tified, or in other words, they are the evidence of justification. It is in this sense, that the Apostle James is to be understood, when he tells us that Abraham, and the harlot Rahab, were justified by works. By their works they manifested that they had that living faith by which, according to Paul, men are to be justified. The Apostle Paul, in his remarks upon this subject, uses the term works in a very different sense. He means by it, the deeds of the law, those by which, we have a legal righteousness. He therefore tells us, that if Abraham were justified by works, he had whereof to glory. He then adds, "Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him for righteousness." Now this faith, which, according to Paul, was counted unto Abraham for righteousness, was what James denominates good works; and it is directly op posed to what is meant by the term works, as it is used by Paul.

Q. In what sense is the righteousness of Christ imputed to believers ?

A. The Scriptures no where intimate a real imputation, or transfer of the righteousness of Christ to those that believe, but only, that through faith, it is consistent for God to treat them as though they were righteous. So righteousness was. counted to Abraham, or he was treated as righteous. From various expressions in the Bible, which are entirely figurative, such as purchase, ransom, &c. some have inferred that there is in the pardon of believing sinners, a real transfer of character. But a moment's attention, however, will convince us that moral character, is inseparably connected with its agent, and cannot be transferred. We may receive pardon and justification, through the righteousness of Christ, but it is his righteousness after all. Besides, if our guilt were literally imputed to him, then he became really guilty, and received, when he suffered for us, a literal punisliment. To this, we presume, no real Christian would be willing to subscribe;

we must, therefore, suppose that all those passages that seem to imply a real imputation, are figurative, and designed to teach merely this important truth, that in consequence of the sufferings of Christ, God can now, consistently with his character, treat the sinner that believes, as though he were right

eous.

Hopkins' System.-Birge on the Atonement.-Dr.Wood's Letters to Unitarians.--Dwight's Theology.-Dr. Edwards three Sermons.

SECTION IX.
Regeneration.

Q. 1. By what means are sinners made partakers of the atonement, if they are depraved, and if none are partakers, but such as repent and believe?

A. By what is usually called regeneration.

Q. 2. What is regeneration?

A. It is a change of heart. By the word heart, we generally understand the desires, or the disposition of the mind. Previous to regeneration, the desires of the mind are wholly selfish. The sinner has no love for any object, that is holy or truly excellent. He derives no real pleasure from contemplations on the character of God or his divine administration; at least, when his views of those subjects are at all correct. But after his heart is regenerated, God is the supreme object of his affections. The language of his heart is, "Whom have I in heaven but thee? and there is none on earth that I desire besides thee." As this love is toward new objects, the beand objects of a holy character, it is in a moral sense, ginning of a new life; and is called in the language of meta

phor, a language in which Scripture abounds, the new birth, or regeneration.

Q. 3. By what agent is regeneration effected?

A. It is attributed to the Holy Spirit. "Not by works of righteousness which we have done; but according to his mercy, he saved us by the washing of regeneration, and the renewing of the Holy Ghost." a "Which were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." b "Except a man be born of the water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." c It will be seen by these passages, that regeneration is the work of the Holy Spirit, to the exclusion of every other agent.

Q. By what instrument, is regeneration effected?

A. Divine truth. "Of his own will begat he us by the word of truth." d "For in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel." e "Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God." "And this is the word, which by the gospel is preached unto you." f

Q. Is the subject of this work active or passive?

A. There is scarcely a question in the whole system of truth, on which the opinions of great and good men, have been more at variance, than on this. But the opinion, that the subjects of this work are passive, it is believed has been imbibed from a habit, to which we are from our situation constantly exposed-a habit of carrying the impressions that we receive from the operations of matter, to those of the mind. Many have undoubtedly received the same impressions, from the metaphorical language of Scripture. Such expressions as the following, begotten, born again, created anew, &c. have often been viewed as teaching the passivity of the sinner

a Titus iii. 5. b John i. 13. c John iii. 5. d James i.-18. € 1 Cor. iv. 15. Pet. i. 23, 25.

in regeneration, with great clearness. But it is certainly unsafe, to depend in forming our opinions on the operations of the mind, on language that must be considered metaphorical. These passages prove decidedly that the producing or efficient agency in this operation, is wholly of the Spirit. But if they are designed to show, that the agency or co-operation of the sinner is entirely excluded, how shall we reconcile them with that numerous class of passages which apparently at least, represent the sinner as being the principal agent in the work? The passages to which we allude, are such as the following: "The men of Nineveh repented at the preaching of Jonah." a And yet we are told by the Apostle, that "Repentance is the gift of God." b "Turn ye, turn ye, for why will ye die ?" "Come ye to the waters." "Labour not for the meat that perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life.” It is doubtless true that these commands are consistent with the sentiment that we have already established that the Holy Spirit is the producing or efficient agent in this work; but unless we admit that such as are regenerated, do turn, do come, do labour, &c. we cannot conceive how these passages can be explained, upon any just principles of interpretation. Upon any other conclusion, we must admit that God has commanded what is never done, and what never can be done. If mankind are in any sense able to do what God has commanded, then when they are made to obey, according to his promise, c they must be active and free. Besides, they are commanded to "make to themselves new hearts." d We know not how to reconcile the opinion with the character of God, that he should command men to do that which they are so far from being able to do, that they are not free or active in it, when it is done. If in regeneration something is done which in every sense is beyond the

a Mat. xii. 41. b Acts v. 31. e Ezek. xxxvi. 27, d Ezek. xviii, 31.

power of men, on what principle can they be condemned for not being born again?

Further, is it not cheerfully admitted by all who believe in the truth of christianity, that the experienced Christian may be the subject of the influences of the Holy Spirit, while his own agency or activity is in no way interrupted nor impaired? By what principle of reasoning can it be made to appear that the first exercises of a holy nature, may not be as easily produced in this way, as any that follow. The experience of every man that is born again, perfectly corroborates this statement. Are not all Christians constrained to acknowledge, that they were "willing in the day of his power?"

Q. Are the operations of the Spirit of God, in regeneration, irresistible ?

A. That the Holy Spirit is able to exert an influence on the mind, which cannot be resisted, there can be no doubt. It is however obvious, that merely because the Spirit is not resisted, in those cases that result in regeneration, is no argument that it cannot be in others, or that it could not have been in them. Stephen declared to his persecutors, that they did always resist the Holy Ghost. If the Spirit may be resisted in some cases, what argument can be drawn from the Omnipotence of God, to prove that it may not be in others? Besides, does not the representation that the influences of the Spirit are irresistible, naturally leave on the mind a collateral impression, that in every instance of regeneration, there is an exertion of power, beyond what the sinner is able in any sense to exert ; and of course, if men remain unregenerate, they are to be condemned for refusing to put forth a power, which they do not possess?

Q. Is the change which is effected in regeneration entire, or is it partial?

A. So far as the question refers to the subject, it is par