T

this mean, than that God is unwilling, that sinners should be damned; but most willing that they should be saved." Now who is the person that is unwilling that sinners should be damned, and most willing that they should be saved? He is no less than JEHOVAH, the infinite, independent, and omnipotent Godthe Lord God omnipotent, who doth what pleaseth him in the armies of heaven; this transcendently illustrious personage is infinitely able, and infinitely willing to save all mankind. The conclusion is irresistible, that all mankind shall be saved. Surely nothing can be impossible to infinite willingness in full unison with infinite ability. None can resist the will of God. Psalm cxxxv. 6. "Whatsoever pléased the Lord, that he did in heaven and in earth, in the seas, and all deep places." He doth what pleaseth him in the armies of heaven, and on earth none can stay his hand, or say unto him, what doest thou ? The will and pleasure of finite beings is often unexecuted, because they want power. But not so with God, for "Who hath resisted his will ?" If therefore a God of infinite power, wills the salvation of the whole human family, it must infallibly take place. With God all things are possible.

As

But stop, reader! suspend thy conclusion, until we shall have examined a little more closely the premises from which this deduction so legitimately follows. The Bible must be consistent with itself. the same generic principle pervades all the texts cited above we shall select one, and test its meaning by bringing it in contact with facts, phenomena and other scriptures. The solution will be equally applicable to all the rest. Let us take 1 Tim. 2. 4. "Who will have all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth." We are ready to acknowledge, that this and the kindred texts above quoted, furnish a plausible argument in behalf of the doctrine we are endea

vouring to disprove. We shall try to give it a candid and impartial examination.

There are evidently two points of inquiry contained in this investigation. 1. The extent of the expression, all men. Is it to be understood in an absolute and unlimited sense? or ought it to be understood in a qualified and modified acceptation? 2. What connexion is there between God's willing, in the sense of the text, that all men should be saved, and their actual salvation. We shall attend to each of these in their order: and

1. Who are intended by all men? Is the expression to be understood absolutely and universally, or in a limited and modified sense?

That the expression all men does not necessarily mean every individual of the human race, universally, has been already proved. Has it such a meaning in this place? This bears directly on the point at issue. We shall show that it has not.

In the first verse of this chapter, the apostle says, "I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men: For kings and such as are in authority, &c. Now God's willingness to save all men in the fourth verse, is adduced as a reason and argument to enforce the duty enjoined in the first verse. Consequently God's willingness to save all men, cannot but be as extensive as that duty, of which it is assigned as the reason. Here is evidently a petitio principii, a begging of the question, a well known sophism, in which the very thing to be proved, is assumed as a truth. It remains to be proved, that prayer, supplications, thanksgivings, &c. should be made for every individual of the human race, universally. This duty is not absolute and unlimited in its extent, but modified as plainly as it is possible for language to make it. 1 John v. 16. "There is a sin unto death, I do not say ye shall pray for it." This is one limitation. We may

mention a second. It cannot be for all and every individual that has been, is, or ever shall be. Myriads of them are in heaven, and need not our prayers-myriads in hell, to whom they can be of no service. We might add in the third place, that thanksgivings, as well as prayers are to be made for all men; but surely it cannot be meant that the church of God was called upon to be thankful for the Neros, the Domitians and the Caligulas, scourges of the Roman empire, and the pests of mankind; or for such heretics as Alexander and Hymeneus, whom the apostle, had delivered to Satan.

That all men cannot mean every individual of the human race is, I think, fully established. We have found its limitation announced by the Spirit of God. We therefore deny that we have any authority categorically and absolutely to pray for the salvation of all mankind, for this would be to pray for the rescinding of Jehovah's eternal purposes; unless we were thoroughpaced Universalists, and believed that God intended to save all. This argument should be fully conclusive with all who admit the doctrine of election. There are some who are foreordained unto condemnation, and are vessels of wrath fitted for destruction. Jude 4, and Rom. ix. 22. The truth seems to be, that the meaning generally given by Calvinistic writers, on this subject, is the least objectionable of any, viz. That as all men, absolutely, universally and individually cannot be the sense of the expression, all sorts, classes, ranks and conditions of men, are intended-men of all nations, whether Jews or Gentiles-all grades, whether magistrates or subjects. It is not true, as has been triumphantly asserted, that all sorts, all classes, &c. must either mean nothing at all, or mean all the individuals belonging to those sorts and classes. We could direct the gentleman's attention to

