It is acknowledged that this view of the subject is different from
that which most Calvinistic writers have given. Yet several eminent
divines have laid down the fundamental principles, at least, of this
sentiment, and have opened the way to it: particularly Augustine,
Theophilus Gale, and a class of German Theologians who may be termed
the school of Leibnitz. A short time ago an attempt was made to excite
the attention of thinking men to his doctrine, by a _Sermon on the
Divine glory, displayed by the Permission of Sin_. But, since the
publication of that pamphlet, the subject has been more ably and fully
treated by my reverend tutor, the Rev. Dr. Williams, in his _Discourse
on Predestination to Life_, published very lately.
Footnote 212:
αδοκιμοι.
Footnote 213:
_See Whitby’s Paraphrase, &c. on Jude, ver. 4._
Footnote 214:
_Thus Beza in loc. calls them_ vessels, _because, as creatures, they
are the workmanship of God, the great potter, but vessels prepared for
destruction by themselves, and therefore adds_, Exitii veras causas
minime negem in ipsis vasis hærere juxta illud _perditio, tua ex te
est_.
Footnote 215:
_It ought to be observed, that the word, here used, is_ κατηρτισμενα
εις απωλειαν, _and not_ προκατηρτισμενα; _nor is there any thing added
to the word, that signifies, that this preparation thereunto was
antecedent to their being; or as though it took its rise from God, as
the cause of that sin for which he designed to punish them; whereas,
on the other hand when the apostle in the following verse, speaks of
God’s_ making known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy,
_to wit, the elect, they are described as those whom he had_ afore
prepared unto glory, ἁ προητοιμασεν εις δοξαν. _What should be the
reason that the apostle alters the phrase, but that we may hereby be
led to consider, that when God chose the elect to glory they are
considered in his purpose as those whom he designed, by his grace, to
make meet for it! So that the vessels of wrath are considered as
fitting themselves for destruction; the vessels of mercy, as persons
whom God would first prepare for, and then bring to glory._
Footnote 216:
_See Whitby’s Discourse, &c. page 10._
Footnote 217:
_See his Riches of God’s love, against Hord. Part II. page 50._
Footnote 218:
_See Bishop Patrick in loc._
Footnote 219:
_This agrees with the sense given of it by Grot. in loc. and Whitby in
his discourse, &c. page 11. and it agrees very well with the sense of
the Hebrew words_, פעל למענרה _which does not so much signify to make,
as to dispose, and adapt one thing to another, which the lxx. render_,
φυλασσεται ὁ ασεβης, &c. the wicked is reserved to the day of evil.
Footnote 220:
_See Quest. xliv._
Footnote 221:
_The words are_, παντα τετραποδα, _that is_, all four-footed beasts.
Footnote 222:
_Matt. iv. 23. The words are_, θεραπευων πασαν νοσον και πασαν
μαλακιαν, every sickness, and every disease; _and so the same words
are translated, in Matt. ix. 35._
Footnote 223:
It is improper to say we have no power, when we can do the thing if we
will; and criminal to take the glory, which is God’s.
Footnote 224:
_See Whitby of Election, Chap. 5. Limborch. Amic. Collat. page 242._
Footnote 225:
_Vid. Sixt Senens. Bibliothec. Lib. V. Annotat 101. Annotavit quidam
Chrytostomum interdum naturæ nostræ vires plus æquo extulisse ex
contentione disceptandi cum Manichæis & Gentilibus, qui hominem
asserebant, vel natura malum vel fati violentia ad peccandum
compelli._
Footnote 226:
_Vid. Aug. Retrac. I. Cap. 25._
Footnote 227:
_Vid. Aug. de Prædest. Sanet. Cap. 14. Quid igitur opus est, ut eorum
scrutemur opuscula, qui prius quam ista hæresis oriretur, non
habuerunt necessitatem in hac difficili ad solvendum quæstione
versari: quod proculdubio facerent, si respondere talibus cogerentur._
Footnote 228:
_Vid. Forbes. Instruct. Historico-Theol. Lib. VIII. Cap. 28. § 16, &c.
