« PoprzedniaDalej »
Quest. II. “ Is it the anxious de- it is possible, that the almighty Jesire and wish of Jesus Christ, that sus, our God and our Redeemer, all should obey him, and be saved?” who worketh all things according
We answer, 1. The question is to the counsel of his will," can have not definitely stated. 'Í'hat Jesus any thing that is not among the all Christ sustains both a human and a
things ? and particularly how he ine character, will not be dis can have a wish, an anxious wish, puted. Some things in divine re. that forms no part of his pleasure ? velation, are predicated of him in The Doctor, notwithstanding his his human character and some in denunciation of metaphysics and his divine. He was, indeed, logic, sometimes argues by syllothan a man, but he was a man. In
gisms. Suppose, after his example, his human nature, he increased in we try the following: wisdom and stature. Of him, as a The counsel of the Lord Jesus man it is said, “But of that day Christ shall stand, and he will do knoweth no man,-neither the Son, all his pleasure : but the Father." “ If thou be will But it is the anxious desire and ing, remove this cup from me; ne wish, i.e. counsel and pleasure, of vertheless, not my will, but thine the Lord Jesus Christ, that all men be done.” If “the anxious desire should obey him and be saved : and wish,” be applied to Jesus Therefore, all men shall obey Christ, as a man, we might answer him and be saved. in his own words to his Father, Whatever the Lord Jesus Christ “Not my will, but thine, be done.” is both able and willing to do, shall It might be the natural feeling, in be done: clination, or dictate of humanity, But the Lord Jesus Christ is both which the blessed Saviour would able and willing to save all mannevertheless resolve into the will kind: of his Father. And from the epi Therefore all mankind shall be thet anxious, applied to desire and saved. wish, one would scarcely imagine This we think sound reasoning, it would, or could, be, at all, as if the assumption or minor proposicribed to the Divine mind, unless tion in the above syllogisms be only metaphorically, or speaking after true. This, however, we have reathe manner of men, and then it son to believe is not the case, becould be no proof of the author's cause we are assured from the word sentiment. When it is said of God, of God, that some shall be eternally that “he rested and was refreshed," damned. who would reason that he had been In order to get correct views, of weary, or was actually refreshed? what our glorious Redeemer is both
But, 2. Let it be applied to the able and willing to do in the article divine character of Jesus Christ, as of salvation, it will certainly be betthe Doctor seems evidently to ap ter to examine the covenant of ply it. We then reason thus: Either grace, than torture our minds with Jesus Christ has an anxious desire syllogistic arguments. The sacred and wish, which is a part of his scriptures reveal that covenant: counsel and pleasure, or he has not. “I have made a covenant with my If he has, we are assured from un chosen." doubted authority, that his “coun Jesus Christ was made man, and sel shall stand," and "he will do was made under the law to reall his pleasure;” and so all shall deem them that were under the obey him and be saved. But if this law." How could this be? How anxious desire and wish be no part could the second person of the of his counsel and pleasure, we beg blessed Trinity, be made under the to be informed what it is? And how law? We would be forever unable
to answer this, were it not for the doubtful, i.e. uncertain knowledge, covenant of grace. And it appears
is not knowledge. “ If God forethat this covenant itself would be know any thing, that thing is' eviutterly unintelligible, were it not dent to the Divine mind, i. e. the for the doctrine of election. It is Divine mind has evidence of that indeed all important to inquire, thing." No evidence can be fur“What is precisely the use which nished from the thing itself, bethe sacred writers make of the doc cause it does not exist. The same trine of election ?” And by pursu thing may be said of every other ing this inquiry for a little, we may thing before it exists. No evidence, remove the complaint of Dr. G. then, can be furnished from any " that not one has paid the slight thing else. From whence then can est attention to that question.”
the Divine mind
possess evidence It will appear, upon examining
of the future existence of any thing? the sacred writings, that election Only from his own purpose,
decree, lies at the very foundation of the or predestination of that thing to system of grace. The whole pur exist. Simple foreknowledge, therepose of God, respecting the salva fore, is posterior in the order of nation of his people, is according to ture to predestination. But the election. Rom. ix. 11. It is so es foreknowledge in the text comes sentially connected with that love before it. Now, nothing can be bewhich is the spring and the origin of
fore the predestination of any to the system of grace, that it is usual eternal life, but that choice of love, ly termed God's electing love. John
which is the fontal spring of the iii. 16: « For God so loved the whole appointment. We have a world, that he gave his only begot
similar application of the word ten Son.”. By the world here, we
know, in the first Psalm, verse must necessarily understand the
6th : “ For the Lord knoweth the elect world, the objects of Jehovah's way of the righteous.” In as far as love, on whose account, and for the mere knowledge is concerned, the redemption of whom, God sent his Lord knows the way of the wicked Son. These are not the whole as well as the way of the righteous, world, i. e. all the descendants yet the one is set in opposition to of Adam, for some of these are the other. The word plainly means, hated of Godsome who are not to approve, love, or delight in. So the sheep of Christ, for whom the
also in Matt. vii. 23: “I never good Shepherd gave his life--some knew you;" where the same verb for whom Christ would not pray.
