Chapter 1

Produced by Keith G. Richardson

Free _and_ Impartial

THOUGHTS,

ON THE

Sovereignty _of_ God,

THE

DOCTRINES

OF

Election, Reprobation,

AND

Original Sin:

Humbly Addressed

To all who Believe and Profess those

DOCTRINES.

The Second Edition, Corrected and Enlarged.

_LONDON:_

Printed for J. ROBINSON, at the _Golden-Lion_, in _Ludgate-Street._

M.DCC.XLV.

THE

PREFACE

_I Cannot find, upon the most impartial Retrospection of the Argument, any Reason to alter my Sentiments concerning it; and as it is a Matter of the greatest Importance, 'tis hoped that those who maintain the Doctrines of_ Election, &_c. will afford it all the Weight and Consideration it deserves. But, if there be any among them, who will hear no Reason or Argument whatever, and are_ sure, only because they are sure, _I Have_ little _or_ no Hopes _to prevail with them, to give me a fair Hearing, or to think_ candidly _and_ impartially _about it. But as there are among them, some, who no doubt will allow the_ Possibility _of their being in an Error; to all such I address my self, and beseech them, as much as possible to lay aside Prejudice and Partiality; wisely considering, that many of their Fore-fathers maintained some erroneous Doctrines, with as much Zeal, and Integrity, as they their Descendants now do the Doctrines of_ Election, &_c. and yet saw Occasion to renounce them afterwards._

_There is Reason to fear, the just Liberty I have taken with the_ Doctrines of Election, &_c. may, by some, be deem'd Blasphemy against_ God _himself; but I am far from intending any such thing. These Doctrines (I think) on the contrary, are_ in them selves _nothing better than_ blasphemous, _tho' the Intentions of some who maintain them, be ever so devout and sincere: And if an Impeachment of Doctrines, which, instead of preserving_ God's Moral Character, _robs him of all that is dear and valuable, or that can render him lovely and adorable to Man, be accounted_ Blasphemy, _the Ignorance and Bigotry of those, who judge after that Manner, ought much to be lamented. It is a melancholy Truth, that where Prejudice, in favour of false Principles, has had early and frequent Access to the Mind, it too often shuts the Ear against Reason and Truth; and 'tis very hard to persuade such People to enter at all, and much less impartially, into the Merits of an Argument advanced against them; nor indeed is the Liberty of Thought on_ Religious Subjects, duly inculcated _in Religious Assemblies: For, the_ Teachers of Christianity, _tho' they are seldom averse to give us the Compliment of a_ just Liberty of thinking for ourselves, _are but too apt_ to set the Terrors of the Lord in array against Unbelievers; _tho' perhaps_ their Dissent _may sometimes be only the_ innocent Effect, _of the best Examination they are able to make. And if there be any thing worthy of Notice, in what I have advanced, I hereby intreat all, into whose Hands this Treatise may come, not to be terrified, by any such popular Arts, from making a thorough Examination for themselves; on the other hand, I am altogether as willing to set right, in whatever I may have erred, or been mistaken._

_'Tis well known, the 17th Article of our own_ National Church, _greatly favours the_ Doctrines _of_ Election _and_ Reprobation; _and it is also generally believed, that the_ Better Part _of our Clergy entirely disapprove these Doctrines, and would very readily assist in expunging them out of their_ Creed; _which would render their Consciences much easier, than now they are, or can be, under a Subscription in a Sense so_ very qualified _and_ remote _from the_ natural Intent _and_ Meaning _of the_ Article.

_Experience makes it evident, that Education is able to retain Men of the_ Brightest Understanding, _in the Belief of the_ Greatest Absurdities. _But, that Men of Learning, Ingenuity and Experience, who have lived perhaps to the Age of fifty, in the Disbelief of the_ Doctrines _of_ Election, &_c. should after that sincerely embrace them, is to me Matter of great Astonishment; yet this I am inform'd is really the Case, with regard to one of the most ingenious_ Divines, _our Metropolis has to boast of. One Reason may perhaps be alledged, for such an unexpected Alteration of Sentiment_, viz. _That tho' we disbelieve these Doctrines, because they are_ absurd, _yet we hold at the same time, others_, equally repugnant _to Reason, and to Common Sense; and certainly we may as reasonably_ embrace _the one as_ retain _the other. Besides, with what reasonable Expectation of Success could such a Man as this sit down to argue with_ another _of_ absurd Principles, _when_ he himself _might be so easily abash'd and put to Silence, by an Appeal to_ other Principles, _of_ his own, _equally absurd and inexplicable. The best way then, instead of embracing a_ fresh, _absurd, Principle of Faith, is, to renounce the_ old. _I would not willingly Offend_ Any, _by a special Application to_ particular Societies _and_ Doctrines: _let but every Man make an honest Application to himself, and the Articles of Faith he professes, and the Work of Reformation will, I am persuaded, gain something thereby. And that, not only these Doctrines, but every other absurd Principle of Faith, which either Ignorance, or Design, may have introduced into the Christian church, to the_ Dishonour _of_ God, _the_ Burthen _and_ Reproach _of Human Nature, may be_ utterly exploded, _is the incessant Wish, and earnest Desire, of_

The Author.