& Joh. Jacobi Hottingeri, Fata Doctrinæ de Prædestinat. Lib. I. § 35,
&c._
Footnote 229:
_Vid. G. J. Vossii Hist. Pelag. Lib. VI. Thes. 8, 9, 10._
Footnote 230:
_Vid. Calv. Instit. Lib. III. Cap. 22. § 1. Certior est hic Dei
veritas, quam ut concutiatur, clarior quam ut obruatur hominum
authoritate._
Footnote 231:
_See the epistles that passed between Berevov, a physician at Dort,
and several divines at that time, in_ Lib. de Term vitæ.
Footnote 232:
_Seneca de Consol. ad Marciam, cap. 20. Nemo nimis cito moritur, qui
victurus diutius quam vixit non fuit, fixus est cuique terminus,
manebit semper ubi positus est, nec illum ulterius diligentia aut
gratia promovebit. Et Cicero de Senect. Quod cuique temporis ad
vivendum datum, eo debet contentus esse. Virg. Æn. X. Stat sua cuique
dies. Serv. Fixum est tempus vitæ._
Footnote 233:
Evil as well as good actions are links in the chain of providence, and
yet do not impeach Divine holiness.
Footnote 234:
_Vid. Senac. de Prov. cap. 5. August, de Civ. Dei, Lib. V. cap. 1, &
8. Lips Phys. Stoic. Lib. J. Diss. 12._
Footnote 235:
_See Quest. XVIII._
Footnote 236:
_See Quest. XXI, XXII._
Footnote 237:
When we contend for this doctrine as a _truth_, it should be viewed in
connexion with its real _importance_. These two objects are extremely
different in things natural, civil, and religious. There are many
things true in history, in philosophy, in politics, and even in
theology, which no sober person deems important. There are other
things hypothetically important, whether actually true or not. And of
this kind is the subject before us. Such is the nature, the connexion,
and consequences of it, that _if_ it be true, it cannot fail of being
of the first importance.
But how are we more particularly to estimate the importance of this
subject? By the influence which the admission or the denial of it has
on the very foundations of religion. For instance, if it be NOT true,
either _man_ himself or mere _chance_ has the principal share in
effecting our actual salvation, and investing us with eternal glory.
Some indeed are so lost to modesty and self-knowledge, and so
unacquainted with the leading truths of christianity, that they do not
scruple to ascribe the eventual difference in our future state,
whether good or bad, to man himself, but attended with some verbal,
unmeaning compliment to divine mercy. Such persons should first learn
the rudiments of christianity, before they have a right to expect any
deference shewn to their opinions. On the other hand, if this BE true,
its utility is plain; it will hide pride from man; it will exclude
chance from having any share in our deliverance; it will exalt the
grace of God; it will render salvation a certain, and not a precarious
thing; and, in a word, it will secure to them who have the Spirit of
Christ the greatest consolation.
This was the view which our episcopal reformers had of the doctrine,
both as to its truth, and the importance of it. ‘Predestination to
life’ say they, ‘is the everlasting purpose of God, whereby, before
the foundations of the world were laid, he hath constantly decreed by
his counsel, secret to us, to deliver from curse and damnation those
whom he hath chosen in Christ out of mankind, and to bring them by
Christ to everlasting salvation, as vessels made to honour.—The godly
consideration of Predestination and our election in Christ is full of
sweet, pleasant, and unspeakable comfort to godly persons, and such as
feel in themselves the working of the Spirit of Christ mortifying the
works of the flesh, and their earthly members, and drawing up their
minds to high and heavenly things; as well because it doth greatly
establish and confirm their faith of eternal salvation, to be enjoyed
through Christ, as because it doth fervently kindle their love towards
God.’—Another observation I would make is,
2. That it is highly proper, in order to investigate the present
subject with success, to keep it perfectly distinct, and free from all
_impure mixtures_. This is what some of our early reformers, and many
of the modern defenders of this doctrine have not done. For want of
this, many bitter enemies have opposed it. Dr. WHITBY, for instance,
and most who have written on the same side of the question since his
time, place predestination to death, or reprobation to misery, as the
very foundation of Calvinism, and inseparable from predestination to
life. But so far is predestination to death from being true, that
nothing can be more untrue. It is but an arbitrary assumption; a
foreign, impure mixture, having no foundation either in the real
meaning of holy writ, or in the nature of things; except indeed we
mean by it, what no one questions, a determination to punish the
guilty.[238] But is not one man’s misery as _certain_ as another man’s
happiness? Yes; _equally certain_. What then; must they therefore be
equally _predestinated_? No. But how can a thing be _certain_, if it
be not _predestinated_? Have a little patience and I will tell you.
