the fathers upon the children.* But this is a truth evident by universal experience. It is seen every day, in every part of the world. If Mr. Paine indulge in intemperance, and leave children behind him, they ⚫ may feel the consequences of his misconduct when he is in the grave. The sins of the father may thus be visited upon the children, to the third and fourth generation. It would, however, be their affliction only, and not their punishment. Yet such visitations are wisely ordered as a motive to sobriety. Nor is it between parents and children only that such a connection éxists, as that the happiness of one depends upon the conduct of others: a slight survey of society, in its various relations, must convince us that the same principle pervades creation. To call this injustice, is to fly in the face of the Creator. With such an objector I have nothing to do: He that reproveth God, let him answer it.

If the idea of the innocent suffering in the room of the guilty were in all cases inadmissible, and utterly

bestows his Holy Spirit to renew and sanctify the soul; gives a new heart, and a right spirit, and takes away the heart of stone. Christ is exalted to give repentance, Acts v. 31. Unto us it is given in behalf of Christ, to believe in him, Phil, i. 29. We have obtained like precious faith through the righteousness of God, and our Saviour Jesus Christ, 2 Pet. i. 1. This favour is conferred on ELECT SINNERS, See Acts xiii. 48. Rom. viii. 28-30.-Thirdly: Through the same medium is given the free pardon of all our sins, acceptance with God, power to become the sons of God, and the promise of everlasting life. Your sins are forgiven you for his name's sake, 1 John ii. 12. God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you, Ephes. iv. 32.We are accepted in the beloved, Ephes. i. 6. By means of his death we receive the promise of eternal inheritance, Heb.ix 15, This kind of blessings is conferred on BELIEVING SINNERS.

* Age of Reason, Part 1. p. 4. Note.

repugnant to the human understanding, How came. the use of expiatory sacrifices to prevail as it has, in every age and nation? Whether the idea first proceeded from a divine command, as christians generally believe, or whatever was its origin, it has approved itself to the minds of men; and not of the most uncultivated part of mankind only, but of the most learned and polite. The sacrifices of the gentiles, it is true, were full of superstition, and widely different as might be expected, from those which were regulated by the scriptures; but the general principle is the same: all agree in the idea of the displeasure of Deity being appeasable by an innocent victim being sacrificed in the place of the guilty. The idea of expiatory sacrifices, and of a mediation founded upon them, is beau tifully expressed in the book of Job; a book not only of great antiquity, but which seems to have obtained the approbation of Mr. Paine, having, as he supposes, been written by a gentile." And it was so, that, af ter the Lord had spoken these words unto Job, the Lord said to Eliphaz the Temanite, My wrath is kindled against thee, and against thy two friends; for ye have not spoken of me the thing that is right, as my servant Job hath. Therefore take unto you now seven bullocks and seven rams, and go to my servant Job, and offer up for yourselves a burnt-offering, and my servant Job shall pray for you; for him will I accept: lest I deal with you after your folly, in that ye have not spoken of me the thing which is right, like my servant Job. So Eliphaz the Temanite, and Bildad the Shuite, and Zophar the Naamathite, went and did according as the Lord commanded them: the Lord also accepted Job." Job xlii. 7-9. The objections which are now made to the sacrifice of Christ, equally apply to all expiatory sacrifices; the offering up of which,

had not the former superseded them, would have continued to this day.

If an innocent character offers to die in the room of a guilty fellow-creature, it is not ordinarily accepted, nor would it be proper that it should. For he may have no just right to dispose of his life; or if he have, he has no power to resume it: there may likewise be no such relation between the parties, as that the suffering of the one should express displeasure against the conduct of the other. Besides this, there may be no great and good end accomplished by such a substitution, to society: the loss sustained by the death of the one, might be equal if not superior to the gain from the life of the other. If the evil to be endured might be survived; if the relation between the parties were such, that in the sufferings of the one, mankind would be impressed with the evil of the other; and if by such a proceeding, great advantage would accrue to society; instead of being accounted inadmissible, it would be reckoned right, and wise, and good. If a dignified individual, by enduring some temporary severity from an offended nation, could appease their displeasure, and thereby save his country from the destroying sword, who would not admire his disinterested conduct? And if the offended, from motives of humanity, were contented with expressing their displeasure by transferring the effect of it from a whole nation to an individual who thus stepped forward on their behalf, Would their conduct be censured as "indiscriminate revenge?" The truth is, The atonement of Christ affords a display of justice on too large a scale, and on too humbling a principle, to approve itself to a contracted, selfish, and haughty mind.

D d

1

THE

SCRIPTURE DOCTRINE

OF ELECTION STATED.

(From the Vermont Adviser.)

IT is a very plainly revealed truth, of great importance in the christian system, that some of our fallen race were, "from the beginning, chosen to salvation, through sanctification of the Spirit, and belief of the truth;" or, elected, "according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification, unto obedience, and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ." It is not true, as many seem to hold, that some are chosen to salvation, because they were previously sanctified; but, they were "chosen to salvation, through sanctification." They are elected, not because they were previously obedient; but, "unto obedience."As this doctrine of election makes the salvation of sinners depend, not on him that willeth, nor on him that runneth, but, on the sovereign electing grace of God, it is very offensive to the carnal heart, and has, perhaps, been opposed with more unchristian zeal and virulence, than almost any other truth of the gospel. nor has it always been easy, even for apparently humble disciples of the Lord Jesus to perceive the entire consistency of this, with other plainly revealed truths. Perhaps, too, this doctrine has sometimes been so

stated, by very pious and learned advocates for the doctrines of grace, in their zeal for the sovereignty of God, as to be an occasion of stumbling to their friends, while it has given their adversaries some advantage.

A leading objection to this doctrine has ever been, that, if it be true, then no grace has been manifested to the non-elect, in the gift of a Saviour; in the atonement he has made; or in the offer of salvation to them, in the gospel; whereas the scripture representation certainly is, that great grace has been manifested in these things. Could this objection be fairly substantiated, it would, indeed, go so far towards invalidating the truth of the doctrine If, then, the doctrine be So stated, by its advocates, that this objection will lie, unanswerably, against their statement, great advantage is given to the adversary.

It has not been uncommon for those, who have undertaken to defend the doctrines of grace, to represent the elect as being chosen, not merely, as the scriptures express it, to salvation, through sanctification of the Spirit, and belief of the truth;" but, also, as chosen, that Christ might die for them, and make atonement for their sins, and for theirs only. But it must be very obvious, that, if the atonement made by Christ were for the sins of the elect only, then, in making the atonement, there could be no act of grace to the non-elect. Besides, if Christ were set forth a propitiation for the sins of the elect only, then, in what he has done and suffered, no provision has been made, in any sense, for the salvation of the non-elect; and, surely, then, there can be no grace in the gospel offer of salvation to them. In this case, were they even to repent and believe the gospel, they could not be sayed by Christ. Against this view of election, therefore, it seems evident, the objection must be valid.