several texts of scripture, which are diametrically opposed to his individual universality. We shall content ourself with one from Gen. vii. 13, 14. "In the self-same day entered Noah, and Shem, and Ham, and Japheth, the sons of Noah and Noah's wife, and the three wives of his sons with them, into the ark: They and every beast after his kind, and all the cattle after their kind, and every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, after his kind, and every fowl after his kind, and every bird of every sort." None, surely will have the hardihood to maintain that all these animals, absolutely and universally, went into the ark with Noah! Some of every sort only were preserved from destruction. The ark could not have contained them. The thing is absurd. The second and the fifteenth verses, regulate the proportions of the various classes or kinds. And in the twenty-first verse, &c. we are told, "That all flesh died, that moved upon the earth, both of fowl and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man. All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died. And every living substance was destroyed that was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven, and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark." We hold it to be no more absurd, that classes or sorts are meant in the passage under consideration, than that they are, as they necessarily must be, understood in the multifarious assemblage in Noah's ark. It is a well known fact, that the converted Jews had very strong prejudices against the Gentiles and their rulers; and with great difficulty admitted the legality of submitting at all, to what they conceived to be an illegitimate government.

The apostle, therefore, begins this chapter, by presenting to them a more liberalized view of the Christian system; and consequently exhorts, that supplications, prayers and intercessions, be made for all men, i. e. for all sorts, classes and conditions of men; or, as it is elsewhere expressed, "For all nations, kindreds and tongues," for, from among all these, some were seen assembled with the Lamb upon Mount Zion. We feel at a loss to conceive, how any person attending impartially to the scope of the passage, and at the same time claiming any kindred with Calvin, can hesitate to admit this exposition.

"Se

But a question presents itself, which deserves some attention in the discussion of this subject. Is there any individual who has not sinned the sin unto death, for whom you would refuse to pray? We answer, No. The extent of the Mediator's purchase is unknown to us. It must remain during the present life unknown to us. It, therefore, can form no rule of our duty. This question analogizes with that of election. Though in virtue of this, the destiny of the elect and of the reprobate, shall remain eternally and immutably fixt, yet it can never become the rule of our duty. cret things belong to God; but revealed things to us and to our children." But in all such cases, it is clear, submission to the will of God, ought to be implied, in all our requests. This amounts to the same thing as to say, "If it be agreeable to thy eternal purposes If thou hast thoughts of peace and purposes of mercy," &c. To pray that God should save a sinner, contrary to his own immutable purpose, is sheer blasphemy! It would be praying him to change, to deny himself to commit suicide! As, therefore, we know nothing about the particular objects of the Mediator's purchase, a priori, but only from the effects of divine grace on the human heart; "By their fruits

ye shall know them."-In humble acquiescence to the will of God, we are as much bound to pray for all men individually in this modified sense, as we are bound to use any established mean in the ordinary occurrences of human life. Christianity is a unit. It is not made up out of heterogeneous materials; neither is it a compound of various, jarring systems. Its law is a unitthe transcript of the moral attributes of Jehovah. Of course all its ramifications, in every department of life, emanating from the same centre, must necessarily possess multifarious analogies and intimate affinities. All the duties incumbent on the Christian completely harmonize. In the ordinary business of life, he is bound to run and to exercise his strength in the performance of his duty. Yet he knows not whether he shall succeed or not. "The race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong." He knows not whether it be in the divine purpose to render the means efficacious. Yet every mean is really a prayer, and involves a solicitation of the end, from the divinity. Now, as all these solicitations should be made in submission to the divine will, so should our prayers for every thing which we are not positively assured God has determined to bestow. The duty is ours, the success is of God. Admirably to this purpose are the words of the preacher, Eccl. xi. 6. "In the morning sow thy seed, and in the evening withhold not thine hand; for thou knowest not whether shall prosper, either this or that, or whether they both shall be alike good."

A denial of the reasoning just presented, would totally unnerve the arm of industry, strike off the wheels of business, and eventually issue in the annihilation of human society. Let men cease to use means, until they shall have been absolutely ascertained, that God has preordained to render then successful, the grand drama will im

mediately close, the awful catastrophe will instantly follow. One thing common sense will suggest, viz. that in the use of the means we may fail; but in the neglect of them, we must inevitably perish. This might be aptly illustrated by allusion to the very common, but disgraceful practice of gambling, in legalized lotteries. None of the gamblers is such a fool as to believe, that the purchase of a ticket will necessarily secure him a prize; none so stupid as to believe he can draw a prize without possessing a ticket. We therefore do deny, that the Calvinistic doctrine of a definite atonement, in any way whatever, eramps the spirit of prayer, or renders it necessary, that the prayers of mankind should dwindle into an idle battology, "Lord save the elect!-Lord save the elect!" With the same propriety, would the belief in the doctrine of predestination, cut the sinews of industry; and reduce all human means of subsistence to a similar battological exclamation, Lord execute thy purpose!-Lord execute thy purpose!

