Bible Arminianism. — Essay the Second.

BIBLE ARMINIANISM. — ESSAY THE SECOND.

Displaying the doctrines of impartial justice, the capital error of the Calvinists, and the excellence of Scripture Arminianism.

THE doctrines of impartial justice rest on these scriptures: — “I say unto you, that to every one who hath [to a good purpose] more shall be given: and from him [the slothful servant] who hath not [to a good purpose] even that he hath shall be taken away from him,” Luke 19:26. “Cursed is he that perverteth judgment,” Deuteronomy 27:19.

These awful doctrines subdivide themselves into an impartial election, and an impartial reprobation; both flowing from Divine justice, which is always irrespective of persons.

The impartial election and reprobation of justice is the righteous and wise choice, which God, as an equitable and unbribed JUDGE, makes, or refuses to make, of some persons, Churches, cities, and nations, judicially to bestow upon them, for Christ’s sake, gracious rewards according to his evangelical promises: or judicially to inflict upon them, for righteousness’ sake, condign punishments, according to his reasonable threatenings; solemn promises and threatenings these, which St. Paul sums up in these words: — “God, in the revelation of his righteous judgment, will render to every man according to his deeds. To them who, by patient continuance in well doing, seek for glory, &c, eternal life: but to them that do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, he will render indignation and wrath: tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doth evil, of the Jew [and Christian] first,” as having received more talents than others; “and also of the Gentile; [or heathen:] but glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew [and Christian] first,” as being God’s peculiar people, “and also to the heathens. For,” with regard to the doctrines of justice, “there is no respect of persons with God. For as many as have sinned without the law, [of a peculiar covenant,] shall also perish without the law, [of a peculiar covenant:] and as many as have sinned under the law, [of a peculiar covenant,] shall be judged by the law,” of the peculiar covenant they were under, whether it were “the law of Moses, or the law of Christ. For not the hearers, but the doers of the law shall be justified in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men according to my Gospel.” And lest some should object that the heathens, having neither the law of Moses nor that of Christ, cannot be judged according to their works, the apostle intimates that they are under the law of the human nature, which law is written upon every man’s conscience, by a beam of “the true light, that enlightens every man that comes into the world. For when the heathens,” says he, “which have not the law, do by nature, [assisted by the general light above mentioned,] the things contained in the written law [of Moses or of Christ,] these, having not the written law, are a law unto themselves; and show the work of the law written in their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another,” as a pledge and earnest of the condemnation or justification which awaits them before the throne of justice, Romans 2:5, 16.

And let none say that this is St. James’ legal doctrine, into which St. Paul had slided unawares, through “the legality which cleaves to our nature;” for the evangelical prophet is as deep in it as the herald of free grace. Hear Isaiah: — “Say ye to the righteous, that it shall be well with them; for they shall eat the fruit of their doings: wo to the wicked, it shall be ill with him; for the reward of his hands shall be given him,” Isaiah 3:10, 11. If Isaiah be accused of having imbibed this anti-Solifidian doctrine, like legal Ezekiel, I reply, that our Lord himself was as deep in it as Ezekiel and St. James; witness his last charge: — “Behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have a right to the tree of life, and may enter into the heavenly city of God: for without are dogs, &c, [all manner of evil workers,] and whosoever loveth or maketh a lie,” Revelation 22:12, 15. The “few names in Sardis which have not defiled their garments, shall walk with me in white, for they are worthy,” Revelation 3:4. “Watch ye, &c, that you may be counted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man,” Luke 21:37.

The election of justice is then nothing but the impartiality with which God makes choice of his good and faithful servants, rather than of his wicked and slothful servants, to bestow upon them the temporal and eternal rewards of goodness and faithfulness, according to their works; when he “cometh and reckoneth with them,” about the talents which his free grace hath bestowed upon them, Matthew 25:19. Nor is the reprobation of justice any thing but the impartiality with which God, as a righteous dispenser of his punishments, reprobates from his rewards of grace and glory his wicked and unfaithful servants, who do not use, or who vilely abuse the talents which his free grace hath entrusted them with. When God “commands the servants, to whom he hath given his pounds, to be called to him, that he may know how much every man has gained by trading,” in order to bestow his evangelical rewards with equity; according to the election of justice, he makes choice of the servants who have gained something with their pounds, rather than of the servant who has slothfully “laid up his pound in a napkin.” And according to the reprobation of justice, he reprobates from all rewards, and appoints to a deserved punishment the unprofitable and slothful servant, rather than the faithful and diligent servants, who have improved their Lord’s gifts. Once more: according to the election of justice, God elects and calls to a double reward his servants who have given double diligence to make their gratuitous election sure. Thus he elects to the honour of “being ruler over TEN cities,” the man whose pound “had gained TEN pounds,” rather than the man whose pound had only gained five pounds, and who, by the rule of equitable proportion, is only placed over five cities, Luke 19:15, &c. And, according to the reprobation of justice, in the day of judgment it shall be more intolerable for unbelieving Chorazin and Bethsaida, than for Sodom and Gomorrah; and for unbelieving London and Edinburgh, than for Chorazin and Bethsaida; because they bury more talents, resist brighter light, and sin against richer dispensations of Divine grace, Matthew 10:15.

