">I <span class="sc">stand</span> amazed at the +Gentlemen, against whom I am arguing; what a <i>Scope</i> do they +give to the <i>Sovereignty</i> of G<span class="sc">od</span>, in +the Doctrines of <i>Election</i> and <i>Reprobation?</i> And yet +they won’t <i>suffer it</i> at all to operate, in the Case of +<i>forgiving Sin</i>, on the Terms of Repentance and Amendment. A +small, yea <i>very small</i> and reasonable Allowance, in regard +to the <i>Exertion</i> of this Attribute, and in a <i>good +Cause</i> too, would be sufficient to justify the Mercy of +G<span class="sc">od</span>, in forgiving Sin. If, as a +Sovereign, he punishes where no Sin is, surely he may also, as a +Sovereign, forgive Sin. So that this Notion of the Impossibility +of G<span class="sc">od</span>’s forgiving Sin, without +Satisfaction first made, is erroneous and despicable. Repentance +and Amendment in the Creature is, in the Nature of Things, a +<i>much better</i> Satisfaction, than can be made by the Act of +another. By the <i>Justice</i> of G<span class="sc">od</span>, I +repeat it again, is meant, that he will not punish the innocent, +and not that he cannot shew Mercy to an offending, repenting, +penitent Creature, unless another sheds his Blood for an +Atonement. Nor is the Righteousness of C<span class= +"sc ls2">hrist</span>, <i>strictly speaking</i>, imputable to any +one. The Terms of the Gospel are, <i>Repent, and be converted, +and your Sins shall be blotted out:</i> Be <i>sorry</i> and +<i>amend</i>, and I will <i>forgive</i> you. <i>The Prayer of a +Righteous Man availeth much;</i> and G<span class="sc">od</span>, +in some Cases, to shew his Regard to the Righteous, and to excite +others to become righteous also, may possibly grant <i>that</i>, +at the Request of such a righteous Person, which without, it +might be improper to grant; and C<span class= +"sc ls2">hrist</span> being our holy and righteous Mediator, +G<span class="sc">od</span> may do more at his Request, on our +Behalf, than he would do without it. Not but that (<i>independent +of</i> and previous to the Intercession of C<span class= +"sc ls2">hrist</span>, at least to the Account we have of it, in +the New Testament) G<span class="sc">od</span> was <i>ever +disposed</i> to be favourable to Man, and always ready to receive +him, coming to him in a proper and becoming Manner: For even this +very C<span class="sc ls2">hrist</span>, and his Intercession, +&<i>c</i>. is all ultimately the Act of G<span class= +"sc">od</span>, and flows from his unbounded Love and Goodness to +Man. So that <i>imputed Righteousness</i> can mean no more, than +G<span class="sc">od’s</span> forgiving us, at the Request of +J<span class="sc ls2">esus</span> C<span class= +"sc ls2">hrist</span> (whom he sent on purpose to make that +Request, and to do every thing for the Benefit and Happiness of +Man) and not a <i>real Transfer</i> of C<span class= +"sc">hrist’s</span> <i>personal</i> Righteousness, which is not +only in itself impossible, but would, if true, take away all +Necessity of our becoming holy. The Righteousness of +C<span class="sc ls2">hrist</span> is altogether different to +what these Men take it to be; it is a real State of +Righteousness, wrought in the Soul by the Operation of +C<span class="sc ls2">hrist</span>’s <i>Spirit</i>, Man +submitting thereto. I know there are some Expressions in the +<i>New Testament</i>, which (if precipitantly understood, without +Regard had to the Nature of the Thing, and to other plain Texts) +seem <i>a little</i> to favour these Doctrines. I can’t say, by +what Means <i>precisely</i> the <i>Bible</i> came into its +present Condition; many Things might concur to give us wrong +Apprehensions of its true Sense and Meaning, He that understands +human Nature will find, that Men, who have been <i>great +Bigots</i> in any Way of Religion, <i>will generally retain</i> +some of their former Prejudices, even after, in the main, they +may have changed their Principles, Prejudice in Education is a +Leaven, not so easily purged out, as some may imagine; and ’tis +possible, the <i>Writings</i> of St. <i>Paul</i> may have in them +a Tincture of this kind; besides what may have since crept in, by +Partiality or Accident: against which, and <i>all Errors</i> of a +like Kind, a due Regard to the <i>fundamental Principles</i>, I +have endeavoured to inculcate, will, I hope, abundantly secure +us. These are some succinct Observations, that I could not well +avoid making; which perhaps may shortly be followed by something +more <i>full</i> and <i>comprehensive</i>, concerning the +<i>Virtue</i> and <i>Extent</i> of C<span class= +"sc">hrist’s</span> <i>Death</i>, and the Nature of <i>imputed +Righteousness</i>. What I have here delivered, concerning +G<span class="sc">od’s</span> <i>Sovereignty</i>, is not the +Result of a few, hasty, or loose Thoughts, but the Effect of long +and mature Deliberation. I have weighed over and over the +Arguments in my own Breast, and tried their Strength with People, +the most likely to afford me Satisfaction; and could I have found +it in either Way, the World had never been troubled with these +<i>Free and Impartial Thoughts</i>.</p> +<p class="pns">P<span class="sc">ermit</span> me, before I make +an End, just to observe, in Regard to the Controversy, between +Mr. <i>J—s</i> and Mr. <i>Taylor</i>, on the Scripture Doctrine +of <i>Original Sin;</i> that Mr. <i>J—s</i>, as well as Dr. +<i>W—s</i>, lays great Stress on that frivolous Distinction, +mentioned a few Pages back, of <i>moral</i> and <i>natural</i> +Necessity, to that Degree, that Mr. <i>Taylor</i> is treated +somewhat <i>rudely</i>, for not perceiving the Force of it; when +I dare aver, <i>none</i> but misguided Zealots, could ever see +any Reason or Argument in it: Nor do some of these very Men, who +urge it, seem to believe it themselves. Ask them how Man can be +justly accountable for Evils, that proceed from a <i>Nature +depraved in</i> Adam, and they immediately leave <i>this +Distinction</i>, and recur to the <i>Covenant;</i> and this +Covenant they cannot support by any Argument short of +G<span class="sc">od’s</span> <i>Sovereignty</i>, which they are +welcome (if they can tell how) to improve to their own +Advantage.</p> +<p class="pns">To say that Man, in the Fall, has natural Powers +to act rightly, and is therefore condemnable when he does not, +tho’, by Necessity; he wants Inclinations to be virtuous, would, +to <i>use</i> Mr. <i>J—s</i>’s genteel Language, <i>be a +senseless Falshood, and shew Poverty of Argument</i> (I am loth +to add as he does) <i>and Effrontery too</i>. Such Rudeness +deserves Lamentation as well as Reproof, nor do I on this +Occasion set before <i>him</i> his <i>own Words</i> with any +secret Pleasure, but purely to shew Mr. <i>J—s</i>, how agreeable +such a Liberty will appear, when, in return, it may be offered to +himself.