Free _and_ Impartial

THOUGHTS, &_c_.

_CHRISTIANITY_ having been instituted, by its great Author and Publisher, for the Benefit and Advantage of Mankind, it is pity we should so greatly differ, concerning what _Genuine Christianity_ is; if the _Holy Bible_, as we generally agree, was designed to lead us to the true Knowledge of God, and to be a standing and perpetual Rule of _Faith_ and _Manners_ to Men, it must surely have been greatly corrupted since the primitive Times of the Gospel, or the _Explication_ of it designedly left to a more excellent and superior Director: For the seeming Contradictions, and Multiplicity of obscure Passages, wherewith it abounds, shew plainly it could never, in its present Condition, be a Rule of Faith, &_c_. becoming an all-wise and perfect Being, to give to rational Creatures. Every _good Man, Society_, and _State_, study Perspicuity in all their _Rules, Orders, and Statutes,_ dispensed to their _Families, Members,_ and _Subjects:_ and can we suppose, that He, who is perfect in Knowledge, would, in the Dispensation of his Laws, take less care of the everlasting State of his immortal Creature _Man?_ Yet it is plain, we differ in our Sentiments of Religion, and greatly too, for want, as I sincerely hope, of the Knowledge of better Helps, to direct our Inquiries, in Matters, the true Knowledge whereof, is of so considerable Moment. Therefore,

I intend, in the Course of this Debate, to descant _freely_, on the Doctrines of _Divine Sovereignty, Election, Reprobation_, and _Original Sin;_ and also, on the Arguments which some ingenious Gentlemen have used to support them. But I hope (with regard to the _Authors_ I may possibly name) to be perfectly decent, and to treat them with all becoming Respect and Deference, as I think Men of Integrity, Learning and Abilities deserve; who, though in some Points they may err, and hold Doctrines in their own Nature and Tendency altogether subversive of Religion and Morality, do nevertheless not perceive them to have these Tendencies, and are therefore by _no Means_ chargeable with them. Yet, as touching the _Doctrines_ themselves, I shall presume to speak freely, both in regard to their Nature, and what appears to me to be their genuine Fruits and Effects.

It is with me an establish'd Truth, that the mistaken Notion of some _learned Men_, concerning the _Sovereignty_ of the _Deity_, has given these Doctrines a more favourable Acceptance in the World, than otherwise they would, or could, ever have met with; and notwithstanding all the Pains and Arguments these Gentlemen have bestowed, to reconcile their Doctrines to our common Sense of _Right_ and _Wrong_, it is plain, that, at _bottom_, this is the grand governing Principle. For, when their Attempts to reconcile these Doctrines with common Sense and Equity fail, they have immediate Recourse to God's _Sovereignty_, and even go so far, at least in Effect, as to deny there is _any_ intrinsick Difference in Things themselves, as shall be made appear from their most approved Writers, whenever they are pleased to demand it: But as this Principle of _Sovereignty_ is most certainly their strong Hold, I shall therefore endeavour to go to the Depth of this Argument; and shew, in the first Place, how greatly they misapprehend the Nature of this _Attribute;_ and, in the second Place, granting it to be as they say, I shall then shew the _precarious_ and _miserable_ Condition of all Mankind, not excepting the Elect themselves, under the Government of such an arbitrary Being.