The previous question is, Does God predestinate to _sin_ as the means,
and to death or misery as the end, in the same way as he predestinates
to holiness as the means, and eternal glory as the end? This we deny,
as it would be infinitely unworthy of God, making him the author of
sin, or doing evil that good may come. Some indeed have distinguished
between being the author or the cause of sin, and being a sinner. But
the distinction itself is not solid, nor could it fully satisfy those
who have made it in clearing the divine character.[239]
In fact, sin and holiness are not only different, but _opposite
effects_, and their causes equally opposite; but as God is the sole
cause, the sole exclusive cause of holiness, the creature, in some
way, must be the sole and exclusive cause of sin. If you ask how? I
reply, by exercising his _liberty_, which is a mere natural
instrument, on _himself_, rather than on God. But how came he to do
that? By his _passive power_. What is passive power? In general, it is
that which distinguishes the creature from the Creator. But more
particularly, it is that tendency to nothing as to being, and to
defection as to well being, which is essential to every created
existence. If every creature have, and must of necessity have this
passive power, you will ask, how came the holy angels, and the spirits
of the just, not to sin? The answer is, because divine grace upholds
them. These things duly considered, though briefly stated, will shew,
that as God is not the author of sin, so neither has he predestinated
sin. He is the author and cause of good only. He is the author of our
liberty; but that in itself is not evil. And he is the author of our
nature as limited; that also of itself is no moral evil. But when our
liberty unites with this limited nature, or terminates on passive
power, when this latter is not controuled by grace, their offspring is
imperfect, or sinfulness attaches to our moral acts.
Hence you may learn, that sin and future misery are events perfectly
certain, though not predestinated. It has been often assumed, but
without propriety or truth, that an event is foreknown only because it
is decreed. In reality all _good_ is foreknown, because it is decreed;
for there is no other ground of its existence. But sin, as before
shewn, has another ground of existence, namely, passive power, which
can no more be an object of divine predestination or decree than its
perfect opposite, the all-sufficiency of Jehovah. Yet, observe
attentively, this has its _proper nature_, and God sees all things,
and all essences, in their proper nature. What! Does not God foreknow
the sinfulness of any event in its _deficient_ cause, as well as the
goodness of another in that which is efficient? Beside, passive power
in union with liberty is an _adequate_, a fully adequate ground of sin
and death; and therefore to introduce a predestination of sin and
death, is to ascribe to God what is equally impious and
needless.[240]—Let us, therefore, keep this doctrine free from all
impure mixtures, and now proceed to a
3rd Observation, that is, When the _end_ is maintained to be
infallibly certain, the _means_ to promote that end are included. Thus
you may suppose a chain suspended from a great height, and to the
lowest link a weight is fixed, which is borne by it. You do not
suppose that this link is unconnected with the next, and so on till
you come to the highest. Every one of the links is equally necessary
with that which is next the weight; and the whole is connected with
something else which is stronger than the weight, including that of
the chain also, however long and heavy.
Thus also in the cultivation of our land, though it is decreed that on
such a field there shall be this very season a crop of wheat, this was
not independent of providential virtue giving the increase, the genial
showers, the solar warmth, and the vivifying air. It is not
unconnected with the proper seed sown, needful tillage, plowing and
harrowing, and the quality of the soil. And the same holds true as to
the health of the body, and the prolongation of life to an appointed
period. He who dies must first have life; he who grows to manhood must
arrive at it through the previous stages of youth, childhood and
infancy. So likewise an the education of our children; if learning be
the end, that supposes the previous means of application; and if it is
determined who shall be the first scholar of the age in which he
lives, it is _equally_ determined that he shall begin with the
rudiments of letters, and diligently prosecute his literary studies.