With regard to the election and reprobation of justice, “there is absolutely no respect of persons with God:” and evangelical worthiness, which dares not show its head before the throne of God’s partial grace, may lift it up with humble confidence before the throne of Christ’s remunerative justice. Hence it is that St. Paul, who so strongly asserts in Romans 9. that, before the throne of partial grace, “it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God who showeth mercy,” or favour, when, and in what degree he pleases, does not scruple to say, when he is going to appear before the mediatorial throne of Divine justice, “The time of my departure is at hand: I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith. Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, shall give me at that day: when he shall render eternal life to them who seek for glory, by patient continuance in well doing,” 2 Timothy 4:6, &c; Romans 2:7. The doctrine of proper merit, or merit of condignity, is unscriptural, irrational, and wild. The bare thought of it might make an innocent angel blush before his Creator, and should fill a reprieved sinner with the greatest detestation. And yet the doctrine of improper or evangelical worthiness is of so great importance, that if you take it away, you eclipse God’s distributive justice; you destroy the law of Christ, and all the conditional promises and threatenings in the Bible; you demolish all the doctrines of personal rewards and punishments, together with the judgment seat of Christ; and upon their ruins you raise an Antinomian Babel, whose dreadful foundation is finished, or necessary damnation for the millions of Calvin’s absolute reprobates; while its airy top is finished, or necessary salvation for all his absolute elect.

Hence it appears that the mistake of heated Calvin is exactly contrary to that of heated Pelagius. Pelagianism throws down the throne of God’s partial grace, and rigid Calvinism leaves no foundation for the throne of his impartial justice. The former of these modern gospels shackles God our Benefactor; and the latter pours infamy upon God our Judge. It fixes upon him the astonishing inconsistency of finally judging men according to their works, and yet of finally justifying them without any regard to their works; and by this mean it indirectly gives the lie to our Lord himself, who says, “In the day of judgment by thy words thou shalt be justified or condemned.”

Having thus described the impartial election and reprobation of justice, for which the Calvinists substitute a partial election of lawless grace in Christ, and a partial reprobation of free wrath in Adam; I support the doctrines of justice by the following appeals to Scripture and matter of fact: — Search the Scriptures, for they bear testimony to the equity of God, our rewarder and punisher. If he praises and rewards one man rather than another, this difference flows from the holiness of his nature, which makes “his judicial ways equal.” He “loves righteousness and hates iniquity;” and therefore he judicially “chooses the man that is godly,” while he judicially reprobates the man that is ungodly. If a veil, as thick as that which is upon the Jews, were not upon us when we read the Scriptures, would we not confess that God’s judicial reprobation impartially turns upon our not receiving the truth, and not living up to it, that is, upon our voluntary unbelief, and the unnecessitated disobedience which flows from it? Does not the experience of all ages confirm this assertion? When creating grace had gratuitously elected and called Adam to the enjoyment of a paradisiacal kingdom, did not impartial and remunerative justice put the stamp of Divine approbation upon his faith and obedience, by equitably continuing him in that kingdom till he sinned? And did not impartial justice seal him with the seal of reprobation, when he had sinned? Hear the reprobating decree: — “BECAUSE thou hast hear-kened to the voice of thy wife, &c, cursed is the ground for thy sake. THEREFORE the Lord God sent him forth from the garden,” Genesis 3:17, 23.

When redeeming grace had reprieved him, and his posterity, did Divine approbation and reprobation Calvinistically fasten upon their children? Did not the judicial difference, which God made between Cain and Abel, spring merely from the personal faith of Abel, and the excellence of his sacrifice? Hear Moses and St. Paul: — “The Lord had respect to Abel and his offering: but to Cain and his offering he had not respect. For by FAITH Abel offered a more excellent sacrifice than Cain.” Thus the Lord had respect to Cornelius and his charity. “His prayers and alms came up for a memorial before God:” but to the Pharisees, their prayers and alms “he had not respect:” for, by faith in his light, Cornelius offered more excellent prayers and alms than the Pharisees. “By which he,” like Abel, “obtained witness that he was righteous and accepted:” God, by the angel, “testifying” of his gifts. “And, by it, he, being dead, yet speaketh” to all Solifidians, who would banish the election and reprobation of justice out of the world. Righteous Seth succeeds righteous Abel: his children do the works of God, and are, of consequence, the elect of his justice, as well as of his grace. But as soon as these pious sons of God begin to draw back, and to follow the worldly ways of the daughters of men, they begin to rank among the reprobates of justice, and are involved in their dreadful punishment. Through the apostasy of these sons of God, “the earth was soon corrupt before God:” and yet “Noah was a just man, perfect in his generation, and Noah walked with God.” Therefore when a decree of judicial reprobation went forth against “the world of the ungodly,” a decree of judicial election was made in his favour: “and the Lord said to Noah, Come thou, and all thy house, into the ark; for thee I have seen righteous before me in this generation,” Genesis viii 1. Ham, the father of Canaan, shared in the election which saved Noah; but, by his flagrant violation of the fifth commandment, he soon brought upon himself a judicial reprobation. A degree of vindictive reprobation passes against Sodom, but the sacred historian, who informs us of it, sets his pen, like a bar of brass, against the Calvinian doctrine of free wrath: nay, God himself condescends to speak in our language on that awful occasion. “The Lord said, Because the cry of Sodom is great, I will go down now, and, [before I judicially reprobate it,] I will see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, and if not, I will know,” Genesis 18:20. So far is the Lord from judicially reprobating his creatures otherwise than according to works, that is, according to evangelical worthiness or unworthiness.

Agreeably to the same doctrine of justice, God showed favour to righteous Lot, rather than to the wicked inhabitants of Sodom. For “it came to pass, when God destroyed the cities of the plain, that God remembered Abraham,” and his cogent plea: (“Wilt thou [reprobate and] destroy the righteous with the wicked? That be far from thee, to do after this manner! Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?”) “And accordingly God sent Lot out of the midst of the overthrow.”

