Section 3.

SECTION 3.

Eight pair of opposite propositions, on which the opposite doctrines of grace and justice are founded, and which may be considered as the basis of Bible Calvinism and Bible Arminianism, and as a double key to open the mysteries of election and reprobation.

Scripture ground of CALVINISM, and the doctrines of GRACE.

PROPOSITION I.

GOD is original, eternal, and unbounded life, light, love, and purity; and therefore, wherever these blessings are found, in any degree, they originally come from him, the overflowing fountain of all that is excellent in the natural, moral, and spiritual world.

II. God is an infinitely wise Benefactor, full of goodness and GRACE.

III. It seems highly inconsistent with the wisdom of a Creator and Benefactor, to make all his creatures of the same size and rank, and to deal out his bounties to them in the same measure. To say that he should do it, is as absurd as to affirm that his goodness requires him to make every insect as big as an elephant, and every spire of grass as tall as an oak.

IV. For want of considering the preceding, self-evident propositions, and their necessary consequences, the heated advocates for the doctrines of justice have erred, either by denying, or by not fully granting these two undeniable truths:

(1.) All good comes originally from God’s free grace and overflowing fulness.

Scripture ground of ARMINIANISM, and the doctrines of JUSTICE.

PROPOSITION I.

THERE is no death, darkness, free wrath, or sin in God: and therefore these evils, wherever they are found, originally flow from inferior agents, whose free will may become the fountain of all evil: for when free agents choose first the evil of sin, God is obliged in justice to choose next the evil of punishment. Thus moral evil draws natural evil after it.

II. God is an infinitely wise Governor, full of equity and JUSTICE.

III. It seems highly inconsistent with the equity of a Governor and a Judge to decree that millions of rational creatures shall be born in a graceless, sinful, and remediless state, that he may display his righteous sovereignty by passing a sentence of death and eternal torments upon them, for being found in the state of remediless corruption, in which his irresistible decree has placed them. IV. For want of considering the preceding, self-evident propositions, and their unavoidable consequences. the heated advocates for the doctrines of grace have erred, by directly or indirectly maintaining these two capital untruths:

(1.) Some real evil can originally flow from that part of God’s predestination which is generally called “absolute (2.) God, as a sovereign benefactor, may do what he pleases with his own. Nor should our “eye be evil because he is good,” and displays his superabounding goodness toward some men, more than he does toward others. V. The grand mistake of the rigid Arminians consists then in not frankly ascribing to God all the original goodness, and gracious sovereignty which belong to him as the sovereign author and first parent of all good. VI. Would you get clear of the error, of rigid Arminians, not only assert God’s grace and goodness, insisting that he is the first cause and eternal parent of ALL good, natural and spiritual, temporal and eternal, but boldly stand up also for his free grace and exuberant goodness; maintaining that he has the most unbounded right to dispense the peculiar bounties of his grace, without any respect to our works. For the children [Esau and Jacob] not being yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to [the] election [of superior grace] might stand, not of works, but of him that [arbitrarily chooseth and] calleth; it was said, [not the one is absolutely ordained to eternal death, and the other absolutely ordained to eternal life; but] “the elder shall serve the younger:” the younger shall have a superior blessing. And in this respect “it is not at all of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God, who most freely and absolutely showeth mercy, or favour,” Romans 9:11, 12, 16. Hence it appears, that to deny a PARTIAL election of distinguishing grace, is equally to fly in the face of St. Paul and of reason.

reprobation,” or “predestination to eternal death.”

(2.) God, as a sovereign, may absolutely ordain some of his rational creatures to eternal death, before they have personally deserved it: or, which is all one, he may so pass by unborn children as to insure their continuance in sin, and their everlasting damnation.

V. The grand mistake of the rigid Calvinists consists then in directly ascribing to God some original evil, and a reprobating sovereignty, which is irreconcilable with the goodness of a Creator, and the equity of a Judge. VI. Would you, on the other hand, get clear of the error of rigid Calvinists, not only maintain in general that God is just, but confidently assert that he utterly disclaims a sovereignty which dispenses rewards and punishments from a throne of justice, otherwise than according to works: witness his own repeated declarations: — “I said indeed that thy house, &c, should walk before me for ever: but now be it far from me: for them that honour me, I will honour; and they that despise me shall be lightly esteemed,” 1 Samuel 2:30. Again: “If the wicked man will turn from all his sins, he shall surely live, &c. But when the righteous man turneth away from his righteousness, &c, in his sin that he hath sinned shall he die. Yet ye say, The way of the Lord is not equal. O house of Israel, are not my ways equal? Are not your ways unequal? Therefore I will judge you, every one according to his ways, saith the Lord. Repent, &c, for I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth,” Ezekiel 18:21, &c. Hence it appears, that with respect to the election and reprobation of justice, God’s decrees, so far as they affect our personal salvation or damnation, are regulated according to our VII. When we consider the election of partial grace, and the harmless reprobation that attends it, we may boldly ask, with St. Paul, “Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto [superior] honour, and f65 another unto [comparative] dishonour?” Cannot God ordain, that of two unborn children, the one (as Jacob) shall be appointed to superior blessings, and (in this sense) shall be more loved; while the other (as Esau) shall be deprived of those blessings, and in this sense shall be less loved, or comparatively hated? “As it is written, Jacob have I loved, and Esau have I hated,” Romans 9:13. When we speak of the same election, we may say, as the master of the vineyard did to the envious labourer, “Is thine eye evil, because the Master of the universe is good?” Matthew 20:15.

VIII. From the preceding propositions it evidently follows, that when God is considered as electing and reprobating the children of men from his throne of grace, his election and reprobation are partial and unconditional.

personal righteousness or sin, that is, according to our works.

VII. When we consider the election of impartial justice, and the fearful reprobation that answers to it, we may say, with St. Peter, “If ye call on the Father, who without respect of persons judgeth according to every man’s work, pass the time of your sojourning here in fear,” 1 Peter 1:17. “God is no respecter of persons: but in every nation he that feareth him and worketh righteousness, is accepted of him,” Acts 10:34. We may add with Christ, “In the day of judgment, men shall give account of their words. For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned,” Matthew 12:36, 37. And we may humbly expostulate with God, as Abraham did: “That be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked: and that the righteous should be as the wicked, that be far from thee: shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?” Genesis 18:25.

VIII. From the preceding propositions it evidently follows, that when God is considered as electing and reprobating the children of men from his throne of justice, his election and reprobation are impartial and conditional Having thus laid down the rational and Scriptural ground of Bible Calvinism, which centres in the PARTIAL election of grace, — and of Bible Arminianism, which centres in the IMPARTIAL election of justice, I shall show the nature, excellence, and agreement of both systems in the following essays, which, I trust, will convert judicious Arminians to Scripture Calvinism, and judicious Calvinists to Scripture Arminianism.