SECT. 4. Future State of the Wicked.

All who die impenitent, having never been born of the Spirit, will be shut out of heaven, and be banished from God into the place of torment, from which there can be no escape, where their sufferings will be inconceivably great, and will never end; yet those who shall be found guilty of rejecting Christ will be punished with much greater severity. See Sect. 4, chap. 11; Luke 13:3; John 8: 21, 24, 44, 47; 3:5, 18, 36; Rev. 21: 27; 1 Thess. 1:9; Luke 16: 28, 26; Mark 3:29; Jude 7; Luke 12: 47; compare Heb. 10: 28 - 31; Matt. 26: 24.

Texts which declare that the sin against the Holy Ghost will never be forgiven. (Matt. 12: 31, 32; Mark 3:29; Luke 12: 10; 1 John 5: 16; Heb. 6:4-6; 10: 26, 27. Passages in which the eternity of heaven and hell are contrasted. Dan. 12: 2; Matt. 25: 46.) C

Those which declare the eternity of future punishment negatively, by denying that they will have an end. ( Mark 9:43-48.)

An unshaken confidence in the truth and righteousness of this doctrine, is an essential part of christian character. To reject it, is to deny the plain testimony of God, turn the Gospel into a fable, and the toils and sufferings of prophets, apostles, and even of Jesus Christ himself, into contempt.

No inference can be drawn from the endless punishment of the wicked, against the infinite goodness of God; for we know from experience, that sin and suffering are permitted in this world, and must, therefore, in the future world, be consistent with the Divine benevolence. "Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?"

Nor can any inference be drawn from the scriptural doctrine that God is love, against this doctrine; because transgressions of the moral, and even of the natural laws, are punished with great severity in this world; and it is reasonable to believe that neglect of Christ would be punished with greater severity than any other sin.

CHAPTER V.

POSITIVE INSTITUTIONS.

"Moral precepts," says Butler, are precepts, the reasons of which we see; positive precepts are precepts, the reasons of which we do not see. Moral duties arise out of the nature of the case itself, prior to external command. Positive duties do not arise out of the nature of the case, but from external command. Moral and positive precepts are in some respects alike; in other respects, different. So far as they are alike, we discern the reasons of both; so far as they are different,we discover the reasons of the former, but not of the latter."*

This distinction is very just. The obligation to love and worship our Creator is a moral duty, arising from the nature of the case; but whether we ought to devote one day in seven to this duty, or more, or less, we could not know without a positive, revealed command. That we ought to consecrate ourselves to God, is a reasonable moral duty; but whether we ought to do it by baptism, or in some other way, we could not have known without a positive command from God. After the command is given, and the form of obedience prescribed, we may be able to discover some of the reasons for it, as well as the appropriateness of the form to teach some great spiritual truth; yet our obligation to obey, does not depend at all on our own discovery of the reasons for the command, nor the fitness of the action, but on the proof that the command is from God.

Positive precepts are necessarily matter of revelation purely, while moral duties are not only made the subjects of revealed command, but are also written upon the human conscience, and are taught by the light of nature. Should circumstances render obedience to a positive institution, or *Analogy, Part II, Chap. 1.

the performance of a moral duty impossible, the latter is always to be preferred to the former; as, when the healing of the sick, or the satisfying of hunger, conflicts with the strict command respecting the observance of the Sabbath, our Saviour has decided in favor of moral duties. "I will have mercy, and not sacrifice." Obedience to positive precepts is sometimes rendered impossible by outward circumstances, as in the case of the penitent thief, who, while on the cross, believed in the Saviour, but was not baptized; because obedience to that ordinance was rendered impossible, by the fact that his body was nailed to the cross.

Yet we should be exceedingly thoughtless and wicked, to take occasion from these facts to neglect any positive institution of religion. We are not appointed to be judges of the relative value and importance of the various duties which God has enjoined. For, to use the language of the same judicious writer and profound thinker, our obligations to obey all God's commands whatever, are absolute and indispensable; and commands merely positive, admitted to be from Him, lay us under a moral obligation to obey them; an obligation moral in the strictest and most proper sense."