His wife shared in this election of justice, for the angels “laid hold upon her hand,” and extended to her the same favour which they did to her husband. But as soon as she looked back, and broke the commandment, “Look not behind thee,” she forfeited her election: reprobation laid hold on her, and she became a monument of God’s judicial impartiality.

Although God’s distinguishing grace shines in his calling Abraham to be a father of his peculiar people; yet the election of justice soon goes hand in hand with the election of grace. How striking are these anti-Solifidian passages! “I will perform the oath which I sware to Abraham thy father, &c, BECAUSE that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes and my laws,” Genesis 26:3, 5. Did not God judicially elect that faithful patriarch to the rewards of grace, when he said, “By myself have I sworn; BECAUSE thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thine only son, that in blessing I will bless thee, because thou hast obeyed my voice?” Genesis 22:16, 18. Do not these scriptures prove that if Abraham had not made his election of peculiar favour sure, by obeying God’s voice, he would have forfeited that election as well as Saul and Judas?

But to return to the election of justice: does not this election extend, m some degree, even to the children of the godly? When God had said to Abraham, according to the reprobation of inferior grace, “Cast out the bond woman and her son” Ishmael, did he not say also, according to the election of justice, “For Ishmael I have heard thee: behold, I have blessed him — because he is thy seed?” Genesis 17:20; 21:13. And is not the decree of this remunerative election openly written by David, where he says, “Blessed is the man that feareth the Lord: his seed shall be mighty upon earth: the generation of the upright shall be blessed?” A striking instance of the impartial reprobation of justice we have in the Amorites and Israelites, the two nations to which God, according to the election of special favour, successively gave the good land of Canaan. God’s justice would not absolutely reprobate the Amorites from it, till they had sinned out their day of national salvation, or squandered away all the time which he had allotted them for national repentance. “I brought thee out of Ur to give thee this land,” said God to Abraham, but thy posterity shall not immediately inherit it, “for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full,” Genesis 15:16. And God was exactly as equitable to the corrupted Israelites, as he had been to the corrupted Canaanites; for he would not drive the Jews out of the land of Canaan, till they were quite ripe for that national reprobation. Hence it is, that our Lord, by nationally sparing them, suffered them also to “fill up the measure of their iniquities,” Matthew 23:32.

To return: God says to Abraham, “I will judge the oppressive nation, whom the Israelites shall serve;” and accordingly he judicially reprobates Rahab and the dragon — Egypt and Pharaoh. But is Rahab struck with any plague, is the river turned into blood, before its waters have been mixed with the briny tears, and tinged with the innocent blood of the children of God’s people? Is Pharaoh drowned in the Red Sea, or hardened, before he has hardened his own heart, by setting his seal to the most cruel decrees, and by drowning the helpless posterity of Joseph, who had been the deliverer of his kingdom?

Proceed to the book of Numbers, and you see at large the awful account, which St. Jude and St. Paul sum up in these words: — “I will put you in remembrance that the Lord having saved the people out of the land of Egypt,” through obedient faith, “afterward destroyed them that believed not,” Jude 1:5. For “our fathers did all drink of the spiritual rock which followed them, and that rock was Christ.” But, because they did not all secure the gracious rewards of justice, notwithstanding their election of grace, “with many of them God was not well pleased, for they were overthrown in the wilderness” by the plague, by serpents, by the destroyer. “Now all these things happened to them,” the elect of distinguishing grace, “and they are written for our admonition,” lest we should not make our election of justice sure by the works of faith: “Wherefore let him that thinketh he sufficiently standeth,” by the election of partial grace,” take heed lest he fall” into sin, which draws after it the reprobation of impartial justice, 1 Corinthians 10:1, &c.

As a proof that, with respect to the election of justice, God is no respecter of persons, I produce Moses and Aaron, the great prophet and the high priest of the Jewish dispensation. They are both elected and called to inherit the land of Canaan; but not making this calling and election sure, they are both reprobated with respect to that inheritance. The adult Israelites share their reprobation. Of several hundred thousand, none but Caleb and Joshua make their election to that favour sure. Joshua and a new generation of Israelites obey; Jordan is parted: Jericho and her wicked inhabitants are destroyed. But Rahab and her friends, although they were Canaanites, are elected to partake of a peculiar deliverance, because “she had received the messengers” with hospitable kindness, James 2:25. On the other hand, Achan, one of those who were interested in the covenant of peculiarity, hides the wedge of gold, and the reprobation which Rahab’s hospitality had averted lights on him for his covetousness. She is blessed as a daughter of Abraham, and he is destroyed as a cursed Canaanite.

After Joshua’s death, God’s chosen people corrupted themselves. “And the angel of the Lord came and said, I made you to go up out of Egypt, and have brought you into the land, which I sware to your fathers: and I said, I will never break my covenant with you.” Here is the election of grace! “But ye have not obeyed my voice. Wherefore I also said, I will not drive out the inhabitants of the land before you. They forsook the Lord, and served Baal. And the anger of the Lord was hot against them: whithersoever they went out, the hand of the Lord was against them for evil, as the Lord had sworn unto them,” Judges 2:1, 15. Here is the reprobation of justice!

