IT has been observed, that though the exact phrases have not been employed by inspired writers, yet the tenor of their doctrine, and the mode of their address, most permanently justify the use of such phraseology. I am, however, of a contrary opinion, and cannot help thinking, that a patient and impartial investigation, of their doctrine and mode of address, will be attended with evidence sufficient to establish my opinion. But should the issue be different to my expectations, and end in the final establishment of the sentiment I am examining, as truth is more dear to me than a thousand prejudices and systems, I shall think myself amply remunerated, though I suffer the overthrow and loss of my whole scheme of religious thinking. Truth is my object, and truth I will embrace wherever I find it, though it should be among never so much rubbish. A diamond is a diamond, though it may be concealed in a dunghill.

The first passage I shall examine is Gen. iv. 7. "If thou doest well, shult not thou be accepted ? and if thou doest not well sin lieth at thy door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him." These words are frequently quoted in support of the doctrine under notice, and are thought to possess considerable evidence in its favour. The arguments generally drawn from it are: Cain had an opportunity of being saved-salvation was placed within his reach and the language fairly implies the notion of an offer of grace. I question the correctness of these consequences, for the following reasons.

1. It is not clear that Cain's salvation is at all intended. The nature of the case will not admit of any positive proof; and no person can be sure that to make such an assertion would not imply a mistake. The evidence, therefore, either for or against, can only be accidental or presumptive.

2. Since all the evidence which can be accumulated is only presumptive, and we can only determine its real signification by a balance of argument, I am inclined to think there will be found a preponderance of conjectural evidence in disfavour of such an interpretation.

The evidence I collect shall be drawn,

l. From the meaning of the word rendered ACCEPTANCE or ACCEPTED.

I submit that the word properly signifies excellency, dignity, elevation. In support of this idea, I have the pleasure of quoting the testimony of some of the most learned men.

Dr. Gill, whose profound erudition and deep researches, are too notorious to be questioned, observes, 'there is but one word in the original text which our translators render shall not thou be accepted, and that word signifies, EXCELLENCY or ELEVATION.' In proof whereof, the Doctor refers to Psalm Lxii. 4. "'they only consult to cast him down from his excellency." The same word that our translators have rendered accepted in the passage under consideration. In Psalm lxii. 4. it signifies the excellency of dignity and government; and is a parallel passage with Gen. xlix. 3. " Reuben, thou art my first-born, my might, and the beginning of my strength, the excellency of dignity, and the excellency of power." On this passage, a learned commentator thus paraphrases,  "As my firstborn, thou hast the right of precedency before all thy brethren, in point of dignity and power, or privileges, the double portion, the priesthood or dominion over thy brethren were thine."

The Rev. Dr. Henry Ainsnworth, in his Annotations, ' is there no forgiveness ?' or, "shalt thou not receive ?' or, 'shalt thou not have the excellency?' or, 'a lifting up?'

Mr. Poole, whose ingenious criticisms have benefited the religious public for a great length of time, points out the same thing in his marginal reference; and displays much useful learning, and sensible criticisms on the passage. Next to him is

Mr. Brown, a Scotch divine, and eminent for his great learning and laborious study, marks the same thought in his Self-interpreting Bible. In what is not improperly termed the Comprehensive Bible, the same thing is noted by the editor.

From these testimonies, to which many more might be united, it is a clear case that the word, has at least the signification of excellency, dignity, elevation ; as well as accepted, pardoned, &c. And if the nature of the case, and the circumstances by which it is accompanied, best agree with such a signification, such a signification, I think, ought to be preferred. The reader will remark, that all these authors, with the exception of Dr. Gill, were strenuous for the sentiment of offered grace, which makes their testimony of double importance ; for we may be sure they would not without absolute necessity allow a sense, which when admitted, destroy all the nerves of their argument taken from this place in favour of conditional mercy.

2. Evidence of a strong presumptive cast, is to be gathered from the different constructions of the pas.. sage. I shall here present the reader with some different forms in which the passage is construed. In Thompson's translation, 1593, the words are thus construed, ' if thou doest well shalt thou riot be accepted, and if thou doest not well sin lieth at thy door : also unto thee his desire shall he subject, and thou shalt rule over him. The note is, the dignity of the first-born was given to Cain over Abel.' - Poole, ' if thou doest well shall not thou have the excellency? And, subject to thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.' The note on the phrase  shalt not thou be accepted,' is, shalt thou not be pardoned, received into favour.' Or, ' exalted, and either preserved in, or restored unto, those rights of the first-born, which thou art conscious to thyself thou hast forfeited.' Or, ' elevated, in thy looks, ie,. would not or should not thy countenance have been upright and pleasant, which now is sad and dejected.'

Mr. Brown., I If thou doest well shalt thou not have the excellency ? And if thou doest not well punishment lieth at the door. And subject to thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.' Dr. Gill, and most critics, construe the passage in much the same manner. To this may be added, that most of the concordances that notice any marginal readings refer to Gen. iv. 7. rendering the words "shalt not thou have the excellency ?' The evidence arising from such a variety and similarity of constructions, are manifestly in opposition to the inference drawn from the passage by the patrons of offered grace.

3. I argue against the consequence in favour of general invitations and tendered mercy, from the circumstances by which the fact is involved.

The evidence collected from this quarter, will be to show, that Cain was not distressed concerning his soul, but was apprehensive of being subjected to Abel who was younger than himself. There were several things which gave Cain the ascendancy over his brother Abel, such as his age, to which much more attention and respect seemed to be paid in the early ages of mankind, than at the present day; particularly among Europeans. His birth-he was the first-born, by which he seemed entitled to the right of primogeniture, which involved privileges of very extensive latitude. His name-which signifies possession. And hence, Eve said, I have gotten, or have in my possession, a man, from, or by, or with the Lord. Or, I have gotten a man, the Lord. Meaning, no doubt, the promised Messiah. Abel's or Hebel's name, signified vanity, or breath, or vapour, or emptiness. This may suggest another circumstance, that Cain being the first child that was ever born into the world, he probably possessed a larger share of paternal regard than what Abel did. His office or employment,-this was of a superior nature; Abel was a shepherd, which was esteemed a much less honorable calling than that of an agriculturist ; and Cain being the eldest he naturally chose the most honorable calling. These are circumstances which would easily operate on the mind of an evil and ambitious person like Cain, and not un-frequently tempt him to look on his brother as vastly inferior to himself.

Another circumstance though only conjectural, is, that if Adam and Eve offered sacrifices with the same interest and faith in the atonement as Abel, they most probably felt, more favourably inclined towards Abel, than towards his brother Cain. Notwithstanding their natural attachment to Cain as the first-born, and other circumstances which might prejudice them in his favour, the religious conduct of Abel, and the known fact that God respected the person and offering of Abel, while he clearly disapproved of Cain and his offering, would be sufficient to give Abel the preference, in the esteem of his parents. And Cain might be quite sensible of this point, and even suspicious of being subject to the control of his brother in the same manner, and with more rigour than his brother had been to him.

Another circumstance which is mentioned is, Cain is said to be very wroth, and his countenance fell. I presume the anger of Cain did not arise simply from Abel's offering being accepted, or respected, nor from his own being rejected; but from a consideration of the fact as operating upon the minds of other people, and the light in which he should afterwards be regarded by his numerous relations both near and distant; together with his entire subjection to his younger brother. It seemed to be these things that so amazingly distressed him, that he could not conceal his irritation and enmity of mind; for he was very wroth and his countenance fell; i. e. he looked dejected, morose, savage, sullen, sour, and malicious. The thought of his younger brother, who was under his control, and in almost every thing his inferior, together with a dread of seeing his brother holding the reins of family government, and invested with those privileges which he then possessed, exercised his mind so forcibly as to mock the act of concealment. Agreeable to these conjectures, God expostulated with him, and said, Why art thou wroth ? and why is thy countenance fallen? If thou doest well shall not thou have the excellency ? Still preserve the rights and privileges which you now possess? And if thou doest not well, sin, or punishment, lieth at the door. If you accomplish your wicked purpose of killing your brother, sin with all its horrors will enter into your conscience, and make dreadful work therein, as we find it did; for he said, "my punishment is greater than I can bear :" the stings of conscience seem intolerable. Beside, said God, there is no need to kill your brother, he will still be your inferior, his desires shall still be subject to thee,- he shall be under thy control, and thou shalt rule over him as formerly. The scope of the expostulation is to point out the unreasonableness and folly of Cain's wroth and malicious purposes; by assuring him that the acceptance of Abel's person and sacrifice, was entirely a sovereign and spiritual favour; that it would never invade the boundaries of natural and relative rights; make no transfer of civil interest, destroy no just claim, nor divest him of any prerogative which he then possessed; but that, he should still have the excellency, the precedency, the double portion, and the right of primogeniture, rule and government. And to remove every thing of a suspicious nature, he suggested that his brother Abel had no such thoughts as he supposed, that he understood the favour shown, to have no influence on worldly things, or at least not to enrich him with any new investments of an earthly nature, but that he was as humble, as affectionate, and as well disposed toward his brother as ever: and so far from wishing to exercise any authority over him, or make any alteration in family affairs, but that he ever wished to be under him ; his desire shall be subject to thee, or to thee is subject his desire; lie is willing and ready to be your servant to do your pleasure. This I think to be a fair interpretation of the phrase; but should not these observations be sufficient, I argue from cases that are clear to those which are obscure.

1. We are accepted in the Beloved. Nothing can make this truth more plain. Now we are sure Cain was never in Christ, for we are clearly informed he was of that wicked one, the devil.

2. God the Father is said to "MAKE us accepted in the Beloved."

Now if Cain's acceptance was intended in the same sense that a sinner is accepted by God, to enjoy eternal life, it follows, either that God has two methods of justifying and accepting sinners, or else such acceptance cannot be intended : but if such an acceptance is not meant, it seems impossible to draw an inference from the passage in support of offered grace. But as we may safely presume, no sensible person will ever contend for the incongruous notion of two contrary rules by which a sinner is eternally accepted; and seeing the rule of acceptance in this place entirely opposes that distinctly, and unambiguously laid down by Paul, we may safely conclude that a spiritual acceptance is not intended.

