Obrázky na stránke
PDF
ePub

stowed upon you, and you only proclaim your infamy by manifesting discontent." Nothing then can be more rational than the doctrine which affirms that God may, without injustice, bestow his favours upon his dependent creatures in whatever measure seems good in his sight. And if we look at the dispensations of his providence, we shall find that he actually does this, and therefore his most perfect right to do it cannot be questioned, not at least, by those, who believe that the judge of all the earth must do right. Providence, (if we may so speak) is full of election; for while God gives to every man as large a share of temporal blessings as he de serves, he gives to some men, and that confessedly, more than they deserve. Why is one person rich, while another is poor ?— why is that man healthy and active, while his neighbour is the perpetual subject of disease? why do some individuals possess minds which seem to rival in strength and comprehension those of the angelic intelligences, while others are fools or madmen? Why, but "because so Father it seemeth good in thy sight." No reason for this superior exaltation, can be found in the creature; the difference results entirely from the sovereign good pleasure of God. There is a similar difference with respect to the religious privileges which men enjoy, and it must be ascribed to the same cause. While all mankind, with the exception of those at least who are destitute of reason, are possessed of sufficient powers of mind, and opportunities, for learning, concerning God, their duty to him, and to each other, all that is necessary to render them accountable creatures; why do some men enjoy the light of divine revelation, while others are destitute of it? Why are some placed in circumstances more favourable for gaining religious instruction, and receiving religious impressions than others? Why are some visited with providences calculated to rouse them to serious reflection, while nothing of the kind occurs in the experience of others? And, finally, why is one fayoured with that peculiar and especial influence of the Holy Spirit by which alone the gospel can be rendered effectual to the salvation of men, while in the case of others it is not imparted? The same reason must again be assigned, "Because so Father it seemeth good in thy sight." The difference in the conduct of God cannot be ascribed to any moral superiority on the part of those who are made the monuments of his grace; for the fact frequently is, that, before their conversion, they were the most abandoned of men. It can be traced to nothing but the sovereign good pleasure of God. It is the result of his purpose of election concerning them. It is because he has " from the beginning chosen them to salvation through sanctification of the spirit, and belief of the truth."

These remarks will prepare us to understand the reason, why they were not all Israel who were of Israel;—why the children of the promise only were counted for the seed; or in other words, why there was this difference, in the sight of God, among the seed of Abraham his servant ;-why the promises were made to some, and not to the rest. It was for the reason already mentioned, " because so it seemed good in his sight." God from the beginning chose them to salvation; and accordingly he promised to be their God-he sent them the revelation of his will-he visited them with the saving influences of his Spirit, and they, consequently, arrived at the enjoyment of the important blessings of spiritual illumination, and justification by the free grace of God, while the rest remained in ignorance and sin.

" In

This exercise of Divine Sovereignty in the choice of some to be heirs of salvation, the Apostle proceeds to illustrate by the restriction of the promise to the particular line of Isaac and Jacob. All the descendants of Abraham according to the flesh were not Israelites, they did not all belong to that nation which was to inhabit Canaan, and out of which the Messiah was to spring. It was his descendants in the particular line of Isaac who were thus distinguished. They alone were chosen to be the depositories of his revealed will, to them alone pertained the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises." Ishmael was the child of Abraham as well as Isaac, but the latter only was the child of promise. Isaac," said God to his servant," shall thy seed be called." "The children of the promise," adds the Apostle," are counted for the seed." Here then was a remarkable and a most unequivocal display of Divine Sovereignty. No reason can be assigned for this manifestation of superior goodness to the posterity of Isaac, but the mere good pleasure of God.They were not more deserving of it than the Ishmaelites, but they were thus distinguished because it was the will of God to distinguish them thus, and for no other reason. To this reasoning it was, however, possible for the Jews to object, that the choice of the posterity of Isaac, in preference to that of Ishmael was not a decided proof of Divine Sovereignty, because Ishmael, was the son of an Egyptian bond woman, and, moreover, of a very perverse and rebellious disposition. The Apostle, therefore, proceeds to specify another instance: -an instance in which certain blessings were promised to one child, to the exclusion of another, born of the same parents, and promised to the former, before either of them was born, and of course before either of them could have done good or evil.

"And not only this," says he, v. 10, that is, there was not only this limitation in the promise, but a further one, for when Rebecca had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac, before the children were born, it was said to her, " The elder shall serve the younger." This is a clear proof of Divine Sovereignty-that God dispenses his favours to whomsoever he will. There was nothing in the parentage of these children, to account for the preference shewn to the younger, a thing which appears so contrary to the order of nature; for they were born of the same father and the same mother. There was nothing in their conduct which may account for it; for the declaration of God that this should be the case, was made before they had done either good or evil, yea, even before they were born. Neither were, what we usually consider, the rights of primogeniture vouchsafed to the descendants of Jacob on account of any foreseen superior goodness in their conduct, because every degree of holiness in a created being, as has been already shown, is the result of the divine purpose and agency. It must, therefore, have been an act of sovereign goodness; and the declaration of God to Rebecca, that the elder should serve the younger, was made that the purpose of God, according to election, might stand, or might appear to be what it really is a purpose originating in the sovereign goodness of Jehovah.