I have already mentioned how Phinehas’ zeal procured his election to the highest dignity in the Church militant, and how Eli’s remissness caused his reprobation from that dignity, and entailed degradation and wretchedness upon his family. As for Saul, “when he was little in his own sight, God gratuitously made him the head of the tribes of Israel.” But when he grew proud and disobedient, “God judicially rejected or reprobated him from being king.” In his days the Kenites were predestinated to be delivered from death, “because they showed kindness to all the children of Israel, when they came up out of Egypt:” while the Amalekites, their neighbours, were appointed for utter destruction, because “they laid wait for Israel in the way, when he came up from Egypt,” 1 Samuel 15:2, 6. Although the Lord called David, rather than Jonathan, to the crown of Israel, according to the election of grace; he nevertheless preferred David to his brother Eliab according to the election of justice! “Samuel,” says the historian, “looked on Eliab, and said, Surely the Lord’s anointed is before him: but the Lord said, Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his stature, because I have refused [reprobated] him: for the Lord seeth not as man seeth, for the Lord looketh on the heart; to this man will I look, who is poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembleth at my word,” 1 Samuel 16:6, 7, and Isaiah 66:2. And therefore when Saul was rejected, Samuel said to him, “God hath chosen a man after his own heart; a neighbour that is better than thou,” 1 Samuel 15:28. “Solomon loved the Lord, and said to him, Thou hast showed unto my father great mercy, according as he walked before thee in uprightness of heart, &c, and now, O Lord, I am but a little child, &c, give therefore thy servant an understanding heart. And the speech pleased the Lord: and God said to him, BECAUSE thou hast asked this thing, and not riches, &c, lo, I have given thee a wise and understanding heart, and I have also given thee [or elected thee to receive] that which thou hast not asked, both riches and honour,” 1 Kings 3:3, &c. Here we see young Solomon, by the power of assisted free will, trading so wisely with his one talent of initial wisdom, as to increase in wisdom above all his contemporaries. And yet when he was old, and had got ten talents of wisdom, he “hid them,” not indeed “in a napkin,” but in the lap of the strange, idolatrous women whom he had collected. A demonstration this, that man is endued with freedom of will, and that, as free grace did not necessitate Solomon to choose wisdom in his youth, neither did free wrath necessitate him to choose folly in his old age.

To return: Divine mercy gently holds out her sceptre to some men whom the Calvinists generally consider as absolute reprobates, while Divine justice awfully brandishes her sword against other men whom the Calvinists consider as absolute elect. Take a proof or two of the former part of this proposition.

Cain’s countenance falls; anger, the parent of murder, is conceived in his envious heart: but God addresses him with the gentleness of a father, and the mildness of a friend. The wretch, notwithstanding, imbrues his hand in his brother’s blood: but the goodness and patience of God endure yet daily, and secure the frighted murderer a long day of grace, by threatening a sevenfold punishment to the man that should slay him. Wicked Ahab repents in part, and God in part reverses the decree of his judicial reprobation. “The word of the Lord came to Elijah, saying, Seest thou how Ahab humbleth himself before me? I will not bring the evil in his days upon his house.” What is such a decree as this, but a judicial reprobation, tempered by a judicial election?

Take one or two proofs of the latter part of the proposition. David numbers the people to indulge his vanity, and God gives him the choice of the decrees of reprobation from his special favour. He sins in the matter of Uriah: a decree of death goes forth against his child, and of slaughter against his family. Hezekiah’s heart is lifted up: he looks at his wealth with self complacence, and a decree of poverty and captivity is made against his house.

What were these severe judgments, but the marks and effects of a judicial reprobation from the peculiar favour which God had for these pious kings? I have observed in the former Essay how partial grace favoured bloody Manasseh, in lengthening out his day of grace: but his election of grace did not hinder the election and reprobation of justice from having their free course. Take first an account of this reprobation: “And the Lord spake, &c, saying, Because Manasseh hath done these abominations, &c, therefore behold I am bringing such evil upon Jerusalem, that whosoever heareth it, both his ears shall tingle,” &c. Take next an account of Manasseh’s judicial election: “When he was in affliction, he besought the Lord his God, and humbled himself greatly before the God of his fathers, and prayed to him, and he heard his supplication, [reversed in part the decree of his judicial reprobation,] and brought him again to Jerusalem into his kingdom. His prayer also, and how God was entreated of him, &c, behold they are written, &c. Amon did evil as did Manasseh his father, but humbled not himself, as Manasseh had humbled himself,” 2 Chronicles 33:12-23.

The New Testament gives us the same views of God’s righteous reprobation. Judas, one of those whom “the Father had given to Christ,” John 17:12, — Judas, whom Christ himself had chosen or elected, John 6:70, — Judas, for whom he designed one of the twelve brightest thrones in glory, Matthew 19:28, — Judas “by transgression fell,” and was lost, or to speak according to the Hebrew idiom, became a “son of perdition,” Acts 1:25; John 17:12. “He loved cursing more than blessing,” and it judicially “entered like oil” into his bones. The decree of reprobation, which had prophetically gone forth, according to God’s foresight of his crime, now goes forth judicially. He is his own executioner, and another fills his vacated throne. Herod does not give glory to God. A decree of reprobation overtakes him, and worms eat him up. Regardless of the starving poor, the rich farmer fills his barns, and the rich glutton his belly, and a decree similar to that which sealed drunken Belshazzar’s doom is made against them. “The Jewish builders reject the corner stone,” and Christ says, “The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.” The master of the vineyard comes three years to seek fruit on his fig tree: but, finding none, he judicially reprobates the barren nuisance at last. And patience, which suspends a year the execution of the sentence, offers to seal herself the decree of reprobation, if the tree continues barren to the end of the year of reprieve. The wicked servant beats his fellow servants: the foolish virgins provide no supply of oil: the uncharitable will not give drink to the thirsty; and therefore they all fall a righteous sacrifice to Divine justice. The Gospel feast is provided, and “all things are now ready.” Multitudes of men are chosen and called to come to the feast, but their frivolous excuses engage the king to reprobate them. Hear the decree of their judicial reprobation, taken down by three sacred writers: — “I say unto you, that none of those men which were bidden [and refused to come in time] shall taste of my supper,” Luke 14:24. “The wedding is ready, but they which were bidden were not worthy,” Matthew 22:8. “I was grieved with that generation, and said, They do always err in their heart, &c. So I sware in my wrath, They shall not enter into my rest,” Hebrews 3:10. These decrees breathe nothing but just wrath kindled by an obstinate contempt of free grace. From these, and the like Scripture examples, it is evident, that a personal reprobation of justice is an awful and true doctrine; and that a personal, Calvinian reprobation of free wrath is as unscriptural as it is cruel and absurd.

