Some time after our heavenly Father had promised the parents of mankind, that the serpent, or Satan, should be destroyed, and consequently they, and their posterity finally restored, probably, to a much better state, than if they had never known evil, he renewed his promises to Abraham, a godly man, to whom he had chosen to reveal his will concerning mankind, more fully and plainly, in these gracious words, (after telling him he should become a great nation, &c.)

And in thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed." (Gen. xii. 3.) And again in chapter 18, "And all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him." And again, (xxii. 16, 18.) "By myself have I sworn, saith the Lord,"-that "in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed." In about fifty years after, the same gracious promise was renewed to Isaac-"And I will perform the oath which I sware unto Abraham, thy father," &c.— "And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed." (Gen. xxvi. 3, &c.)

And again, the same promise (about forty years after) was confirmed to Jacob-"And in thee, and thy seed shall all the families (before it was nations, it is now and families) of the earth be blessed." (Gen. xxviii. 14.) And St. Peter applies these promises (Acts iii. 25) to" all the kindreds of the earth." Thus it has been six times repeated that "all the nations, and lastly all the kindreds and families of the earth, shall be blessed."Positively, and unconditionally blessed, without any ifs, or any conditions on the part of man; and, most astonishing, that God should condescend to swear that he would fulfil his promises. Now what can all this mean, if all are not finally

blessed. For certainly all nations, and all families includes every individual of the human race. But how can all be blessed, unconditionally blessed, if millions of mankind are to lie under an endless curse and suffer eternal pain.

According to Calvinism and Arminianism, all these promised blessings should have read almost altogether the reverse, i. e. the greatest part of the nations, and families, and kindreds of the earth shall be cursed: then, according to their doctrine, it would be true, as they believe many will be cursed, and that forever.

If a father of a large family of children, and one who is abundantly able, should repeatedly and unconditionally promise that he would bless all his children, with all the necessary and comfortable things of this life, and once swear to them that he would fulfil this promise; then, sometime after, leave several of them to suffer in want and poverty, what would his children, and his neighbours, think of his promises?

What would be thought of a king who should unconditionally promise that he would bless all his subjects, every family of them, with all the comfortable things of this life, or that they should all be placed in easy and comfortable circumstances, and afterwards cast great numbers of them into prison, to be tormented, or deliver them over to a tyrant, his greatest adversary, for that purpose, because they had done something to offend him, when his promise was unconditional? Certainly he would be considered as deceiving his subjects, or that he only meant to tantalize them.

A calvinistic divine says, "There can be no decree which frustrates, or makes void the Divine promises." This is well, hold fast here.It is evident that the promises are to the whole world of mankind, to all nations, which will be clearly proved from the numerous texts that will soon be presented.

Can any person believe that an infinitely wise, good, and unchangeable being would make unconditional promises, and obligate himself by an oath to perform them, and then leave the event, and that of such vast importance as the eternal state of man, to such poor, weak, ignorant, fallible creatures as mankind are? What should we think of the man who should promise, on oath, the performance of something of conse quence, (and he abundantly able to fulfil his promise,) and afterwards make the final event depend upon the conduct of a fool? The difference between the most learned and wise, and a natural fool or idiot, can be calculated; but who can draw the line, and tell the difference between the wise man and the great Creator?

A writer truly says, that "We may challenge all men in the world to prove the promise of Jehovah, sworn by himself, (the greatest and most important oath that ever was or ever can be taken,) that in the seed of Abraham (Christ) all the nations shall be blessed, contains any thing conditional, and binding on the part of man, in default of which God would absolve himself and abrogate his promises." Read the following, (Is. lv. 10, 11,)" For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh

it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater, so shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return to me void, but shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the things whereunto I sent it."

Sin, or transgression, will have no effect with one soul to hinder the fulfilment of those promises. Nay, for we are told positively, that "He will have compassion upon us: He will forgive our iniquities: And will cast all their sins in the depth of the sea. Thou wilt perform the oath to Jacob, and the mercy to Abraham, which thou hast sworn unto our fathers from the days of old." (Mic. vii. 19, 20.)

There are numerous other passages, both in the Old and New Testaments, that refer to these gracious promises, considering them as the fundamental evidences of his unlimited grace, they being the only promises (or any thing else) that ever the Almighty condescended to confirm by an oath. I think they are of as much, if not of more importance to us, than any thing else in the scriptures. And this, with the promise to Adam, that the head of the serpent should be bruised, may with propriety be called the gospel preached by Jehovah, and so the apostle calls it "the gospel which was preached unto Abraham:" and therefore it is the foundation on which is built all that relates to man's salvation; and nothing in the scriptures should be understood contrary thereto. Every passage of scripture should be understood in conformity to these first, great, and glorious promises. These should be the key-texts to all others, and any passage. that may

་

appear contrary thereto, should be so understood as to correspond therewith. If God ever did reveal any thing to man, we have as much reason to believe this to be a revelation, as any thing else in the scriptures; for there is nothing more worthy of a God, and more probable that a good God, the supreme, infinitely good Parent, would reveal, than that he would bless his children. This is becoming in all good parentsthere is hardly any thing looks better in the patriarchs, than their blessing their children. And if I really believe in those promises, and believe them to be as they were, universal, unlimited, positive, and unconditional, and delivered in such plain words I cannot misunderstand, I can believe nothing that expresses any thing contrary thereto. And if any other passage or text in the scriptures appears to the contrary, I should rather conclude it was a mistranslation, or an interpolation, or that I did not understand it, or that it was by some means a mistake, than to think for a moment, that the Almighty, who is declared to be unchangeable, would contradict himself, or declare one thing at one time, and of such importance, and so vastly interesting to mankind as the declaration in question, and at another time, something the reverse of it. This is impossible, as we read it "is impossible for God to lie:" and the apostle says this in reference to those very promises. (Heb. vi. 18.)

Wesley says, that" Predestination represents God worse than the devil. But you say you will prove it by scripture. Hold! What will you prove by scripture? That God is worse than Satan? It cannot be. Let the scripture mean