This doctrine is confessed by most denominations, to be of infinite moment ; and there can be but little doubt, that such suffrages, occupy primary relations to indispensable principles. If I was solicited to disclose wherein the great strength of mercy's mighty plan consisted, I should unhesitatingly answer, ' in the atonement.' If asked where a full length portrait of salvation might he obtained, my answer would be ready-' in the atonement.' If requested to state through what medium every feature might be viewed in a developed position, I should say, ' the atonement.' If interrogated as to where all the rays of wisdom, mercy, and justice concentrated, I should reply, ' in the atonement.' If urged to define the golden fulcrum of a quickened sinner's hope, I should reiterate ` the atonement.' If tempted to point out the centre-prop of mercy's dome, I should stretch my finger towards `the atonement: If asked what was the best criterion of Christian doctrine, I should instantly rejoin, ' the atonement.' In my mind it is the sun in the spiritual system; and to wrench it from the scheme of salvation, is like plucking the sun from its orbit, which, like the globe, would be rendered dark, dull, dreary, and useless to those for whom it is intended.

Most people who are in the habit of thinking over religious subjects, must be aware of the important relation which subsist between the atonement and the form of divine administration. It is with the most intense anxiety that I have sought after and read, every thing that I could procure which have a bearing upon the subject under notice ; and I must acknowledge, if it Can be done without giving offence, that my anxiety has only been equaled by the disappointment and mortification which have closed my perusals. But never was my anxiety greater, or my mortification deeper, than on the last research. It had been frequently said by some of the Wesleyans, ' why do he not attack Mr. Drew? Were he not too despicable for Mr. D. the enquiry would be soon overthrown, *

* It has been said by some, and it is easy to guess who, that my sentiments come from hell, that they are the very scum of the bottomless pit-that Calvinists must be worse than highway-men-that the  Free Enquiry' will send thousands to hell, and that the writer will be sure to accompany them; with other things equally genteel and classical. Now, if the `Enquiry' is likely to he so very fertile in its destructive operations, it is hoped that the obscurity of the writer, will not be a barrier to its refutation, nor the means of plunging thousands into unending misery. And as Mr. D. occupies a situation where the energies of free-will reasoners are concentrated in due polemical form, we may judge it will be as little trouble for him to counteract its action as anyone beside. It may not however be amiss to observe, that I had not my eye fixed on methodism as a leading object, but something of greater consideration, though of a more motley nature and mongrel character. My ambition did not lead me to the amputation of gnats, but the dissection of a giant. Neither had I any thoughts of angling for sprats, shooting flies, or storming a house of cards.

' &c. This produced a thirst after the ° Essay on the Being, Attributes, and Providence of the Deity. By S. Drew.' But what was my surprise, when I saw two thin octavo volumes, pages 339-370, price eighteen shillings! the whole of which might have been easily compressed into one volume 12mo. But my mortification was not yet complete ; for on examining the new and dear-bought treasure, I had the vexation to behold an imperfect copy of Archbishop King, the original of which was standing in my study. As to that part of the work which treat upon the moral attributes of God, the major part of the reasoning if stretched into it respective ramifications, is decidedly opposed to the chief tenets of Wesleyanism. But perhaps Mr. D. was not thinking about any religious theory at the time those sections were penned, being, as he informs his reader, contending for a literary prize. Let it not, however, be thought, that I wish to depreciate the claims that Mr. D. or any one else, has to literary acquirements or public indulgence ; for when their claims are fairly made, they seldom receive above a penny-worth for their penny, and the workman is worthy of his meat.

Having made these remarks, I will now return to the subject of the atonement; upon which subject I submit the following propositions.

Prop. 1. There must be a Divine Being from whom we derive our existence, support, and protection.

Prop. 2. This Divine Being must be necessarily eternal, immense, and immutable. Supposing this to be granted,

Prop. 3. A Being of such perfections must possess eternal rectitude. If God is immense (and that he unquestionably is) he must be infinite in all his attributes, consequently his wisdom and holiness must partake of that character; and if so, he must be a God of endless order and unbending integrity.

Prop. 4. A Being whose love of order is everywhere conspicuous, must require the same character of his intelligent creatures, supposing him to have any. This needs no illustration.

Prop. 5. A conformity to order, can only be required upon the principle of a law, introduced and understood. To suppose the contrary, would be to reflect in no sparing manner upon the wisdom and justice of God.

Prop. 6. This Divine Being, must be the author of a law to his intelligent creatures, which brings them under obligation, and renders them amenable to the author of their existence.

Prop. 7. This law while it supposes a liberty which may be abused, must nevertheless, be adapted to the primeval condition and capacity of his obeying creatures.

Prop. 8. A law agreeing with the nature and extent of the human faculties, must also be in accordance with the attributes and perfections of the lawgiver. The law must be a transcript of the Deity-a copy of an original -a portrait of himself ; and as such, must answer to his attributes both natural and moral, as a copy answers to an original print, &c.

Prop. 9. A law commensurate with the perfections of Deity, must be sacred, immense, immutable, and eternal.

Prop. 10. Every breach of this law, must bear a relation to the perfections of God, and in consequence of such a relation must become objectively infinite.

Prop. 11. A law protecting his perfections and preserving his creatures in happiness, must be attended with motives and sanction. Motives to produce rectitude of action, and power to enforce and maintain the just claims of the law-giver.

Prop. 12. A law with such obligatory power, embracing objects of infinite magnitude and interest, must inflict its penalty wherever it is incurred.

Prop. 13. As justice is natural and essential to God, the correctness of its requirements can never be disputed, nor the integrity of its manifestations be impugned. Whether it is exercised in either a vindictive, or remunerative, or any other form, the rectitude of ,its manifestations may always be depended upon even should we be unable to perceive it. This I presume will not be questioned.

Prop. 14. If the integrity of all the exercises of justice may be with safety depended upon, then the infliction of penalty must be regulated by the actions of the transgressor, and the nature, number, and magnitude of the transgressions, must determine and fix the extent of their suffering; just as the nature, number, and magnitude of meritorious actions, would guide the hand of distributive justice. The extent of merit and demerit, would measure the rewards of the one and the misery of the other. In short, justice cannot make more than a fair reward, or less than an equitable claim; nor vice versa.

Prop. 15. No transgressor can either arrest the progress, or turn the course of the law, by which he is, or must be, arrested and prosecuted. This would suppose him to be stronger than Omnipotence, or wiser than divine wisdom, or rather, too crafty for his law and justice; which would imply imperfection in his law and character.

Prop. 16. If a sinner avoids the infliction of the penalty when incurred, it must be through the medium of a surety, because he is unable to meet the claims which are made upon him, in his own person.

Prop. 17. This surety-ship must be founded on the ground of substitution, or which is the same thing, by putting Christ in the place of those for whom he became surety, and in that situation to receive the same treatment at the hand of justice which they must have done, supposing that he had not been their surety. If not, the law would be injured, the honours of justice would be humbled, and a place of never-ending suffering justly questioned.

Prop. 18. The atonement is of a substitutionary and therefore vicarious character. I have said, page 82, that "I know of no sect that will admit, and much more contend, for general redemption upon a vicarious plan.' I wish to be understood as referring to redemption accomplished by Immanuel, as the surety and substitute of all those who are and will be eternally saved, and who are familiarly known to the lovers of truth, by the names, elect-election of grace-elect of God-his elect, &c.

Prop. 19. A surety and substitute, answering to precisely the same claims which would have been made on those for whom he interfered, must release from condign punishment all who are involved in his suretyship engagements and substitutionary sacrifice. And not merely, that as a simple consequence, but as a necessary production-a necessary effect, from a voluntary cause.

Prop. 20. Spiritual deliverance is a matter both of right and grace. Right, on the part of the surety and sinner, and of grace, on the part of the lawgiver and judge. Observe, this grace arose out of that construction which infinite wisdom put upon the law, so as to admit of a substitutionary satisfaction. Favour is therefore the root of right; and regarding salvation as the tree of life, the believer has it both in its root and branches, as Jehovah's favour, Immanuel's purchase, the Spirit's unction, and his own right.

Prop. 21. Redemption is complete, infallible, and eternal. Complete-this is argued from the resurrection of Christ, which was effected by the virtue of his official power, or by the blood of the everlasting covenant. Infallible-or the nature and relations of suretyship and substitution must be destroyed, the sinner's right denied, the Saviour's purchase lost, Jehovah's character disgraced, and the rectitude of his justice destroyed. Eternal - because in heaven, the abuse of liberty will be prevented.

Prop. 22. The administration of salvation must accord with its nature and design. The manner of its being dispensed, must answer to its character and the intentions of its author, or they must be allowed to contradict each other; and if the nature and character of the form of their conveyance, disagree with the nature and character of the things to be administered, and God has chosen these means and modes, then God must be chargeable with disorder; but to charge him with disorder, is to charge him with sinning; and to charge him with sinning is daring presumption and horrible blasphemy.

Prop. 23. If the nature and mode of the administration, must agree with the nature and character of the things imparted, then salvation must be administered in absolute and positive forms, because the salvation is absolute and certain.

Prop. 24. There can be no such thing as offers of grace, and general invitations; because such a mode of dispensing them, is at direct and open variance with the nature of redemption and the design of its author. To prove this, we need not call in the aid of metaphysics, nor the art of logical sophistry. The conclusion is easy, and its facility is only equaled by its correctness and, strength. Christ is the surety and substitute of his people; his obedience was complete, and the measure of his sufferings was full-the effects of his obedience and blood are conveyed to his spiritual posterity, as the effects of Adam's transgression are conveyed to his natural offspring, which is to all, and no more. The effects can never be destroyed nor diverted from their purposed line of obligation, either in the one case or the other. Necessary effects can never be offered conditionally, so as to be rendered uncertain as to their operation, or the time and place of their operation; and if the blessings of salvation are necessary effects of immutable causes, it must be the greatest absurdity in the world to offer them to all, as if they were obtainable by all, when, in point of fact, they are given only to some, and even to them they flow as effects from the most productive causes.

Mr. Dwight, whose objections to this view of redemption I shall examine in a proper place, thought the atonement must be sufficient for the un-elected part of mankind because Christ could not be offered to all mankind, without such being the case. Such a mode of reasoning, is like attempting to prove one error by another error. Mr. Fuller made this concession, that ' If the measure of his (Christ's) sufferings were according to those for whom he died, in such a manner as that if more had been saved, his sorrows must have been proportionably increased ; it might, for aught I know, be inconsistent with indefinite invitations.' Now I have fairly proved that his sufferings were proportioned to the guilt of those for whom he died, and ' for aught I know,' the proofs must be admitted.