is used as in Rom. viii. 29. In reJohn xvii. 9. This is further evi spect to the fact of knowledge simdent, from the fact, that at the last ply, the omniscient Judge of the day, Christ says to those on his left quick and the dead, knew the wickhand, “I never knew you ;” but he ed as well as the righteous. But I expressly says, “ I know my sheep." never approved of you, I never loved John, x. 14. This will still further you, I never delighted in you as in appear, from Rom. viii. 29: “ For beloved objects, must be the meanwhom he did foreknow, them he did ing of the word. In like manner, predestinate,” &c. Whatever the those whom God foreknew, are word foreknow means, in the order those whom he loved before. More of nature here, it precedes predes examples would be unnecessary. tination. It cannot then signify Now this love, this electing love, mere prescience, because God can this primary principle in the sysnot foreknow any thing, unless that tem of grace, is in Christ, who is thing is certainly to happen. Fore also the Father's elect. Eph. i. 4: knowledge must be certain, other According as he hath chosen us wise it would be doubtful. But in him before the foundation of the
world. Not that he is the cause imputable to them, simply as elect of their election, or that the choice persons, but as believers. of him is, in the order of nature, The responsibility of the Lord anterior to theirs. Indeed, “his Jesus Christ for those who were election is subordinated to theirs, given him, further shows the use of as a mean to an end." In their election in the system of grace. election they were given to him as The sheep delivered to his care,
as a body to a head. He was to effect a flock to a shepherd. God the Fathe purpose and end of their elec
ther gave them to him, and will one tion. They were given to him to day require them at his hand. be redeemed: “ Thine they were,” “ Where is the flock that was given says the Redeemer to his heavenly thee, thy beautiful flock?" Jer. xiii. Father, “and thou gavest them me." 20. Then will he be able to say, John xvii. 6. They were the pro “Lo, here am I, and the children perty and possession of the Father, that thou hast given me. Of all that before they were given to Christ, thou gavest me, have I lost none.” not merely by creation, for so were Here is the place to ascertain the others as well as they, but by the value of Jesus' blood, the nature Father's choice, the Father's elect and the worth of his atonement. ing love.
The abstract or intrinsic value of They are definite and fixt as to the blood of Christ, is a thing with their number: “ The Lord knoweth which we have nothing at all to do. them that are his.” 2 Tim. ii. 19. Who could form an adequate idea Those that are his by election, other of that which is infinitely valuable ? wise there would be nothing definite Jesus Christ represented the elect in the expression. Their very names in the covenant of
grace. In their are known and recorded : “ Their name he engaged, and for them he names are written in heaven-in became surety. He took their guilt the book of life.”
upon himself; he said to the divine The covenant of grace is wholly law," If they owe thee aught,” or about these persons. Here then is whatever they owe thee, “set that precisely the use the sacred writers to my account. In due time, I will make of the doctrine of election.
Unconnected with They make it the very groundwork the elect, Jesus Christ
not the very
matter about which the in the whole transaction. The cocovenant of grace treats. The co venant of grace embraces them, and venant of
is a covenant of re no others. The value of the satisdemption. Jesus Christ is the Re faction of Christ was settled in the deemer in that covenant. He en eternal covenant. It was to be acgages pay a ransom, a price, for counted as worth, precisely, what those who were given him. Does was agreed upon, between the Fahe so engage for others that were ther and the Son in that transacnot given him? Does he also pay tion. It is not its intrinsic value their ransom? Election is not, with (though it must be, intrinsically, of sound Calvinists, " a mere element infinite worth), but the persons for in a metaphysical theory," but, ac whom it is shed, those whom Christ cording to the Bible, it is, indeed, represented in the shedding of it, an elementary principle in the sys that will show the extent of its tem of grace. It also shows the worth in the everlasting covenant. value, but certainly not the imputa- | It is worth all that the law requires, bility, of Christ's righteousness, in for them, or in their behalf, but it is the covenant of redemption. The of no value at all in the covenant, righteousness of Christ is imputable for those who are not recognised in to those who possess it. There are that covenant. indeed elect persons, but it is not The broken law had equal claims
upon all the human family. Does ly to intimate God's design of limitJesus represent them all in the co ing the benefits resulting from the venant of redemption? If he does, death of his Son, to a part of the then they are all redeemed. If he human family.. Independently of a does not, then those who are not restriction originating in Divine represented have neither part nor Sovereignty, intimated to us in this lot in this redemption. It is to passage, as well as in many others, them as though it had never been, the merits of his obediential life. in as far as redemption is really and satisfactory death, should have concerned. How then can that be been not only imputable, but also imputable to them, in which they must have been, in due time, imhave no interest? But we forget puted to all mankind. Then it is that Doctor G. uses the word impu evident, that “the remedial righttable in a sense hitherto unknown eousness of Jesus Christ would have in the English language. If he ex the same extent, bounds and limits, plains his meaning, he may, how. with the covenant transgression of ever, be indulged in the oddity, as Adam,” and all that were lost by if one should say, I mean the Mo the one would be saved by the nongahela river, but I choose to call other. As it is, Doctor G. attempts it the Mediterranean sea.