Who can read the Scriptures without prejudice, and not see that the election and reprobation of partial favour yield to the election and reprobation of impartial justice? Although God chose and called Abraham out of distinguishing grace, did he not extend his mercy far beyond the little circle of that narrow calling and election? Did he set his love upon the father of the faithful and his posterity in such a manner that there was nothing but blind mercy for the favoured seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and nothing but free wrath, and Calvinian reprobation, for all who were reprobated with respect to that election? What shall we say of conscientious Abimelech, venerable Melchisedec, patient Job, and his pious friends, for whom “God was entreated?” What of Bethuel, Rebekah’s father? What of Asenath, an Egyptian woman, the wife of Joseph? What of prudent Jethro, and his daughter, the wife of Moses? What of the submissive Gibeonites, whose part God so eminently took, against the children of Israel and the house of Saul? What of loving Ruth, a daughter of Moab? What of the inquisitive queen of Sheba, and the Sidonian widow, who had charity enough to share her last morsel with Elijah, a hungry and desolate stranger? What of grateful Naaman, the Syrian, whom the prophet sent away in peace, when he entailed a curse, upon Gehazi, the lying Israelite? What of humbled Nebuchadnezzar, who was restored to his former greatness, in as wonderful a manner as patient Job, and penitent Manasseh? What of the wise men, who came from the east; and the treasurer of queen Candace, who came from the south, to worship in Judea? What of the importunate woman of Canaan, the zealous woman of Samaria, and the charitable Samaritan, who had compassion on the wounded man, the “poor creature,” whom the elect priest had reprobated, and whom the chosen Levite had passed by? Had God absolutely no respect to their repentance, faith, and charity? Was there never a “well done! thou good and faithful servant,” for any of them? Shall “a cup of cold water,” given in Christ’s name, have its reward; and shall not the oil and the wine of the non-elect Samaritan, given in the name of humanity, divinity, mercy, love, truth, and righteousness, (six of Christ’s sweetest names,) shall not, I say, that “wine and oil” have their reward? Hath God forgotten to be gracious? Hath he shut up his remunerative kindness in displeasure? Is there nothing but vindictive free wrath for all that are not interested in the peculiar “covenants of promise,” made with Abraham, Moses, and “the High Priest of our profession?” And nothing but flaming love for Nadab, Abihu, Korah, Dathan, Abiram, Demas, Hymeneus, Philetus, Alexander, and Diotrephes, who so eminently shared in the Jewish and Christian covenants of peculiarity?

If you say, with St. Paul, “All are not true Israelites who are of Israel,” you grant what we contend for: you allow that all are not the elect of God’s impartial justice, who are the elect of his partial favour; and that finally the scale will turn for the retribution of eternal life or eternal death, according to the election or reprobation of impartial justice, and not according to the election of partial grace, and the reprobation of free wrath. Who had ever a larger share in the election of partial grace than David? And yet, who ever maintained the election and reprobation of justice more strongly than he? Does he not still cry to all the world, from the walls of Jerusalem, “Verily, there is a reward for the righteous, [of whatever family, tribe, or religion he be:] doubtless there is a God that judgeth the earth?” Does not every body know, that to judge the earth is to justify, or condemn all its inhabitants, according to their works? And when God finally justifies or condemns, what does he do but declare that the godly are evangelically worthy of walking with him in white, and of following him to fountains of living water; and that the ungodly are every way worthy to depart with the devil, and follow him into the lake of fire?

I have observed that the election of partial grace extends to cities and nations; and so does the reprobation of impartial justice. Take one or two remarkable instances of it. According to the election of distinguishing favour; God “chose Jerusalem to put his name there.” But when Jerusalem showed herself absolutely unworthy of his judicial election, he reprobated her in righteousness. Hear the awful decree: — “I will make Jerusalem heaps, and a den of dragons. The houses of Jerusalem shall be defiled as Tophet,” Jeremiah 9:11; 19:13. The mild Jesus, after a last effort to “gather her children, as a hen gathers her brood,” with a flood of tears, pronounces the final sentence of her judicial reprobation: “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, — there shall not be left in thee one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.”