To begin with the first. That God is a _Sovereign_, we readily allow: But it will not therefore follow, he is _morally capable_ of doing any thing, in its _own Nature_, immoral or unjust. All religious Debates are allowed to be best determinable by the divine Attributes; and yet nothing is more common, than to single out, and lay the greatest Stress on, that Attribute alone, which appears best to suit our own particular Opinions: which, however innocent our Intention may be, is, I think, in itself, a very erroneous and unwarrantable Procedure; for as God is _all-wise_ and _good_, as well as _almighty_ and _independent_, it is, in the Nature of Things, impossible (and therefore we should never admit it possible) he should be capable (in a moral Sense, I mean) of exerting any one particular Attribute in _Opposition_ to, or _Diminution_ from, another. A _Sovereign_ he is, nor can any Creature whatever dispute his _unlimited_ and _uncontroulable_ Power over his _whole Creation_. But Power alone, without Wisdom and Goodness to make a right Use and Application of it, may be perfect _Frenzy_, and run into the greatest Latitude of _Folly_ and _Tyranny_. It is, if I may be allowed the Comparison, like a _Vessel_ that has lost its Helm, continually exposed to the tossing of Winds and Waves. To talk, therefore, of _mere Sovereign Pleasure_, without Regard to the proper Reason or Fitness of Things, so far operating and bring in the _Divine Mind_ (and which is nothing more than the Presence and Operation of his own Wisdom) in order to prefer what, in its own Nature, is _best_, and _fittest_ to be done, is excluding from the Deity, those _more_ blessed and _valuable Perfections_ of _Wisdom_ and _Goodness_, and establishing in their room, and at their Expence, mere Sovereign Power alone. _Physically speaking_ indeed, we allow God can do Evil itself; but the moral Perfections of his Nature, are to us an _infallible_ and _unshaken Security_, that he _never will_ do it. _Man_ being an impotent and fallible Creature, liable, not only to mistake the true Nature and importance of Things, but when he does understand his Duty rightly, liable also, thro' the Prevalence of _Habit_ and _Passion_, to be very backward and defective in performing it, must necessarily be subject to such Laws, as contain in them Rewards and Punishments, proper to influence his _Hopes_ and his _Fears_.

But as God, on the contrary, is a Being of all possible and infinite Perfections; an exact Knowledge of what we call _Right_ and _Wrong_, _Just_ and _Unjust_, ever hath, and always will exit in the _Divine Mind_, and be to him a perfect, constant, and invariable Rule of Action, in relation to his Creatures. He that is _infinite_ in Knowledge, cannot but know, at all Times, and under the most (to us) difficult and perplex'd Circumstances of Things, what in its _own Nature_ is _best_, and _fittest_ to be done; and, being void of all Bias, Prejudice, and Passion, cannot but approve of what is _right_ and _best;_ and being likewise _Almighty_, no Power can possibly interrupt, or prevent what he determined to accomplish: So that it is _morally impossible_, that God should do an evil Thing, These Truths are so deducible from each other, and in themselves so evident, to all unbiassed and inquisitive Minds, that one would wonder to find Men, of Learning and Integrity, give into the contrary Sentiments; which, in Effect they do, who hold Doctrines _naturally subversive_ of these fundamental Truths, as all certainly do, who depart from the moral Good and Fitness of Things, and resolve all into _mere sovereign Pleasure_ alone, _independent_ of Wisdom and Goodness; which must ever be at hand to _cooperate_ with, and govern the Exertion of, their favourite Attribute, _sovereign Power_ itself; or, if they do not expressly affirm this, they do by another Method the very same thing; and that is, by denying, in Effect, the _intrinsick Difference_ of Good and Evil, which, according to them, has no Foundation in the _Nature_ and Relations of Things, but takes its Rise, only, from the mere Will and Appointment of the _Deity_. But if all Things are in themselves equally Good, where is the Use to _appoint_, or the Sense of talking about it? Wisdom and Goodness must, according to this Notion, be idle and unmeaning Sounds, without Sense or Service. But alas! the natural Consequence of maintaining Tenets, so repugnant to common Sense, is seldom less than running into and embracing other Absurdities, in themselves equally great with what they are brought to defend, And here, as some of these Gentlemen are exalted, and I hope deservedly, to the Dignity of Teachers in the _Christian Church_, they will, I hope, permit me to ask them a Question or two, which I should, on almost any other Occasion, blush to ask any rational Man, _viz_. If they do not perceive an intrinsic Beauty and Excellence in Virtue, as opposed to Vice; independent of all _positive_ or arbitrary Appointment, tho' of the _Deity_ itself; and whether, besides the Commands of God, (which to be sure are of high Importance, and ought ever to be urged with great Strength and Energy) they do not also _press_ upon their Hearers, the Practice of Virtue, and endeavour to recommend, and inforce it on the Mind, from its _own_ native Charms? But to make this Matter, still, if possible, more evident; let us suppose the present excellent Order of Things inverted, and that God, of his own mere Pleasure, had given Mankind quite contrary Laws, and commanded _Rebellion, Murder, Ingratitude_, and all Manner of Intemperance and Debauchery, instead of their _opposite virtues;_ would the same Fitness, Beauty, and Propriety, appear to these Gentlemen, as there now does, in _Virtue?_ If not, from whence the Difference arises, let them answer.