a comparison, in every respect, beIt is in the covenant stipulations, tween the two (p. 91.) in these methat we see the application and the morable words : « Therefore the bearing of the atonement. Jesus remedial righteousness of Jesus Christ made atonement for men. Christ has the same extent, bounds, Atonement removes the offence, and and limits, with the covenant transrestores the culprit to favour. Je gression of Adam; the latter has sus died the just for the unjust, that destroyed all mankind, the former he might "bring us to God.” All is capable of saving all mankind.” those whose sins he expiated are The comparison is, however, not brought to God. These are God's homogeneous. It is made not bechosen. The principle of election tween destruction and salvation, is never lost sight of through the but between destruction and the whole of his sufferings. If he is capability of salvation. taken, those who are elected are let We shall not charge this with their way.
being either logical or metaphysical. The nature of angels he took not, It is far enough from either. The and therefore he satisfied not the actual doing of a thing, and the calaw of God for them. He could pability of doing it, will not, genenot represent them, not being one rally, be allowed to identify. One in nature with them. For this is man works, and another is capable the law, “that he that sanctifieth, of working: therefore, they are both and they who are sanctified, be all alike. It is believed, that few would of one,
; Heb. ii. 11: i. e. of one be disposed to admit this conclucommon nature.
sion, But he did take on him the seed That the righteousness of Jesus of Abraham. Heb. ii. 16. Two things Christ has the
“extent, are here observable.
bounds, and limits, with the cove1. The nature that belonged to nant transgression of Adam,” in rethe seed of Abraham is human na lation to all for whom it is wrought, ture. Jesus, therefore, took on him will be readily granted; but that it human nature.
has the same extent, &c. in relation 2. It is not said by the apostle, to others, certainly does not follow. He took upon him the seed of Were we to present the reasoning Adam,” but “ the seed of Abra in the form of a syllogism, it might ham." This would appear evident
Jesus Christ undertook to satis In Rev. xiv. 3, 4, we are informed fy, in human nature, for all the seed that they are “ redeemed from the of Abraham :
earth,” i. e. from among carnal, But the seed of Abraham are part earthly men. Did he both redeem of the seed of Adam :
them from among carnal, earthly Therefore, Jesus Christ under men, and redeem those men too? took to satisfy, in human nature, In Ps. cxxx. 8, we are assured that for all the seed of Adam.
- he redeems his Israel from all his Logicians have a name for this iniquities.” Can all men, elect and kind of reasoning, but no man reprobate, be said, in truth, to be covets to have it applied to his. his Israel, or to be redeemed from
We learn here the precise use all their iniquities? The same truth which the apostle makes of elec is taught in Tit. iii. 14:“Who gave tion, in this part of the system of himself for us, that he might regrace. Abraham is called the father deem us from all iniquity.” It is of believers. His seed are the elect, evident from this passage, that the an: the elect only. Such are the object which the Redeemer had in children of Abraham's faith. Rom. view in giving himself, was, to reix. 8: “But the children of the pro deem from all iniquity, those for mise are counted for the seed." whom he
himself. And is it Gal. iii. 7: They which are of not, on this very account, that the faith, the same are the children of blessed Redeemer gets the name of Abraham."
Saviour, (Matt. i. 21, “And thou Jesus Christ took human nature, shalt call his name Jesus: for he having the satisfaction which he shall save his people from their was to make in that nature limited sins.” The salvation which Jesus by covenant agreement to the seed procures, is, primarily, a salvation of Abraham. Abraham's seed are, from sin. in relation to this transaction, be Are the reprobate as well as the lievers, and believers only. All the elect saved from sin ? If Jesus proelect shall be made believers. No cured salvation from sin for the rereprobate shall ever be a believer. probate, how could he say of any Consequently, Jesus Christ pur * ye shall die in your sins » chased nothing for reprobates. Again : Those whom Jesus re.
It is not disputed by Doctor G. deems, he redeems from the broken that the covenant of grace is a co law. Gal. iv. 5: “ To redeem venant of redemption ; that in this them that were under the law." covenant Jesus Christ acted as a Are all the human family thus reRedeemer. Whom did he
deemed ? Certainly not. They only to redeem ?- The elect only? or all who are under grace, are redeemed mankind ?
from the law as a broken covenant. This question, it is presumed, Rom. vi. 14: “For ye are not unwill be satisfactorily answered by der the law, but under grace.” attending to two things.
II. To whom or what did Christ 1. From what did he engage to engage to redeem his people! redeem those whom he represented? 1. To God. Rev. v. 9: " For
II. To whom, or what, did he en thou wast slain, and hast redeemed gage to redeem them?
us to God.” To God as their own These two questions are fully an God, to the everlasting enjoyment swered in the sacred volume.
of God, as their soul satisfying porThat, from which Jesus Christ tion. “ The Lord is my portion, actually does redeem his people, saith my soul.” Can this be said must be that from which he engaged of such as shall never see God in in the covenant of grace to redeem mercy, but be eternally excluded them.
from his blissful presence ?