Page images
PDF
EPUB

:

and in time he made all things, and probably the angelic creation was previous to men. Now, many attempt to make God the author of sin; but sin is not a creature as many falsely think; it is the abuse of good. And to say that God who is good, abuses good, is the highest blasphemy that we could impeach the Deity with; therefore he cannot be the author of it, consequently it must have come from another source. Now we must admit the idea that there was a time when there was no creature, but the Creator only and declarative glory could never redound to God; except that finite accountable intelligencies, were created, (for what should declare his glory,) his justice nor goodness could never be shewn forth in rewards and punishments, except such accountable beings were made; and of course must have remained in solemn silence: therefore declarative glory could never have redounded to God. But, that he might have declarative glory, arising from his attributes, by intelligencies, it appears that angels were created; and we must suppose they were all happy, holy, and good at first; seeing this is the nature of God, (as all argue from the christian to the deist.) As likeness doth beget likeness, and every cause produces its own effect; and as we are informed, that the devil sinneth from the beginning, and that some kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, and sinned, and were cast down to hell, &c. (2 Pet. ii. 4.) Jude 6. Rom. iv. 15. 1 John iii. 4, 8.) And as we read, where there is no law, there is no transgression: It must be that the angels had a law to

*

us in HIM before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and WITHOUT blame before HIM in love. Ver. 9. 10. hath reference to building up Zion in Christ, not in the universalist's sense, but upon earth, &c..

*Rev. iv. 11. "Thou hast created all things, and for THY PLEASURE (or glory) they are and were CREATED"

keep, and power sufficient to keep or break the law; or else, how could they be accountable; and if they were not, they could not be rewardable, and if not, then not praise nor blame worthy. But says one, allowing that God did make such pure intelligible accountable beings, and had a sovereign right to demand their obedience, seeing they were dependent: what should induce a holy being to sin against a Holy God, especially as there was no evil in him or them, nor yet any to tempt him? Answer-suppose I were walking along in meditation, in a great field; of a sudden I cast a look forward, and can see no end to it; it would be natural for me to stop and look back the way from whence I came. So, in my opinion, the angels were looking into futurity-they could discover no end to eternity, and it would be natural for them to reflect on time past. They could remember no time when they had no existence, any more than I can. This would open a door for self-temptation to arise in thought, "how do we know but we are eternal with God? and why should we be dependent on him, or be accountable to him?” In order to find out whether they were dependent or independent, the only method was, to try their strength, by making head against the King of heaven, by a violation of his command.

Now, evil is the abuse of good, and the first abuse of good was the origin of evil, and as their commandment was good, the evil consisted in the abuse of it; and the natural consequence of breaking the same, would be to convert them into devils-as the consequence of murder is death. From this we may see, that God made THE devil, but he made himself A devil. Now it appears to me impossible for God to shew the devils mercy, consistent with the principles of reason and justice; for I may sin against my equal, and in the eyes of the law, the crime is looked upon as a triflle; the

:

same crime against a government, would forfeit my liberty, if not my life. Thus the magnitude of a crime is not looked upon, according to the dignity of the offender, but according to the dignity of the offended of course, a finite being sinning against an infinite God, there is an infinite demerit in the transgression; of course justice demands infinite satisfaction. A finite being can make finite satisfaction only, although the crime demands an infinity of punishment-a finite being cannot bear an infinity of punishment at once; therefore the punishment must be made up in duration, and of course be eternal, that it may be adequate to the crime.

:

But says one, Why was not a mediator provided for fallen angels, as well as for fallen men ?— Answer-it was impossible, in the reason and nature of things; for when mankind fell it was by the action of one, and they multiply. So the Godhead and Manhood could be united, as in the person of Christ but not so with the devils, for they were all created active beings, and each stood or fell for himself, and of course was actually guilty, and therefore must have actual punishinent; except a mediator was provided; which could not be, for the devils do not multiply; therefore the Godhead and devilhood could not be joined together. But supposing it could, yet, says Paul, without shedding of blood there can be no remission, and spirits have no blood to shed: and upon this ground it appears, that the devils' restoration or redemption must fall through.

The seripture which sayeth, Rom. ix. 11, &c. "The children being yet unborn, having done neither good or evil, that the purpose of God, according to election, might stand, it was said unto her, the elder shall serve the younger; as it is written, Jacob have I loved, and Esau have I hated," &c. Any person by examining Genesis xxv. 23. and Mal. i. 1-2. may see that Paul's

talk doth not mean their persons, but that undeniably it must be applied to their posterities. And to apply them the other way, as though one was an elect, the other a reprobate, on purpose to be damned, without a possibility of escape, is a plot of the devil, to blindfold mankind by a multitude of words without knowledge: for no such inference can be drawn from that passage, that Jacob was made for salvation, and Esau for damnation. But observe, it must be applied to their posterities: see Genesis xxv. 23. "And the Lord said to Rebecca, Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people, &c. shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people, and the elder shall serve the younger." Which came to pass in the reign of King David, when the Edomites were brought in subjection to the Israelites. (2 Sam. viii. 14.1 Chron. xviii. 13.) and that passage," Jacob have I loved, and Esau have I hated," was not spoken before the children were born, but hundreds of years after they were dead, by Mal. i. 1-2. Now, cannot any person who is unprejudi, ced, plainly discover, that the word Jacob" here means the Jewish nation, which God saw fit to exalt to high national privileges; because Christ was to come through that lineage, &c.— And as to "Esau have I hated," the word hate in scripture, frequently means loving in a less degree, &c. for instance-Christ sayeth, except a man hate his father, inother, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple the word hate, here means loving in a less degree, as we are to love God supremely; and lent favors in a less degrec, as belonging to him: so the passage "Esau have I hated." meaneth, that God did not see fit to exalt the Edomites, to so high national privi leges as the Jews; yet they were the next highest, for their land was given to them for a posses

sion, which the Jews were not permitted to take from them, as they were going from Egypt to Canaan, (Deut. ii. 4, 5.) and that passage, (Heb. xii. 17.) which sayeth, that Esau was rejected, and found no place of repentance, though he sought it carefully with tears," we must not therefrom infer, that it was God who rejected him, because he was a reprobate, but his father Isaac.

Take notice, at a certain time Esau went out a hunting, and on his return home, being at the point to perish with hunger, came into Jacob's tent, and desired refreshment; but Jacob attempted to make Esau's extremity his opportunity to grow rich, and to cheat him out of his birth right for a mess of pottage; and Esau rather than starve, promised to give it up; and who can blame him, considering his distress. All that a man hath, will he give for his life, saith Satan :

this is the truth, and you cannot deny it, (Gen. xxv. 30, &c.) But there is no account that ever Jacob got the birth-right, but by Esau's continuing with his father, and being so rich, on Jacob's return; it appears, that he lived with his father, and was heir to the inheritance. Jacob got not any thing from Esau; but Esau got a present from him. After this Isaac was deter mined to bless Esau, and commanded him to get venison for that purpose; and while he was going for it, Rebecca told Jacob to kill kids, &c. and he should get the blessing: He saith, "I shall get a curse instead of a blessing;" she said, "the curse be on me, &c." and it appears as though she got it, as it was the means of her losing her idol's company during her life time; for there is no account of her being alive at his return. Scarcely had he told the lies to Isaac, and withdrawn, &c. but Esau came in, and thereby blind Isaac perceived the deception in full, and began to tremble exceedingly, by which Esau perceived what had

« PreviousContinue »