But it is easy to accumulate evidence, if more evidence can possibly be desired ; and amongst the numerous sources from whence additional proofs may be drawn is, 1. The covenant of grace. In the preceding papers, I have fully proved that there is such a thing as the covenant of grace; and it must be noticed, that the blood of Christ is called the "blood of the everlasting covenant." Heb. xiii. 20. 1 have observed, that this covenant signifies to dispose, arrange, methodize, &c. and that it was ratified, by cutting, slaughtering, dividing, &c. thus resting its importance upon the purifying and sacrificial offering of the great High Priest. I have also further proved, that in the new testament it answers to a person's disposing of his property by a will, and is therefore a testamentary will. His blood is also obviously represented as being necessarily attached to this testament, as a seal is impressed on the instrument of a person's will. These things will now be assumed as facts, respecting which no serious discussion can arise ; and the inferences that may be fairly drawn are the following :

1. That he died for those, and those only, who are properly disposed, and distinctly mentioned in the covenant of grace. It is absurd to suppose that he died for any more, because the very nature and representation of the covenant excludes every such supposition; and if people are determined to retain such ideas, it must arise either from perverseness, or imbecility of intellect, or both united, or from some secret phenomenon, perhaps nobody can be sure what.

2. That he died for all his covenant ones, or those for whom he covenanted. We are told "he gave his life a ransom for many." And it is equally affirmed that he gave his life a ransom for all; i. e. all the many. The words, ransom for many, constitute a term of numerical comparison: thus, he gave his life a ransom for many; it was possible for him to have ransomed more; yea, he might have ransomed all mankind. But he has not-he gave his life a ransom for many; for a definite number, not for more, not for all mankind. Now this involves two important ideas. 1. The idea of exclusion. If he died for many the rest are excluded. 2. Certainty. He died for many, not for any. But it is said, "he gave his life a ransom for all." This phrase is descriptive of numerical perfection; the whole of the many, the sheep, the children, the legatees, the elect; the many sons whom he will bring to glory. Heb. ii. 10.

3. He suffered the exact measure of wrath which was due to their transgressions. Should it be said this is begging the question, I would ask, did he not die for their sins agreeable to covenant agreements ? If so, did he die for all their sins, or for some only ? If the former, must he not expiate those sins by suffering what the sinner deserved? If he suffered for some only, or for many, or most, how could his redemption be perfect? How came it to be accepted? And who is to die for the rest ? " For Christ having once died, dieth no more, death bath no more dominion over him."

But there is no doubt of its having eternal dominion over us, if Christ did not die for all, and every sin, of which we are or shall be guilty ; for without shedding of blood there is no remission of sins. To contend that he died only for some of their sins, is to contend that he expiated only some of their sins, and this is equal to affirming that there are some sins which are not atoned for ; which is equivalent to asserting that God can pardon some sins without an atonement, or else that the sinner can make expiation himself, or otherwise that the elect must perish in everlasting perdition. I imagine these things will not be anxiously coveted, and therefore conclude that the antithesis must be admitted. But its admission demonstrates the point in dispute.

2. If more proofs are demanded, more are at hand, and I am ready to advance more, drawn from the nature and character of the Redeemer's surety-ship. Assuming that the apostle's declaration, Heb. vii. 22. will be sufficient to prove that Christ is a Surety, 1 shall content myself with barely citing the passage to which I have referred. It stands thus, " By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament."

"He, being God-man, is a surety, one that bindeth himself for another, to see something paid or performed, to give security for another."-Poole on Heb. vii. 22.

The collective force of the above observations which regard the nature of surety-ship, is thus concentrated. He drew nigh, mixed himself with a multitude, was employed, engaged with another in contract, became implicated, pledged himself, and became responsible. Take the following comment upon these particular features.

Draw near. He drew near to the offended party in a very astonishing manner, and hence his engagements are represented in language of surprise. ' Who is, "Hebrew Word" this he,' this mighty, this intrepid, this signal, this determined he! 'that has engaged his heart to approach unto me? saith the Lord.' This was no other than his shepherd, the man who is near to him, his neighbour or near dweller, the man that is his fellow, who is in nearness and conjunction with him, and is no other than his only begotten Son, who dwelt in his bosom from of old, even from everlasting. This renowned He, went near to his Father in the behalf of his church.

2. Mixed himself with a multitude-with the general assembly and church of the first-born, whose names are written in heaven. He mixed himself up with their interests and welfare, and that in the most ready and willing manner. He mixed his love with the glory of his children, and while he was mixed in the affections of his Father, being his daily pleasure, he rejoiced in the habitable parts of the earth, and his delights were with the sons of men. And it must not be forgotten, that, as our surety, he possessed two natures, and though they never were nor never will be mixed, they are notwithstanding inseparably conjoined.. In this character it was, he mixed or mingled with the family as the first-born of many brethren.

3. Was engaged or employed-in representing himself as their Surety-writing their names in his book of life and testament of grace-stipulating for their salvation-signing the bond of agreement -surveying his inheritance, &c.

4. Became implicated-in the transgressions of his people, and in the penal consequences thereof: and in the fullness of time he became implicated in a fiery law, like the threads thrown through the woof by the shuttle; or like the ram caught in the thicket by its horns. As his people were wove in his affections, and could not be separated, so he became entangled, caught and held by his own engagements, and kept under the unsparing hand of justice till he procured his discharge by fulfilling the contract, and wove in the loom of the law a garment for his church; when that was completed-when the last thread was drawn, he exclaimed, `it is finished!' bowed hii head, and justice divided the thread of life.

5. Pledged, or pawned, or mortgaged. Christ had a glory with his Father before the world was, which glory he prayed to enjoy, an the ground of his having finished his work, or fulfilled his contract. Vide John xvii. 7. Now it seems by no means inconsistent to suppose that he should pawn, or pledge his own glory the glory of his human nature, to redeem, or bring back again Jacob unto God. He was made a priest with an oath, and having made the oath he gave the pledge. He placed his inheritance in the hands of justice, who held it as a security for debt; and the sins of believers were, or might be considered as a mortgage upon it, which could be paid off only by suffering, blood, and death.

6. He became responsible. Justice looked to the sinner's surety for satisfaction. See this beautifully illustrated by Paul's engagements for Onesimus :-" If he bath wronged thee, or oweth thee ought, put that on mine account: I Paul have written it with mine own hand, I will repay it:" i. e. I will be responsible for him-make your claims on me. The case also of Jacob's taking the charge of his uncle Laban's flock, is much to the point "That which was torn of beasts I brought not unto thee : I bore the loss of it; of my hand didst thou require it, whether stolen 'by day, or stolen by night." Gen. xxxi. 39. That is, you looked upon me as responsible-I took the charge of the flock, and you considered me as answerable, or accountable.

Lastly, Judah's becoming surety for Benjamin is a fine elucidation of surety-ship engagements. "I will be surety for him; of my hand shalt thou require him; if I bring him not unto thee, and set him before thee, then let me bear the blame for ever." Gen. xliii. 9. "I will be surety for him," i. e. I will engage for his safety of my hand shalt thou require him;" i. e. I will be answerable for him:-" if I bring him not unto thee, and set him before thee, then let me bear the blame for ever;"-if I do not fulfill my engagements, let me lay under the blame-let an everlasting stigma be fixed upon me. "Judah ! thou art he whom thy brethren shall praise!"

The plain thoughts from these illustrations are-1. Christ became a surety for debt and crime. 2. He received his flock numbered and told into his hands. 3. He engaged to bring back his church from sin to glory, or all those for whom he became Surety. 4. He became amenable to law and justice for all their transgressions. 5. Satisfaction was demanded of the Shepherd, not the sheep -at the hand of the Surety, not at the hand of offending Onesimus's.

The only question which is of any further importance is this, in what did the satisfaction consist? It was satisfaction to justice, no doubt; but in what character? -legislative or punitive? Was it a compensation to justice in the character of a legislator, a creditor, or an offended attribute ?-or was it in all those characters ? I think all, and am not forgetful that I am opposed in my views by men of talent and influence. Mr. Fuller thought the grand object of redemption was to place the government of God in as good a condition as it was before sin had impugned its authority. So thought Mr. Dwight, and so thinks Mr. Hinton, and those in whose behalf he wrote. Now it will not be denied, that a form of government may he satisfied with the infliction of punishment, disproportioned to the magnitude of the offence or offences ; but then it will be denied that the perfection of the law would be preserved by such satisfaction. It is one thing to pacify a government, and another thing to satisfy the law in its claims. Now it seems to me, that though the moral government of God, might be represented to sinners, as a pure, firm, and efficacious administration, by requiring of substitutional suffering, less in its extent than was actually due to the offenders, yet neither himself nor his law could be satisfied.

I present my objections to such a scheme in the following form.

1. It blends and confuses the nature of government, with the perfection of the law and the attribute of justice. Now, in my view there is a manifest difference between a form of government, the law by which the government is administered, and the moral perfection of the Law-giver. I `will grant that his government might he satisfied, if nothing more was necessary than to make moral agents believe, that God hated sin, and would punish severely for it; but then, would his law receive a compensation? Would the attribute of justice be satisfied ?

2. It is a severe reflection upon the HOLINESS of GOD. If by holiness we understand his infinite rectitude, it must suppose, that he is not so averse to sin or moral obliquity, as the scriptures represent; and that a trifling acknowledgment will be deemed sufficient.- Mr. Dwight says, ' Nor will it be believed that any created nature could in that short space of time, suffer what would be equivalent to even a slight distress extended through eternity.' According to this, Christ did not suffer half so much as due to the sins of one single individual. If this is not an unsparing reflection on the holiness of God, I am greatly mistaken'.

3. It would render retributive justice EXCESSIVELY PARTIAL. If suffering is the penalty due to sin, ought it not to be inflicted on one as much as another? Admit of exemption by a substitute, must not the substitute undergo the same affliction , both in nature and degree, that must have been sustained by the offenders for whom he is a surety and substitute? If the substitute suffered but a small degree of what was due to the offenders, why might not the offenders have been excused in the same manner themselves? And how will God be just in punishing sinners in the bottomless pit till they have paid the last farthing? It must be confessed, that in these awful cases, justice is but partially administered, which is a necessary though an insufferable conclusion.

4. It depreciates the WORK AND MERIT of the gracious Redeemer. It is certain that his chief work and merit consisted in his sufferings. But if he did not suffer what was the full due of my sin, I cannot conceive how his merit can be equal to my demerit: and if all he bore did not amount to half what a lost sinner must suffer, I am at a loss to conceive how he is able to save one single sinner, much more the whole world.