The gratuitous election, and the judicial reprobation of Jerusalem, are typical of the gratuitous election of the Israelites, and of their judicial reprobation. An account of their gratuitous election is set before the reader in the Essay on Scripture Calvinism. Here follows an account of their righteous reprobation: — “And it shall come to pass, if thou shalt hearken diligently to the voice of the Lord thy God, to observe all his commandments, that the Lord will set thee on high: all these blessings shall overtake thee; the Lord shall establish thee a holy people to himself, as he hath sworn to thee. But it shall come to pass, if thou wilt not hearken, &c, that all these curses shall overtake thee, &c. The Lord shall send upon thee cursing, until thou be destroyed, and until thou perish quickly, because of all the wickedness of thy doings, whereby thou hast forsaken me,” Deuteronomy 28:20. Again: “See, I have set before thee life and good, and death and evil, in that I command thee to love the Lord thy God, that thou mayest live. But if thine heart turn away, &c, I denounce unto you this day, that ye shall surely perish,” Deuteronomy 30:15, &c. Here are the decrees of God’s judicial election and reprobation. According to these decrees, David says to his elect son, “Solomon, my son, serve the God of thy father with a willing mind. If thou seek him, he will be found of thee: but if thou forsake him, he will cast thee off for ever. Take heed now, for the Lord hath chosen thee to build a house,” &c, 1 Chronicles 28:9. According to these decrees, “Because of all the provocations, &c, the Lord said, I will remove Judah also out of my sight, as I have removed Israel, and I will cast off this city Jerusalem, which I have chosen, and the house, of which I said, My name shall be there,” 2 Kings 23:26, 27. It is only to defend the election and reprobation of justice that St. Paul says, “God hath not cast away his [believing, obedient] people whom he foreknew,” that is, foreapproved as believing, and obedient: for, as there were seven thousand believing and obedient Jews, upon whom impartial justice smiled in the days of Jezebel, under the Jewish election of partial grace; “even so at this present time,” adds the apostle, “there is a remnant” of such Jews under the Christian election of partial grace. That is, a number of Jews make their Christian election sure, not by the works of the Mosaic law, but by obedient faith in Christ. And even these obedient believers, in conjunction with the convened Gentiles, the apostle keeps in their duty by threatening them with reprobation of impartial justice. “Because of unbelief,” says he, “they [the unbelieving Jews] were broken off, [that is, judicially reprobated,] and thou [Christian believer] standest by faith. Be not high minded, but fear. For if God spared not the natural branches; [so inflexible is his justice!] take heed lest he also spare not thee. Behold, therefore, the goodness and severity of God: on them that fell [the Jews elected through distinguishing grace] severity; but toward thee [a Christian, elected by distinguishing favour] goodness, if thou continue in his goodness, by continuing in the faith of Christ; otherwise thou shalt also be cut off,” notwithstanding thy Christian election of distinguishing grace. “And they,” notwithstanding their present reprobation of justice, which is occasioned by their unbelief, “if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in:” that is, if they make their Christian calling and election of grace sure by the obedience of faith, they shall be numbered among the rewardable elect, the elect that do not perish, the elect of justice as well as of grace, Romans 11:1-23.

The apostle frequently speaks the same anti-Calvinian language: take one or two more instances of it: “The end of those things is death,” that is, final reprobation from life. “But, &c, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end [of this fruit is a judicial election to] everlasting life: for the wages of sin is death,” that is, a judicial reprobation from life, “but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ:” an invaluable gift, which the Redeemer has procured, and which shall be judicially bestowed upon obedient, persevering believers, as the king’s purses and plates, which are the mere gifts of his majesty, are equitably bestowed upon them that so run as to obtain the prize. And, therefore, “so run,” says the apostle, “that ye may obtain an incorruptible crown. Be followers of me: I so run, &c, lest I myself should be cast away,” according to the reprobation of justice, 1 Corinthians 9:24, &c.

The election and reprobation of partial grace depend entirely upon the wisdom and sovereignty of God. The great “Potter hath power over the clay, to make of the same lump vessels to honour, or to comparative dishonour,” just as he pleases. As a supreme Benefactor, he had a right to raise the Jews above all nations, by calling them at the third hour into his enclosed vineyard. He could, without injustice, call the Corinthians at the sixth hour, and the English at the ninth hour. And if he call the Hottentots at the eleventh hour, they shall be entitled to the blessings of the richest election of grace, which are represented by the penny of the parable, as much as if they had been called as early as Abraham was; and had borne the burden and heat of the day as long as St. Paul and Cranmer did. I repeat it, with respect to the privileges of the covenants of promise made with the Jews and the Christians, which privileges our Lord sometimes calls his pence, and sometimes his talents; they are ours as soon as we are called, if we do but answer the call by going into the Lord’s vineyard or field. This is what Christ condescends to call our hire for going into his Church militant — our hire bestowed according to the election of prevenient grace. But our eternal reward shall be given according to a very different rule, namely, according to the election of impartial justice. To secure this reward, we must not only go into the Lord’s field, when we are called; but we must sow as we are directed. “Be not deceived,” says the apostle when he stands up for the doctrines of justice; as God does not necessitate man by Calvinian decrees of finished reprobation, and then mock him by Arminian offers of salvation: so he “is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. For he that soweth to his flesh, shall of the flesh [naturally and judicially] reap corruption and destruction: [the word has this double meaning in the original.] But he that soweth to the Spirit, shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting,” both by natural and judicial consequence. “For the moral earth, which bringeth forth herbs meet for them by whom it is dressed, receiveth blessing from God:” (“Come, ye blessed, inherit the kingdom, &c, for I was hungry, and ye gave me meat.”) “But that which beareth thorns and briers is rejected [reprobated] and is nigh unto cursing, whose end is to be burned,” according to the fearful sentence, “Depart, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, for I was hungry and ye gave me no meat,” &c, Galatians 6:7; Hebrews 6:7; Matthew 25:34, &c.