</p> +<p class="pns">W<span class="sc">hy</span> is this favourite +Distinction urged, unless it be to shew, that because Man has +natural Powers, ’tis his <i>own</i> Fault, if he does not employ +them aright; but how does it appear, that such a Power +<i>only</i>, can render <i>Man</i> a whit better, or <i>more</i> +a <i>moral Agent</i>, than he is, or would be, without it? If +Inclination to <i>Virtue</i>, must <i>precede</i> every truly +virtuous Action; and Man’s Depravity under the Fall, be +<i>such</i> as prevents his ever having such good Inclinations, +his natural Ability to do Good, must needs be a mere <i>Joke</i> +and a <i>Cypher</i>. Just the same as, on the other hand, would +be, the strongest Inclinations to Virtue, and <i>no</i> natural +Power of complying with them in Practice. As nothing short of +<i>Knowledge</i> and <i>Power</i>, Power of both kinds, +<i>natural</i> and <i>moral</i>, can constitute Man a <i>moral +Agent</i>, or proper Subject of <i>Law</i>, of Rewards and +Punishments, either here, or hereafter; one would wonder to see +this insignificant Distinction urged at all in this Controversy: +for it is, at the best, a mere <i>Parade of Words;</i> which +prove nothing, except it be the Want of Truth and Righteousness, +in this Doctrine of <i>Original Sin;</i> or great <i>Bigotry</i>, +and Defect of Understanding, in its most accomplished Patrons. +And after all that is, or can be said, concerning <i>natural</i> +and <i>moral</i> Powers; it is doubtful, if such a depraved +miserable Wretch, as Man under the Fall is said by the +<i>Assemblies Catechism</i> to be, can (strictly speaking) have +any Power at all over his own Thoughts and Actions; The immediate +Cause and Spring of Action <i>is</i> the <i>Soul</i>, to which +the <i>Body</i> is subservient only as an <i>Instrument</i>, but +has in itself, according to the best Philosophy, no Power to +produce <i>voluntary</i> or <i>self Motion</i>. What is called +<i>natural</i> Power in Man, as opposed to <i>moral</i>, is at +least, a Power lodged in the Soul, to give Motion to the Body. +But these <i>Volitions</i> of the Mind, and the immediate Act of +the Soul upon the Body, in order to produce <i>Virtue</i>, +depending on the Mind’s being in a State of <i>Freedom</i>, able +to chuse and prefer Virtue, as better than Vice; it is evident, +that in a Mind, totally abandoned to Evil, <i>moral</i> Motives +have not their due Power over the Man; and what we call his +<i>natural</i> Power to be virtuous, is either suspended, or +quite overpowered, by an evil and irresistable Turn of +Inclination, arising from the <i>Act</i> of another; I mean, +<i>Adam</i>. Man then, considered as a <i>moral</i> Agent, has +Power to <i>do</i>, or <i>not</i> to <i>do</i>, the very same +Thing; be it good or evil. But this Liberty of Choice and Action +in the Creature, as the <i>Soul</i> is but <span class= +"sc">one</span>, and also <i>the</i> immediate Source of all +Action in Man, cannot properly, I think, be called <i>two</i> +distinct Powers, but rather <i>different Applications</i> of +<i>one</i> and the <i>same Power</i> lodged in the Soul. On the +other hand, in such a <i>depraved Creature</i>, as Man under the +Fall is said to be, the Power of <i>choosing</i> and +<i>refusing</i>, of being virtuous or vicious, which he +<i>pleases</i>, is altogether lost and destroyed; and such a Man, +so far from having <i>natural</i> and <i>moral</i> Powers, has +(properly speaking) <i>no Power</i> at all remaining: all his +Thoughts and Actions, like those of a Machine, are merely +involuntary; he is constantly impelled by something mightier than +himself, and ever necessitated to think and act as he does: his +being an intelligent Creature, doth not alter the State of the +Case, or render him more an Agent than a Stock or a Stone. In +this sad Condition, Man can have no Power at all to love and +pursue Virtue, untill the overruling Principle, which determines +all his Thoughts and Actions to the contrary, be removed, or he +receive Superaddition of Understanding and Strength agreeable +thereto. My natural Strength of Body may be equal to four hundred +Weight; but what can this avail, while I am continually pressed +down by four thousand? and all Mr. <i>J—s</i>’s Skill and +Criticism (<i>Pages</i> 71, 72) will not evade this Reasoning. +The Distinction between immediate and remote Causes of Sin, is as +trifling and inconclusive, as the ’forementioned Distinction of +<i>moral</i> and <i>natural</i> Powers. Those indeed, who can +fancy themselves to be G<span class="sc">od’s</span> own dear and +elect Children, may reject all Opposition with <i>Scorn</i>, and +without <i>Examination</i>, and acquiesce readily in the most +rigid and tyrannical System of Religion, that renders the Bulk of +Mankind miserable, while the Elect may think themselves secure in +the Divine Decree, <i>with an humble Assent, and awful</i> (it +should be superstitious) <i>Reverence of the Majesty and +Sovereignty of the great God</i>. But what Reason or Recompence +will that be to <i>him</i>, who under proper Means and Motives +would have kept the Commandments, and so have entered into Life; +who would have loved the L<span class="sc ls2">ord</span> his +G<span class="sc">od</span>, with all his Heart, Soul, and +Strength; and his Neighbour as himself? Or how can such a partial +and tyrannical Doctrine, be reconciled to the Voice of Reason in +Man, to our common Notions of <i>Right</i> and <i>Wrong</i>, to +the General Scope and Tenour of the <i>Holy Scriptures</i>, or to +that Text in particular, which assures us, that <i>the Almighty +doth not grieve nor afflict the Children of Men +willingly?</i></p> +<p style= +"text-align:center;font-size:150%;margin-top:2em; margin-bottom:5em"> +<i><span class="ls4">FINIS</span>.</i></p> + + + + + + + +<pre> + + + + + +End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Free and Impartial Thoughts, on the +Sovereignty of God, The Doctrines o, by Richard Finch + +*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK FREE AND IMPARTIAL THOUGHTS *** + +***** This file should be named 28401-h.htm or 28401-h.zip ***** +This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: + https://www.gutenberg.org/2/8/4/0/28401/ + +Produced by Keith G. Richardson + +Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions +will be renamed. + +Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no +one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation +(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without +permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, +set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to +copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to +protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project +Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you +charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you +do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the +rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose +such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and +research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do +practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is +subject to the trademark license, especially commercial +redistribution. + + + +*** START: FULL LICENSE *** + +THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE +PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK + +To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free +distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work +(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project +Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project +Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at +https://gutenberg.org/license). + + +Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic works + +1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to +and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property +(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all +the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy +all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. +If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the +terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or +entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. + +1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be +used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who +agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few +things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works +even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See +paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement +and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. See paragraph 1.E below. + +1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" +or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the +collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an +individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are +located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from +copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative +works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg +are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project +Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by +freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of +this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with +the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by +keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project +Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. + +1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern +what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in +a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check +the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement +before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or +creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project +Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning +the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United +States. + +1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: + +1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate +access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently +whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the +phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project +Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, +copied or distributed: + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + +1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived +from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is +posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied +and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees +or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work +with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the +work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 +through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the +Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or +1.E.9. + +1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted +with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution +must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional +terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked +to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the +permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. + +1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this +work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. + +1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this +electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without +prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with +active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project +Gutenberg-tm License. + +1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, +compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any +word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or +distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than +"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version +posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), +you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a +copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon +request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other +form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. + +1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, +performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works +unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. + +1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing +access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided +that + +- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from + the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method + you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is + owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he + has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the + Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments + must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you + prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax + returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and + sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the + address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to + the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." + +- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies + you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he + does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm + License. You must require such a user to return or + destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium + and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of + Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any + money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the + electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days + of receipt of the work. + +- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free + distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set +forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from +both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael +Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the +Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. + +1.F. + +1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable +effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread +public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm +collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain +"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or +corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual +property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a +computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by +your equipment. + +1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right +of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project +Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all +liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal +fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT +LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE +PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE +TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE +LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR +INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH +DAMAGE. + +1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a +defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can +receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a +written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you +received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with +your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with +the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a +refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity +providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to +receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy +is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further +opportunities to fix the problem. + +1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth +in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER +WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO +WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. + +1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied +warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. +If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the +law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be +interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by +the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any +provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. + +1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the +trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone +providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance +with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, +promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, +harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, +that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do +or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm +work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any +Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. + + +Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm + +Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of +electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers +including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists +because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from +people in all walks of life. + +Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the +assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's +goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will +remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure +and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. +To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation +and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 +and the Foundation web page at https://www.pglaf.org. + + +Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive +Foundation + +The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit +501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the +state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal +Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification +number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at +https://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent +permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. + +The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. +Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered +throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at +809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email +business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact +information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official +page at https://pglaf.org + +For additional contact information: + Dr. Gregory B. Newby + Chief Executive and Director + gbnewby@pglaf.org + + +Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation + +Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide +spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of +increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be +freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest +array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations +($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt +status with the IRS. + +The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating +charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United +States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a +considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up +with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations +where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To +SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any +particular state visit https://pglaf.org + +While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we +have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition +against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who +approach us with offers to donate. + +International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make +any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from +outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. + +Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation +methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other +ways including including checks, online payments and credit card +donations. To donate, please visit: https://pglaf.org/donate + + +Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. + +Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm +concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared +with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project +Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. + + +Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed +editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. +unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily +keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. + + +Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: + + https://www.gutenberg.org + +This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, +including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to +subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. + + +</pre> + +</body> +</html> |