5. It confuses the plan of salvation. I have always thought that a sinner was saved by the merit of Christ, which was reckoned a counterbalance to the weight of his transgressions. When it is said, "the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all," I concluded in the simplicity of my mind, that he suffered what was due to their sin : and when it is said, " the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and by his stripes we are healed," I conceived the meaning to be, he suffered in the room and stead of certain individuals. But such simple thoughts and illogical conclusions, would destroy the system to which I am objecting.

I would here observe, as a fresh source of argument, that the nature of the Redeemer's surety-ship assumes a substitutionary aspect. If he became our surety he must take our place and stand in our room or stead; and if he take our place he must sustain what would have fallen upon those whose place he has assumed; and if he honourably delivers any of the human race, it must be, by BEING ALL-DOING ALL-and SUFFERING ALL, that they should have, been, done, and suffered. Now this requires three important things, viz. the assumption of human nature in its purity, obedience to the law in its perfection, and suffering the exact penalty for offences committed. Let us see if the scriptures support these ideas.

• Heb. ii. 9. ought not to be omitted, as it is one of the clearest texts for snbstitutionary and limited redemption of any in the bible. " We see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour, that he, by the grace of God, should taste death Lrep aavros in the stead of all." On this passage it may not be amiss to remark, 1. That the passage is defective in point of grammatical correctness. It is not uper pantos antfiropos, in the stead of all mankind, or in the stead of every man, but uper panlos, in the stead of all. 2. That the noun must be sought for in the connection; this will be allowed. 3. The connection would necessarily furnish us with a noun of multitude, and not with a common noun. The scope of the apostle's argument is to point out the humiliation, suffering, and glory of Zion's Lord and Saviour. His humiliation, " thou madest him a little lower than the angels ;" or a little while inferior. The hebrew nwi, and the greek eaarrorv, signifies a change of condition, and such a change as supposes diminution, deprivation, &c. Such was the Redeemer's condition when he became incarnate. He was placed in this situation, to qualify him for suffering the curse of the law. But for whom did he suffer? Let the apostle tell his own tale, " For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings. For both he that sanctifieth, and they who are sanctified, are all of one (nature and family); for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren." From this it appears 1. God designed bringing many of the human race to glory. 2. That the moral fitness of things rendered substitutionary suffering necessary. "It became him." 3. That by standing in the sinner's stead, he was constituted a perfect Saviour through suffering. 4. That those for whom he suffered are described as sons, sanctified, brethren, and in the succeeding verses children given him, whom by death he delivers from death, even all the seed of Abraham. Now by employing any one of these nouns, the passage stands corrected thus, lie tasted death in the stead of all the sons, or all the children, or all the seed. This cannot be wrong, because it gives the true scope of the apostle's argument, and we may remark that it is perfectly analogous with other nouns of the same class; thus the people, the sheep, the jewels, the chosen generation, the royal priest. hood, &c. - or if we construe panlos, distributively, the passage will stand thus, in the stead of every son, every child, every one of the seed of Abraham, &c. Let it not be forgotten, that while this destroys the impious notion of general redemption, it restores the passage to its original situation ; by which its beauty is seen, and its force is felt. Can Mr. T.... deny this? And if not, can he escape the charge, of endeavouring to deceive the major part of his congregation?

Second. Let us now examine the scriptures with reference to the Redeemer's person, work, and suffering.

1. His person. As I am not directing my enquiry to meet the eye, nor engage the attention of professed Socinians, I shall assume the fact of his being GOD, in the most unlimited, absolute, and unqualified sense. I shall also further take it for granted, that he is really, truly, and properly MAN. I shall also assert without offering proof, that these two natures are not mixed, so as to lose their identity; nor separated, so as to introduce distinct personality; but so united as to render him one perfect, powerful, precious, and all-sufficient Saviour. I shall only observe, that his human nature was immaculate and perfect : there was no spot, stain, nor blemish in that holy thing which was born of a virgin ; for it was a clean thing brought cut of an unclean. The following scriptures, if examined, will shew the correctness of this observation. Jer. xxx. 21. Rom. v. 19. Eph. v. 2, 26, 27. Heb. ii. 14.-vii. 26.ix. 14. 1 Pet. i. 19.

3. His sufferings. He could not deliver his people by being all that the eternal law required with regard to their nature, nor by doing all that they ought to have done, namely, obey the law of God in its perfection, because there were offences committed which required penal satisfaction. And if redemption is effected by substitutionary suffering, it must, in my mind, be by sustaining the punishment due to transgressors. Here I wish it to be remarked, that sin was really and truly imputed to Christ. This I take to be sufficiently illustrated and proved in the scriptures of truth. 2 Cor. v. 19. may serve for the present purpose-,, God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them." But surely they were imputed to him, through, and by whom the reconciliation was made. Query, can he offer to receive into his favour those towards whom he is not reconciled ? If not how are offers of grace to be vindicated ? And further, if God is reconciled to this world by imputing their trespasses to Christ, how can he damn them without hating them, and how can he hate them without changing, and how can his justice be preserved if his rectitude is destroyed ? But if these cannot be answered, how can any man have the face to plead for general redemption ? I freely confess that it is to me inexplicable ?

By imputation I mean placing to the account of a person an action either good or bad, which action the said individual did not perform himself, and then judging, reckoning, accounting, and declaring that person to be either righteous or unrighteous, according to the merit or demerit of the action. This shews 1. That sin was not imputed to Christ simply as a thing. 2. That it was not imputed as an inherent quality. Nor 3. as physical acts. But 4. as guilt or offences. The first would have emancipated either all the devils and all mankind, or else none of them. The second would have required its insertion as well as its imputation, which would have made his heart and life unholy, and thus have rendered him incapable of redeeming any. The third would. represent God, as reckoning and declaring things to be different to what they really are, which is an idea that no sober Christian will entertain, and arminians have no reason to be proud of it. The fourth gives the true idea, and shows how God can be just and yet the justifier of the ungodly. I am anxious that this point should be understood, because it is of primary importance. For if Christ sustained the guilt of every physical action, he must suffer for the guilt of every action ; if at least his sufferings are complete and satisfactory, and if so, the absurdity of general redemption and offers of grace must both appear.

There is no shutting the eyes against this conclusion, because it is as evident as the father of day. I. have my thoughts upon, the sun in the firmament.

That distinct offences were charged on Christ, I submit, 1. The meaning of the word impute, which is to account, or reckon, as well as to transfer. Now to count or reckon, is to look over things as they exist and give judgment accordingly, and this supposes that there exists a plurality of things, or there would be no counting or reckoning. Reckoning or counting, is bringing scattered items to meet in one sum total, and this seems exactly to correspond with the prophet's description in Isa. liii. the Lord bath laid, or caused to meet on him the iniquity of us all. All the sins of all the elect met on Christ, like different items in one sum total.

2. I alledge express passages of scripture where a plurality of sins are mentioned. Rom. iv.. 25. " Who was delivered for our offences." Rom. v. " And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift ; (imputed righteousness), for the judgment was by one (o/once) to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification." The plain meaning of which is, one single offence made man guilty, and judgment passed upon him accordingly, but the righteousness by which a sinner (an elect one of course) is justified before God, is not by one act of Immanuel's obedience, nor by his suffering for sin as a thing, or in the gross, but of many offences: i. e. the righteousness of Christ, consist in his having all the many distinct offences of his people imputed to him, for which offences he yielded a satisfaction of right: I am aware how these remarks cut, but they are the plain words of soberness and truth. Again, "God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them." Here it is plain that reconciliation was effected for a world of believers, by the imputation of every sin to Christ, which was in that world. It is of no use to quibble and say, the word all is not in the text, and therefore trespasses might be imputed to Christ, and yet not all trespasses. Answer, My aim is to establish the distinct manner in which the sins of believers are imputed to Christ, the consequences will follow. In the mean time, will the objector inform Us, how sins can be forgiven except they are expiated ? -Sins are viewed as debts, and called by that name. I begin with Matt. vi. 12. " Forgive us our debts, a:; we forgive our debtors." It is plain that here is an allusion to commercial affairs, where every debt is a distinct item; and if sins are to be forgiven as distinct debts through the redemption of Christ, must it not prove in a conclusive manner, that redemption is of a mercantile character, or that there is something in it which is analogous thereto ? Surely our Lord would never employ a mercantile figure to illustrate a subject, which bore no resemblance to it when compared therewith. But this prove, that sins are allusively called debts, and that as debts are distinctly charged either upon the debtor or the surety, so sins were distinctly charged upon Christ who was a surety for debts. Prov. xxii. 26. Another passage is Luke vii. 41. "A certain creditor had two debtors, the one owed him five hundred pence, and the other fifty." Allowing this to illustrate the nature of sin and its forgiveness it shews, 1. That the sum total of one man's sins, may differ exceedingly from that of another's. The case before us is as one to ten. 2. That sins must be distinctly charged on Christ, or else he must suffer as much punishment for one as another ; and if so, he must either suffer too much or too little. If lie only suffered enough to pay the debts of the last mentioned debtor, he could not suffer enough for the larger, and if he suffer enough for the largest, he most suffer more than enough for the smaller. For instance, had the creditor in the case before us, have forgiven through a, surety the debt of fifty pence, the same measure of favour would not be sufficient for him who owed ten times the amount. His surety must pay ten times as much for the one as the other, and of course the favour would be ten times as large ; and so vice versa. Allow this to bear a resemblance to the subject of its application, and I request no more. The point is as conspicuous as it can be desired. The reader may consult Luke xiii. 4. " Think ye that they were sinners (debtors) above all men that dwelt in Jerusalem?" and Romans iv, 4. -Sins are distinctly charged upon the conscience of a quickened sinner. Thus Psalm xl. 12. " Mine iniquities have taken hold of me." Job xiii. 23. "how many are mine iniquities and sins . Thou makest me to possess the iniquities of my youth." xxii.5. "Is not thy wickedness great ? and thy sins infinite? Now if they are charged distinctly upon the conscience, I imagine they were thus charged upon the sinner's surety, or else the charge is unfounded and deceptive. -Jehovah regard Sins in a distinct manner. Thus Psalm xc. 8. " Thou hast set our iniquities before thee, our secret sins in the light of thy countenance." Now this denotes the exact and distinct knowledge the omniscient God has of all sins, however secretly they may be committed, And also the ground on which his judicial administrations are conducted. And if it is thus towards the sinner, I presume it must be so towards his surety.-The petitioning penitent, and the praying saint, solicit the forgiveness of sins distinctly noticed by justice, the sad remembrance of which are impressed upon their minds. "Hide thy face from my sins, and blot out all mine iniquities." " Remember not against me the sins of my youth." Here sins are regarded as distinct items by the petitioner, who conceives of them as distinct debts in the creditor's book ; and as he is in a state of spiritual insolvency, he implores the creditor to cross out the debts, or rather to obliterate the characters by covering the whole surface with thick ink, well knowing that the debt involves the obligation to p4yinent. And if that is the case with the debtor, it must be the same with his substitute.