2. But let us now attend to the second branch of this inquiry, namely, whether there be any infallible connexion between God's willing, in the sense of the text, "that all men should be saved," and their actual salvation. The light shed from the lamp of revelation, will leave to the humble inquirer, no room to doubt on this subject. The sacred oracles, in various passages, clearly intimate to us, that the Deity is said to will things, which do not actually come into existence. Matt. xxiii. 37. "O Jerusalem! Jerusalem!--how often would I have gathered thy children as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not.” Here we have the divine Jesus willing to gather Jerusalem's children, yet they remain ungathered! Deut. xxxii. 29. "O that they were wise, that they understood this, that they

would consider their latter end!" Yet Israel remained a foolish and inconsiderate people! Many more texts of similar import might be mentioned, but we conceive those already cited, to be quite sufficient for the purpose. Now before even the shadow of an argument can be deduced from the text in Timothy, under consideration, it ought to be categorically demonstrated, that the will of God, is not used here in the same sense as in the passages just now cited. But although it should be found to be used in exactly the same sense, still, there is no more inconsistency in supposing that all men will not be saved, though God wills them to be saved, in the sense of the text; than that Jerusalem's rebellion continued, the will of God to the contrary notwithstanding. The truth seems plainly to be this, from the authority both of the Old and New Testaments, in numerous instances, that the nonrepentance and death of the sinners, are matters of fact, which take place, contrary to the divine will, in some particular sense of that expression. God has no pleasure in the death of the sinner; yet the sinner dies. God would have him to return unto him and live; yet he does not return, but dies. God is not willing that any should perish; yet himself informs us, "The wicked shall be turned into hell, and the nations that forget God." But the argument for Universalism founded on these texts, proceeds on the assumption, that God's will is efficient, and absolutely operative. Here lies the sophism. It will be found in the major proposition, when the argument is reduced to the syllogistic form. Thus,

Maj. Whatever God wills, comes to pass;

Min. But God wills the salvation of all men ;

Concl. Therefore, the salvation of all men shall come to pass.

Here the truth of the conclusion is completely vitiated, by the false

hood in the major proposition. We have already clearly proved that God wills many things, in some sense of the word, which do not come to pass. But let us apply the same process of ratiocination to the text in Ezek. xviii. 32. Thus,

Maj. Whatever God wills comes to pass;

Min. But God wills, that he who dieth should not die ;

Concl. Therefore he who dieth doth not die!

Credat Judæus Apella; non ego! Let him swallow this who can !

I cannot help here dropping a hint, to such (for such there are!) as in conjunction with a belief in a universal atonement and willingness on the part of God and Christ to save all men, admit the doctrine of election. Now the very idea of an election, supposes, a nonelection, rejection, or passing by some who are not chosen. Let us for a mo-. ment bring the different parts of this system into contact, and examine their affinities and their repulsions. God is most willing, that is infinitely willing (for in God these are the same) to save all men. Then he is infinitely willing to save those whom he has rejected. And as there can be no succession of ideas in the divine mind, he was from all eternity infinitely willing to save those whom he intended not to save, but rejected and passed by, as Jude 4. "foreordained of old to condemnation." And Rom. ix. 22. "Vessels of wrath fitted for destruction!" Infinitely willing to do what he did not will to do, that is, was unwilling to do! And to cap the climax of sublime wonderment, he laid down his life to redeem from death, those very persons, whom, from eternity he did not design to redeem from death!! Jesus made a complete atonement for all men. He is infinitely willing that all men should be savedyet, at the same time, his will concerning some, is, that they should believe a lie, that all might be VOL. I.

damned who believe not the truth. 2 Thess. ii. 11, 12. "For this cause God shall send them strong delu. sion, that they should believe a lie : that they all might be damned which believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness." From such a system, good Lord, deliver us!

Having now, we trust, sufficiently exposed the false glosses, superinduced on the sacred text, let us proceed to state what we believe to be the true meaning of the påssage, harmonizing with the context, with the general analogy of faith, and at the same time, in perfect concinnity with the moral phenomena of the universe.

We shall not even attempt to conjure up the hideous spectres, which haunt the wild domains of metaphysical speculation, lest we shock the nervous system of some of our more delicate readers. But we beg leave to apprise the reader, that we have not the most distant idea of denouncing metaphysics, as

66

an infernal fiend ascending from the bottom of Erebus, or Old Night, croaking her endless and unblest ditty!" The science is as legitimate as physics or mathematics. It deals as much in matters of reality as either of them. It differs from physics, principally in tracing the ramifications of the roots of a subject, if I may be allowed the expression, beyond the limits of physical science; and exploring more minutely, and more extensively, that part of the concatenation of antecedence and subsequence, which is further removed from vulgar view. Without her aid, human knowledge would indeed be very limited. And, as in other departments of human inquiry, it often happens, that those who have been most beholden to her, and have drawn the most lavishly upon her treasures, are the least disposed to acknowledge the obligation. For ourselves, we would not wish to incur the suspicion of affectation, by concurring in her vituperation. Yet

2 R