« AnteriorContinuar »
"and to purify us unto himself a peculiar people, "zealous of good works."'
* To prove that peace with God was now ob'tained for the whole human species, through the 'precious blood of Christ, he represents Adam as '" the figure of him that was to come," that is, a 'type of Christ: he then describes the analogy 'between the first and second Adam, by declaring 'that the former brought death upon all men, and 'the latter restored all to life; that universal sin 'and condemnation were the consequence of 'Adam's disobedience, and universal righteousness 'and pardon the effect of Christ's obedience: "As 'by the offence of one judgment came upon all 'men to condemnation, even so by the righteous'ness of one the free gift came upon all men to 'justification of life: for, as by one man's disobe'dience many were made sinners, so by the obedi'ence of one shall many be made righteous." The 'sin of Adam and the merits of Christ are here 'pronounced to be co-extensive; the words applied 'to both are precisely the same; "Judgment came 'upon all men," "the free gift came upon all 'men:" "Many were made sinners:" "many 'were made righteous."—Whatever the words '" all men " and "many" signify, when applied 'to Adam, they must signify the same when ap'plied to Christ. It is admitted that in the former 'case the whole human race is meant; and con'sequently in the latter case the whole human 'race is also meant.'2
This view of the parallel between Adam and 1 Tit. ii. 11—14. 'Ref. 189,190. on Rom. v. 12—19.
Christ, and the effects of Adam's disobedience, and of the Saviour's obedience, as drawn by the apostle, is given by many commentators: but it is liable to insurmountable objections. Especially it most clearly admits, that " the righteousness of "one came upon all men to justification of life:" and how then can universal salvation be denied? Indeed his Lordship's words seem to admit this consequence: 'Universal righteousness and par'don, the effect of Christ's obedience.' But the passage itself plainly suggests another interpretation. "If by one man's offence death reigned by "one, much more shall they who receive abundance "of grace," (r^v .sspura-iiav rrjs xcifiro;,) "and of the "gift of righteousness, reign in life by One, Jesus "Christ."1 Here not all men are spoken of, but they alone who " receive this abundant grace, and "the gift of righteousness ;" that is, true believers exclusively; for others neither receive Christ and his grace, nor the " gift of righteousness;" 6r justification. The apostle evidently contrasts the loss sustained through Adam's fall, by all who are in him, as his descendents by natural generation, with the vastly superior and additional advantages enjoyed by all who are " in Christ," as true believers, by regeneration, or by partaking of his life-giving Spirit. "Of him are ye in Christ "Jesus." 2 "There is no condemnation to them "that are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after "the flesh, but after the Spirit: for the Spirit "of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from "the law of sin and death."3 "If any man be in
'Rom v. 17. M Cor. i. 30. 'Rom. viii. 1,2.
See also 1 Cor. xv. 45—47.
"Christ he is a new creature."' As, however, this does not materially affect the argument, I shall not further insist upon it. His Lordship, I am persuaded, does not intend universal salvation; and to the universality of redemption, in the sense above explained, I do not object.
'Nay,' we are even told, that "where sin 'abounded grace did much more abound:" but 'how can this be, if sin extends to all, and grace 'is confined to a part only of mankind.'2
This argument would be equally conclusive for universal salvation. For how can " grace much "more abound," if the effects of Adam's sin extend to all, but final salvation 'is confined to a 'part only of mankind r' It therefore proves too much, which shews that it proves nothing. "Grace much more abounds" to those who receive, by faith, " the abundance of the grace," and are in Christ Jesus; but "how shall they escape "who neglect so great salvation?"
1 2 Cor. v. 17. 'Ref. 190.
PREDESTINATION, ELECTION, AND REPROBATION.
'The doctrine of universal redemption, namely,
* that the benefits of Christ's passion extend to 'the whole human race; or, that every man is 'enabled to attain salvation through the merits
* of Christ; was directly opposed by Calvin, who 'maintained, that God from all eternity decreed 'that certain individuals of the human race should 'be saved, and that the rest of mankind should 'perish everlastingly, without the possibility of 'attaining salvation. These decrees of election 'and reprobation, suppose all men to be in the 'same condition, in consequence of Adam's fall, 'equally deserving of punishment from God, and 'equally unable of themselves to avoid it; and 'that God, by his own arbitrary will, selects a 'small number of persons, without respect to 'foreseen faith or good works, and infallibly or'dains to bestow upon them eternal happiness 'through the merits of Christ, while the greater 'part of mankind are infallibly doomed to suffer 'eternal misery.'l
I am not fully competent to say, exactly, what
1 Ref. 184.
Calvin maintained or opposed: but, were he now living, he would, I am confident, bring strong objections against this statement of his sentiments; and no less energetic animadversions on him that made it. He would, for instance, object to the clause, ' without the possibility of attaining salva'tion:' because the language implies, that some, at least, of the non-elect are truly desirous of the salvation revealed in the gospel, and disposed to use earnestness and diligence in all means of attaining to it; exerting themselves to the utmost, using all needful self-denial, and parting with whatever they are required to renounce; and yet after all are excluded and perish everlastingly, through a natural impossibility, unconnected with their own sin and depravity. Whereas Calvin held, (as most modern Calvinists do, and as we think the apostles, and the Lord himself did,) that there is no impossibility, except total unwillingness, constituting a moral inability, which nothing except regeneration, a new creation unto holiness, can remove. "If any man thirst," says the Redeemer, " let him come to me and drink." We give the same invitation, and so did Calvin, without in the least thinking it inconsistent with "the secret things which belong to the Lord our God."1
Again, Calvin would have said, all men alike are " by nature children of wrath," and " vessels "of wrath fitted for destruction:" but he would not have said, 'all men are equally deserving of 'punishment from God;' for he would have allowed that some are vastly more criminal than
1 See B. I. c. ii. | 6. On Moral and Natural Inability.