And respecting religious attainments the matter is equally plain; if
life or eternal glory be the end predestinated, the previous steps of
purity of heart, justification and a new birth unto righteousness,
preservation in Christ, and every individual event and circumstance
preceding, is included in the decree, as far as there is any
_goodness_ in them. As to the _evil_ with which any events or
circumstances are blended, that has been already accounted for on
another principle. Nothing can be more true or plain, God had
predestinated an everlasting righteousness to be brought in by the
Lord Jesus Christ. But is it not equally true and plain that the birth
of Jesus, and of his virgin mother, the existence of David, the call
of Abraham, the preservation of Noah, and the creation of Adam and Eve
were predestinated?—Let us therefore guard against separating the end
and the means; and what God joins together in his predestinating care
and love, let no man put asunder.—We now come
II. To consider some proofs of this doctrine.—That the scriptures,
especially those of the New Testament, _appear_, at least, to maintain
the doctrine in question, no person of common modesty will deny. Thus,
for instance, Rom. viii. 29, 30. “Whom he did foreknow, he also did
_predestinate_ to be conformed to the image of his Son.” Again, Eph.
i. 4-6. “According as he hath chosen us in him, before the foundation
of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in
love; having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus
Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, to the
praise of the glory of his grace.” And again, ver. 11. “In whom also
we have obtained an inheritance, being _predestinated_ according to
the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own
will.” Believers are said to be “called according to God’s _purpose_;”
and certain discriminations are made between man and man, between
nation and nation, “that the _purpose_ of God according to election,
might stand, not of works but of him who calleth.” “The _election_
hath obtained it.” “So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him
that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.” “Shall the thing formed
say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?”—“I will have
mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I
will have compassion.”
These are some of the many passages of holy writ which at least _seem_
to hold this doctrine. But it is of importance to observe, that to
establish this very doctrine is the main drift of the apostle Paul’s
elaborate argument in a considerable part of his epistle to the
Romans. See Rom. ix.-xi.—But more particularly,
1. It is evidently inconsistent with God’s infinite perfection to
suppose that he has _no_ purposes, designs, or aims in his operations;
or, which is virtually the same thing, to suppose that he decrees or
predestinates _nothing_. Wherein would he then differ from blind,
unmeaning chance, which hath neither wisdom, power, nor properties? An
intelligent spirit without _any_ plan or purpose, is inconceivable;
much less is the infinitely perfect Jehovah such a being.
But if he purposes _any thing_, what can be conceived of in this world
of higher importance, or more worthy of his predestinating care, than
the _salvation_ of his people, that is, of those who are eventually
saved? Shall he purpose from eternity to give his Son to appear in the
form of a servant, to suffer an ignominious death, and to be head over
all things to the church, at an _uncertainty_? Does he bestow his Holy
Spirit without knowing, or without intending, who shall be ultimately
changed into the divine image from glory to glory, and made meet for
the inheritance of the saints in light? Truly, if in time he draws
with loving-kindness, it is because he has loved with an everlasting
love.
2. What scripture and experience teach of man’s condition as a sinner,
utterly excludes every other cause of salvation but God’s
predestinating love. From our very birth we are sinful, guilty, and
without strength. The carnal mind is enmity against God. The graceless
heart is a heart of stone; in spiritual concerns unfeeling and
impenetrable. Well may our Lord say to his disciples, Ye have not
chosen me, but I have chosen you. If then those who were dead in
trespasses and sins have been quickened, if persecutors have been
arrested and alarmed, if those who were fully bent on rebellion have
been instantly rendered humble, meek, loving and obedient, to what can
we rationally ascribe it but to the discriminating and sovereign
pleasure of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own
will? If such are not predestinated, how came they to be called,
converted, and regenerated?