3. As the agent in accomplishing our acceptance is God, it entirely opposes the agent in the words under notice, who is a mortal, sinful man, and not the immortal, and impeccable Jehovah. If thou (i. e. Cain) doest well, &c.

I would ask, by what law his doing was to be regulated? Not the law of man; that was never intended to govern all the powers of the mind. Not the law of sacrifice, for that directed to the Beloved through whose sacrifice we are accepted. Not the law of works, or the moral law in covenant form, for that Cain had violated; and besides, by the works of the law no flesh living can be justified, and if not justified, of course not accepted. Not a remedial law, such as Mr. Baxter and others would persuade us the gospel is, because there is no such thing, and if there was, it would be of no use.

Lastly, if the word acceptance, must be retained, it must denote the acceptance of his offering, and not his person. If he acted uprightly and sincere, his sacrifices should be accepted as they formerly had ; but if not, he must take the sin and punishment to himself. The reader is now in possession of evidence, collected from the meaning of the word rendered accepted ; the different forms in which the passage is construed; the circumstances which accompany the fact, and which result from a comparison of the passage in its present form; with others of a positive, decisive, and unequivocal nature. If, after summing up the evidence, and care fully comparing one part with another, and all the parts with the whole, he can still see an offer of grace made to Cain, I can only say, he possesses a strength of vision to which I can lay no claim.

The following is copied from Dr. Gill's Commentary on John iii. 12.-' The Jews relate the occasion of it (death, after this manner:-Cain said to Abel his brother, come, and let us go out into the open field and when they were both out in the open field, Cain said to Abel his brother, there is no judgment, nor judge, nor another world : neither will a good reward he given to the righteous, nor vengeance be taken on the wicked : neither was the world created in mercy, nor is it governed in mercy; or why is thy offering kindly accepted, and mine is not kindly accepted ? Abel answered Cain, and said to Cain, there is judgment, and there is a judge, and there is another world and there are gifts of a good reward to the righteous, and vengeance will be taken on the wicked : and the world was created in mercy, and in mercy it is governed, for according to they fruit of good works it is governed: because that my works are better than thine, my offering is kindly accepted, and thine is not kindly accepted. And they both strove together in the field, and Cain rose up against his brother, and slew him.' This quotation by the Doctor is from the Targum of Hieros. and Jon. in Gen. iv. 8.

The same learned author further observes, ' in the Hebrew text in Gen. iv. 8. there is an extraordinary large pause, as if a discourse of this kind, which passed between the two brothers, was to be inserted. Philo, the Jew, says, that in the contention or dispute between Cain and Abel, Abel attributed all things to God, and Cain ascribed every thing to himself: so that the controversy was about grace and works as now: and as then Cain hated his brother upon this account, so now carnal men hate and persecute the saints, because they will not allow their works to be the cause of justification and salvation.' And from hence also it may be observed, that a work may be, as to the matter of good; and yet, as to its circumstances, and the end and view of it, evil. To which may be added, a grammarian's figure of speech, that not nouns, but adverbs constitute well-doing. It is not enough that good works are done, they must be well done. The manner as well as the matter enter into the character of obedience. And, perhaps, one of the greatest difficulties in the world, for a good man, is, to do good things well. I have only to add in this place, that Jehovah only reasoned with Cain upon his own principles, in the same method as a Calvinist may reason with a Wesleyan, a Baxterian, a Fullerian, and other terminations of like sound, but different significations.

Gen. vi. 3. " My spirit shall not always strive with man."

These words are thought by some to include the idea of offered grace; and to suggest, with great force of consequence, a salvable state, in which it is supposed the antediluvians lived. It is thought, that an offer of grace and salvation, was not only made by Noah, but that the Holy Ghost was engaged in reasoning with them, and persuading them to accept of the proffered grace.

I cannot feel satisfied with this general interpretation for the following reasons :

1. The consequences resulting from such a view of the passage. It seems a clear case with me, that there is always a natural and necessary likeness between principles and consequences, as much as there is between a spring and its streams, a root and its branches. If the spring is salt, it seems an error to calculate upon the streams being fresh; and if the root is holy, we may, correctly enough, expect to find the same quality in the branches. If principles are rigidly correct, consequences cannot be erroneous : and, if consequences are decidedly opposed to plain and practical ideas, the principles from which they are drawn must be manifestly wrong.

According to the interpretation into which we are enquiring, the following may be considered as an abridged statement of the case. God ardently desired the salvation of the antediluvian world, which to accomplish, he makes an offer of grace to them all; and more effectually to complete his desires and secure their happiness, he follows up the same by the exertions of his Holy Spirit. We might ask, what more could he have done, or what more could be done ? But man's will opposed to his Maker's wishes, rejects the offers of grace, and the strivings of the Spirit; he opposes, and successfully opposes too, his resistance ; and though but a feeble worm, he overcomes Omnipotence, frustrates divine purposes, and ends the strife by conquering everlasting strength. That Jehovah, defeated in the conflict, stung with disappointment, and covered with disgrace, determined to wreak his vengeance on them, and therefore covered them with a flood of cold perishing water.

Persons anxious to defend such awful sentiments, are at liberty, for me, to claim and enjoy all the honour and glory connected with a triumphant defense.

Should it be said, Jehovah could have saved them by his power, but he treated them as reasonable, rational, and intelligent beings ; we have only to look over their history, to be convinced of their rationality and intelligence ; and a very brief survey of such an idea seems sufficient to discover the rationality and intelligence of the person in whose mind it originated. If the ambassadors for the triple alliance should fail in their efforts to persuade the sublime Porte into a compliance with the terms of the three united powers, and should order their maritime forces to return home without effecting, or even en-deavouring to effect, the liberation of Greece, would the nation be satisfied with their conduct, though they should strongly urge the rationality, and intelligence of the Turkish nation. Were they to say, the people are human beings, they are reasonable, and some of them even intelligent persons, though their stubbornness and peculiar notions will not allow them to agree to the proposals so strongly urged upon their notice, by the combined powers of Britain, France, and Russia; would such a defense be deemed a justification of their conduct? I think not.

And equally deficient and ludicrous, is, in my view of things, the reasoning and defense which many people adopt and set up, in order to prove the propriety of the conduct of Jehovah in desisting from his efforts to persuade men into a compliance with his terms, as they are called, because they are reasonable creatures ! ! As if their intelligence and reason was a barrier, an indestructible barrier, to their salvation! ! This has always appeared to me a very peculiar mode of reasoning, and does still.

2. The equivocal reading of the passage, forms another objection with me.

It will be said, half the texts in the bible are not free from this objection, and that to reject doctrines because they are not founded on scriptures incapable of a different reading, is, for substance, to reject all truth and doctrine whatever. But, let it be observed, some passages are much more doubtful as to the correctness of their translations, than what others are. A passage, may be construed, like a sentence, into twenty different forms, and yet the same ideas be strictly retained. When this is the case, a change in the form of expression, is, with me, a matter of indifference; but when different instructions involve contrary ideas, we ought at least to proceed with great caution in fixing the precise meaning of such passages. And for any person to build a scheme of doctrine on passages confessedly obscure, is certainly to proclaim his want of judgment and revelation; especially if such passages admit of constructions at once subversive and destructive to his favourite ideas. No judicious man would choose to raise a fortification on a base, subject to the superior prowess of his enemies, and liable to be crumbled to pieces the moment it is assailed. Yet such appears to me the case, with many persons in a theological point of view; whenever you institute au enquiry in order to investigate the legitimacy of their creed, their parchments are rolled together like a scroll, and the moment you touch their foundation, that moment their fabric falls.

Two things may be briefly noticed, viz. what we are to understand by the Spirit, and its striving.

As to the first, interpreters, both ancient and modern, Jewish and Christian, are much divided. Some of the Jewish rabibes think the soul of man is intended. This is the opinion of the famous Aben Ezra; and it is certain, the soul is called the spirit of God-" The spirit of God is in my nostrils." The word rendered strive, is said to signify a sheath; and is thought to suggest, that what a sheath is to a sword, that the body is to the soul. And then the sense is, ' the soul of man shall not always be in-closed in the body, like a sword in its sheath ; I will draw, separate, or divide the soul from the body, as a sword is drawn from its sheath; yet, nevertheless, though I will destroy the thread of human existence, it shall be protracted to the term of one hundred and twenty years.'

Whatever objections maybe made to this exposition, thus much is certain, that the comparison is by no means novel. Authors both profane and sacred, have adopted the very same similitude; and Dan. vii. 15. seems to agree with the sense just given. " I, Daniel, was grieved (cut) in my spirit in the midst of my body," (sheath), so Montanus, Munster, Vatablus, Gill, Poole, Brown, Bagster, &c.

2. Some understand the spirit mentioned as referring to himself, and then the words must be considered in the form of a divine soliloquy.

Mr. Poole, in his commentary hints at this sense, and refers to the case of Ephraim and Israel, Hosea xi. 8, 9. And the meaning is, 'My spirit which is within me, shall not be, as it were, always in a tumult and contention respecting man, whether I shall or shall not destroy him ; I will decide the strife and be at a point ; I will positively destroy him after I have given him the space of one hundred and twenty years to repent of his wickedness.' Dr. Gill observes, this sense much obtains among the learned. See his ' Cause of God and Truth,' vol. 1, sect. 2.

