Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

tion of his general government advocated, and majesty and the right of control conferred on Satan," &c. and (in p. 15.) he charges the writer with "resting alone upon his, (Satan's,) delusive testimony for the support of it." These are not trifling charges for one professing Christian to bring against another; and such bold assertions ought at least to have been well-founded. One moment's attention to them will show with what justice they are brought. The author of the "Letter" has himself declared, (p. 23.) that "we have no right to annex to the words of any writer, inspired or uninspired, any meaning that did not enter into the design of the writer." The following quotations from the pamphlet will show how near these charges agree with "the design of the writer." Speaking of Christ, (p. 6.) he says, "In his Mediatorial character he possesses, in an extensive sense, universal empire-He is exalted far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion; and has a name which is above every name-He is King of kings and Lord of lords-He is not only king on his holy hill of Zion, but rules amongst the nations. He is however, in an appropriate sense, King of Saints, under the gospel dispensation; as he governs the worlds with a view to his own glory and their exaltation." (p. 14.) "The great conflict in our world is between the kingdom of the Mediator, and the kingdom of Satan; but the victory is not uncertain." (p. 19.) "Satan is the strong man, but the Mediator is the stronger; and he will bind him and spoil his goods." The following quotation, (p. 29.) will show the writer's view of the providence of God. "That God in his holy providence has so disposed of events, that governments of some kind or other do exist in all parts of his dominion, none but sceptics will deny.". Here we find the writer did, in the most unequivocal terms, acknowledge the universal

·

and unlimited power and providence of God, extending throughout heaven, earth, and hell. Who but the author of the "Letter" would ever have imagined that the writer of the pamphlet " designed" to ascribe to Satan, power independent of the superintending providence of God?

Whenever the "Prince of this world," is spoken of by the spirit of God, or his people, it is a thing understood by babes in knowledge, that his power is not meant to be independent of the power of God. If a person who was accustomed to acknowledge the unlimited providence of God, should speak of the Emperor of France, and style him an absolute monarch, ruling the Empire; who, that was acquainted with his character, would think of charging him with " an attempt to limit our Creator's power"-denying his providence, and conferring the right of control upon the Emperor, independent of the providence of God? The principle which denies that Satan exercises power under the providence of God, would annihilate at a stroke all the created power in the universe, and destroy the moral agency of angels, men, and devils.

The objections urged against the writer of the pamphlet for ascribing to Satan the power of a prince, (although the prince of darkness,) are objections, not only against him, but against the word of God. In 2 Cor. iv. 4. he is styled "The God of this world." In Eph. ii. 2. "The prince of the power of the air;" and the Son of God himself, hath styled him a prince. He said to his disciples, (John xiv. 30.) " For the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me." But if this authority is not admitted, the writer is happy in having authority which he trusts the author will not reject—that is, the authority of the author himself, who, by granting to Satan "subjects," has invested him with

princely power. He tells us, (L. p. 16.) " That Satan's subjects do many things right in themselves abstractly considered." Now all these charges, of limiting the divine government, of arraigning God's character, and denying his providence, may, with just as much propriety, be charged upon the author of the "Letter," as upon the writer of the pamphlet. Although it may be a light matter to bring such accusations against either of the writers, yet it can never be a light thing, when they rest with equal force against the word of God. But he charges the writer of " resting alone upon his, (Satan's,) delusive testimony," that he is the prince of this world. A very short examination will exhibit this charge in its true light.

[ocr errors]

The writer of the pamphlet so proved the following things, that the author of the letter has not disputed them, viz. That Christ has a kingdom distinct from all other kingdoms-and that the kingdoms of this world are not united to it. This being established, the writer rested the question upon the testimony of the faithful and true witness, who had declared, "He that is not with me, is against me ;" and that Satan is "the prince of this world."

The author of the "Letter," attempts to support his argument upon the supposition that Satan never did speak any thing but what was false, because that he is the father of lies. For if he admits that he ever has spoken the truth, it is possible that he spoke the truth, when he said the kingdoms of this world were given to him ; and it is worthy of notice, that it is not recorded, that our Lord contradicted him.

Satan, to accomplish his subtle designs, does not always wear his robes of darkness; but at times," is transformed into an angel of light," and speaks some truth, especially in the presence of him, who knows

the heart. On one occasion he testified of Christ, and said; "I know thee, who thou art, the Holy One of God;" and he declared truth, quoted from Psalm xci. 11 and 12, to our Lord, while upon the pinnacle of the Temple; although not the whole truth; for he garbled a sentence, as has since been done by some who possess a better spirit. Truth does not cease to be truth, because Satan may occasionally use it for the better accomplishment of his wicked purposes.

The manner in which the author has replied to a note in the pamphlet, must not pass unnoticed. Because that Satan could tempt short-sighted creatures, by of fering a delusion for a reality, he supposes that he could impose the same fallacy upon the Lord of life and glory. But where is the parallel which he has endeavoured to make between Eve, who had never known evil; and the Lord Jesus Christ, who was fully acquainted with all its nature and consequences? Eve was in the midst of Paradise, and had never known sin until she felt its sting in her guilty conscience. Although the Son of God was in all points tempted like as we are; yet he had a very different knowledge of temptation, and a very different degree of power to resist it.

To support his argument, he is obliged to allow that Satan, (p. 13.) practised a delusion upon the Son of God himself. Could a good cause require such support as this, or could a bad one gain any strength by it?

[ocr errors]

The author of the "Letter" has quoted in part, a passage of Scripture which requires a little attention. He observes, (p. 13,) "Rulers, says Paul, (and I quote his words,) are the ministers of God, and for good. The Scriptures say, "For he is a minister of God to thee for good." The Scriptures may easily be perverted, if persons may be allowed to garble a sentence at pleasure.

To whom does the apostle say he is a minister for good? To thee; (which the author has been pleased to omit) to the Christians. In another place, the apostle "We know that all things good to them that love God," &c. There is a wide difference between a thing being good in itself, and be. ing over-ruled by God for the good of his children.

says:

work together for

In p. 14, he inquires of the writer of the pamphlet, how his faith accords with his practice, in giving his suffrage for a ruler?

As this has little to do with the merits of the question, it is sufficient to say, that he may have done that at one time which he may not think it his duty to do at another. Perhaps he is satisfied that there is abundant authority to obey magistrates, in all things, not contrary to the precepts of the Gospel; while he can find no command to aid in making them. But admitting he believed that war was forbidden by the Gospel, and should then engage in it--what would that have to do with the truth on the subject? It would, to be sure, prove him to be an inconsistent character; but it would not prove the doctrine to be false.

In connexion with this subject, the author has been pleased to mutilate a sentence in the pamphlet, in such a manner as requires notice. He has stated that the writer made this observation; (p. 14.) "When the subjects of the Redeemer, you say, mingle with the world, and unite in its pursuits, they may spiritually be styled adulterers." In the pamphlet it is," when they thus mingle," &c. The word thus, refers to the following words in the preceding sentence," political contentions and fightings." Agreeably to the author's representation it is indefinite; and the reader might suppose that the writer meant, if they mingled with the world in any

« AnteriorContinuar »