more on this head. You see, that "the reprobate shall be damned, do what they can," is the whole burden of the song.

5. Take only two precious sentences more, which include the whole question.

"We assert, that the number of the elect, (chap.4.) and also of the reprobate is so fixed and determinate, that neither can be augmented or diminished:" and,

"That the decrees of election and reprobation are immutable and irreversible."

From each of these assertions, the whole consequence follows, clear as the noon-day sun.-Therefore," the elect shall be saved, do what they will the reprobate shall be damned, do what they can."

6. I add a word, with regard to another branch of this kind, charitable doctrine.

Mr. Toplady says, (chap. 1.) "God has a positive will to destroy the reprobates for their sins.' For their sins! How can that be? I positively assert, That (on this scheme) they have no sins at all. They never had: they can have none. For it cannot be a sin in a spark to rise, or in a stone to fall. And the spark or the stone is not more necessarily determined either to rise or to fall, than the man is to sin, to commit that rape, or adultery, or murder. For "God did before all time, determine and direct to some particular end, every person or thing, to which he has given, or is yet to give being." God himself did "predestinate them to fill up the measure of their iniquities:" such was his sov ereign, irresistible decree, before the foundation

of the world. To fill up the measure of their iniquities, that is, to commit every act which they committed. So "God (chap. 4.) decreed the Jews to be the crucifiers of Christ, and Judas to betray him." Whose fault was it then? You plainly say, it was not his fault, but God's. For what was Judas, or ten thousand reprobates be sides? Could they resist his decree? No more than they could pull the sun out of the firmament of heaven. And would God punish them with everlasting destruction, for not pulling the sun out of the firmament? He might as well do it for this, as for their not doing what (on this supposition) was equally impossible. "But they are punished for their impenitency, sin, and unbe lief." Say unbelief and impenitency; but not sin. For "God had predestinated them to continue in impenitency and unbelief. God had positively ordained them to continue in their blindness and hardness of heart." Therefore their not repenting and believing was no more a sin than their not pulling the sun from heaven.

7. Indeed Mr. T. himself owns, "The sins of the reprobate were not the cause of their being passed by; but merely and entirely the sovereign will and determinating pleasure of God."

"O, but their sin was the cause of their damnation, though not of their preterition:" that is, God determined they should live and die in their sins, that he might afterwards damn them! Was ever any thing like this? Yes, I have read something like it. When Tiberius had determined to destroy Sejanus and all his family, as it was unlawful to put a virgin to death, what

could be done with his daughter, a child of nine years old? Why, the hangman was ordered first to deflower, and then to strangle her? Yet even good Tiberius did not order her to be strangled, "Because she had been deflowered!" If so, it has been a parallel case: it had been just what is here affirmed of the Most High.

8. One word more. "I will obviate, says Mr. T. a fallacious objection; How is reprobation reconcileable with the doctrine of a future judg ment? There needs no pains to reconcile these two." No pains! Indeed there does: more pains than all the men upon earth, or all the devils in hell will ever be able to take. But go on. "In the last day, Christ will pass sentence on the non-elect. 1. Not for having done what they could not help, but, 2. For their wilful ignorance of divine things. 3. For their obstinate unbelief. 4. For their omissions of moral duty, and, 5. For their repeated iniquities and transgressions."

*He will condemn them, 1. "Not for having done what they could not help." I say, yes, for having sinned against God to their lives end. But this they could not help. He had himself decreed it. He had determined, they should continue impenitent. 2. "For their wilful ig norance of divine things." No. Their ignorance of God, and the things of God, was not wilful, was not originally owing to their own will but to the sovereign will of God. His will, not theirs, was the primary cause of their continuing in that ignorance. 3. “ For their obstinate unbelief."--No how can it be termed obstinate, when they never had a possibility of removing

:

it? When God had absolutely decreed, before they were born, that they should live and die therein? 4. "For their omissions of moral duty" that is, for not loving God and their neighbour, which is the sum of the moral law. Was it then ever in their power to love God and their neighbour? No; no more than to touch heaven with their hand. Had not God himself unalterably decreed, that they should not love either God or man? If therefore they are condemned for this, they are condemned for what they never could help. 5. "For their repeated iniquities and transgressions." And was it ever in their power to help these? Were they not predestinated thereto before the foun dation of the world? How then can the judge of all the earth consign them to everlasting fire, for what was, in effect, his own act and deed?

I apprehend then this is no fallacious objection; but a solid and weighty one; and defy any man living, who asserts the unconditional decree of reprobation or preterition (just the same in effect) to reconcile this with the scriptural doctrine of a future judgment. I say again, I defy any man on earth to shew, how on this scheme, God can judge the world in righteous

ness.

TRACT VIII.

THOUGHTS ON THE IMPUTED RIGHTEOUSNESS OF CHRIST.

1. A TRACT has lately been published in my name, concerning the imputed righteousness of Christ. This calls me to explain myself upon that head; which I will do with all the clearness I can. But I quarrel with no man for thinking or speaking otherwise than I do: I blame none for using those expressions which he believes to be scriptural. If he quarrels with me for not using them, at least, not so frequently as himself, I can only pity him, and wish him more of the mind which was in Christ."

2. The righteousness of Christ is an expression which I do not find in the bible. The righteousness of God is an expression which I do find there. I believe this means, First, The mercy of God, as 2 Pet. i. 1. Them that have obtained like precious faith with us, through the righteousness of God.' How does it appear, that the righteousness of God here, means either more or less than his mercy? Psalm lxxi. 15, &c. ‘. My mouth shall shew forth thy righteousness and thy salvation' thy mercy in delivering me. I make mention of thy righteousness only.' Thy righteousness, O God, is very high.' Here the righteousness of God is expressly mentioned; but I will not take upon me to say, that it means

6