3. Can any sound reason be shown, why the words should not by a metonymy signify the gifts and graces of the Holy Ghost, as in 2 Tim. i. 7.? " For God hath not given us the spirit of fear, but of power, of love, and of a sound mind." And then the sense is, that Noah, abundantly qualified by the Holy Ghost, stood in the circle of blasphemy, and with the greatest and most manly intrepidity insisted on the necessity of moral and evangelical righteousness. And, like Paul, when before an adulterous and intemperate Felix, " he reasoned of righteousness, temperance, and of judgment to come." Compare Neh. ix. 30. with Acts xxiv. 25. and vii. 51, 52.

4. Or, by the spirit may be intended the nature, the tone, and the object of Noah's ministry. " The testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy," Rev. xix. 10. And seems to have been the very spirit and soul of Noah's ministry, which was ridiculed and rejected by the antediluvians, until wrath came upon them to the uttermost.

5. If the Holy Ghost is intended, it must be in the ministry of Noah, as he was in the ministry of the prophets, Neh. ix. 30. " Yet many years didst thou forbear them, and testified against them by thy spirit in the prophets; yet would they not give ear : therefore gayest thou them into the hands of the people of the lands." " Ye stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost ; as your fathers did, so do ye. Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One." Acts vii. 51, 52. Here we find the Holy Ghost is said to be resisted in the gospel ministry; and as this appears to have been the uniform practice of the Jews, why should the rule for such an interpretation of the words in Gen. vi. 3. be set aside?

As to the striving of the Spirit, we may observe, the Hebrew word rendered strive, signifies to judge, to execute judgment, or punish in a righteous way: and hence the words are construed by some, my Spirit shall not JUDGE these men for ever. And then, it must regard the Spirit's acting as a judge in the consciences of men; and thus, either accusing, excusing, acquitting, or condemning, all the day long. And that, in consequence of their multiplied iniquities, God determined to exercise his righteous severity upon them ; which threat seems

to be mitigated by the boon of an hundred and twenty years reprieve.

'It also signifies, to litigate a point, or reason in a cause, before it is ripe for judgment, or the execution of it.'-Dr. Gill. And the sense is, that the Spirit of God had been reasoning, contending, and litigating with these men in the court of conscience, about their sins, both in the gospel ministry and in providence; and finding them still incorrigible, stiff-necked, and notoriously infamous, he determined to proceed to pass judgment on them, and to consign them over to general destruction. Yet, such was the long-suffering of God in the days of Noah, that he gave them the space of one hundred and twenty years to repent; but they repented not. Ainsworth's note is,-' The word, strive, signifies, to judge, to contend in judgment; and may here intend or import, both contending by preaching, disputing, convincing in the mouths of the patriarchs, as Neh. ix. 30. and by inward motions and checks of conscience, which his Spirit gave them for their sins.' This seems to me, as near the truth of the case, as we can reasonably expect a person to come. But then, what has all this to do with an offer of grace, or the Holy Ghost striving to save every man by his gospel and influence ? It is an excellent rule which every body approve, and which perhaps nobody uniformly practice, (viz) never to draw an inference except the premises are free from obscurity, so that the consequence is natural and necessary. But will any person say, that the gospel cannot be preached without making an offer of spiritual food to carnal appetites? without casting pearl before swine, or offering to dogs the children's meat? Cannot the gospel be preached, and the purity of the law maintained, without an offer of salvation ? Cannot sinners be convinced of their bad practices, without an offer of forgiveness ? Or, must a traitor have an offer of pardon and liberty before he is condemned? May not a minister of the gospel reason, warn, dissuade, and exhort the unregenerate part of his congregation, without offering the blessings of spiritual and everlasting affection? And may not such reasoning, &c. produce very pungent feelings, and bitter remorse!

Did Paul make an offer of any spiritual blessing to Felix, when he reasoned on righteousness, temperance, and a gudment to come? Where a minister of the gospel consistently and conscientiously abstains from offering, or tendering, the treasures of distinguishing mercy, -say, are none of his unregenerate hearers stung, affected, convinced, and often converted under their ministry? I think they are; and think the case is so clear that few people will be disposed to contest its correctness. For my own part, I never yet dare to offer salvation to any of my hearers, being well convinced it is a given one, and that consistency can never shine brighter than in the Christian ministry : yet, I have no doubt but some of my hearers who are uncalled, and it may be un-chosen, have, nevertheless, very strong convictions at times, and very powerful struggles in their own bosoms. But unless it can be proved that the Holy Ghost designs the salvation of every person who is conscious of their wrong every person who is accused and upbraided in his very conscience-who is stung with guilty recollections, and distressed at times by the accusations of conscience; except it can be solidly proved, that the Holy Ghost designs their eternal salvation, the premises will never sustain an inference in favour of offered mercy. Let the different constructions of the passage, and the different thoughts suggested, be fairly attended to; and I am much mistaken, if it can furnish any evidence in support of general, offered, uncertain, and even ineffectual grace. So far from it, that it strikes me it might be improved into a very powerful argument against what it is intended to support ; for if after so much striving, and so many offers, they at last perished in their sins and iniquities, it must suggest the inutility of free-will; and point out the necessity of omnipotent and irresistible grace, to regenerate the heart and sanctify the affections.

OBJECT. -But how could God be just if he did not offer and strive to save every one ?

ANS.-How could God be just to offer a salvation without an atonement ? If this was the case, no marvel that they were successful in their contentions with the Holy Spirit, seeing the Divine Spirit was striving with justice, order, and purpose, as well as sinners.. And if an atonement was made for them, how could he be just in condemning them to eternal flames, and reserving them in chains, fire, and horror, till the judgment day? Would it not have been more consistent to have said, deliver them from going down into the pit, I have found a ransom. We might. ask, how could he be just in involving children and infants in the general deluge ? In sending the gospel to one village and country, while others remain destitute for years and centuries ? And if any divine agency is necessary to form a man after God's heart, why is it exercised on one person and not another? Should it be said, one person is more deserving of it than another, how then can salvation be entirely of grace? And would not creature deservings at least, render a complete atonement unnecessary and impossible? And would the substitution of human qualifications in the place and stead of the atonement, or in any manner connected with the atonement, in order to its completeness, render it available to any, be any honour to the Redeemer's work, or bring any glory to God ? I believe not. In short, look at the subject in any direction, in any relation, or in any of its tendencies, and the objection vanishes in every point of view.

Will any of the advocates for offered grace, offer an answer to the following questions ?

Query 1. Supposing an offer of grace was made to the antediluvians, on what ground was it made?

2. If made on the ground of a general atonement, how was it that such an atonement did not savingly embrace them ?

3. If owing to their resistance and depravity, could it be generally efficient ? Or, can the atonement be generally sufficient without being as generally efficient? Or, is it sufficient for all the purposes of salvation where it is not efficacious ?

4. If this is the case, does it not imply a contradiction? because it must be sufficient and deficient, at one and the same time.

5. If redemption is efficacious to the elect only, s the offer to be made to the non-elect on the ground of a redemption generally deficient, or, what is the same thing, generally inefficient?

6. If the ground of general offers will not allow of practical application on a general scale, must not the offers be grossly absurd, and insufferably ridiculous ?

Deut. xxx. 19, 20. "I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore, choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live: that thou mayest love the Lord thy God, and that thou mayest obey his voice, and that thou mayest cleave unto him : for he is thy life, and the length of thy days : that thou mayest dwell in the land which the Lord swore unto thy, fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give them."

As there are several passages in the old testament of a similar import to the one above, I shall offer a few remarks, which in my view, are adapted to illustrate and point out their proper meaning.

1. Offers of grace are based upon creature obedience. No person ever thinks about offering covenant blessings on the ground of faith and repentance. These are designated the terms or requirements of the gospel, and considered as the indispensable conditions on which the offer is made.

2. It must be conceded, that obligation arises out of a subsisting relation, between the subject obeying, and the object obeyed. From the different relations which mankind sustain to one another, and their Creator, proceed the diversified nature of their obedience, exemplified and maintained by consistent conduct.

3. By the same root is brought into existence, those distinctions which Point out, the nature of the duty required, or the action performed. The distinction between spiritual, moral, natural, civil, &c. obligation, explain the nature of the relation, by which their duty is regulated, and their obedience required.

4. If relation is the ground of all obligation, there must be a necessary agreement between the one and the other. There will be the same resemblance between relation and duty, as between the root and branches, the spring and the stream. If it arises out of creation, it will be moral, if from the constitution of bodies, natural, if from a relation to national interest, political; and if from a given interest in the Redeemer, spiritual. And as relation determines the nature of obligation, so it also regulates its magnitude. There is always a just proportion between the relation sustained, and the duty imposed; to deny this would be to make the commands of God like the ways of man-unequal.

5. When any relation ceases to exist, the obligation founded thereon must expire. Thus, when the dissolution of a covenant takes place, the contracting parties are free from their engagements, because their voluntary relations are no more ; and every duty which that covenant involved, must be reseinded.

6. Both the Abrahamic, and Mosaic covenants, have long. since disappeared. Circumcision, the sign and seal of the former, and Urim and Thummiui, the glory of the latter, have lost their identity in the present state of things, as winter loses its existence in the succeeding summer.

7. All obligation, therefore, which sprang out of those relations, must be cancelled. This must be admitted, or truth rejected in a pal able shape.

8. If all such obligation is e aced by the expiration of the covenants out of which it arose, it follows, that all arguments drawn from these sources, must be alike groundless and unavailing. But, that this is the true state of the case, must be obvious to every thinking mind. Neither the assumption can be questioned, nor the consequence resisted.

9. If such relation and obligation is obliterated, it is impossible to reason by analogy, because there can be none. All this mode of reasoning must, therefore, be uniformly rejected; and if offers of grace can be proved to be a scripture doctrine, it must be done by a different mode of reasoning, and by evidence derived from different sources. Those relations were but temporary, and on temporary relations there could never be suspended everlasting blessings ; and if not, bow could they be offered on those grounds ?