Consult the good man’s experience. Will he coolly and deliberately
arrogate any thing to himself? Follow him to the throne of grace; what
is his language before God? Listen to his most holy, happy, and
animated praises in the church. Attend to him in his happiest
frames—or, when emerging from the deep waters of affliction—when
restored from backslidings—or with faltering speech on the brink of
eternity; and you will find him steady to one point; “Behold, God is
my salvation.” My recovery from sin and woe is all of grace. Yea,
follow him to heaven, when he joins the noble army of martyrs, and the
countless myriads of the redeemed from among men, and there he shouts
aloud in chorus, “Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins
in his own blood, and hath made us kings and priests unto God and his
Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.”—“Thou
art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory, and honour, and power; for thou
hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were
created.” If we search eternally into the origin and cause of our
deliverance from sin, and our exaltation to happiness and glory, none
can be found but God’s predestinating love.
3. Nothing short of eternal predestination could secure that which is
demonstrably the most worthy, the most glorious, the most real _end_
of God in the salvation of man, that is, the praise of the glory of
his grace. No _end_ can be compared to this in excellence; it is
expressly the end which God has proposed to himself in the salvation
of his people; “having predestinated us unto the adoption of children
by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his
will, to the praise of the glory of his grace.” If there be no
predestination, how can such an end ever be proposed, and how
infallibly secured? Can there be any effect without an adequate cause?
Or can the invention of men or angels discover any other cause than
predestination?
On any other supposition, how can divine love, grace, and mercy be
glorified, _infallibly_ glorified? Is the honour of these glorious and
blessed perfections of Jehovah to be suspended on a feeble
peradventure? Or is the spiritual temple constructed of some materials
which come by chance, or approach of themselves, while others are
brought forth by a divine hand out of the quarry of nature, and placed
on the living foundation? Is the glory of the Creator to depend upon
the precarious will of man? The supposition is too absurd to admit a
thought.—Again,
4. Predestination to life is essentially necessary to secure the _full
end_ of the _death of Christ_ and the efficacy of divine influence.
What though he laid down his life for his sheep, if after all he do
not bring them into his fold? For him to lay down his life a _ransom_
for many, and then leave it to _them_ whether they should come for
life, and all the benefits of his death, righteousness and grace, is
to suppose them possessed of more power than Adam had before the fall.
For the power he needed was only that which might keep him from
falling; but the power which fallen man requires is that by which he
may rise from his fallen state, and enter into the favour of God, into
union with Christ, into spiritual sensibility and life, into wisdom,
righteousness and holiness, and into eternal glory. Now what can be
adequate to this but omnipotent power helping our infirmities?
If it be said, Though we cannot of ourselves do this, may we not
through Christ and his holy Spirit assisting us? I reply, _assistance_
is of two kinds; it is either affording us proper _means_, such as the
holy scriptures, the ministry of the word, ordinances of religion, and
precious promises by way of encouragement;—or, it is actually to
_influence_ the mind by supernatural agency. If this latter assistance
be afforded, the event is secured; for nothing is requisite to secure
the volitions, and all the exercises of the will, in faith,
repentance, love, hope, and even perseverance therein unto the end,
but _this kind_ of influence to a certain degree. But does God impart
any gracious influence without _purposing_ to do so? And does he not
know what influence is necessary to secure the end? Without
predestination to life, what security can there be, that the death of
Christ will not prove abortive and unavailing?
The notion that a _sufficient_ degree of grace is given to all, but
that a degree _more_ than sufficient is given to the elect; that all
the elect are certainly and infallibly saved, but the others left at
uncertainty, with a _perhaps_ that some of them may be saved in
_addition_ to the elect—this notion is neither founded in revealed
truth, nor capable of rational consistency.[241]
Without predestination to life, the influences of the Holy Spirit,
which, it is confessed, are given to some, might be given in vain, or
without effecting any saving purpose in any one of the human race.
Where then could be the wisdom of a dispensation of the Spirit, or of
communicating the influence of grace? Does God foresee that some will
be so good and pliable as to improve a _common_ favour in such a way
and to such a degree as to constitute the difference between them and
others that perish? But where is this divinity taught, and by whom is
it sanctioned? It is not sanctioned by the patriarchs and prophets, by
Christ and his apostles, nor is it contained in the words of
inspiration, or even in the tablet of unsophisticated reason.