Page images
PDF
EPUB

they sound the most horrid and blasphemous discord I ever felt to chill my veins. I abhor such breathings in my very soul. I cannot sound such notes on earth, nor can I expect to sound such in heaven; I cannot believe they will chord with the harmony of the blood washed songsters, or heighten the glory of God and the Lamb: If the Lord, in his infinate mercy, should raise my ruined guilty soul to the realms of eternal bliss, and give poor worthless me to be with him where he is, to behold his glory; I believe, I shall be ready to adore, and to praise him for " Restoring that which he took not away;"-Ps. lxix. 4. And for restoring it more abundantly."-JOHN, x. 10. 28.

SEVENTH.-The doctrine of God ordaining Sin, appears to me to degrade the attonement and work of Christ; and to reflect the highest dishonour upon the justice and holiness of God.

To assert, that God decreed, and immutably ordained the Sin of angels; and then to cast them out of heaven, and down to hell for that Sin.-That God decreed the Sin of our first parents; and then, to consign them to banishment and death for that Sin. -That God immutably fixed in his eternal purpose, all the wickedness of Sodom; and then, to rain down fire and brimstone from heaven because of that wickedness. That God decreed, that the sons of Judah, (Er and Onan) should be wicked; and then, destroyed them because they were so.-Gen. xxxviii, 7.--10.— That God decreed, and immutably ordained, that his people Israel should commit abominations: and then, send to them all his servants the prophets, saying,

"Oh, do not this abominable thing which I hate."JER. xliv. 4.

Does the divine wisdom, righteousness, and justice of God shine in such a procedure; or does it not rather reflect the foulest dishonour upon the attributes of Jehovah?

But what scripture authority is there for saying, that God ordained the first, or last, or any of the above cited particulars! For my part, I have not as yet fouud any; and I have both searched, and enquired of others for a proof to the purpose; and even some (when contending that God decreed Sin's existence, entrance, &c.) I have pushed close, to point me to a "Thus saith the Lord," for their authority. But all I could fetch out, was but human argument and assertion; such as before noticed, "It is certain that the existence of Sin was the ordination of God." But were all the men in the world to assert it, without a scripture proof, it is but human, not divine authority. Shew me God's signature upon it, before I receive it as divinity. I believe the scriptures are clean from such a doctrine, and as such 1 reject it.

EIGHTH. THE FLIMSY ARGUMENTS, AND CRAFTY POSITIONS, laid down as a basis for the doctrine, clearly shew its want of solid scriptural foundation. For example the following:

"I would offer says MR. T-R, a few considerations to shew, that though the existence of Sin was in consequence of the sovereign appointment of God; yet, it was impossible that he should be the blamable cause of it. And I would observe,

"That Sin could not be a first cause, and so produce itself; nor be without a cause: for then it would be eternal, and consequently God himself: But as it is a departure from, and a transgression of some law, which the subject was under an indespencible obligation to obey, it must be an effect and consequent of something prior.

"Whatever was the first cause or occasion of Sin; it must be entirely free from the fault or 'blame; for, if fault or blame was in the cause; Sin must be in it; and then, this flagrant contradiction must follow, that Sin was before it was. But this is impossible. And therefore, God may be the first cause or occasion of Sin, and yet be absolutely free from the fault or blame.

"It is evident, the first cause could have no positive influence in its production; I mean, so as by force, fraud, or incitement, to compel, deceive, or instigate the creature to the commission of it; for if this is supposed, Sin must be in the cause, and the above contradiction returns, that is, Sin was before it was."-TUCKER, Let. xvii. p. 123. 124.

This argument, I consider flimsy for foundation work; especially for so weighty a structure, as that of charging the cause of Sin upon God. Let it be noticed, that it is but human argument, with not a single "Thus saith the Lord" to base upon. It is therefore at best, but a sandy rotten foundation. Let me have the word of God for foundation work in every point of doctrine. I well know that this, and this only will stand the coming storm; this, and this only will remain unshaken, when "the rain descends, and the floods come, and the winds blow." Then all fine spun arguments, and spider webs will go to wreck; yea, the Lord says "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my word shall not pass away."

Away then with all foundation work short of the word of the Lord.

But to notice the argument itself. As to position 1st. I would observe, that the plausibility thereof is obtained, by an artificial placing of things; for he tells us, that, "Sin could not be a first cause, and so produce itself; nor be without a cause; for then it would be eternal, and consequently God himself." Here Sin is exhibited as though it were distinct from, and prior to the creature; and hence it is made to appear either as a self-existent without a cause, or as the necessary effect of God himself. This is handling the subject in cunning craftiness. But if we turn to scripture upon this point, we shall see that the word exhibits the creature, and then his offence. "By one man's offence, Sin entered into the world;-By one man's disobedience many were made sinners."-Ro. v. 12, 17. 19. Mark, here is the man, and then his offence; the man, and then his disobedience; and this offence and disobedience of the man is Sin. The scripture teaches most plainly, that, "Sin is the transgression of the law"-that, "All unrighteousness is Sin"-and that, "Whatsoever is not of faith is Sin,"

Now suppose we substitute "the transgression of the law," for the word Sin; and apply it to MR.T-R'S mode of argument. For example, instead of saying, "Sin could not be a first cause and so produce itself, &c." Say, "The transgression of the law," could not be a first cause, and so produce itself, (or the offence of one man could not be a first cause, and so produce itself,") nor be without a cause, for then it

[ocr errors]

(the transgression of the law or the offence of one man) would be eternal, and consequently God himself." "It (the transgression of the law, or the offence of one man) must be an effect and consequent of something prior," (to the creature who transgresses, or offends.)

Wonderful are the powers of logic; nevertheless, truth, and truth only, is the essential power of argument. "The path of the just is uprightness," not craftiness.

POSITION SECOND." Whatsoever was the first cause of Sin, it must be entirely free from the fault or blame; for if fault or blame was in the cause, Sin must be in it; and then this flagrant contradiction must follow, that Sin was before it was. But this is impossible, And therefore, God may be the first cause of Sin, and yet he absolute free from the fault or blame."

Now if this be a just and general mode of argument, it will equally apply to the first cause of other things; such as light, life, truth, grace, righteousness, &c., as well as 10 Sin. But how would it shine in such positions? For example, were we to say, that, whatever was the first cause of light, it must be entirely free from the essential glories of light; for if these glories were in the cause, light inust be in it; and then this flagrant contradiction must follow, that light was before it was. But this is impossible. And therefore, absolute darkness may be the cause of light.

But the mode of reasoning is unscriptural and false, for the first cause of light was not darkness, for "God is light, and in him is no darkness at all." (JOHN,

« PreviousContinue »