There is a marked difference between the Messiac, Adamic, Abrahamic, and Mosaic covenants. The relations of the two former are perpetual, while those of the latter were but temporary. The reason is, because the two first are founded on his perfections, while the succeeding two rested upon his dispensations. In the two last we see, relations adapted to his government; in the former, relations agreeing with his nature. His dispensations may pass away, but his nature knows no limits, can sustain no change, approach to no termination.

The covenant of grace is immutable and everlasting, because it is not built on his government, but his government on that; it is not subservient to his dispensations, but his dispensations are regulated and conducted in subordination to his covenant. This covenant can never be broken, seeing the relation is unchanging, and its mercies are the sure mercies of David. Nor can the covenant of works be ever destroyed, while Adam's posterity is propagated in one continuous relation to their Creator, Governor and Judge. Like the covenant of grace, it is founded in Jehovah's nature and perfections. The one contain his gifts, the other retain his rights. This, was fixed in complex personality ; that, in simple humanity. One respected the offspring of grace, the other the productions of nature. In the law his rights are demanded, in the gospel his gifts are diffused.

While therefore his nature remains the same, the relation founded thereon must continue . and while those relations exist, both his gifts and his rights must remain immutably the sauce. He can no more neglect. the rights of his nature, than he can cease to bestow the gifts of his nature. The precepts of the law are as dear to him as the promises of the gospel. The latter are all yea, and amen, sure and certain to all the seed : the former, are immutable and binding on all mankind. A man may be justly, as well as mercifully delivered from the penalty of the law of works ; but, it would be neither merciful nor just, to place him beyond the scope of its precepts. The cross may remove the curse, but it can never banish the rule by which it was incurred. . Blood may cancel the erettas of human nature, but it was never designed to abolish that system of regulations, which arose out of his relations, was founded on his nature, and stood adapted to the original capacities of his intelligent creatures. Before his law can be annulled, either his relation to us, as our Creator and Governor must be destroyed, or his rights from us as his creatures must be forfeited ; but we know the latter can never be done ; and how relationship by grace can destroy a relationship by nature, any more than the latter can dissolve the former, is not very easy to imagine. These observations, are chiefly designed to spew, that man's obligation must be viewed in connetion with his- relation ; and that relation, duty, and privilege, are of the same nature, magnitude, and importance. From these remarks it will appear, that if we wish to understand with correctness, the meaning and application of perceptive language, we must study the relative situation of the persons addressed, and then strive to ascertain the subsisting analogy between them and us. But if analogy should be sought for in vain, we may rest satisfied that there is no application; at least, if our researches are complete.

Much of the confusion of the present day might be soon dismissed, would people but distinguish between things that differ. But many persons seem to have made general invitations the staple of their mind, and without paying any attention, to either character or relation, they seize detached passages of scripture, lay down their propositions, and then pass to their conclusions in about a brace of shakes. The premises are never surveyed, nor is the measuring reed applied to ascertain the distance ; but, like the gods of Homer, they think of crossing the globe in four strides, extolling the efficacy of their creed to the empyreal heavens, before its virtues have time to rise above the clouds. Having advanced my thoughts on this important point, I will now consider the passage selected from Deuteronomy. I observe, 1. Particular stress is laid upon the word choose, as indicating an offer made. But this verb is used in an active sense, and represented in a commanding form. It is not in the indicative mood, but in the imperative : as such, the inference in this point must be defective.

2. The phrase, I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing, is a metonymie, where the effect is formally put for the cause. And the obvious sense is this, ' I have plainly pointed out the cause of life and death, blessing and cursing;' or as in ver. 15. " life and good, death and evil."

3. The things set before them, or pointed out to them, were exclusively of a moral and temporal nature. By consulting the whole of the discourse, we find the cause of life and good, was their prompt and cheerful obedience to the laws of their King and God. Now v-e are sure that eternal life and happiness, is not procured by the obedience of empty offenders. Nor is it hereditary; but runs in the line of electing friendship. The phrase, therefore, " that thou mayest live, both thou and thy SEED," can only agree with an inheritance of Canaan, as an earthly possession. Added to this, whenever heaven is represented under the imposing notion of a kingdom, it is not in the form of an offer, but in the shape of a gift.

4. This shews that they were addressed according to the nature of the relation they sustained. Political relation formed the ground of the address, and to national interests were their attention directed.

5. The whole proves, that the passage can have no possible relation to offers of grace. The words, cleave unto him, for he is thy life and the length of thy days: simply signify that he was the giver and protector of their lives, and that from him hung suspended the vibrating thread, both of their natural and political existence; and as such, they ought with determined vigour, to adhere to the dictates of their acknowledge God and King. Let the enquiry be guided in any direction, which an advocate for the sentiment can desire, and I shall be unusually surprised if any evidence can be collected in flavour of offered grace. Things need only examining.

Ps. cxlv. 9. " The Lord is good to all, and his tender mercies are over all his works."

I have selected this portion of scripture, because it is uniformly pressed into the service of free-willers, in order to destroy absolute and sovereign grace, as settled on the elect by immutable fixation, in the exalted person of Immanuel: "who is the first-born among many brethren ; the beginning of the creation of God ; and head over all things to his church, which is his body, the fullness of him who filleth all in all."

The plain idea which the words exhibit, is this : the goodness and mercy of God are commensurate with his works. By his works must be meant, either those of nature or grace, or both of them united. If those of nature, there is no doubt but what his eve watches the safety, and his hand supplies the need of every living thing ; we are assured that he hears the ravens when they cry, and gives to them their 'meat in due season.

And we are certain that he sees and governs all things, from the moss in Finland, to the cedar in Lebanon; the chinking fragments of rocks, detached, by the crumbling chisel of time from their tenacious position, are viewed by him with as much intenseness as the mountain of Vesuvius. His providence embraces all things, from the sparkling diamond, to the common pebble in a gravel heap. From the leviathan that sports in the mighty deep, to the animalcule which floats at large in a single drop of the same element. From the lion that bounds the forest, to the ephemeron that receives its existence from a floristic grub, deposits its eggs in a un-ligneous substance, and complete its existence within the space of five hours. Every link in the vast chain of creation, is known, seen, and cared for, by the prolific author of nature ; from Gabriel who floats in golden rays of bliss around the eternal throne, to the humble insect that basks beneath the shade of an imperceptible hair. All fall within the range of his govern meat: and in this lower creation all come into existence, are sustained in their existence, and complete in an appointed time, the whole of their existence, whether short or long. His goodness and care are plainly seen in his providence. He causes his sun to shine arid dissolve the impervious barriers of winter : the clouds at his command send down their watery stores; he calls forth the spring in all its rich variety, and pours the horn of plenty within the lap of nature. He calls forth the seasons in all their mingled majesty, dress his works in all the luxury of elegance, unlock the springs of fruitfulness, covers the cultivated soil with " golden grain," and cause the mountains to sing, and the little hills to rejoice on every side. Mankind, and all creation, seem to he invited to the general feast. He also manages the elements to the advantage of his creatures. The lightning shoot, and the thunder roll, to purify the air, that man may not breathe his bane, nor imbibe his own destruction. He neutralizes the rigour of pitiless severity, and tempers the wind to the shorn lamb. He is good to all, and his tender mercies are over all his works. Man is placed in the centre of his treasures, while nature smiles around him, courts his friendship, and invites his aiding ]land. That God has also furnished man with the means of improving his moral condition, wherever his word is diffused, there can be little doubt; but that in his general benevolence lie should offer spiritual blessings to all mankind, and urge them to accept the same, when those blessings are not adapted to people in a state of nature, for which they have no relish, which they dislike even to aversion, and which they have no capacity to receive, is very much unlike his wisdom and usual discrimination.

If spiritual mercies are involved, so are his gracious operations in the soul. For believers are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus. Eph. ii. 20. They are formed for himself in order to shew forth his praise. Isa. xliii. 21. Are we most joyfully subscribe to the truth, that he will not forsake the work of his own hands : but that he will cover them with the shadow of his wings, hide them in his secret chambers, and watch over them night and day lest any hurt them. No enemy shall ever crush his work; no foe shall break his sceptre. To such characters, spiritual blessings are admirably adapted, immutably promised, richly given, and gratefully received. He has promised to supply their needs, has invited them to a throne of grace, falls upon them like dew upon the pasturage, and like showers that water the earth. The young lions may lack, and suffer hanger, but they that fear the Lord shall not lack any good thing. He will guide them by his counsel while here on earth, and afterward receive then to glory. From these remarks it will be seen, that the passage offers no support nor countenance to the system of offered grace. To apprehend truth in our researches, nothing more is necessary than to study things in their respective relations. If we invert their order, or derange their connections, we are sure to be involved in a labyrinth.

Isaiah Iv. 1. "Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters ; and he that hath no money, come ye, buy, and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk, without money and without price."

This passage is considered as a decisive proof of general invitations and offered grace. We are often told nothing can be clearer, no truth can be plainer. Mr. Fuller observes, no man is bound to believe the scriptures till he has -had an opportunity of examining them; and if so, I think every person must be at liberty to withhold his assent from any human explanation, until he has an opportunity of examining that interpretation, and judging for himself. No scripture is of private interpretation, nor ought any person to urge his ideas upon another, when they are not attended with sufficient evidence. To do this, is to plead for infallibility, stop the flow of free opinion, destroy the right of private judgment, and throw us at once into the bosom of the Romish hierarchy. Every individual is at liberty to question and examine the opinions of others ; and at liberty either to receive or reject them. Believing these things, and calling no man master, I venture to institute an enquiry into the passage, in order to judge for myself; and leave other people to follow my example, should they feel disposed.

I observe, FIRST, this passage cannot contain a general invitation, because it is couched in LIMITED terms. The characteristic of the invitation proves it to be far from universal. And how any thing peculiar to a certain character, can be adapted to general purposes, seem to require a universal capacity to comprehend.

2. It cannot be understood literally, because no one can offer money to God. There are few people, I presume, so ignorant as to think thus. Beside, the silver and the gold is his, and the cattle upon a thousand hills.