[ocr errors]

All this is confirmed by what was written aforetime concerning them, viz. "Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated," v. 12. These words are to be understood not in an absolute but a comparative sense. They do not, I apprehend, decide upon the eternal state of either, but merely point to the different measure of temporal blessings bestowed upon each, and mark them in both cases as flowing from the sove reign pleasure of God. Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated; i. e. comparatively, I have loved him less than Jacob, and the measure of earthly possessions imparted to him, though more than he had any right to claim, is inferior to that bestowed upon his younger brother.

It should be especially observed that the Apostle introduces the cases of Ishmael and Isaac, of Esau and Jacob, to illustrate the conduct of God in counting the children of the pro mise for the seed. This was unquestionably a high display of sovereignty-or, in other words, that God bestows his favours upon whomsoever he will. But the exercise of this attribute was not a thing with which they were utterly unac quainted. They had witnessed, as he proceeds to shew, some signal displays of it in the cases of their ancestors. They had seen sovereign favour manifested to Isaac and Jacob; for in Isaac, said God, shall thy seed be called; and when Jacob,

[ocr errors]

and Esau were yet unborn, and, of course, had neither done good nor evil, it was said unto Rebecca, the elder shall serve the younger. These cases afford a display of Divine Sovereignty, and might naturally prepare them to expect its manifestation with relation to higher blessings, the blessings of grace.

(To be continued)

་་་་་་་

REMARKS ON THE PHRASE "THE FULNess of the TIME.”

GOD sent forth his son, says the Apostle, Gal. iv. 4, in "the fulness of the time." By this phrase, I understand, the period which he had appointed for the advent of the Saviour. In the exercise of his Sovereign wisdom he had determined that a certain space of time should intervene between the first comparatively obscure revelation of his mercy to fallen man, and the full and explicit doctrine of that astonishing plan of salvation which glorifies all the perfections of the Divine character, while it confers eternal blessedness upon those who deserve everlasting woe. And when this space was passed over, when the full time, or the fulness of the time, which he had appointed to transpire before that event had arrived,

he sent forth his son made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons." Now it might be sufficient, in reply to every inquiry with respect to the reason why this time was fixed upon, to appeal to the sovereignty of God, to say it was so, because" so it seemed good in his sight." There are not wanting, however, several important reasons why God sent forth his son "in the fulness of the time." A few of which are here subjoined.

ist. Our Lord's advent did not take place sooner, in order, probably to give opportunity for a long series of prophecies describing his person, and character, and work, so minutely, that by being evidently fulfilled in him, they might afford unquestionable proof of his Divine mission. It is doubtless true that the Saviour might have appeared immediately after the first promise of his coming had been announced, and yet have brought sufficient credentials in support of his character as the Messiah,-credentials, which ought at least to have satis! fied every reasonable mind. It is equally true, however, that they could neither have been so numerous, nor so convincing They could not have been so eminently calculated to expose the guilt and folly of infidelity, and thus, to render those who reject the gospel testimony, without excuse, when" he shall come again to judge the world in righteousness." And, VOL. II. No. 10.

3 D

therefore, he was ushered into the world by the Jewish eca, nomy an economy remarkably adapted, by its pomp and splendour, to strike the senses, and to captivate the attention of men; as well as by a long series of illustrious prophecies: Let us not then complain that the advent of Christ was so long delayed; for notwithstanding the vast accumulation of evidence to which this delay has given occasion and space, there yet are many who remain unsatisfied, and unconvinced after all; who make God a liar, because they believe not the record which he has given of his son.

2d, Our Lord's advent did not take place sooner, in order, probably, that, by the lapse of a great many ages, it might be effectually proved, that the light of nature is unable to discover any method of correcting the awful depravity of the human heart.

It is most manifest that, where Christ is received as the only Saviour for the guilty, and where the doctrines he taught are believed, a wonderful change is effected upon the whole moral character. The gospel of Christ converts a drunkard into a sober man; it can lead the habitual swearer to fear and tremble at an oath; the thief, the sabbath-breaker, and the intemperate man, to forsake their ungodly practices. In the hands of the spirit of God, it can, in short, effect so complete a revolution in the sentiments, feelings, and conduct of men, as to justify the application' of the term "new birth," to the astonishing change. Now, if the mission of Christ had taken place at a much earlier period of the world-and if the doctrines he taught had then been productive of similar effects, it might, perhaps, have been alleged, that many other systems of philosophy and morality would have accomplished as great moral achievements as Christianity; and it might have been difficult in speculation to disprove the truth of the assertion. But the delay of the advent of Christ afforded time for making a grand and conclusive practical experiment of its truth. And that experiment was made for the space of 4000 years (a time, long enough surely for the evolution of all their energies). Human reason, philosophy, genius, and eloquence, exerted their utmost efforts to effect a moral revolution in the world;-to do all that the gospel has since done, and with such mighty and resistless power. And their efforts were completely unsuccessful. They did not throw a single ray of light into that worse than Egyptian darkness, which covered the earth. They did not dry up the springs of a single vice, nor stop a single current of depravity. They did not, in a moral point of view, meliorate the condition of a single village; nay, they did not even in a solitary instance, remove that enmity against God, which is to be found in the

[ocr errors]
« PredošláPokračovať »