-The manner of forgiveness exhibits the same fact. "I, even I, am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins." Isa. xliii. 25. This invaluable passage, represents Jehovah forgiving the sins of his people as a tradesman crosses out the debts of his insolvent debtors, and promises not to think any more about them in a judicial manner, so as to cause the insolvents to be arrested or perplexed. And what adds to this incomparable favour, is, the unconditional manner in which the act is performed, and the promise made "for mine own sake." Not for any thing that the sinner has done, or will do not for his improving the grace of God-his continuing faithful-his increasing perseverance, &c. which if not observed, would destroy the efficacy of the favour, cause the creditor to open his debt-book, and make out a fresh account of some sort or other, and in his rage take me by the throat and demand payment, or imprison me in hell for ever. I speak solemnly and deliberately when I say, I would not embrace the proud tenets of Arminianism or Wesleyanism, would it invest me with all the gold-mines in the globe. I wish to honour the divine perfections, in all the freedom of their exercise and grandeur of display. I am saved by grace, and there is no consideration on earth, which shall induce me to throw a veil over that by which I am everlastingly saved and honoured.

Resuming the argumentative part of the subject, I ob'serve,-The same thing is exemplified by the form of those exultations, which a sense, a feeling and blessed sense of divine forgiveness produce in the soul of a pardoned sinner. Take as instances, Psalm ciii. 2, 3. " Bless the Lord, 0 my soul, and forget not all his benefits ; who forgiveth all thine iniquities." " And you being dead in your sins, and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses." Col. ii. 13. The joy of a pardoned sinner arises from a spiritual persuasion, that all his sins are forgiven.-The declarations of the gospel establish the same fact. "All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men, but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost" -is the express declaration of Christ, in Matthew xii. 31. Whatever may be the sin of exception and privation, thus much is certain, that it is some particular sin, not more distinct than others, but a sin which God has determined not to forgive. Not I imagine, because he could not, but because he would not.-It seems not to be designed to spew his imbecility, but to display his sovereignty. With the pen of justice he has made a mark of sovereignty in the book of mercy; by which he arrests two extreme characters in their career-the licentious antinomian, and the self-righteous arminian. But while this sin is unpardonable, it plainly proves that there are other sins distinctly committed, and as distinctly noticed. Again. the phrase all manner of sin and blasphemy, forcibly points out the great variety and multitude of criminal acts, and the distinct and exact manner in which they are noticed, and entered by justice in the great debt book. Again, Eph. i. 7. " In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace." And I John i. 7. "the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin." To the same import is Isaiah xl. 2. "She hath received at the Lord's hand double for all her sins." From these passages, to which many more might be added, it is evident from the gracious declarations of scripture, that sins are noticed and pardoned in a distinctive manner; and if so, it must involve the idea of their being distinctly imputed and transferred to Christ. -Sins will be distinctly noticed and reckoned up at the judgment day. In scenic vision, John said, "he saw the dead, small and great, stand before God: and the books were opened; and another book was opened, which was the book of life : and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. Rev. xx. 12. It is sufficient to observe from this passage,-1. That the great judgment day resembles a reckoning day in commercial affairs. 2. That sins will be distinctly observed and charged upon transgressors. 3. That they will he distressingly imprinted upon the memory, and fastened upon the conscience. 4. That an exact knowledge of every sin will guide the judicial administrations of the great day of God's wrath. 5. That their punishment will be proportioned to the multitude and magnitude of their sins:-" And they were judged every man according to his works, "verse 13. If then, sinners will have their sins distinctly charged to their account at the last day, and will have a distinct though distressing know ledge of them, it proves that such must be the case with him, to whom the transfer of accounts are made over.

Now as the accounts of the elect were transferred to Christ, who is their surety for both debts and crimes, he must have had the very same accounts against him that his people had against them ; and if they were accounts made up of distinct items, it must prove beyond controversy, that such was the true character of the accounts transferred. It seems to me as if this conclusion could not admit of a question. -The scriptures represent Christ as suffering for sins in a distinctive manner. 1. Prophecy. " He shall bear their iniquities." Isaiah liii. " Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people, and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make au end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the Most Holy." Dan. x. 24. Here observe, that the word transgression preceded by the definite article the, plainly points out the sins of all God's people collected together; just as several debts united together make one, and may with the strictest propriety be called the debt. It is obvious to a demonstration, that sins are here regarded as being distinctly imputed to Christ. 2. The language of Christ himself "Innumerable evils have compassed me about : mine iniquities have taken hold upon me, so that I am not able to look up ; they are more in number than the hairs of mine head : therefore my heart faileth me." Palm xl. 12. Whatever relation this language might have to the writer's feelings, the psalm is certainly prophetic, and is the language of a greater than David; even the root and offspring of David, the bright and the Morning Star. But how innumerable evils could distinctively take hold of him, if not distinctively imputed and transferred, I believe no person will be able to render a reason. If innumerable evils laid hold of him, innumerable evils must have been distinctly marked and specified in their transfer : there is no evading this conclusion. Other passages might be selected of the same import. But 3. The language of prophetic fu / lment ronfrm the same thing. " He bore our sins, and carried our griefs." " Whom God bath set forth (or ordained) to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission (passing over) of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God." Rom. iii..25.

From these quotations it is evident that he has borne our sins in all their distinctness and weight; and, that God ordained him to be the expiatory sacrifice, for the passing over the transgressions of his people, I submit the following syllogisms grounded upon the foregoing remarks.

1. If the word impute, signifies to transfer an account composed of distinct counts, or items, the every sin of the whole church must be distinctly, and actually transferred to Christ. Now the word impute has that signification, and therefore every sin of every believer must be distinctly and actually transferred to Christ.

2. If sins are viewed as debts, and Christ became the great paymaster of his people's debts, then sins must be distinctly charged upon Christ; but sins are viewed as debts, and Christ is the great paymaster of his people's debts, therefore sins must be distinctly charged upon Christ.

3. If sins are distinctly charged upon the conscience of a quickened sinner, and Christ had that imputed to him which we have a sense of in our own conscience, then sins must be distinctly imputed to Christ; but sins are distinctly charged upon the conscience of a quickened sinner, and Christ had that imputed to him which quickened sinners have a sense of in their consciences, Heb. x. 2. therefore, sins must be distinctly imputed to Christ..

4. If sins are forgiven as distinct offences, it must arise from their having been imputed to Christ as distinct offences : but sins are forgiven as distinct offences, and therefore they must have been distinctly imputed to Christ.

5. If the exultations of a pardoned penitent, arise from a conviction that all his sins are pardoned, and they can only be forgiven as distinct sins but by being distinctly imputed to Christ, then they must have been thus imputed to Christ ; but the exultations of a pardoned sinner do arise from a conviction that all his sins are pardoned; therefore, they must have been distinctly imputed to Christ.

6. If the declarations of the gospel represent the same thing, then the same thing is proved by the declarations of the gospel: but the declarations of the gospel do represent the same thing, and therefore the same thing is proved by the declarations of the gospel.

7. If the sins of the ungodly will be distinctly charged upon them on the day of judgment, they must have been distinctly charged upon those who are saved, supposing that no surety had been provided. But the sins of the ungodly will be distinctly preferred against them, therefore it must have been distinctly preferred against those who are saved, supposing no surety had been provided. Assuming, however, that justice would be impartially administered.

8. If the sins of the elect would have been distinctly preferred against them, supposing them to have had no surety, then their sins must be distinctly preferred against their surety, supposing them to be saved by a surety. But the sins of the elect would have been distinctly preferred against them, bad it not have been for their surety, therefore their sin must have been distinctly preferred against Christ, supposing them to be saved by him. This argument rests upon the same principle as the preceding one, (viz.) the impartial administration of divine justice.

Lastly. If the scriptures represent Christ as suffering for sins in a distinctive manner, then Christ must have had them imputed to him in the same character. But the scriptures do represent Christ as suffering for sins in a distinctive manner, therefore they must have been distinctly imputed to him. To destroy this conclusion, it will be necessary to prove, either, that Christ suffered for that which was not imputed to him, or else, that the scriptures of truth are false.

There are but two ways by which these arguments can be overthrown ; one is by showing the fallacy of the preceding observations on which the assumption is founded ; and the other is, by proving the inferences are neither necessary nor legitimate. Now the observations are obviously founded on the plain meaning of scripture, and the conclusions drawn from the premises are as natural as the emissions of light from the sun. And if they are to the point, and cannot be overthrown, they must establish the point for which they were brought; and that proved, the fact of Christ's suffering the exact amount of vindictive wrath due to the sins imputed to him, is easily ascertained from such considerations as these.

1. A substitute standing in the room and stead of another, must make the same satisfaction which the person for whom he is a substitute must have made himself; and if so, Christ must make the same satisfaction which would have been demanded of those for whom he became a substitute.

2. A surety for either debts or crime, must pay the same amount, and suffer the same infliction, as the person must for whom he is surety. Now Christ is a surety for debt and crime; he must, therefore, pay in suffering what those must have paid for whom he became surety for good. Now they could have paid only by suffering, nor could Christ. True, the divinity of his person was infinite, but his divinity could not suffer, though it could and did give amazing worth to his human nature, and might thus render, and did thus render, his sufferings as much superior to the sufferings of a mere creature as the finest gold is to the grossest metal. But though a surety might justly satisfy a creditor by paying in gold what the personal debtor owed in copper or any other inferior metal, still the debt must be paid; and there must be as much gold advanced, as is equal to the amount in more inferior specie. And so with regard to the sufferings of Christ, they certainly were of more avail than the sufferings of a mere creature, and as much superior as his person is to the person of a mere creature. Gold is of much more value than tin or lead, but a guinea is not sufficient to procure a legal discharge of a debt amounting to thirty shillings, much more thirty pounds, &c. In point of_ justice, it makes no difference who pays a debt, whether the personal debtor or his surety ; nor in what kind of specie it is paid, provided the full amount is paid. But to urge, that the sinner can be discharged though his debts are not fully paid, because his surety was Christ, is like urging, that a guinea is worth a thousand pounds, because it happened to find its way into a monarch's purse. If I owed a debt of ten thousand pounds, and his present majesty became my surety, and to meet the debt he presented a sovereign (the ten thousandth part of it) would the dignity of his person and office satisfy for the rest? Would it agree with the nature of commercialjustice? If the creditor was told, it was always the case with kings to pay off such large debts with such small suns, would he not think the prerogative of kings destructive to commercial and moral justice? He would most probably reprobate such a transfer of debts, and would look upon kings and princes as the Jews did upon the Samaritans, with no very kindly feelings, and with no very strong desire to have any intercourse with them; at least, they would not desire to have any dealings with such dignified personages.