3. It cannot be understood PROPERLY, because no EQUIVALENT can be rendered for a spiritual interest in Christ. It cannot be gotten for gold, neither shall silver be weighed for the price thereof. It cannot be valued with the gold of Ophir, with the precious onyx, or the sapphire. The gold and the chrystal cannot equal it: and the exchange of it shall not be for jewels of fine gold. No mention shall be made of coral, or of pearls, for its worth is above rubies. The topaz of Ethiopia shall not equal it, neither shall it be valued with pure gold. Job xxviii. 15-19. And we are assured, in language the most decided, that the Lord taketh not pleasure in the legs of a man, Ps. cxlvii. 10. Solomon found after he had sifted things very minutely, that the race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise; nor yet riches to men of understanding ; nor yet favour to men of skill. Eccles. ix. 11. And we are informed in terms the most unequivocal, by a greater than Solomon, that it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth, (not offereth) mercy ; Rom. ix. 16. So far is man from rendering an equivalent for covenant blessings, that they are dispensed without any reference to creature worthiness whatever.

4. Such a commercial idea as the text exhibits, can only be understood in a figurative and qualified sense.

The idea of buying, can only be intended to represent that exchange which is generally the consequence of mercantile transactions. The sinner who finds himself poor, and miserable, and naked, parts with his poverty that he may inherit substance; that he may suck of the abundance of the seas, and of treasures hid in the sand. His own misery is exchanged for God's mercy; and for his filthy rags he receives a covering of honour well adapted for glory and defense. He receives the white stone, and the new name, which the mouth of the Lord doth name. And thus become a crown of glory in the hand of the Loran, and a royal diadem in the hand of his God; no more to be termed forsaken and desolate, but to be called Hephzibah, and his land Beulah. He exchanges all his worthlessness, vileness, and emptiness, for the merit, worthiness, and fullness of Christ Jesus. Nothing can be better suited to his case, nor be, more reviving to his fainting spirit, than the freeness of everlasting things - the person and fullness of God with us. To call his own, this pearl of price immense, he parts with all that once was near and dear to him-his self-righteousness, his supposed excellencies, his worldly companions, interest, and celebrity. He forgets his -own people, and his father's house, and worships Jehovah as the Lord his God. What things were considered gain to him, he reckons as lost for Christ ; and is willing to count all things but lost, for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus his Lord; for whom he willingly suffers the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that he may win Christ, and be found in him, not having his own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God through faith : that he may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his suffering, being made conformable to his death. He parts with all to enjoy a crucified Christ in his relations and work. May the reader through grace go and do likewise. Thus far there is no appearance of a general invitation, or offered mercy.

The next thing of importance is, was the character described, godly or ungodly. It seems not a little surprising, that God should describe a class of persons in such a perplexing manner, as to be entirely unintelligible. For my own part, I must confess, that I can see no reason to conclude that they were ungodly persons ; but there are several reasons, which induce me to think they were spiritual individuals. Whether my reasons are conclusive or not, shall now be submitted to the judgment of the just.

1. It is evident that the whole of the chapter is not addressed to sinners, because ver. 5 is addressed to the Captain of our salvation. This seems to me very plain from the preceding verse, wherein he is styled the witness, the leader, and the commander of the people. And in the verse just noticed, is pointed out the conquest of the cross, the triumphs of truth, and the grandeurs of grace.

2. The style and address is manifestly varied. It is partly exhortative, partly predictive, partly descriptive, and partly illustrative. The first four verses are an address to the gentiles in gospel times. The fifth is directed to the Messiah, and in prophetic style points out the glory of his kingdom and reign. The sixth is directed to his professing people the Jews. The seventh points out the conversion of the gentiles in the acceptable time and day of salvation ; including the conversion of the Jews with the fullness of the gentiles, when the deliverer should come out of Sion, and turn away ungodliness from Jacob, that there might be one fold, and one shepherd ; and thus both Jew and gentile be saved in the Lord with an everlasting salvation. Verses eighth and ninth, describe the vast difference between Jewish and divine thoughts. Verses tenth and eleventh, illustrate the mysterious subject. A subject too profound for the capacious Paul, which made him exclaim, " 0 the depth both of the wisdom and the knowledge of God! how un-searchable are his ways, and his judgments past finding out." Verse twelfth is the application of that part which still belongs to the Jews : and represents their future prosperity, peace and comfort, in the land of Palestine.

3. The form in which ver. 6 and 7, may be construed. In the sixth verse the substantive while, may be exchanged for the adjective where : the passage denoting place, rather than time. Dr. Gill suggests the same thought in his commentary on the chapter, and referring to a marginal note observes, a so in the Jerusalem Talmud, as quoted by Abendana on the place. " Seek the Lord where he is to be found, in the synagogues and in the schools." And so another Jewish writer, mentioned by him, interprets the words, "whilst his Shekinah is found in the sanctuary; before he hides his face, and causes his Shekinah to remove from you." This was the sense entertained by that celebrated rabbi, Abraham Aben Ezra, a Spanish Jew, and who flourished about the middle of the seventeenth century. This proves, that the Jews considered the passage as referring to temple worship; and circumstances seem very much to favour this sense. For it is well known that Jerusalem was the place, where men in ancient days ought to worship ; there the Shekinah dwelt, and there the God of Israel manifested himself to his chosen tribes. The promise of meeting with two or three in any place, is peculiar to the gospel dispensation, and adapted to elevate the present above the past.

Previous to this, the Jews had their dispersion, persecutions, and privations distinctly pointed out by Hosea, in the following descriptive language.-" For the children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and without a prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an image, and without an ephod, and -without teraphim." Hosea iii. 6. This prophecy suggested the entire overthrow of their political affairs, the abolition of their morning and evening sacrifices, the deprivation of the private means of enquiring into future events, together with the termination of the priesthood, and the loss of Urim and Thummim. The prophet seems to press upon their notice the importance of temple worship, and urgeth them to embrace the advantages which their laws and their religion afforded. But an exhortation to external duties or privileges, cannot by just consequence support the idea of general invitations and offered mercy.

Verse 7th is a prophecy of future things, and not an exhortation to present duty. ` It is certain,' says Mr. Stevens, that all the four verbs contained in the 7th verse, are in the future tense. Therefore the true and literal reading will be this : The wicked shall forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts; he shall return unto the Lord, and he will have mercy upon him, and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.' -See his "Help for the true Disciples of Immanuel,' Part 2, page 82. I am not aware that this construction has ever been disputed ; and if it has not, it suggests with great force of evidence, that such a translation must be rigidly correct. For if such a reading can be established, every shade of support in behalf of possible salvation instantly vanishes. And if it cannot, is it not a little surprising, that those caustic pens which teem with acrimony, and are guided by the feverish hand of spleen, have never been employed in exposing such a destructive mutilation of holy writ. To what point, for instance, can the acumen of the editors of the New Evangelical Magazine been directed ? or what can have paralyzed the virulent pen of Mr. Binney ? How is it that these I knights of the quill' should have allowed their genius to slumber? To what cause can their silence be attributed? Is it from the consideration that every opposing idea would be too visionary for the sober durability of Asiatic ink? Conjectures might probably be conceived more vague and unlikely than the one I have hinted. But passing these things, it is by no means improbable that the gentiles are identified by the adjectives wicked and unrighteous. A designation perfectly understood by the Jews, and in the strictest accordance with the views they entertained of their moral condition. Like Matt. xv. 26. it was descriptive of heathenish or gentile character. The concision of the Jews and the engrafture of the gentiles upon the same stock, were finely contrasted by the prophet and apostle, " if that by any means they might provoke to emulation them which were their flesh, and might save some of them."

4. The known fact that every natural person is thirsting after natural things. No person who understands any thing of the human heart, will deny that it contains dispositions which are adapted to the enjoyment of carnal things; and that carnal objects often raise those dispositions to a very feverish tone. But if every natural person is thirsting after carnal things, where is the propriety of addressing them in terms of marked discrimination? And if every natural person does not thirst after carnal things, what reason can be shewn why they should be excluded? If there are offers of mercy in the gospel, why should none but the vilest of carnal men be invited to receive them? Are moral habits exemplified in the family and in the world, to place them beyond the inviting hand of mercy? Are those dispositions which parents have been so anxious to cultivate, regulate, fix, and bias,-are those dispositions when exercising their moral and commanding influence over society, when pouring forth their odours to neutralize the obnoxious fumes of lewdness and obscenity, shedding the balm of consolation into the bosom of unrelenting anguish, and elevating the temporal and moral condition of neighbors, society, and mankind at large?-If such persons do not thirst after carnal things, are their superior qualifications and attainments, to displace them from the circle of salvation? What encouragement can this be to virtuous parents? What restraints can it lay upon unsanctified affections ? What amiable representations can it, make of the divine character? And how can the moral consequences of such sentiments be made to appear ? According to this scheme, except every person drink down iniquity as the thirsty ox drinketh down water,-except they relax every bond of obligation and become notoriously vile, they are not to come within the scope of offered mercy! Sin must mature and qualify them for the inviting voice of mercy, as much as grace is to ripen and fit a saint for the enjoyment of bliss ! ! Talk about antinomianism, canceling every tie, and dissolving all obligation,, why this is antinomianism with a vengeance ! But persons must either submit to these consequences, or else desist from shoring up the incongruous sentiment of general invitations and offered mercy by the 55th of Isaiah.

5. The nature of the metaphor requires us to understand the invitation as belonging to spiritual characters. Most people consider, that the allusion is to those places and practices, where ships are unfreighted, their contents exposed for sale, and the inhabitants apprized of the circumstance by the belman or crier; which seem to involve an invitation of extensive advantage. Here we must observe, that the poor, the hungry, and thirsty were invited; the benefit was for them. 2. That there was a strict agreement between their thirst and appetites, and the provision recommended to their notice. 3. There was a triple advantage; there was the article itself, the article free from adulteration, and to be procured at a cheaper rate.