Well then might our Lord and St. Paul charge us to escape the reprobation, and secure the election of justice. How awful and anti-Calvinian are their directions! “Watch and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these terrible things, and to stand rewardable before the Son of man,” Luke 21:36. “Whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord: knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance,” Colossians 3:24.

From these and a multitude of such scriptures it appears, that when the Calvinists overlook the impartial election and reprobation of distributive justice, they betray as much prejudice as the rigid Arminians do, when they deny the partial election and reprobation of distinguishing grace. There is, however, some difference between the extensiveness of their errors. If rigid Arminianism rejects the partial election and reprobation of distinguishing grace, it strenuously maintains the righteous election and reprobation of impartial justice; and, by this means, it preserves one half of the doctrines of the Bible in all their purity, namely, the doctrines of justice. But rigid, downright Calvinism equally spoils the doctrines of grace and the doctrines of justice: for it turns the holy doctrines of special grace into Solifidian doctrines of lawless grace: and, with respect to the doctrines of impartial justice, it totally demolishes them by allowing but of one eternal, absolute, partial, and personal election, which necessarily binds Christ’s righteousness, and finished salvation, upon some men; and of one eternal, absolute, partial, and personal reprobation, which necessarily fastens Adam’s unrighteousness, with finished damnation, upon all the rest of mankind. Now, according to these doctrines of partial grace and free wrath, it is evident that justice can no more be concerned in justifying or condemning, rewarding or punishing men under such circumstances, than you could be equitably concerned in crowning some men for swimming, and in burning others for sinking; supposing you had first bound the elected swimmers fast to an immense piece of cork, and tied a huge mill stone about the neck of the sinking reprobates. Hence it appears, that, although a Bible Christian may hold Pelagius’ election and reprobation of justice, he can neither hold Calvin’s one election of lawless grace, nor his one reprobation of free wrath.

But, while I bear my plain testimony against rigid Calvinism, I beg the reader to make a difference between that system and the good men who have embraced it. With joy I acknowledge that many Calvinist ministers have done much good in their generation. But whatever good they have done, was not done by their errors, but by the Gospel truths which they inconsistently mixed with their errors, and by God’s overruling their mistakes. The doctrines of distributive justice belong no more to rigid Calvinism, than to Nero’s private system of policy: but as good magistrates, even under Nero’s authority, steadily punished vice, and rewarded virtue; so good men, who have the misfortune to be involved in rigid Calvinism, inconsistently deter men from sin by preaching the terrors of a sin-revenging God, and by pointing out the rewards of grace and glory, which await the faithful. Add to this, that by still holding out the law of God to the unawakened, though that kind of preaching is absurd upon their system, yet they do good, because, so far, they preach the doctrines of justice. And by preaching a “rule of life” to believers, they now and then meet with professors ingenuous enough to follow that rule. For, as there are even in Billingsgate persons cleanly enough to wash their hands, although their neighbours should constantly assure them that they can never get one speck of dirt off; that the king must do it all away himself in the day of his power; that, in the meantime, his majesty sees no dirt upon their hands, because he looks at them only through the hands of the prince of Wales, which are as white as snow, and the cleanness of which his majesty is pleased to impute to their dirty hands; and beside, that dirt will work for their good; will display the strength of their constitution; will set off, by and by, the cleansing virtue of soap and water; and will make dirty people sing louder at court, when the king’s irresistible power, and their own deadly sweats, shall have cleansed their hands: as there are cleanly persons, I say, who would wash their hands notwithstanding such dirty hints as these; so there are some sincere souls among every denomination of Christians, who hate sin, and depart from it, notwithstanding all that some mistaken theologists may say, to make them continue in sin, in order that the graces of humility and of faith in the atoning blood, may be abundantly exercised.