3. The nature o f that Justice, which had such a peculiar relation to the affair of Christ's suffering. This justice, was commutative, legislative, and vindictive. Commutative-by this I mean, the act of allowing, one obligation to be ransomed by mother. Justice allowing the obligation of the sinner, to be nullified by the obligation of the surety. Legislative-that which formed the laws by which the sinner is held to obligation. Vindictive - that which enforces the penalty without mitigation. Thus while a favourable interpretation is put upon the law of God in allowing a surety, it loses none of its authority, nor foregoes any of its claims; it allows au alteration in its executive, but not in its constitutive character. The penalty is executed upon the surety, but with the same inflexible rigour, as it would have been upon the actual offender.

I submit the following scriptures. Ps. xl. 12. "In. numerable evils have compassed me about,"-have poured upon me from all quarters, like floods of water rushing from declivities, and meeting in a receiving focus with the most tremendous rage. Surely this strong expression, can denote nothing less than the vindictive displeasure of God against Christ, as the surety of his people. " Mine iniquities have taken hold upon me." Mine, not by perpetration assuredly, but by imputation unquestionably. Mark, here are innumerable evils compassing him about, and distinctly taking hold of him. What else can be meant, but that Christ suffered the vindictive wrath of God, which was distinctly due to those iniquities which he calls his ? " So that I am not able to look up," or am not able to see. What with the weight, the waters, and the darkness, I anz unable to lift up my eyes to see through the storm, or to behold my Father's countenance. "Therefore my heart faileth me." " Was ever sorrow like my sorrow?" "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me !" Could any thing short of punitive and unqualified justice, make him utter such heart-rending language? Well might the apostle say, " he who spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all;" i. e. the elect. Unquestionably it was delivering him up as the sinner's surety, into the avenging hands of divine justice.

Psal. xxii. 14. " I am poured out like water;- am in a profuse bloody sweat, as if my whole frame must be entirely dissolved. " All my bones are out of joint;" or " sundered from each other." Such is the panic, the fright, or the unequalled consternation which I experience. '' My heart is like wax, it is melted in the midst of my bowels : it is like wax exposed to the intense agency of fire. Surely this must be understood of the effects, which the flaming, fiery, vindictive justice of God, produced, when executed upon the church's substitute and surety. Psal. lxxxix. 38, 46. " But thou hast cast off and abhorred. Thou hast been wroth with thine anointed-how long, 0 Lord, wilt thou hide thyself for ever? Shall thy wrath burn like FIRE?" These words are expressive of the sufferings of Christ, and represent him as cast off, abhorred, and singled out as the surety of his people ; and also devoted as the victim of just, though burning vengeance of relentless severity.

A few observations on that illustrious and intuitive chain of prophecy, the fifty-third of Isaiah. I begin at the third verse. " Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows, yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted." The vulgate latin as quoted by Gill, is, we esteemed him as a leprous person. And as rendered by others, we reckoned him the stricken, smitten God, and humbled. Which latter version is said to have converted several Jews in Africa. " But he was wounded (tormented) for our transgressions ; he was bruised for our iniquities." The word rendered bruise, signifies being bruised as corn is bruised; not by the English flail, but by the eastern method of treading it out by oxen, drawing over it a cart wheel, or other instruments. Or bruised as corn in a mill, or as a medicinal root in a mortar. "The chastisement of our peace was upon him;" the punishment due to our sins by which our ransom was effected and our peace obtained. " And with his stripes (or bruises) we are healed." '` All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way and the Lord .hath laid on him the iniquities of us all. Or, as the Hebrew, ' made the iniquity of us all to meet on him.' All the sins of God's people in every age of the world, which they ever did, or ever will commit, came from all quarters of the globe and met on him, or ill him, i. e. in his soul. The word also signifies to rush, all upon, and may denote the sins of all his people, falling and rushing upon him like an infuriated army. Now, the punishment due to sin is undoubtedly intended, and represent the most awful suffering by the most striking and terrible images. Thus all the sins of his people meeting on him, or in him, denotes all the punishment due to those sins; and the allusion very probably is, to the rays of the sun collected by a burning lens, meeting in one focus, and directing their mltiplied and united energies to one spot. Thus justice was the lens, that collected all "the dreadful wrath of that God who is a consuming fire. Could all the rays which the sun ever emitted be collected, what a tremendous action would it produce. But 0 what unimaginable anguish must be excited, when all the flame, of hell concentrated their intense agency for ages and ages, and poured with torturing fury their immense and dreadful contents, upon the Lamb ordained to expiate my guilt ! Well might lie be sore amazed-in agony -sweat blood-cry upon the cross, " Why hast than forsaken me?"-"my heart is melted like wax-how long shall thy wrath burn like fire!" &c. Well might the sun refuse to shine-the rocks be rent-the graves opened-the dead disturbed-and nature reel, and yawn and gasp in horrible convulsions ! It might have but stop, "it is finished!"-" His cries and tears are now all o'er-the dreadful work is done-the thunders are hushed-the lightnings are quenched-the clouds are discharged-the sun throws off his funeral pallnature regains her tranquillity, and every odorous zephyr breathes the astonished news from heaven, " fury is not in me!"

" Worthy is the Lamb that was slain," may ransomed sinners say, to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, arid glory, arid blessing." May I live to call him blessed, to throw myself upon the sparkling pavement of his feet, and rise to crown him LORD or ALL. May I live to cast my little mite into his boundless treasury of praise, and mingle with eternal strains.

But further, to mark a little more distinctly the Hebrew word rendered laid upon, has the signification .of meeting, or falling upon with force and violence-to rush with resistless and tremendous fury in a military manner. To this purpose is Symmachus as quoted by Parkhurst, Ka rarrn rat earoincer, hath caused to meet, which exactly agrees with Hebrew Word fall upon him, and with the English to fight. And then the idea is to be taken from an immense army of infuriated soldiers, rising up from ambush, or pouring out of their entrenchments, and directing their murderous weapons with envenomed rage against the general of an enemy's army. Thus the sins of every believer were hid or fixed in their intrenchments till justice gave the word of command, when like Ezekiel's host, they rose up an exceeding great army, and plunged their thirsty burning spears, in the Surety and Captain of Israel's great Redeemer. It was then, that,

Every crime became a sword,

And every sin a spear.

Now the thoughts naturally suggested by this figure of speech, are, 1. Every sin is of a penetrating, cutting, destroying nature. 2. That sins, though they may not inflict immediate mischief, are nevertheless reserved as swords for the day of slaughter. 3. That there will be a day of righteous retribution, when sins, like rusty swords, will be collected and sharpened for an awful eternity of operation. 4. That if they are not inflicted upon the actual offender, they must be upon his surety. 5. That if exemption is obtained by a surety, the surety must receive into his soul and quench in his blood, every sin that has been committed by those for whom he suffered; or the consequences would be fatal to their salvation. For as one leak is enough to sink a ship, and one sword sufficient to kill a man, so one sin is enough to sink a sinner into the chambers of death, and sufficient to pierce him through with many sorrows. Again, to have sins laid upon him, is to have those sins previous imputed to him, and to bear the sins of many, is to lift up, take upon, carry, away, &c. and denotes the complete and entire removal of all those sins which were imputed to him. The leading significations of the word [Hebrew Word] evidently justify such ideas, and is explained by the greek lambano, which means, to take, take upon, admit, receive, carry, &c. Thus Gen. xxi. 18. drise, lift, or [Hebrew Word], a take up the lad." Psalm cxvi. 13. " I will take [Hebrew Words] the cup of salvation." Again, " He made himself of no reputation, and (Hebrew Word) took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness (habit) of men." LXX. See other examples, Matt. xvi. 5, 6, 7. Isa. liii. 4, 12. where the idea of taking up and carrying is obvious. So Jesus Christ took up his people's sins as a porter takes up a load, stood up under them until they were expiated, and then carried them off, or away, 'into the land of forgetfulness. Most beautifully is this precious doctrine represented by the two goats, which Aaron was to take and present before the Lord at the door of the tabernacle. One was to be offered to the Lord for a sin-offering, and the other was to carry away all the sins and iniquities of the children of Israel, which had been typically imputed and transferred unto it. Now however this may have puzzled mystical interpreters, the scope and drift is singularly obvious; which was to represent, 1. The necessity of an atonement by sacrifice, as plainly indicated by the goat that fell a victim to sacrificial fire; thereby pointing out the sufferings and death of the Lord Jesus Christ. 2. The distinct imputation of sin and transfer of guilt to Christ; represented by Aaron's laying his hands upon the head of the scape-goat, and thus imputing and transferring all the sins and iniquities of the children of Israel. 3. The particular nature of the atonement; for while Aaron imputed and transferred all the sins of all the children of Israel, he evidently -excluded all the sins of all the heathen; thereby teaching the doctrine of a limited atonement. The scape goat was loaded with all the- sins of the children of Israel ; but with no more. The reason doubtless was, because no more was to be benefited by their annual sacrifice. 4. Another idea, was the entire and everlasting removal of sin as expiated by the precious blood of Christ; 'so that If sought 'for they should not-be found, and if enquired after there should be none to answer. This is signified by the very name of the scape-goat, [Hebrew Word] aiz, a goat, and Hebrew Word azal, to go away. And is literally, the goat sent away,-the goat dismissed, the goat going away. See the note in the Comprehensive Bible, which is very valuable; and Parkhurst's Hebrew Lexicon, p. 479. Why goats should be preferred to sheep for this purpose, I am unable to determine; but 1 wish to submit two or three ideas to those who have more learning and greater facilities, than what in my humble situation, I can ever pretend unto, or expect to enjoy.

1. May not its NAME. assist our thoughts on this subject? which, according to the best Hebrew Lexicons and criticisms that 1 have seen, signifies strength, agility, .vigour; an animal of active power. The same word is used for the inconceivable power and vivacity of the conflicting ethers; and I conjecture, the goat was an emblem of Christ as God-man, the author of both creation and redemption. But more particularly it designed, the prodigious strength that was necessary to bear his people's sins, and to sustain the unexampled conflicts of his own soul, when it pleased the Lord to bruise him and to put him to inexpressible grief.

2. Might not the goat be preferred for its long and powerful HORNS, as affording more scope to a spiritual mind, when reflecting upon the conquests, glory, and honour of the Prince and Saviour of a chosen world?