As God is an infinite Mind or Spirit, perfectly acquainted, at every Instant of Time, with whatever _hath been, is_, or _shall be;_ and all Things _possible to be;_ 'tis evident, that all possible Relations of Persons and Things are fully known to him; and that all _moral_ and _divine_ Obligations, arising from the Relation we stand in to God, and to each other, did, in their own Nature, _previous_ to actual Law or Commandment, exist; because the one was in Time, and the other Eternal; one commenced only (at best) with the _Being_ and _Beginning_ of Creatures, the other was from all Eternity, _co-existent_ with the _Divine Wisdom_ itself; and such an inseparable Concomitant therewith, that, in regard to the _Divine Being_, himself, it was absolutely impossible, but that, on his creating such a Rank of Beings as we are, _moral_ and _religious_ Obligations must have been _invariably_ and _unalterably_ the same; and if, as these Men teach, God's having commanded the Practice of Virtue, be its peculiar Sanction, and that _alone_ which distinguishes it from Vice or Evil; then, by the same or as good an Argument, his commanding Light in the Beginning, is all the Reason we have for esteeming Light and Darkness different, (as they really are) the one being the actual Pretence of a real Body, and the other a mere Name, to signify its Absence; not that Vice is therefore a mere Name, to signify the Absence of Virtue, for Comparisons seldom hold good in _every_ minute Particular; but there is a Parity between the two Cases, sufficient to justify my bringing in the one, as an Illustration of the other. There is no Knowledge _more certain_, than what Mankind commonly have of Good and Evil; and he who, in order to serve any private Scheme of Religion, goes about to depreciate this Knowledge, robs Mankind of all Truth and Certainty whatever, and in the End subjects his own darling Schemes to the same Uncertainty; for if we cannot judge of the Fitness, of plain moral Truth and Duty, neither can we of any Scheme of Religion; especially such as hang together more by Art and human Contrivance, than by Reason or Revelation.

Being very desirous to get all the Information I could, concerning the Matter in Debate; I have attentively read over Mr. _Cole's_ Treatise on the _Sovereignty_ of God. I know 'tis thought an unanswerable Performance; and, so far as it regards general Christianity, it is worth every Christian's serious Notice: But as to the Doctrine it was wrote to support, it leaves it (in my Judgment) no better than it found it; but is miserably weak, and defective, as to any Thing that looks like sound Reason, or true Argument; and amounts to no more than this _poor Assertion, That because God is a Sovereign, he may do what he pleases:_ And, from the Instances he brings from Scripture, 'tis plain, that Mr. _Cole_ himself pays as _little_ Regard to the intrinsick Worth and Excellence of Things, as is done by many of his Brethren. The manner in which he has been pleased to give us the Story of _Jacob_ and _Esau_, proves the Truth of this Observation, I have no great Inclination to spend Time in explaining _hard Passages_ of Scripture, (tho' if any thing of that kind can be serviceable, or deem'd excellent, 'tis Mr. _Taylor_ of _Norwich_ his Book on _Original Sin_,) or to trespass on the Reader's Patience, by throwing one Text of _hard_ and _uncertain_ Meaning against another; for by this means the Controversy hath been needlessly prolonged. Where the Scriptures are _plain_, _positive_ and _reasonable_, their Authority ought to be conscientiously adhered to: But as this is not always the Case, the _next_ Thing to knowing what is the _true Meaning_ of any particular Text of Scripture is, to know what it neither _does_ nor _can_ possibly mean; in which Case, the Divine Attributes, and the Nature and Reason, or (if you please) Fitness of Things, is the best Rule. We _cannot_, it is impossible we _should_, understand the certain determinate Meaning of any Text of Scripture _better_, if altogether _so well_, as we do _know_ certainly, that God is _just_ and _good_, and _know_ also as clearly, what _Justice_ and _Goodness_ mean, when applied to the _Deity_, as we do, when we apply them to _ourselves_. And this Rule, if duly observed, would be abundantly sufficient, to set aside many Interpretations of Scripture, too commonly admitted upon this and the like Occasions. And, besides this never failing Argument (to all who attend duly to its Force) it is worth while, just to remark, that though, as the _Bible_ now stands, there are in it (as we must acknowledge) some Passages, which (especially at first sight) seem to favour the Doctrine of _Sovereignty_, &c. yet as it is possible, nay sometimes easy, to give them _another interpretation_, and the general Scope and Tenor of the Scripture being agreeable to such an Interpretation, we have abundantly more Reason to _reject_, than to _admit_ of the Sense, in which these Gentlemen are pleased to understand and expound many Texts of the _Bible_, relating to this and other affinitive Points.