Again: the rigid Arminians are greatly deficient in exalting God’s partial grace, and the rich election which flows to Christian believers from this grace. Now when the Calvinists preach to Christians a gratuitous election of distinguishing grace, though they do not preach it aright, yet they say many things which border upon the truth; and by which God sometimes raises the gratitude and comforts of some of his people; overruling Calvin’s mistakes to their consolation, as he overruled to our comfort the high priest’s dreadful sentence: “Ye know nothing at all, nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people.” Never did a prophet preach the atonement more clearly than Caiaphas does in these words. Just so do pious Calvinists preach the election of grace, and in the same manner is their preaching overruled to the comfort of some. But alas! if this confused method of preaching election be indirectly helpful to a few, is it not directly pernicious to multitudes, whom it tempts to rise to the presumption of “Mr. Fulsome,” or to sink to the despair of Francis Spira? Beside, would not doubting Christians be sufficiently cheered by the Scriptural doctrine of our election, as it is held forth in the Essay on Scripture Calvinism? Are those liquors best, which are made strong and heady by intoxicating and poisonous ingredients? Cannot the doctrine of our gratuitous election in Christ be comfortable, unless it be adulterated with Antinomianism, fatalism, Manicheism, and a reprobation, which necessarily drags most of our friends and neighbours into the bottomless pit? And might we not so preach our judicial election by Christ, and so point out the greatness of the helps, which the Gospel affords us to make our election sure, as to excite the careless to diligence without driving them upon the fatal rocks, with which the Solifidian Babel is surrounded? From the preceding remarks it follows, that the error of rigid Calvinists centres in the denial of that evangelical liberty, whereby all men, under various dispensations of grace, may, without necessity, choose life in the day of their initial salvation. And the error of rigid Arminians consists in not paying a cheerful homage to redeeming grace, for all the liberty and power which we have to choose life, and to work righteousness since the fall. Did the followers of Calvin see the necessary connection there is between the freedom of our will, and the distributive justice of God our Judge, they would instantly renounce the errors of Calvinian necessity, and rigid bound will. And did the rigid followers of Arminius discover the inseparable union there is, since the fall, between our free agency to good, and the free redeeming grace of God our Saviour, they would readily give up the errors of Pharisaical self sufficiency and rigid free will. To avoid equally these two extremes, we need only follow the Scripture doctrine of free will restored and assisted by free grace. According to this doctrine, in order to repent, believe, or obey, we stand in need of a talent of power “to will and to do.” God, of his good pleasure, gives us this talent for Christ’s sake; and our liberty consists in not being necessitated to make a good or bad use of this talent, to the end of our life. But we must remember that, as this precious talent comes entirely from redeeming grace, so the right use of it is first of redeeming grace, and next of our own unnecessitated, though assisted free will; whereas the wrong use of it is of our own choice only; an unnecessitated choice, which constitutes us legally punishable, as our right, unnecessitated choice of offered life (through God’s gracious appointment) constitutes us evangelically rewardable. Hence it follows that our accepted time, or day of salvation begun, has but one cause, namely, the mercy of God in Christ: whereas our continued and eternal salvation has two causes. The first of which is a primary and proper cause, namely, “the mercy of God in Christ;” the second is a secondary or improper cause, or, if you please, a condition, namely, “the works of faith.” Nor do some Calvinists scruple, any more than we, to call these works a cause, improperly speaking. Only, like physicians, who write their prescriptions in Latin, to keep their ignorant patients in the dark, they call it Causa sine qua non; that is, in plain English, a cause, which, if it be absent, absolutely hinders an effect from taking place. Thus a mother is not the primary cause of her child’s conception, but causa sine qua non; that is, such a cause as, if it had been wanting, would have absolutely prevented his being conceived.

If the Calvinists will speak the truth in Latin, I will speak it in plain English. And therefore, standing up still as a witness of the marriage between prevenient free grace, and obedient free will; (an evangelical marriage this, which I have proved in the Scripture Scales;) I assert, upon the arguments contained in these two Essays, that our eternal salvation depends, first, on God’s free grace, and secondly, on our practical submission to the doctrines of grace and justice; or, if you please, on our making our election of grace and justice sure by faith and its works.

To be a little more explicit: our day of salvation begun is merely of free grace, and prevents all faith and works; since all saving faith, and all good works, flow from a beginning of free salvation. But this is not the case with our continued and eternal salvation: for this salvation depends upon the concurrence of two causes; the first of which is prevenient and assisting free grace, which I beg leave to call the father cause; and the second is submissive and obedient free will, which I take the liberty to call the mother cause. And I dare say that the Pelagians will as soon find on earth an adult man who came into the world without a father; and that the Calvinists will as soon find one who was born without a mother, as they will find an adult person in heaven, who came there without the concurrence of free grace and free will, which I beg leave to call the paternal and maternal causes of our eternal salvation. And therefore, while the rigid Arminians and the rigid Calvinists make two partial, solitary, barren gospels, by parting mercy and justice, free grace and free will, let Bible Christians stand up, in theory and practice, for the one entire Gospel of Christ. Let them marry preventing and assisting free grace with prevented and assisted free will; so shall they consistently hold the two Gospel axioms, and evangelically maintain the doctrines of grace and justice, which are all suspended on the partial election and reprobation of distinguishing grace, and on the impartial election and reprobation of remunerative justice.

Till we do this, we shall spoil the Gospel, by confounding the dispensations of Divine grace; we shall grieve those whom God has not grieved, and comfort those whom God would not have comforted; we shall involve the truth in clouds of darkness; and availing ourselves of that darkness, we shall separate what God has joined, and join what he has separated; causing the most unnatural divisions and monstrous mixtures, and doing in the doctrinal world what the fallen Corinthian did in the moral, when he tore his mother from his father’s bosom, and made her his own incestuous wife. In a word, we shall tear the impartial election of justice from the partial election of grace; and according to our Pelagian or Augustinian taste, we shall espouse the one, and fight against the other. If we embrace only the election of impartial justice, we shall propagate proud, dull, and uncomfortable Pelagianism. And if we embrace only the election of partial grace, we shall propagate wanton Antinomianism, and wanton cruelty, or absolute election to, and absolute reprobation from eternal life. We shall generate the conceits of finished salvation and finished damnation, which are the upper and lower parts of the doctrinal syren, whom Dr. Crisp mistook for the Gospel; the head and the tail of the evangelical chimera, which Calvin supposed to have sprung from “the Lion of the tribe of Judah.” But, if we equally receive the election of grace and that of justice, we shall have the whole truth, as it is in Jesus — the chaste woman, who stands “in heaven clothed with the sun, and having the moon [Pelagian changes and Calvinian innovations] under her feet.” Nor will candid Christians be offended at her having two breasts, to give her children “the sincere milk of the word;” and two arms, to defend herself against Pelagianism and Calvinism, the obstinate errors which attack her on the right hand and on the left. She has put forth her two arms in these two Essays; and, if her adversaries do not resist her, as the Jews did Stephen by stopping their ears, it is to be hoped that some of them will impartially renounce the errors of heated Pelagius and heated Augustine, and will honour Christ both as their Saviour and their Judge, by equally embracing the doctrines of grace and the doctrines of justice.