it should be obeyed, when there was no rule nor reafon for it, but merely to fhew God's abfolute fovereignty over his creatures; this must terminate, not in his glory, but in his dishonour; because it is acting below himfelf, and unfuitable to his character, as the moft rational, and the wifeft and best of Beings. Again, Seventhly, If God had thought fit to exexemplify Abraham's obedience, and Ifaac's fubmiffion, for their improvement and that of pofterity; this you think would have rendered it fit, that Ifaac fhould die by the hands of his father. But in this alfo I am obliged to diffent; because the exemplifying of thefe were circumftances, which Abraham's obligations were no way concerned with, and therefore they could not be cancelled by them; and because I cannot conceive, what valuable improvement either Abraham, or Ifaac, or pofterity could make hereby. As for Abraham, his taking away Ifaac's life, would indeed have been an act of obedience in a very trying inftance, an inftance which ftrikes the mind with horror, and from which nature would be apt to Start; for who can imbrew their hands in the blood of their innocent children, without the greatest reluctance? But then, it is hard to conceive, what valuable improvement Abraham could make upon it. Indeed, his acting against reafon and natural affections in P 2 one one inftance, might render him capable of doing it again in other inftances with less reluctancy; and this tended to leffen the power of reason, and to weaken those affections, and render them useless. And farther, his Submitting to the arbitrary command of God, might learn him to affume abfolute fovereignty, and to play the tyrant over his dependants. These are the improvements (if they may be fo called,) which Abraham was pable of, and likely to make upon this action. As for Ifaac, I think he is out of the cafe; because his life was to be taken away, and that furely would put a stop to all farther improvement with refpect to him, except he was to be raised from the dead, and then, with refpect to improvement, he would have ftood upon the fame foot with pofterity. And as to them, the uses they were likely to make, were fuch as thefe; namely, men might be led by Abraham's example to offer their children in facrifice to God; and it likewife tended to establish this practice among thofe who were then in the ufe of it; and this was more likely to be the cafe, when the action was confidered, as backed with a divine command. So that there feemed no room to doubt of such fa crifices being accepted. Again, parents and governours might be led from Abraham's example, efpecially, when confidered, as backed with a divine command, to affume and exercife exercife an abfolute fovereignty over their children and people, and thofe children and people might be led by Ifaac's example, paffively to fubmit, in fuch inftances and cafes, in which it would be their duty to refift. These, I think, were the improvements, which pofterity were likely to make upon this action. Again, Eighthly and lastly, If God had intended to raise Ifaac from the dead, to evince the poffibility and certainty of a future resurrection, and to inftruct the world in the affairs of another life; this, you think, would have rendered it fit, that Ifaac fhould die by the hands of his father. And here likewife I am obliged to diffent from you; because thefe circumftances would by no means cancel Abraham's obligations, and because the death of Ifaac was not necessary to answer these purposes. Mortality fooner or later attends all our fpecies: fo that if God had thought fit to raise a perfon from the dead to answer the purposes aforefaid, then every day afforded inftances of mortality, and proper fubjects for him to have exercised fuch power upon, and whom he might have raised up, and fent forth, to anfwer thofe purposes. And therefore, thofe circumstances would not have rendered it fit, that Ifaac fhould die, much less that he should die by the hands of his father. Thus, Thus, Sir, I have examined the circumftances you have produced, and, I think, have fully fhewn that they are not to your purpose. The account which the hiftory gives of the cafe is, that the command was given to Abraham by way of temptation or trial, without entering into the question, whether the action was fit or unfit. Indeed, God's recalling the command plainly proves, that the action was unfit; and therefore, why fhould you wrack your invention, to find out circumftances to ground the fitness of the action upon, when the history does not fuppofe it to be fit, but plainly proves the contrary? To conclude; I beg leave to obferve, that truth is what I value and pursue, and this is the ground of all my enquiries; and, as I have offered my thoughts on many subjects to publick confideration; fo it is with this view, that they may be examined, and that my readers may judge whether my reafoning upon any queftion, carries the force of truth with it or not. And, if any man thinks me to be in error, (from which I do not pretend to be exempt;) he has not only a right, but I think it is commendable for him to endeavour to refute me, provided it be done in a proper manner. Error is not defireable in itself, nor to be chosen for its own fake, it is what I am no way interested in, it anfwers no good purpose to me me in this world, and I prefume you will grant it will not in another: and, therefore, I am obliged to any man who thinks me in error, (which poffibly may be the cafe in many inftances, tho' I perceive it not,) if he will be fo kind to ufe his endeavour to fet me right. But then give me leave to add, that this is to be done only by reason and argument. 1 am, Reverend Sir, Sarum, September Yours to ferve, THO. CHUBB. |