The Mosaic Dispensation was a positive institution, founded, chiefly, on mutable relations and circumstances, which existed in the condition and wants of the human race at that time. It was, therefore, of such a nature that it might be repealed when it had fulfilled its purpose. Accordingly, we are taught that it was done away when the Christian Dispensation commenced. (Heb. 10: 9; 2 Cor. 3:7-11; Gal. 3: 19, 24, 25; Eph. 2: 14-16.) But moral laws, founded in the nature of things, or on immutable relations between God and his creatures, or between man and man, are immutable, and cannot be abrogated. But while the Mosaic Dispensation was in force, obedience to every part of it was a sacred and indispensable duty.

It must not be forgotten, that disobedience of a positive precept of God to Adam, brought death into the world, and all our woe. So the way and the conditions of salvation come to us much in the form of positive, revealed commands

"Believe

of God. 'Repent ye, and believe the gospel." on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved." "Repent and be baptized every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ." And salvation is promised on condition of obedience to both these commands. "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved." God has not informed us which is the more important to be obeyed, the command to believe, or to be baptized, when both are equally in our power; and for us to disparage either is unwarrantable presumption.

As the obligation to obey a positive institution rests entirely on the revealed, specific command of God, and not on the nature and fitness of things, nor on our own perceptions of its appropriateness; it requires literal, as well as sincere obedience. No authority but that of the Supreme Lawgiver, can change the form of an ordinance, or positive institution of religion, in the smallest particular. The power to change a positive institution involves the power to abrogate entirely. God, only, possesses this power. It has never been delegated to any of his creatures.

Obedience to a positive institution of God, therefore, consists in two things: First, the spirit of sincere obedience; in which the understanding, the conscience, and the heart, unite their full assent. It is the province of the understanding to determine whether the command is from God, and in what form obedience is required, but not to inquire into the propriety of the action enjoined, nor whether some other act or form will not do as well; it is the province of conscience to recognize the supreme authority of the Lawgiver, and to impel implicit obedience; while the heart, moved by ardent love to Christ, consecrates the whole. Second, the literal doing of the specific action which is enjoined. Some other action than that commanded, or some other form observed as a substitute, on the ground that no mere outward form can be, in itself, essential to salvation, is not, and from the nature of the case cannot be, obedience to a positive institution of Christ. Sincere obedience, growing out of love, and the literal performance of the thing com manded, are always essential,

SECT. 1. The Sabbath.

1. At the creation, God blessed, sanctified, and set apart one day in seven, to be observed by the whole human race as a day of rest from labor, and to be devoted to religious duties. Gen. 2: 1–3, compare Ex. 31: 17.) The necessity of one day in seven as a day of rest is also illustrated by experience; so that the principle seems to be founded in the nature of things, though revealed as a positive command. 2. The precept for the observance of the Sabbath is incorporated in the moral law, all the precepts of which are binding on all men, at all times. (Ex. 26: 8-11; Lev. 23: 3, compare Acts 15: 21; Neh. 13: 15—21; Is. 56: 2-6. Jer. 17: 24, 25.) It is, therefore, of perpetual force.

3. At the resurrection of our Saviour, the particular day on which the Sabbath is to be kept, was changed, in such a way, that, while the design in its observance is the same, the obligation to keep it holy is rendered still more impressive. Concerning this change it may be observed, 1. Christ possessed, and claimed, authority to regulate the observance of the Sabbath, in all respects, as he saw fit. (Mark 2: 28; Luke 6: 5. 2. His example, and the grounds of his defences against the charge of violating the Sabbath, prove that he had no intention to abolish, but to vindicate it from superstitious abuses, and restore it to its original design. 3. The resurrection of Christ from the dead, is incomparably the greatest event connected with the history of this world. If the finishing of the work of creation was worthy to be commemorated by a Sabbath, surely the resurrection of Christ, the finishing act in the great work of redemption, I was much more so. 4. His example in meeting his disciples for religious instruction on the first, instead of the seventh day, as before, plainly indicates his purpose to change the day. Matt. 28: 9; Luke 24: 34, 18; John 20: 19, 26. 5. On this day, at the festival' of Pentecost, the Spirit was poured out in so remarkable a manner and degree, Acts 2: