There are some of Paul's writings to the Romans, which have been used by divines, to prove the partial plan of falvation true, of which, I think it will be proper to take notice, in this place. Romans ix. 21, 22, has been made great use of, in order to prove, that God made fome men veffels of eternal dishonor, and others veffels of eternal glory. The words read as follow: "Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the fame lump to make one veffel unto honor, and another unto difhonor? What if God, willing to show his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much long fuffering the veffels of wrath fitted to deftruction." In order that the reader may fee, that the paffage has not the meaning which has been generally attached to it, let him observe, that the two veffels, mentioned in the text, are made of the SAME LUMP; which alfo may be feen in God's communication to Jeremiah, fee Jeremiah, xviii. 3, 4. "Then I went down to the pot. ter's house, and behold he wrought a work on the wheels, and the vessel that he made of clay, was marred in the hand of the potter, fo he made it again another veffel, as it feemed good to the potter to make it." Obferve, the firft veffel being marred was difhonorable, and it marred IN the potter's hand. The potter did not make the veffel perfectly found and good, and lay it away whole, and the veffel mar itself afterwards; but it marred, while in the hand of the potter. The potter did not condemn the clay as good for nothing, because it marred; he did not caft it away and take other clay, to make another veffel; but, of the fame clay, made a veffel as it feemed good unto him to make it. This veffel not being marred, was a veffel of honor. Here the reader may fee

the power of God manifefted, in making, of the fame lump, a veffel of honor, and a veffel of dif honor.

The thread of the apoftle's discourse to the Romans, in which he introduced the paffage above written, was intended to show the distinction between law and gospel, or flesh and spirit; by turning to the eighth chapter, the reader will find himfelf affifted in the introduction of this particular. We then fay, that as man ftands in the earthly Adam, he is a marred veffel. Chrift himself, when for us he was made a fin offering, in the flefhly nature, was "more marred than any man, and his form than the fons of men." But in his refur. rection, he was a veffel of honor and immortal glory;" and as we have borne the image of the earthly, we fhall, alfo, bear the image of the heav enly. Further, fee the two veffels defcribed in 1 Cor. xv. 42. "It is fown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption; it is fown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is fown in weakness, it is raised in power; it is fown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.". Again, Romans xi. 7. &c. "What then? Ifrael hath not obtained that which he feeketh but the election hath obtained it, and the reft were blinded (according as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of flumber, eyes that they fhould not fee, and ears that they fhould not hear) unto this day. And David faith, let their table be made a fnare, and a trap, and a stumbling block, and a recompenfe unto them; let their eyes be darkened, that they may not fee, and bow down their back alway."

On this paffage, and others like it, is built the doctrine of limited falvation, by Jefus Chrift, ac cording to the fore-knowledge and predeftination

H

of the Almighty. It is argued, that those who are here called the elect, are thofe for whom Chrift died, and thofe alone who will finally obtain falvation by him. But why any perfon fhould make fuch a mistake, in reading this chapter, I am at a lofs. The falvation of the elect is not argued, in this chapter; but the certainty of the falvation of thofe who were blinded, and the propriety of believing it, occupies the greatest part of it. Obferve the words next to those I have quoted above, verfe 11, &c. "I fay then, have they ftumbled, that they should fall? God forbid but rather through their fall falvation is come unto the Gentiles, to provoke them unto jealousy. Now, if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them, the riches of the Gentiles, how much more their fulness ?" Again, verfe 15th, "For if the calling away of them be the reconciling of the world, what fhall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?" Again, in his argument to the Romans, he endeavors to fhow them, by the fimilitude of the branches of olive trees, that they ought to believe that thofe blinded ones, though broken off, through unbe lief, would be graffed in again. See verse 24, "For, if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature, into a good olive tree; how much more fhall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree?" The apoftle feems defirous to inftruct the Roman church, and argues the point fervently; fee verfes 25, 26. "For I would not brethren, that ye fhould be ignorant of this mystery, (left ye fhould be wife in your own conceits,) that blindness in part is happened to Ifrael, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. And

fo all Ifrael fhall be faved; as it is written, there fhall come out of Zion the Deliverer, and fhall turn away ungodliness from Jacob." Compare the laft verfe which I have quoted, with Levit. xxvi. 44, 45. "And yet for all that, when they be in the land of their enemies, I will not caft them away, neither will I abhor them, to destroy them utterly, and to break my covenant with them: for I am the Lord their God. But I will for their fakes remember the covenant of their ancestors, whom I brought forth out of the land of Egypt, in the fight of the heathen that I might be their God: I am the Lord." And Isaiah xlv. 25. "In the Lord fhall all the feed of Ifrael be justified, and fhall glory." Many like paffages might be quoted, from various parts of the fcripture; but, perhaps, the above will fuffice for this particular purpose. More, of the like nature, will be noticed in the fequel of this work.

The fcriptures have been as much violated, to maintain the doctrine which I am examining, as good reafon is, by fuppofing God to be fo infinitely partial, as he must be, in the eye of reason, in order to be what the doctrine represents him.

I fhall now invite the attention of the reader to another system of atonement, which was undoubtedly formed, with a view to fhun the abfurdities in the former, and to get rid of fome of the confequences that were naturally deducible from that idea of the fufferings of Chrift. This fyftem fuppofes, that the atonement by Christ was not intended for the falvation of any part of the human race; that its main end, and fole object, was the glory of the Supreme Being, as manifefted in his holy and righteous law. In fupport of this plan, it is argued, that it is inconfiftent, for

infinite wisdom and goodnefs to prefer an inferior object to a fuperior one; that all creation, when compared with the Creator, finks into nothing, bearing no poffible proportion to the infinite Je-. hovah; of course, that God always has his own glory in view, as his fupreme object, in all he does.

"

This plan agrees with the former, in supposing fin to be of infinite magnitude, and deferving of endless punishment; that, as the law of God is infinite, like himself, finite man is infinitely to blame for not fulfilling all its requirements; and that the penalty of the law is endless mifery, which mifery Christ sustained; not with a view of acquitting the finner, nor in room and ftead of the tranfgreffor, as is fuppofed in the other plan; but for the honor of divine juftice, and the glory of his Father. It is further argued, that by Chrift's fuffering the penalty of the law, juftice is as fully fatisfied, as if all mankind had been made miferable for an eternity. And this being the case, it is now juft and right for God to acquit as many of the finful race of Adam, as is confiftent with. his grand object, which is himself; yet, by no means rendering it unjuft for God to punifh, to all eternity, as many as is neceffary, in order for the fatisfying of the fame grand object.

I firft enquire into the propriety of the argu ment, on which this plan of atonement feems to be founded; which is, that God always acts for his own infinite and incomprehenfible glory; never ftooping fo low, as to act with an intention for the good of his creatures.

ift, I afk, is God as infinitely glorious as he can be, or not? If it be answered, that he is; then, if his object in all he does, is to augment