Habakkuk, in selecting the most miraculous incidents connected with Jewish history, did not forget the magnificent display of divine glory which attended the giving of the Sinaitical law. " His glory covered the heavens, and the earth was full of his (Hebrew Word) splendour. And his brightness was as the light: resplendent beams (were) at his hand, and there (was the hiding of his power.-"Bates. Now this glorious personage was no other than the author of eternal redemption; and his irradiations, manifestations, and shinings forth, were proofs of his unsearchable Godhead; and proper representations of his power, . excellency, and regal authority. In. Luke i. 69. -he is called a horn of salvation. What can this mean, but that he resembles the rays or columns of light, which are of a prodigious strength, as well as being of a refulgent appearance; and the sense seems to be, he bath raised up a powerful, splendid, or glorious Saviour.

The Jewish altar was four square, and a horn was fixed at every corner. Was not this intended to represent the efficacy of the atonement as embracing some objects in the four quarters of the globe? And might not the horns denote the irradiations and splendour which should beam in brilliant rays from the atonement; which like fluxes, or streams of light from the sun, should diverge in every direction, until the glory of redemption should embrace the most distant stranger on the globe, and shine and smile on all the numerous progeny of a spiritual parent? The fire which came from heaven and fell upon the altar to consume the sacrifices was never allowed to go out, but to be kept burning; strongly suggesting that the wrath of God could not be appeased till Israel's anointed came, and put away sin by the sacrifice of himself: this accomplished the fire dies away, and endless streams of light and grace for ever beam on all the ransomed heritage. When John said, "we beheld his glory as the glory of the only begotten, full of grace and truth," may it not denote the radiancy of his person, and the communication of his fulness and glory? And may not John i. 9. further illustrate this point? "That was the true light which lighteth every man that cometh into the world." No doubt the figure is borrowed from nature, and as the natural sun disperse his columns of light, and throws his beams across the whole globe so as to enlighten every one of its inhabitants; so Jesus Christ, the true and spiritual light, is fixed in the centre of the spiritual system, pours his glorious rays of spiritual illumination upon the minds of all his new-born race, and will ultimately clothe them in garments of light and immortality. Now the manner in which they are brought into this spiritual world is not by general invitations, but by special translations.-" Who bath translated us out of the kingdom of darkness, into the kingdom of his dear Son."-" Who hath called us out of darkness into his marvellous light."-" Now are ye light in the Lord," &c. And hence the exhortation to ha walk as children of the light." In Rev. v. 6. Christ is exhibited as having seven horns. Is not this to represent the power and glory of his intercession, the fulness, perfection, and splendour of his person, and also the glorious and active nature of his communications? I would just suggest, might not the heathen idol-god Pan, which signifies a goat, and also productiveness, generativeness, &c. be a corruption of those spiritual similitudes, by which the chosen and innumerable family of Zion's parent were redeemed; and by which they are also covered with all the glory which emanate in endless streams and dazzling rays, from the incomparable sacrifice of Israel's priest and Judah's lawgiver? I feel I have trespassed upon my own limits and the reader's patience, in pursuing this article so far. I will now return to Isaiah liii. and notice one passage more. " He was oppressed, and he was afflicted." The word (Hebrew Word) construed oppressed, signifies, according to both Frey and Parkhurst, to squeeze out, to extort, to exact with rigour, &c. and is used to denote the requirement of a debt in its full amount according to law, or the infliction of punishment in its full extent, agreeable to the very letter and spirit of judicial enactments. Hence the words are differently construed by different persons, agreeable to the prophet's idea, and the nature and genius of the Hebrew language. Thus, " It was ENACTED, and he became ANSWERABLE," i. e. Covenant engagements rendered him accountable for the conduct of his people. Or thus, " It Was DEMANDED, and he ANSWERED," justice made the demand, and our Surety gave the answer-be honoured the claim by paying the debt. Again, " He was EXACTED UPON, and was AFFLICTED ; or impersonally thus, "Exaction was made, and he was afflicted;" i. e. he complied with the exaction and suffered accordingly.

Here I wish it to be observed, 1. That the law of God requires the punishment of sin, in all its circumstances and extent. 2. That Jesus Christ as the everlasting Surety of a certain number of persons, whom he foreknew and loved, was responsible for all their transgressions. 3. That in consequence of this, the demand was made upon him as; a responsible Surety, and not upon them as offending sinners. 4. That this demand arose out of the very nature and letter of law and justice. 5. That the law of God being steady in its requirements, the justice of God was inflexible in its claims. 6. That these- claims were plenary and full, i. e. justice claimed a full compensation for every sin that his people had, or would commit; which required the Surety to yield a perfect obedience to the same law which they had violated, and sustain the same suffering which they had incurred. 7. This being the case, justice enforced its demands with the utmost severity and rigour; and received satisfaction by squeezing, extorting and exacting with severity. The words squeezing, &c. are employed to denote the pitiless requirement of full and hard labour, of debts, levies, rates, &c. and likewise punishment or suffering; and when applied to the Redeemer, as the Surety and substitute of his people, denote the fulness and perfection of his obedience. There was no abatement, no allowance, nor no pity. Justice squeezed from him every particle of labour which the -holy law of God could demand. He went to the end of the law for righteousness, and the law received its scope and fulfillment in him. Then again, if we consider sins as agreeing with the idea of debts contracted, we gain a scriptural idea of redemption, as represented by commercial transactions. And indeed the very meaning of the word redemption strengthens such an idea, for it signifies to buy, or purchase, by paying a full price; an& is not unfrequently applied to the act of buying slaves out of the hand of the slaveholder, by giving or paying down the full worth of the slave. Now, the people redeemed by Christ, were, in common with others, slaves and captives; and their sins being as debts, for which they must have suffered in their own persons, gives the true calculus by which the price was fixed for their deliverance. And of this price there was no abatement; nothing thrown off, although the sum was incomprehensibly large. Justice pressed his claims, even to severe exaction, and extorted the price fixed and greed upon, even to a fraction.

Further, if we regard sins as criminal offences which require corporeal suffering, we obtain another view of redemption, under the idea of an atonement or expiation by suffering, sacrifice, and blood. Now though human laws cannot allow of the innocent to suffer as a substitute for the guilty, nor punish an offender for several acts, each requiring death ; still the law of God can admit of substitutionary sufferings, and allow the just to atone for the unjust, that they may be brought nigh unto God. And though our law cannot punish a subject for more than one act which demands his life, because he has but one life to give, and therefore, as a matter of course, his sufferings are disproportioned to his crimes ; yet the law of God can ; and accordingly we find that, retributive justice will deal to every sinner according as his deeds have been. And as it would have been with the sinner, so it was with his Surety; there was no softening, mollifying, nor palliating the charges; nor no mitigating the punishment which was due to the accusations brought against him.

Froral these remarks, which are evidently founded upon truth and reason, it is as obvious as any mathematical demonstration, 1. That redemption is characterized in its extent by restriction. 2. That had the sins of those who are redeemed, been larger or smaller in either their multitude or magnitude, the sufferings of Christ would have been varied accordingly. 3. That his church being thus purchased by redemption, is lawfully claimed by the buyer as his purchased possession, "to the praise of the glory of his grace." 4. That the blessings and benefits of free salvation can never be enjoyed by any beside the rightful heirs of promised glory. 5. That the promises of salvation cannot be more extensive than the benefits which that salvation embrace; which of course will stamp them with the seal of discrimination. 6. That as the promises of the new covenant are of a distinguishing nature, the invitations of the gospel must be of the same character. If they, ire not, then, 1. We must separate promises. from invitations, and thus destroy their a ciency. If we extend the invitations beyond the reach of the promises, we render the invitations useless and their author absurd. 2. In pushing the invitatory part of the gospel beyond the promissory, we actually thrust it beyond the encircling line of redemption, where no spiritual favours can ever be bestowed; and thus the garden walls of Zion are thrown down, to invite the beasts of the forest, and encourage the tribe of Jacob to ramble upon the sterile dominions of Esau. One would imagine that the simple adoption of such practices would be their own condemnation, without a formal array of scripture and argument. For while on the one hand it can do no good to the unredeemed part of mankind, it is capable on the other hand, of doing a great deal of mischief. Let but the enclosures be cast down, and there is no calculating upon the injury that may be sustained, by the egress of the inhabitants of the garden, or the ingress of the wild beasts of the forest. Things are always best in their proper places. The dark mountains of Esau are in the same condition that David, in his unrivalled elegy for Saul and Jonathan, wished the mountains of Gilboa to be-without either dew or rain. Deed we wonder that while this state of things continue, Christians should be as lean as some of the rambling Arabs, who are said to be mere skeletons of a human body, God is giving professors the desire of their hearts, and sending leanness into their souls ; which is a lamentation, and stall be for a lamentation.

Allow me briefly to notice the meaning of the word atonement; which in my judgment is strongly opposed to the unchastened notion of general sufficiency and offered grace. And,

1. It is well known that the English word is drawn from the Hebrew (kuphar) to cover; from which is transposed the Greek, (krupto) which means, to hide, secrete, conceal, bury, &c. Take an example or two,-Matt. v. 14. " A city set upon an hill cannot be hid:" that is, cannot 'be concealed, or covered, so as to be unseen or unnoticed. -Luke xviii. 34. " And this saying was hid from them," that is, its design and import was not perceived by them.

It was hid, buried, covered from their view.-Matt. xiii. 44. "Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto treasure hid in a field;" secreted in the earth, buried, covered. See more examples in Parkhurst's Greek Lexicon; to which I add, in illustration of the last cited passage, Isaiah xlv. 3. and Jer. x1i. 8. Apparently from. the same source is derived our English word cover and coffer, which will explain, or give the true idea of Col. ii. 3. " In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge." That is, all the riches of grace which are displayed in the foreknowledge of God, and in the illustrious scheme of salvation, are all deposited, secured, and locked up in the human nature of Christ, as in a coffer, chest, temple, or magazine. And chap. iii. 3. " Your life is hid with Christ in God;". your future well being is identified with the humanity of Christ, which is hid, secured, and established in the great abyss of Godhead. To the same purpose is John xvii. 21. " That they all may be one, as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us." Plainly denoting, that the divinity of the Father inhabited the humanity of the Son, and that the humanity of the Son inherited the divinity of the Father ; and also that the church stood rooted in both; dwelling in the humanity of Christ as its fullness and portion, while the humanity of Christ lay in the bosom of Deity, as the acquired possession and first of all Jehovah's ways.

