all that the Lord hath beftowed on us, and the great goodness towards the house of Ifrael, which he hath bestowed on them, according to the mercies, and according to the multitude of his loving kindnesses. For he faid, furely, they are my people, children that will not lie fo he was their faviour. In all their affliction he was afflicted; and the angel of his pref ence faved them."

Does what is here faid of the divine fenfibility, on beholding the afflictions of Ifrael, infer that the happiness of God was increased by the afflictions of that people? Even the caufing finful rebellious people to fuffer the due reward of their wickedness, is denominated by the prophet, God's frange work. "For the Lord fhall rife up as in mount Perazim, he shall be wroth as in the valley of Gibeon, that he may do his work, bis frange work; and bring to pass his act, bis frange at." Ifa. xxviii. 21. For the comfort and confolation of the afflicted, the prophet holds the following language," For the For the Lord will not caft off forever. But though he cause grief, yet will he have compaffion according to the multitude of his mercies. For he doth not afflict willingly, nor grieve the children of men. The apostle, entertaining the fame idea with the prophet, of the afflictions of men, fays, "Wh

Sam. iii. 31, 32, 33.

Wherein

ye greatly rejoice, though now for a season, if need be, ye are in heaviness through manifold temptations. 1. Pet. i. 6. From thefe fcripture representations of God's manner of afflicting his church, or individu

als.

als, are we led to fuppofe that the fufferings of mor tals on earth, redound to the happiness of God? rather, are we not moft clearly taught that God hath ever had a uniform regard to the perfonal benefit of the afflicted, in thofe fufferings which his providence hath inflicted upon them?

Though we should concede that Univerfalifts may be mistaken, in some articles of their creed; yet they will never be convinced, or refuted, whilft their adverfaries oppose them with falfe and corrupt principles, borrowed from an old hackneyed fyftem of faith, and grofs contradictions and mifconftructions of fcripture. I have no doubt but that Univerfalifts lie open to conviction, and are as willing as other men to receive light and truth. But it is a But it is a very very prepofterous method to endeavor to fubvert their argument from the divine benevolence, by prefenting them with fuch ideas of that benevolence, as are palpably false, and contradictory in themselves, and which infer the groffeft reflections on the divine character.

p.

3:

n

We will go on ftill with our examination of Mr. S's. ideas of benevolence. Towards the bottom of 112, he begins his 5th obfervation thus, A be nevolence, limited by the law of individual happi nefs, is fo far from the true benevolence of God, and of holy creatures, and from making all creatures bleffed in its operation; that it is not holiness, neither çan it ever give perfect happiness to any mind. There is no middle way, between felfishness and a fu

preme

preme regard to the good and glory of God and his kingdom. The heart must have an object of its fupreme regard. If felf be this object there is a neceffary oppofition to the public good; and all the measures of divine government, will be approved or dilapproved by this rule, am I benefited, or not? Selfishness will look with a jealous and an afflicted' eye on the emolument of every other being, that cannot be made fubfervient to its own purposes. The human heart wishes that every thing may confpire to the advancement of that intereft, which it prefers to all others. A felfifh creature wifhes that every thing may confpire to the advancement of felf, and puts himfelf in the place of God and the universe; and he muft either be unhappy, or the divine 'government mult bow to his individual interefts." We now have a long quotation before us. Let us candidly and fairly, though critically, examine it.

A benevolence, limited by the law of individual happiness, is felfifhnefs. All the measures of divine government will be approved, or disapproved, by this rule, am I benefited, or not? A felfish eye looks, with jealousy and affliction, on the emolument of ev

ケ

ery other being. A selfish creature wishes that every thing may confpire to the advancement of self. A felfifh foul is unhappy, if all the measures of the diVine government do not bow to his individual interefts. Thus I have truly and fairly ftated Mr. S's. idea of felfifhness.

3:1

t

ΣΟ

Will it not be conceived by every candid and consistent mind, that benevolence ought to be so defined as to form a perfect contrast to selfishness ? Benevolence, then, tenders the happiness of every individual in the universe, that is capable of it. Benevolence will highly approve of all those measures of the divine government, which are calculated to fabserve the real intereft and happiness of all the members of that government. A benevolent eye will look, with the most cordial pleasure and fatisfaction, on the emolument of every other being, A benevolent creature wishes that every thing may confpire to the advancement of the pleasure and happiness of all others, as well as of itself. The benevolent foul feels itself, in a great measure unhappy, whilft, under the excellent measures of the divine government, all its fellow creatures are not perfuaded to be virtuous and happy.

I appeal, not only to the reafon and common fense of my readers, but to their hearts, whether I have not stated the idea of benevolence in perfect contraft with Mr. S's. idea of felfishness, and in fuch manner as to meet their entire approbation. Yes, my christian readers, I ask your hearts, whether they do not approve of the picture of benevolence which I have fet before them.

M

But you know that this is far from being Mr. S's, idea of benevolence. If it really were his idea, we fhould have no controverfy with him. His benevolence, inftead of grasping the intelligent universe in

the

the arms of its tendereft affection, is a regard to an airy phantom, a mere fyftematic figment, called the public good, or greatest quantity of happiness, even that public good, or greatest quantity of happiness, which is neceffarily produced by the fin and mifery of a great part of the human race ! !

Turn back, my kind readers, a few pages, and you may refresh your memories with Mr. S's. fundamental ideas of benevolence. There you will find that I here reprefent them truly. What, but a fond attachment to a hypothefis, could prevent Mr. S. from seeing the inconfiftencies which he hath made ? Selfishness, he fays, is a regard to one's own individual happiness, without refpect to the happiness of others. Benevolence, he fays, is a regard to God's holy intelligent kingdom, without any respect to the virtue and happiness of numberlefs millions of finful and miferable beings. In a fociety of a thousand members, what is the difference between that benevolence which is limited to one, and that which is extended to five, or to fifty, or to five hundred, if it ftill fall fhort of grasping the whole ? They are both partial. One, indeed, includes a few more within the arms of love; but leaves a great part of the fociety in mifery.

Again, our author proceeds, " p. 114, According to the above explanation, the infinite benevolence of God is no proof of univerfal falvation; for if the just and eternal mifery of fome, be a neceffary mean's of the greatest happiness, it will doubtless be preferred