the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themfelves swift destruction. And through covetoufnefs fhall they, with feigned words, make merchandise of you whofe judgment now of a long time lingereth not; and their damnation flumbereth not. For if God fpared not the angels that finned, but caft them. down to hell, and delivered them into chains of. darkness, to be referved unto judgment. And fpared not the old world, but faved Noah the eighth perfon."

t

His obfervation immediately follows; "thefe lat words explain what is meant by the fpirits in prifon, mentioned in the firft epiftle. They are the impenitent finners of the antediluvian world, delivered unto darkness, and reserved in chains, with the finning angels, to the fame punishment." After the quotation from 1 Pet. iii. 19, 20. Mr. S. has thefe obfervations ; "The apoftle is here fpeaking of the means of grace, which were used with ancient finners in the days of Noah: when God bare long and. warned them, the whole time the ark was building, and they repented not. Why are they now called fpirits in prifon, unless they are confined for a public trial and punishment ?"

A very great majority, both in the catholic and proteftant church, have fuppofed that Chrift went in perfon and preached to the antediluvians in hell. Be this as it may; he went in perfon, or by his fpirit. Mr. S. affirms that the means of grace were ufed with the antediluvians; but that they did not

repent.

repent. We have now got from St. Pet, and from Mr. S. that Chrift went in perfon, or by his fpirit, and preached the gospel to the antediluvians, and ufed the means of grace with them; and that they did not repent.

Now, I wish to afk Mr. S. whether God knew of this preaching, and ufing the means of grace with the antediluvians? If he did, whether he approved of it? If he knew and approved of it, whether he had not fome good end in view, in giving his approbation to this measure ? If he had fome good end in view, what it was? Was the end, to bring the antediluvians to repentance? The end must have been, either to render them more criminally guilty, or to make them penitent.

We will suppose it was, to make them more criminally guilty. Then the inference is this, that God, the wife, the powerful, the good, the merciful God, the maker of the antideluvians, who knew they would be eternally miserable, when he made them, and who forefaw that they would increase their guilt and aggravate their future mifery, by refifting his fpirit, and turning a deaf ear to his overtures of grace; yet fent his fpirit and gospel to them, with defign to render them more criminally guilty, that they might suffer the more! My kind reader, do you believe all this to be true of the wife, good, powerful, and merciful God, who hath fworn that he is unwilling that any should perish? If this cannot be admitted; let us try the other alternative. Then God fent his fpirit and gospel to the antediluvians,

with express design to bring them to repentance. But he knew, from the days of eternity, that they would not repent. To have had no end in view, and to have one which he knew would never exift, are the same thing. If the antediluvians perith without end, God had no defign in view, in sending his spirit and gofpel to them, according to the present hypothefis. We are now driven to adopt one of these three alternatives; that God fent his fpirit and gospel to the antediluvians, to increase their guilt and eternal damnation; or that he had no end in view; or that the antediluvians will repent. The reader may adopt which of thefe alternatives he pleases. I fhall adopt the laft, as infinitely the most rational, the most honourable to God, and the most perfectly confiftent with his re vealed benevolent government of men.

Thus Mr. S., by quoting St. Peter, as he did by quoting St. John, hath given us one of the best fcriptures to comment upon that we have in favor of the falvation of all men, as it undeniably favors the falvation of the old world.

We have already confidered a large portion of the 3d chap. of the 2d epiftle of St. Peter, and hown the harmony between Peter and John, in their ideas of the new heavens and new earth.

Mr. S. goes from the epiftles of St. Peter, to those of St. Paul; and begins his remarks on that to the Romans. Mr. S. takes an extraordinary method with the epistle to the Romans. And it is not diffe

cult

cult to difcern the reafon of it. He gives us a general statement of what he fuppofes to be St. Paul's defign in this epiftle; and affirms that he was a strong advocate for eternal mifery, and for a partial election to eternal life; but brings forward no particu→ lar paffages to fupport this flatement, and these af firmations. In this way a man may prove any thing, or, rather will prove nothing. For the confideration of the gth chapter, he refers us to his 3d part. He mentions the 9th, ioth, and 11th, chapters, as containing a partial election to eternal life, and reptobation of the reft of mankind; fo that fome muft unavoidably be eternally miferable.

After Mr. S. had made a statement of St. Paul's general fyftem of doctrine, in this epiftle he has the following obfervations, page 51. "Hitherto, a connected view of this epiftle, appears to be much against the opinion of universal falvation, and if the apostle had faid nothing further, an unattentive reader would gather from his writing, his belief of eternal punish. ment. The weight of evidence from this epistle remains ftill to be confidered, and is found in the 9th, 10th, and 11th chapters; where the point is decided with as great plainness as language can do it."

"He takes up the fubject of the blindness of his own nation, the Jews; and their rejection by the fovereignty of God from the benefits of the gofpel. His defign was to juftify the righteousness of God in doing it, and reconcile all the former promises made to that people, with fuch an event.

If part of the

Jews

Jews are eternally rejected by God, the opinion of univerfal falvation is unfounded; and part of every other nation may alfo be forever loft." Here the reader fees what he may expect to find in these three chapters, viz. a rejection of a part of the Jewish nation from eternal life. If this be not found here, then Mr. S. hath been guilty of mifrepresenting St. Paul, and of affirming that which is not true. The reader cannot have forgotten yet, how Mr. S. treated the xvii. chapter of John, and that he affirmed that Chrift prayed not for the world, in that chapter; when it was proved, from the very chapter, that he repeatedly prayed for the world, and that the choicest bleffing might be conferred on the world, even the knowledge and faith of the Son of God. If it fhould happen, when we come to a critical examination and analyfis of these three chapters of St. Paul's epiftle to the Romans, that there is no proof in them that any part of Ifrael were rejected from eternal happiness, and obliged to be eternally miferable, Mr. S.'s affertion must be unfounded, and he confidered as having mifrepresented St. Paul.

Rom. ix. 1-5. "Ifay the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the holy Ghoft, That I have great heaviness, and continual forrow in my heart. For I could wifh that myself were accurfed from Chrift for my brethren, my kinfmen according to the flesh: Who are Ifraelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption and the glory; and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; Whofe

1