2. Following this train of thinking, we are led to consider the ark of the covenant and the mercy seat, which the apostle has assured us was a type of the Lord Jesus Christ. This ark being a sort of coffer, or chest, and copied from a divine pattern, was appropriated to a special use, which formed the sacred repository of covenant stipulations with other things of primary consideration. The mercy-seat, or covering, was the lid, which was of pure gold, and being shut down, hid, secured, covered, and concealed from public view, the sacred things therein deposited. On this cover stood those tompouid figures denominated cherubims, between which Jehovah dwelt in his glory and irradiations, and which I think, with the learned Bates, were artificial representations of the persons employed in the economy of human redemption. But see his learned enquiry into the sinmilitudes of the Lord God, and Parkhurst's Heb. Lex. Now as this ark represented the Lord Jesus Christ, so we find the following circumstances of agreement. 1. The ark was made in conformity with a divine plan, and was therefore a perfect representation of the draught or model. So the humanity of the Saviour was formed and brought into existence according to a divine purpose; and when brought into existence was the first copy, image, or visible display, of Jehovah's idea, purpose, decree. 2. This ark was divinely appropriated as a natural similitude to spiritual purposes. Christ was divinely appointed as the real Surety and Saviour of his people. " For him hath God the Father sealed." 3. The ark contained all those covenants and stipulations which involved the interests of all the Hebrew nation. So in Christ is deposited, all the stipulations of the covenant of grace which involve the eternal inheritance and glory of the chosen seed. 4. The law being placed in the ark, may further point out the eternal rectitude of Jehovah, and the immutable nature of his holy law. Moses when speaking of his depositing the two tables in the ark, observes with peculiar emphasis, " there they be till this day." The divine law was carefully placed in Christ, that he might honour it by his obedience and cover it with his blood. While Jehovah purposed the salvation of his church, he thought on the honour of his law, and that justice might never shake the credit of his scheme, he secured its claims in suffering, blood, and death. All its jots and tittles were noticed and obeyed; and God is well pleased with his Son for his righteousness sake, for he has magnified the law and made it honourable. Respecting the precepts of the law, we may point to Christ and say, " there they be to this day, and there they will be to-morrow, and for ever." His gospel may cease to be, but his law can know no end. It is substantially the same, though formally different; commanding alike the sinner and the saint; condemning the former for his deficiencies and extravagancies, while it justifies the latter through the obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus. 5. The ark protected the interests of only the Jewish nation. Neither does the person and work of Christ, afford any protection to those who are without the pale of the covenant. And as the covenant made with Moses in behalf of the children of Israel, embraced the honours of his moral law, so the covenant of which Jesus is the Mediator, involves the security of his law which arose out of his nature and relations. And just as many of the human race as stand in covenant fellowship with God, have had the law fulfilled and established by Christ; and no more. Now how in the world are sinners to be invited, if Christ have not fulfilled the law for them ? Can they be saved by a broken law? Can they mend the tables which they have broken to atoms and ground to powder ? How call they be justified or even pardoned ? Where is the fountain for sin and uncleanness ? The fact is, there is none. God has passed by them in sovereignty, and determined to punish them in equity. And to talk about unrestricted invitations and offered mercy, in the teeth of such humbling truths, is to talk about an absurdity unparalleled in civil affairs, insulting to the plan of heaven, and utterly indescribable by the language of mortals. Another point of agreement is this, the mercy seat was not. of larger dimensions than the ark of the covenant, neither is the mercy of God any larger than the covenant of grace and the work of Christ. 7. As the covering was not more extensive than the ark, there could be no surplus. The covering was not twice as large as the ark, but exactly commensurate therewith. Nor is there any surplus in the atonement; like the lid of the ark, it is of equal dimensions with the covenant of grace, so that the blood and righteousness of the Lord Jesus Christ, reaches to all his family and covers them over for ever. The same may be observed with regard to Solomon's chariot which was made for his bride; the purple covering was no doubt made to fit the chariot without either redundancy or deficiency. Now allow that a greater than Solomon is intended, and that by the chariot is meant the covenant of grace, made for the benefit of the church, the Lamb's wife; do we not see the fitness, congruity, and proportion, of all the parts of salvation ? We see love, merit, and strength, proportionately conspicuous. The chariot was not made to fit the purple covering, but the covering was measured by the chariot. lit like manner the covenant of grace, was not made to fit the atonement, but the atonement made to agree with the covenant. Neither was it designed for any body, much more for every body. The reader will not imagine that every person was invited, by either the royal monarch or his ministers, to get within this chariot. Or that though it was designed but for special characters (which make but a remnant) and therefore no more would ever be privileged to enter ; yet notwithstanding this, every body ought to be invited, and all might enjoy the privilege of being seated in the palanquin with his majesty and household. And though in point of fact, the vehicle was but just large enough for the royal monarch and his family, yet there was a large surplice of covering, sufficient to inwrap all the world; which though it would never be of any service to a single individual, was nevertheless necessary, in order to justify the publication of unrestricted invitations! Would such proceedings have drawn the queen of Sheba from the uttermost parts of the earth to witness his wisdom? Or rather, would not his subjects have detected the fallacy of such things, ridiculed such incongruous measures, and held in just contempt both the king and his ministers ? Or if they would not, such is the march of intellect (to use a flash phraseology) in this our day, that were our present king and his ministers thus to act, they would instantly be denounced for conduct so unutterably absurd ; and I imagine, we should presently meet with proposals for erecting new and strong buildings, for purposes and ends sufficiently obvious. And yet such absurd measures are ascribed to God, and applauded by many as the perfection of his wisdom and government ! And what seems more unaccountable is, those very persons who are so noisy about these conflicting things, are: those who are so frequently talking and writing about the divine government, as if they had adjusted every wheel, and numbered every cog. Surely such motley things as I am noticing, could never emanate from wisdom and prudence; and if God is the author of such a system, it must be far from prejudicing us in favour of his qualifications for government. But,

Observe, 3. The word atonement, signifies to pacify, reconcile, bring together, make friends, &c. and if divided into syllables immediately presents the idea; thus atone at-one, atonement at-one-ment, plainly denotes an expiation which pacifies the offended party, and unite together both the offended and the offender in terms of friendship. And here let it be observed, this was effected, 1. by covering, burying, drowning the atoner in a sea of boiling wrath. This seems to be strongly indicated by the lavers and brazen sea in Solomon's temple. This brazen sea was for the priest to wash in, previous to his offering sacrifice, and no doubt was intended to point out the purity and innocence of our great High Priest : while the lavers were to wash the sacrifices before they were offered. Now a sea is generally the emblem of affliction, and the hieroglyphically representations confirm the idea. We are told, Solomon "graved cherubs, lions and palm-trees, according to the proportion of every one, or, according to the pouring out, or exertion of every one ; i. e. the condition in which they exert themselves. " The brazen sea," says Julius Bates, " being a sea of affliction, had rows of bulls upon it, [Hebrew Word] is to mark inquisition in order to punish : to enquire diligently, search out, or examine. Thence it signifies the morning, and is a name adapted to the bull, as an emblem of wrath." With the bulls upon the brazen sea were the gourds of the wild vine, which obnoxious plant contains a heat so intense as to form a deadly poison. The lion, was no doubt an emblem of the Lord Jesus, and is derived from the word under notice, which signifies to cover, or the coverer. The palm-trees in bloom, are emblems of conquest and victory, and designed, to point out the ever-blooming victory of the lion of the tribe of Judah. Its standing on twelve oxen, with their faces outward, represented the atonement as belonging to the twelve tribes of Israel, and that by its virtue, the scattered family of heaven should be collected front the four quarters of the globe ; no doubt these figures were designed, to instruct the mind into the suffering of Christ as the great sacrifice for the sins of his people. To me it seems clear, that those emblems were intended to point out the tremendous wrath of God which was poured out in hot and fiery torrents. The wild gourds in exertion or a state of pouring forth, represented the destructive nature of sin, and showed how justice poured the poisonous contents of every sin into the great sea of the Redeemer's sufferings. There was not a sin that had not its deadly poison, and there was not a sin that failed to discharge its content: into the sufferings of Christ, the poison whereof drank up his spirits. The bull in its rage, as the symbol of fire, denoted Jehovah as exerting his power, and pouring forth his burning wrath into the brazen sea in which Immanuel was baptized. While the lion in it, exertion, or triumph, was no insignificant symbol of triumphant Redeemer, who was covered in the sea of wrath, that he might cover his people with everlasting glory; and who also rose glorious and triumphant. Wrath here made its demand, the victim by its purity and innocence made a full atonement, and triumphed upon it, and all turned betwixt the image of the lion and man, whose eyes were fixed during this trial upon a palm tree in bloom : a tree that bears the greatest pressure, and thrives the better for it, its perfection being owing to it."-Bates' Enquirq into the Similitudes. p. 147.

" I have a baptism," said Christ, " to be baptised with, and how am I straitened until it be accomplished." And observe, he was not baptised in a basvn, but in a sea ; not sprinkled, but plunged, buried covered, &c. and that in a poisoned, fiery sea; a sea into which every sin of ransomed mortals had poured its fiery poison, and God had poured his fiery wrath. But the lion of the tribe of Judah prevailed, and everlasting honour and victory arise out of his sufferings; so that is redeemed fock will sing and shout his glorious conquest through all eternity. This thought is clearly marked in. Rev. xv. 2. " And 1 saw as it were a sea of glass mingled with fire; and them that had gotten the victory over the beast, and over his image, and over his mark, and over the number of his name, stand on the sea of glass, having the harps of God."

" I asked them whence their victory came,

They with united breath,

Ascribed their conquest to the Lamb,

Their victory to his death."

It might be remarked, that as this sea of brass standing upon twelve oxen expressed the peculiar nature of redemption, it must stand opposed to general invitations ; for we cannot suppose that there could ever be an offer of grace designed where there was no atonement made. And if it only embraced the twelve tribes, by expiating the sins of all the spiritual seed, how could it be sufficient for any beside ? And if not sufficient, how could it justify a general tender of salvation? Did Jehovah make inquisition, or search diligently for the sins of any besides the elect? And must not his making such a strict enquiry after sins in order to punish them,. suppose that Jehovah measured the punishment of Christ by the transgressions of his church ? If not, why make such a diligent search and enquiry after them in order to punish for them.) Must not such enquiries and examinations be wholly unmeaning, and to say the least of them, could only be conducted for the sake of amusement. But God has done nothing with such a view in either creation or providence, and it is only for the sake of erroneous sentiments that people attribute such conduct to him in the economy of ;race. It is clear, that if sins are thus distinctly sought out, and punished in Christ for the sake of the elect, the sufficiency cannot be of greater extent, which scriptural sentiment destroys the very basis of general invitations and offered grace. But let us pursue the idea of covering a little further. And

4. The word is used in a JUDICIAL sense, "of whose hands have I received [Hebrew] a bribe, and hid mine eyes therewith." 1 Samuel xii. 3. Now God has received a covering at the hands of his Son, by which his justice is satisfied, and can bring no law charges against his people. But has lie received this covering for any besides ? If not, how can he invite them to be saved ? And by what rule can he make a general tender of salvation ? Christ must have either covered the eyes of the law for all mankind or not : if he has, how is it that any of the human race are lost How came Judas to go to perdition when he Advent to his own home ? The covering surely could not be complete, and instead of a general sufficiency, there seems to have been a general deciencii. But if Christ hath not given a covering into the hands of God for all mankind, and it is evident that he has not, how absurd is must be to invite them.