Now if we consider the place referred to, to design the house of God, where free grace is proclaimed by the heralds of mercy, we must suppose, the prophet intended to illustrate the subject of sovereign salvation, and to encourage the gentiles who were interested in them, and who were seeking after them. The figure employed supposes, 1. That they had spiritual dispositions for spiritual blessings, and that those dispositions were gratified by embracing the things to which they related. 2. That the blessings of the gospel were admirably adapted to meet their spiritual dispositions, and to supply all their need. 3. That they were the very individuals to whom the invitations of the gospel were made, and therefore might expect to obtain mercy and find grace to help in every time of need. 4. That by complying with the invitation, there would be a threefold advantage : first, they would find under the ministry of a free grace gospel, not only what they needed, but what in many places they sought for in vain. Every impartial observer must confess that, if in many places an enquiry was made for the substantial truths of the gospel, it would be like enquiring for substantial articles at a London puff-shop. An artful tradesman might succeed in persuading many clever persons, that they were really the articles for which they enquired, only they are worked up in another form, (a more fashionable one of course,) manufactured on a more eligible plan, and adapted to more general utility. But should the fraud be detected by here and there one, and the vender of such available articles have in reserve a little spark of honest communication, he would (tapping the unwelcome querist on the shoulder) say, ' why to tell the truth between you and me, we do not keep, them; there is no demand for them, there is not indeed. We kept them as long as we could, till we found it would not do. People came and introduced spurious articles in the same street, and almost at the next door ; competition became so general, and the public taste so vitiated, that we were obliged to comply with the deluded spirit of the times, or close our concerns altogether ; and that you know would not do at any price.' In many places of public worship the gospel never was preached, and in others it is not now as it was in the beginning, which seems to be a sign the case is altered. In many places there is nothing but the monotonous sound of do, do, do! There is plenty of work for the dead, and paintings for the blind; but no  "best robes" for the naked, no food for the hungry, no drink for the thirsty, nor strong drink given to such as are ready to perish, nor wine to such as be of heavy heart. By attending, therefore, a free grace ministry, the very things after which they are hungering, thirsting, and seeking, are discovered, apprehended, and realized, to the joy of their souls.

Secondly, another advantage is, they will enjoy them in their simple and unmixed state. " We are not as many," said Paul, "which corrupt the word of God," by mixing things that ought to remain separate, as the merchant mixes water with wine; a dishonest miller chalk with flour; or any tradesman that may adulterate his articles, or substitute spurious ones for genuine. We have recourse to no such unjust measures, we practice no such schemes; we imitate no such puffers, we resemble no such impostors. " But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth, commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God." They were not ashamed of the gospel of Christ; they brought forward the ancient and sublime doctrines of revelation ; they asserted that there was a remnant according to the election of grace; that it was not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy; that they were saved by grace, through faith, and that not of themselves, for it was the gift of God. They retained things in their proper places, preached the gospel in its discriminating properties and abounding fullness, as the glorious gospel of the blessed God; and separating the precious from the vile, they were as God's mouth. Of how many ministers can these things be said in the present day? Of how many may it not be said, " their silver is dross, their wine is mixed with water?" Isaiah i. 22. Their clothing is mixed, being a linen and woollen garment, Lev. xix. 19. much unlike the seamless garment-a thing of shreds and patches. Their shoes are old and clouted, and the bread of their provision dry and mouldy, Josh. ix. 5. Their wine bottles are old and rent, and bound up, verse 4. Their grapes are sour, and set the children's teeth on edge, Jer. xxxi. 29. Their waters are mixed, and mixed with mud, Ezek. xxxiv. 18, 19. Their addresses are mixed, and like Ephraim they themselves are mixed among the people, Hos. vii. 8. In addition to this, we see a mixed seed, Ezra ii. 59. and ix. 2.-a mixed multitude, Neh. xiii. 3.-a mixed language, verse 24.-a mixed communion and a mixed creed; half orthodox, and half heterodox, forming one whole paradox. Such a combination of things resemble Nebuchadnezzar's perplexing image, composed of iron mixed with miry clay. Dan. ii. 41. Some of the family seem contented with these things in their initial state, but they are un-skilful and inexperienced in the word of righteousness, being babes, Heb. v. 13. As their hunger and thirst, however, become more pressing, their minds begin to grow restless, and they find a chasm which all the husks in the world can never fill,-a thirst, which nothing but the well of living waters, and streams from Lebanon, can ever slake.

And such characters are invited to attend the pure preaching of the gospel,-to hear, and their souls shall live to purpose, live on all the blessings of the everlasting covenant, even the sure (not offered) mercies of David.

There is another advantage in attending a free grace gospel, it is this, the free and sovereign manner in which its blessings are dispensed. They are to procure these things without money and without price, for they are the sure mercies of David; which involve the idea of freeness: without being free, they would not be sure. They are not free because they are sure, but sure because they are free. Their certainty arise out of their freeness, and. not their freeness out of their certainty. In the gospel every thing is as free and as sovereign as the rain. And seeing this is the case, wherefore do you spend your time and talents in pursuing unprofitable measures? Hearken to me, listen to my gospel, forsake such legal preaching and practice, and let your souls delight in the pure, precious, profitable, and enriching doctrines of the cross.

Nor was such an invitation useless and unmeaning, if we consider the strong propensity there is in human nature to he a co-worker with God, or if not a co-ordinate, yet a subordinate worker with God; together with the various ties and motives that induce them to remain in legal synagogues. Some have just joined the class, others have' been just baptized, or just entered into communion without it; while others have continued in the connection for many years. Others again think they can wear the garb of religion, flounced with respectability; and though they do not expect to walk to heaven in silver slippers, yet they hope to travel in soft raiment, and now and then to lodge in king's palaces. Thus their minds are deluded and starved, while the gospel in its freeness, fullness, and sovereignty, is disregarded. The love of self and money is the root of all evil.

It will probably be said, that though carnal characters are not addressed in the passage under consideration, yet the metaphor plainly supports the idea of an offer made. For whenever such commodities are exposed for sale, they are offered for sale, and therefore an offer of grace must be included. To this I answer, an offer and price must go together. The price is the condition, and without this the thing cannot be obtained. Faith and repentance are said to be the price, or the terms on which the offer is made. Now, if the conditions are taken away, the offer must fall to the ground. They are to buy without money and without price ; by which I understand the free, sovereign, and unconditional nature of salvation. And the meaning is, in the ministry of a free grace gospel, salvation is proclaimed to be free, absolutely free, adapted to their miseries and exigencies; suited to meet their needs in every shape; to hide their nudity, banish their poverty, and accelerate their liberty. And thus entirely opposed to general invitations, offered and uncertain salvation. If, after the remarks I have made, a person can honestly declare, that he can see in a very clear light, general invitations and offered mercy in the passage I have been examining, I can only say the science of optics is but very imperfectly understood.

"I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, saith the Lord God: wherefore turn yourselves and live ye." Ezek. xviii. 32.

It is thought that there must be a general provision made for mankind, and a general overture or offer made to them; or else it could not be said, that God bad no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, &c. The reader must be aware, that there are several other passages of the same import in the prophecies of Ezekiel ; and if he is familiar with the sacred oracles, he must have observed that those passages are peculiar to Ezekiel. And if he has paid any attention to the chronology of the bible, he must have observed that Ezekiel prophesied to the Jews during their captivity in Babylon. And if an attentive observer of the nature and tendency of men and things, he must have witnessed how nien are affected, directed, and instructed, by the action of local circumstances. If he has observed the nature of prophetic imagery, it cannot have escaped his notice, that the images were suggested by surrounding circumstances, passing incidents, prevailing customs, &c. And that they were adapted to either the then present times, or periods more remote, according to the nature of the prophecies. If he is acquainted with civil things, and is familiar with political phraseology, it must readily occur to his mind, that men are said to be officially and politically dead, when they retire from office, and their official and political influence is suspended. He will also recollect, that when the form of civil government departs from a nation, they may be said to be politically dead. It will also recur to his mind, that great trouble and affliction is sometimes put for death. When these circumstances are recollected, it is thought the passage will be far from affording any support to those ideas they are supposed to involve.

1. It will be clearly seen, that the controversy between God and Israel was of a civil and political nature. This the whole chapter plainly proves. Nothing can be more absurd, than to suppose that spiritual and everlasting things are designed.

2. The ground of the controversy arose from their unjust parable of the sour grapes, and their preferring a charge of injustice against God, on the ground of his having confirmed their captivity in the seed of the aggressors. Their fathers done the mischief, and they sustained the punishment. This they improved into an argument of gross injustice on the part of God.

3. It will be seen that the whole of the chapter from verse 3 is directed against this charge, and therefore must have a bearing upon that point. The affirmation, illustrations, and exhortations, are all related to the same subject. The proverb was concerning the land of Israel, verse 2, which plainly shews that the subject of contention was of a civil and national character. To die or to be dead is to be in great affliction, as 2 Cor. ii. 10. " Who hath delivered us from so great a death, and doth deliver;" also chap. ii. 13. " In labours more abundant, in stripes above measure, in prisons more frequent, in deaths oft." And every person may know by turning to Ezekiel xxxvii. 12, 13. that their afflictions are compared to death, and their captivity to graves.

Calvin observes in his commentary, that a corporeal death is principally intended in this chapter, and I have no doubt but bodily suffering is designed. The Jews misrepresented the conduct of God, and charged him with injustice in the face of other nations. Indignant at such a charge, Jehovah declares that for the future his judgments should be so conspicuous and severe, and should be so plainly discovered, that his justice and impartiality must be owned; and that the next generation should have no ground to use such a proverb as that in verse 2. But notwithstanding this, he points out the fallacy of the argument, by shewing his relation to, and property in, all mankind. The soul of the father was as near to him as the soul of the son, and the soul of the son as the soul of the father ; and therefore he .could not be more partial to one than another. But the soul that sinneth, whether the father or the son, should die;-should be visited in anger with affliction and calamity, and perhaps not live out half his days. Yet nevertheless, though his judgments should be severe and manifest, he would be the staff of the feeble and the shield of the innocent; and although they might talk very tart about the sour grapes, yet the son should escape that affliction and calamity, with which others of an opposite character should be visited. And if the wicked man reformed his conduct and acted consistently, he should save his soul alive;-he should by his good conduct prevent an untimely death. What pleasure, says God, can I have in afflicting you as creatures? It is for your sins that these things are come upon you. Think not that I realize a savage satisfaction inn bruising you under my feet, without any regard to justice or judgment. So far from it, that it would be more agreeable to my dispensation were you to reform and turn unto me, that you might live in plenty and peace in your own land.

The latter part of the chapter is an exhortation to promote reform. The phrase turn yourselves, in verse 30-32. might be, turn others, so the margin of the Comprehensive Bible. And it is very observable in both verses that the plural pronoun is in italics. The idea suggested by making them a new heart and a new spirit, is much the same as those suggested by circumcising the foreskin of the heart. And nothing more is intended than a sincere and thorough reformation, both in life and doctrine. There is no necessity either to expunge such passages, or to understand then as relating to spiritual and evangelical things. They form, in connection with other passages, an important history of a peculiar people; and while Christians and churches read the whole account, they may rejoice and tremble.

They all admit of a consistent interpretation, without embracing the notion of offered grace, &c. For my part I confess, I am in this instance, something like the self-plumed socialist, who boasted of his illustrating a subject, without any difficulty, when it soon appeared that the subject involved none. If we study character, relation, periods, and circumstances, I really cannot think that there is any necessity to conclude that we must either reject them, or embrace offered grace, &c.

Matt. xxiii. 37. u 0 Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not."

These words are often quoted with a view of supporting the sentiment into which I am enquiring. It is urged, that the sheltering care of the Redeemer was equally extended to all,-that all had an opportunity of being saved, and therefore all must have had an offer of grace.

In reflecting on the passage, it must appear, that the language is highly metaphoric, and therefore must be understood in a figurative sense. And in all such cases, the principal thing to be sought after, is the sentiment intended to be conveyed by the speaker or writer. In order to obtain this, it seems necessary that we should allow the drift of the writer or speaker, together with the time, customs, habits, and other circumstances, to enter into our enquiries; and that we assign to them their respective influence in their different bearings on the point in question.

The design of our Lord in this place was, to point nut the destruction of the Jewish nation for their rejection of him as the promised Messiah. To express his affection to, and his concern for, the seed of Abraham, no figure could be better employed, no language more affecting, than what was used by him who spake as never man spake. By this metaphor, he also pointed out the calamity that would befall them, the hand that should effect their desolation, the feeble resistance which they would make, and his anxiety to preserve them from spoliation and ruin.

The affection of Christ to the Jews. The attachment of the hen to her feathered family, is so striking as to become proverbial.

" Beneath her fostering wings the hen defends

Her darling offspring, while the snow descend.

And through the winter's day unmor'd, defies

The chilling fleeces, and inclement skies ;

Till rangr,ish'd by the cold and piercing blast,

True to her charge, she perishes at last."

It seems almost impossible that our Lord could have represented his affection for the Jewish people by a metaphor more familiar, striking, or interesting.

Their calamities. When the covering care of the hen is wanted, the exposure of the brood is manifest and perilous. And when the fostering and surrounding attention of Jehovah is withdrawn from a people, their situation is awfully alarming. It is with the most sublime feeling that we learn the protection of God is compared to outstretched wings ; and with peculiar interest we mark the privilege of the good man, who dwelling in the secret place of the Most High, shall abide under the shadow of the Almighty. The promise of protection involves his security-" he shall cover thee with his feathers, and under his wings, shalt thou trust, his truth shall be thy shield and buckler." Ps. xci. But when the wings of safety are withdrawn, there is no security against the eagle that hasteneth to the prey. Job ix. 26. Even Jacob shall become a prey and a spoil to their enemies. 2 Kings xxiv. 14. They are for a prey and none delivereth. Isaiah xlii. 22.

The hand or power that should effect their desolation. The gathering of them under his wings, doubtless suggested their danger from the Roman power, the representation of which was an eagle ; and which continued to the times of Constantine, when it was exchanged by him for the sign of the cross-the symbol f safety and conquest.

When therefore the Roman legions were advancing for hostile operations, their ensigns on which were engraven or painted golden eagles, while floating and buoyant in the air, could not fail to suggest the idea of an eagle hovering in the atmosphere, and waiting to fall upon its prey.

The same thought is inculcated in Matt. xxiv. 28. The Jews were judicially and morally dead; their system of policy was exanimate and hastening to decomposition, while their moral feeling was enervated, perverted, and destroyed. And the sense is, wherever there are Jews who have dealt unfaithfully with God, rejected his authority, and crucified his Son, there should the destroying Romans be gathered together. And probably there was not a carious Jew but met with a furious foe. Every carcase had its eagle, so exactly was the prophecy of their generous prophet fulfilled in Num. xxxii. 23. " Be sure your sin wall find you out."

The feeble and unsuccessful resistance which they should make. They could no more resist the overwhelming force of the Romans, than a distracted and unprotected brood of chickens could resist the talloned eagle or elude the vulture's eye. It is true their city was well fortified both by nature and art; and well supplied with provision, insomuch that Josephus asserts they could never have been taken, had they not have prepared the way by imprudent measures. But when God leaves a people, counselors are led away spoiled, and judges become fools. Job xii. 17. The line of confusion and the stones of emptiness are stretched over the city. Isaiah xxxiv. 11. So that in drinking of the cup of wrath, they are moved and mad. Jer. xxv. 16. The contentions between Eleazar, Simon and John, were frantic, destructive, and protracted. In their intestine wars they slaughtered one another, and burnt their provision, by which seditious infatuation, they destroyed, as Josephus judiciously termed it, the nerves of their power. " Except the Lord build the city and keep it, the labourers labour, and the watchmen watch in vain."

His concern for them. He was a minister of the circumcision, and sent to the seed of Abraham, whose posterity, he in his love and pity redeemed from Egyptian bondage, and bare and carried them all the days of old. They were Israelites to whom pertained the adoption, and the glory, the covenant, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; whose are the fathers; and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God, blessed for evermore. Amen. Rom. ix. 4, 5. Their worship, temple, and city, were peculiar, interesting, and magnificent. " Beautiful for situation, the joy of the whole earth was mount Zion, on. the sides of the north, the city of the great King." Ps. lxxxiv. 2. It was when the attention of Christ teas drawn to the city, by expressions of admirations from his disciples, that he observed there was not one stone laid upon another that should not be thrown down. And the Romans not only conquered the Jews and demolished their buildings, but actually ripped them open, and ploughed up the very foundation of their buildings in quest of treasure. It was when approaching to this almost celestial spot, and beholding the city that he wept over it, saying, " If thou hadst known, even thou at least in this thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace, but now they are hid from thine eyes. For the days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass thee on every side, and shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee, and they shall not leave thee one stone upon another, because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation." Luke xix. 41-4.

This was the consequence of their rejecting and crucifying the Lord of life and glory. It is with sincere pleasure the following extract is copied from the New Evangelical Magazine, for May 1827. Matt. xxiii. 27.

The metaphor here used is a very beautiful one. When the hen sees a bird of prey coming, she makes a noise to assemble her chickens, that she may cover them with her wings from the danger. The Roman eagle was about to-fall on the Jewish state. Our Lord expresses a desire to guard them from threatened calamities. They disregarded his invitations and warnings, and fell a prey to their adversaries.'

If this scriptural illustration can be admitted, it will be a clear case that there can be nothing in favour of offered and rejected grace. For ' it will not be asserted that the calamities of the Jews befell them for their criminal neglect in getting the principle of electing grace, but for their rejecting the evidence of his Messiah-ship, persecuting and ultimately crucifying him. And if so, it will follow that a belief in him as the Messiah, an attendance on his ministry, and belief in his miracles, &c. would have prevented their overthrow and dispersion. It will therefore be clearly seen, that no offer of grace was necessary, and that no rejection thereof is implied.

The plain truth is this, Jesus Christ plainly foresaw the destruction of the Jewish nation, would have gathered them by his ministry, protected them from their calamities, and did actually commiserate with them in the prospect of their future sufferings. For, as he spoke as never man spoke, so he felt as never man felt. Unquestionably the attributes of his soul were fitly proportioned to each other; but to conclude that because his feelings were exquisitely sensible, he must offer them everlasting blessings, seem to me a very doubtful inference.

If I mistake rot, the following things will shew such a conclusion to be entirely fallacious.

The WILL which our Lord had to shelter and protect the Jews, was an attribute of his human nature, and not of his divine. It will be readily allowed, that our great Redeemer had two wills, as well as two natures; and that as there was an essential difference between the two natures, so likewise between their attributes and relations. The attributes of the one were very different to those of the other, though not contrary; those of the human nature being always in subserviency to those of the divine. Instances of his human affection and will, may be seen in Mark x. 21. Luke xix. 41. xxii. 42. The divine will knows no control. His counsels shall stand, and he will do all his pleasure. His government is grounded on potent wills and shalls, displays the independency of his throne, opens his sovereign designs, and will cover both himself and his church with unrivalled glory.

2. Had Immanuel willed their salvation as God, he mould certainly have accomplished it as God-man. He came to do the will. of his Father; and had it have been the absolute will of his Father to have saved Jerusalem by his Son, either in a temporal or spiritual point of view, no doubt but his will would have been executed by his Son. If he had purchased them by his blood, no doubt they would have been brought under his sheltering atonement. Seeing it is said, " this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day." John vi. 39. And we are assured that all the chosen seed shall come unto him, and shall not be cast out. ver. 37.