5. To appease an offended person. Thus Jacob said. "I will cover his face with the present." Gen. xxxii. 20. I will appease his anger, and shelter myself from his frowns. So Christ, has presented his sufferings and righteousness to God, who has declared that lie is pacified towards his people or all that they have done and that Christ is his beloved Son in whom he is veil pleased. So that while his chosen sees stand sheltered beneath his precious atonement, there is no dissatisfaction nor angry condition of mind in the party offended. But if Christ has not sheltered any beside his church. why invite them ? Is God pacified for all that they have done ? If not, how, can he make them an offer of favour ? If he invites all to be saved, must it not suppose that he is alike pacified towards all? If not, offers of grace must be preposterous indeed.

6. To cover the transgressions of the transgressor. "And it came to pass on the morrow, that Moses said unto the people, ye have sinned a great sin ; and now I will go up unto the Lord ; peradventure I shall make an atonement (Hebrew covering) for your sin," Exod. xxxviii. 30. Again, "help us, 0 God of our salvation, for the glory of thy name: Hebrew Word and cover our transgressions for thy name's sake," Ps. lxxix. 9. " Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, and whose sin is covered," Ps. xxxii. 1. Now if sins are covered only by the atoning blood of Christ, it is necessary to enquire if he has covered the sins of all the human race; and if so, how is it that God should sentence any man to endless torments? He cannot for his. sins if they are covered, and the covering is complete. But if not for their sins, what can it be for ? Is there any thing else besides sin, that can justify God in pronouncing upon his creatures the awful sentence of damnation ? Surely not. Then independent of scripture authority, we must conclude that redemption is particular. And if this is true, we are led to enquire how Jehovah can make an offer of salvation to all mankind when only some are redeemed. Has Christ covered their sins by the worth of his atoning sacrifice? No. Can they cover them from the eve of justice themselves? They cannot. Is there any other covering under the heavens ? There is no such thing; the universe cannot afford a shelter. Yet so complete is the covering for his church, that "he beholds no iniquity in JACOB, nor perverseness in Israel ;" but can this be said of any beside ? It cannot, for they are loathsome and in their blood, and the sinner dying an hundred years old shall be accursed. Then if Christ has not covered their sins, and there is no other covering, there must necessarily be an everlasting exposure of them. And how can Christ invite those for whom he never provided an atonement? Can they receive remission of sins ? That is impossible. Can they be justified in their sins ? No, for that is contrary to the holiness of God. Then how is it possible for them to be invited upon the ground of offered mercy ? The truth is, we must either plead for the arminian doctrine of general redemption, or- else discard the notion of offered grace; supposing however that we desire to rank among sober-minded Christians.

7. To annul a covenant, which is engraven upon marble slabs or tables of stone by smearing or covering it. Isaiah xxviii. 18. is sufficient to justify this idea. It stands thus - your covenant with death shall be disannulled, or besnnieared, or covered over as the ark was with pitch, so as to fill up all the cracks or fissures. The idea is to be taken from the ancient practice, of engraving the terms of a covenant on blocks of stone or marble slabs, with a view of rendering the compact conspicuous and lasting. But the prophet assures them that the articles of the covenant should be so besnicared with things of an adhesive quality, as to render the characters illegible, and thus the covenant should be dissolved by nullifying the terms of agreement. Or in other words, that the dissolution of the covenant should be as sudden and complete, as if some one had obliterated all the characters by which the stipulations were formally expressed; and thus cancelled the obligation by, effacing or rendering the terms obscure and illegible.

This will illustrate the dissolution of the covenant of works by the blood of Christ, in behalf of those for whom he bled and died; which covenant is an everlasting covenant, and hold both the parties to obligation. Ye are not under the law but under grace, said the apostle; by which I understand the dissolution of the covenant of works, as a condemning covenant; or a. covenant requiring conditions which cannot be met by empty offenders, and yet condemning them for their breach of covenant. But how is this dissolved ? By the precious blood of Christ being poured over the articles and stipulations, so as to obliterate and destroy every vestige of a covenant of works. Here let it be observed, that Christ has not obliterated the precepts, but the form of their agreement, by which the obligation to punishment is blotted out. It is the same law in a new relation; the same precepts in a new order. The form of precept is altered, but its morality remains eternally untouclced. The stipulations are covered and obliterated for ever by the merits of Christ, whose sufferings have been weighed against those of the law, and taken as an equivalent. The enquiry is now, whether the covenant of works is abolished for all mankind, or only for all the elect. Assuming the latter to be true, the next question is, can any man be saved by the covenant of works? The answer is in the negative; decidedly so. Can pardoning grace be given to any but those who are delivered from the covenant of works by the blood of the everlasting covenant of grace ? This is seldom contended for. Then if it never can he given to any beside, how can it be offered to any others, flow is this question to be answered? Does Jehovah offer to his creatures what he cannot give? What he has not to impart? Does he know that their depravity is such that they never will make application, and that therefore the offers will never be accepted ? Then where can be the utility of making them ? Because of human depravity he knows he is secure, will he therefore offer upon pain of eternal death what he never can, nor never meant to bestow? Is he determined to increase the fury of eternal torments, because lie knows they never will nor can make application for what he never will nor can bestow, although he may surround them with a system of empty offers? Shocking conclusions ; insulting divinity. But it suits the march of intellect, the improved state of morals and society !

8. To cover by way of ORNAMENT, and is applied to the al-hennah, or cypress tree, mentioned in Cant. i. 14. because the African ladies are in the habit of covering, dying, or tinging, their lips, hair, hands, and feet, with the powder of this plant. It thus forms an indispensable article for the toilet, and the kind ladies are said to be so excessively fond of this plant for ornamental purposes, that they endure with cheerfulness almost any kind of privation in order to obtain the al-hennah. "This beautiful odoriferous plant," says Dr. Shaw, " if it is not annually cut and kept low, grows ten or twelve feet high, putting out its little flowers in clusters, which yields a most fragrant smell like camphor. The leaves of this plant, after they are dried and powdered, are disposed of to good advantage in all the markets of this kingdom (meaning Tunis). For with this all the African ladies, that can purchase it, tinge their lips, hands, hair and feet ; rendering them thereby of a tawneiy colour: which with them is reckoned a great beauty. -Travels, p. p. 113, 114. And it seems customary for ladies of rank, to tinge or cover themselves, pretty thickly with the al-hennah previous to their appearing in public. Will not this explain Psalm cxlix. 4. " He will beautify the meek with salvation." And also Psalm xlv. 10. " The King's daughter is all ,glorious within." Within what? Not within herself surely; but within the royal Palanquin. The figure is borrowed from oriental customs, and the idea is to be taken from an eastern bride dying, or staining herself with the powder of the al-hennah, and arraying herself in all the splendour of eastern ornaments and apparel. Thus arrayed, she enters within a splendid palanquin, which corresponds in pomp and style with the dignity and grandeur of a royal bride. Within this vehicle are short sentences, fond expressions, and poetical mottos, expressive of the attachment of the bridegroom to the bride. Now under such circumstances as these, i. e. being beautified with the al-hennah, attired in magnificent garments, decked with brilliant ornaments, and seated in a stately vehicle which surrounds her with expressions of glowing affection, she must be all glorious within. Such is the church in the covenant of grace, which answers to Solomon's royal palanquin. It is the production of royal love, and designed for Jesus and his royal bride. It is paved or spread with glorious purposes, promises, and expressions of everlasting love; and is composed of the best materials in the best form and manner. Jesus, her beautifying alhennah, was cut down in bloom, withered and powdered for her. His royal atonement, united with the Spirit's royal unction, becomes her beautifying righteousness; and adorned in the ornaments of holiness, she will openly appear as Immanuel's bride. Seated in the covenant of grace, in all the splendour of her marriage robes, she will be surrounded with innumerable expressions of covenant love, and borne in triumph by applauding angels to the royal palace above. She shall be brought into the king in raiment of needle-work. The same train of thinking, might be made to bear upon believers in a distributive sense. They are seated in the covenant of grace, surrounded and borne up by its promises, oaths, and blood; clothed in the robes of righteousness, and beautified with the ornaments of salvation, they shall enter into the king's palace.

This likewise illustrates the conditions of the covenant on the part of the Aleim to the human nature of Christ; viz. that in consequence of suffering the just for the unjust lie should be advanced to great dignity, and see the travail of his soul in a progeny as numerous and splendid, as the sparkling drops of dew when the opening morning pour its golden rays of light over the spangled lawns. And that these should willingly offer themselves in the beauties or ornaments of holiness, and live and reign in splendid triumphs with him world without end. These were covenant oaths, and agree with the language of Psalm xxxix. 20. where Jehovah is represented as reciting covenant transactions for the comfort of his church in the following singular language. " I have laid help upon one that is mighty." Hebrew Word I have equalized help. Meaning that Jehovah had proportioned or balanced his strength against his sufferings; which seems to denote that his sufferings were weighed or balanced against his people's sins, and that his strength was equalized to his day of suffering. Now surely it will not be said, that had the sins of his people been more, or his people been a greater number, that the burden laid upon Christ would not have been heavier, and that Jehovah would not have added a proportion of strength so as to have equalized one against the other. This was his debasement and suffering; mark his advancement and glory, as described in Psalm xxi. 6.is glory is great in thy salvation; Hebrew Word thou hast equalized upon him, honour and majesty. Now what can this mean, but that as his sufferings were weighed against the sins of his people, so his glory should be as extensive as his sufferings, covenant promises, and his own anticipations. The honour and glory enjoyed in the salvation of his church, is an equivalent to his sufferings and death; just as they were an equivalent to the injuries which his law sustained. In my view, the sufferings and merit of the Redeemer, were of equal weight to the tremendous load of sin, and the sufferings which were due thereto; and that justice held the balance with such nice exactness, that when it stood in a state of equiponderancy, he said, it is enough ; the sufferer exclaimed it is finished, bowed his head, and gave up the ghost. Afore would have been useless; and I cannot conceive -how God could punish his Son in vain. Neither his love, justice, covenant, nor promises, would allow him to do it. He was deeply sunk in suffering and disgrace, but he is as highly exalted in glory and honour. He bore a heavy load of sin and guilt, but God has laid as heavy a mass of honour and majesty upon him.

Such are my thoughts upon the sublime doctrine of redemption, and it is evident that if they are firmly established they must sunder to tatters the mysterious tissue of general sufficiency and offered grace. But let us airly meet the objections, and though the resist