3. This WILL to gather the Jews was not continuous and eternal; as the adverb OFTEN clearly demonstrates. God's will is eternal, invariable, and unalterable. The language therefore can by no means agree with the will of Jehovah. But the attributes of the human nature of Christ not being eternal, and his will while on earth being often guided by local and relative considerations, there appears no difficulty in applying ; the language to denote his human will in distinction from the divine. And this could only regard temporal things.

4. They resisted his WILL and his EFFORTS. Now we are sure that his calls and efforts as God, can never be resisted. The energy of divine grace is irresistible. Who hath resisted his will? u I will work and none shall let it," or turn it back, (Heb.) lsa. xliii. 13. '1 If he had purposed none could disannul it, and if he had stretched out his arm to have gathered them, none could have turned it back. Isaiah xiv. 27. The desire therefore of our Lord to save them, must be confined to his human nature, his efforts to his ministry, and their safety to his providence.

5. Jesus Christ did not direct his observations in a general manner, but confined them chiefly to the ecclesiastic rulers of the people, as may be clearly seen by consulting verse 29, where the same persons are addressed as in verse 37. By Jerusalem is not meant either the city or temple, nor yet the inhabitants in a collective point of view, but, those that had the rule and management of civil and religious affairs; and principally the latter. The meaning seems to be this: How often would my ministry have gathered the Jews together, and convinced them of my authority and Messiah-ship, by which means those calamities and desolations which will shortly come upon you might have been avoided, but ye would not allow them ; you agreed that if any man should confess me to be the Messiah he should be excommunicated; ye have taken away the key of knowledge, will not enter into the kingdom of heaven, (gospel dispensation) and those who would enter in ye hinder ; behold, your house (temple, city, and people) is left desolate.' It must be observed, that our Lord did not say I I would have gathered Jerusalem, but Jerusalem would not,' nor ' how often would I have gathered you, and you would not;' nor ' how often would I have gathered thy children together, but thy children would not be gathered;' but how often would I have gathered thy children and ye would not.' The adjective pronoun thy, is in the possessive case, and relates to posterity; and therefore must be understood as relating to official characters, and particularly the ecclesiastical part of the community. I cannot conceive if these thoughts have any solid basis, how offers of grace can be included in the words I am noticing. To make them tell in favour thereof, it must be shewn that God's will is not eternal, invariable, immutable, nor efficient; that would the scribes and Pharisees have allowed him he would have offered salvation to their people, and have saved them from eternal flames. But that seeing they would not suffer the people to hear him, he could do nothing for them, and they must therefore perish everlastingly in hell. The just consequence is, that there are thousands of Jews in everlasting misery for whom he laid down his life, and whom he would have saved but their rulers hindered him. And that though they were willing and anxious to hear him, and to gather about him, yet all their desires and wishes were crushed by the prevailing influence of their rulers:-that Christ beheld this, pitied their condition, commiserated with them, but could render no assistance.

It will also be necessary to shew, whether such things can be with safety attributed to God; and, if so, whether they are in reality worthy of his character. It appears to me, that for people to attempt to prove offered grace and general invitations from this passage, is only to lose themselves in a wilderness of incongruities, or to shroud themselves in a tissue of mystification. And could any individual combine with the pen of Petrach, the muscles of Hercules, and the longevity of Methuselah, he would not accomplish the task. I, however, may be mistaken in this point as well as others; and should that be the case, I will say, that no person will be more happy to be corrected than myself; truth is my aim in publishing my thoughts.

John v. 40. "And ye will not come unto me that ye might have life."

Persons of undisciplined ideas, contend for an offer of grace being couched in these words, because it is thought, Christ could not have upbraided them with neglect of coming to him had he not have made them an offer of salvation.

In reply to this, I remark, it is not clear that a spiritual coming to him is intended, nor that a spiritual life is implied.

Reference seem to be had to their sufferings and destruction by the Romans, which they would not avoid by receiving his mission and attending his ministry. This is the sense which the subject matter of the discourse seems to support, for which many arguments might be brought, and for which consistency must always plead.

It will be clearly seen, that the drift of our Lord was to vindicate his conduct, by asserting and proving his divinity ; in which he succeeded to the great dismay and confusion of his enemies. It will greatly assist our minds in understanding this scripture, if we can ascertain to whom the words were directed, whether to the Jewish people generally, or to the Sanhedrim particularly. I am inclined to think the latter; which, according to Maimonides, was composed of both ecclesiastics and laics. Amongst the former were both priests and levites, and amongst these, some of the well-known enemies of the promised Messiah. And if we mark the 14th and 15th verses, we shall find something suggested which seems to favour this idea; Jesus found the man in the temple, made himself known to him, and cautioned him against ever pursuing his former line of conduct; and we are informed the man departed and told the Jews. Now the time when this occurred was at some memorable feast at Jerusalem; probably the Passover, when the concourse of people must have been prodigious, seeing all the males were commanded to attend. The man was found in the temple, probably the outward court, where persons were walking about, and where our Lord identified the subject of his miraculous power. This person departed from Christ, to tell the Jews who performed the miracle which had excited so much irritation and interest. That he left the temple seems clear, and went either to the pool of Bethesda, or to the Sanhedriui. To the latter I think, and that for these two reasons. First, that he might convince the Sanhedrim that Christ was the promised Messiah, or a divine person. The information which he gave was not from any enmity towards his benefactor, but from the best of motives; and with a view no doubt to proclaim his greatness, also to establish his honour, character, and reputation, where they were the most questioned. Second, ver. 33. refers to the deputation which was appointed to wait on John the Baptist, (see chap. i. 19.) and must therefore be addressed to those who sat in council, inspected the mission and doctrines of prophets, and swayed the affairs of the nation. We may therefore suppose, Jesus Christ was standing before the Sanhedrim, and that he justly upbraided them for their neglecting to attend his ministry, properly examining his works, and for not deliberately weighing the evidence in favour of his office and doctrine. Had they have done these things they would not have crucified the Lord of life and glory, their temple would not have been destroyed, nor themselves scattered to the winds.

To support this sense, many arguments might be collected. One argument might be drawn from ver. 34. " These things .1 say that ye might he saved." This seems to me clearly to refer to their reception of him as the anointed and sent of God, by which their safety would have been established. For we cannot consistently suppose, that the testimony of John respecting Jesus Christ, if it had been implicitly believed, would have saved their souls eternally, but we may conclude that it would have saved them in a political point of view, which was the nature of the salvation mentioned in the 34th verse. And of course, the only life which such a salvation necessarily includes, is one of a natural or political description. At all events, it cannot imply that life which stands in Christ, flows through his blood, and is hid with him in God.

Another thing in favour of such an interpretation is, the affinity between the 34th and 40th. The address is by no means varied. Verse 39th is a direction to search the scriptures, in which they thought they had eternal life, because they represented him in a very luminous point of view ; both the style and strain is exactly the privileges of the glorious gospel of the blessed God. The middle wall of partition was broken down, and the news of redemption was no longer to be confined within the precincts of Judea. That this must be the meaning, will appear from the following suggestions:

1. There is no evidence to prove that the disciples ever did go into every part of the world. It is even questionable whether any of them visited either Britain or France; and still more doubtful whether they ever reached Lapland, or preached to the Australians of New South Wales. I know of no source from whence evidence can be derived in favour of such ideas.

2. In the scale of probability, the difference is as ninety-nine to one, against their preaching the gospel to every creature. If we consider their age, the place from whence they emigrated, the means by which they traveled, the time which they sometimes remained at one place, and the violent and untimely deaths which some of them met, are considerations which must prejudice the mind against the sense which many persons wish to support. But,

3. It was impracticable. Supposing that the sum total of mankind was seven hundred millions of souls, an estimate which perhaps would have excluded nearly one hundred millions; but supposing the above is correct, it was impossible that they could preach the gospel to every creature. Allowing them to preach two hundred times every year, and each time to address an auditory to the amount of two thousand persons, it would take twelve persons upwards of one hundred and eighty years to accomplish the task. Now when it is considered that the apostles traveled principally on foot, the time taken up by judicial examinations and imprisonments, the length of time they tarried at certain places, and the frequency of their return to visit the mother churches, together with other difficulties, such as the length of time they must tarry at one place, or at least visit every place twice, in order that those who were infants might hear the gospel when adults,-the length of time they must be on the water, and other circumstances, render the thing absurd in conception, and impossible in its execution. It can only mean that they were to preach the gospel in gentile lands, and that there was ample scope for their exertions.

If an offer of grace is made to all mankind by the gospel, it ought to be shewed that the gospel is always preached to all mankind. But this, I presume, will never be attempted. The state of religion in the present day is sufficient to overturn every effort of that description. The following statement will shew pretty accurately the present state of religion.

Polytheists .................................466,000,000 viz.

Fetiche Worshippers ......................124,000,000

Budhists .................................169,000,000

Brahmins .................................115,000,000

Lamaites .................................58,000,000

Antichristians .................................133,970,000 viz.

Sunnites .................................72,000,000

Mahomedans Schiites ...........43,000,000

Ismaelites .................................190,000

Jews .............................................9,000,000

Confucians ..................................5,000,000

Nankinists ..................................4,000,000

Jorastians ..................................780,000

1. Roman Catholics .......................169,150,000

Jacobites .........................................3,526,000

Masonites .... ..................................150,000

2. Monophysites.............................. 6,276,000 viz.

Armenians .... ..................................2,200,000

Nestorians .... ...............................400,000

3. Greeks .... .................................41,375,000 viz.

Russo Greeks .. .............................35,375,000

Eastern ditto .. ....................6,000,000

4. Anglicans ...............................15,050,000

5. Lutherians ...............................16,000,000

6. Reformed .... .............................12,240,000 viz.

Proper reformed ....................7,400,000

Presbyterians „ .............................4,800,000

7. Evangelics , , ....................8,200,000