disobedience to the will of God." To which may be replied, that God's will is either secret or revealed, purposing or commanding; the one is the rule of his own actions, the other of his creatures: now it oftentimes is so, that what accords with the secret and purposing will of God, is a disobedience to his revealed and commanding will. As Dr. Manton* observes, "Things that are most against his revealed will, fall under the ordination of his secret will; and, whilst men break commandments, they fulfil decrees: his revealed will showeth what should be done, his secret will what will be done." So, for instance, it was agreeable to God's secret will, that man should fall; yet, eating the forbidden fruit, by which he fell, was an act of disobedience to his revealed will. The crucifixion of Christ was according to the determinate counsel and fore-knowledge of God; and yet, this act of the Jews was a disobedience to the sixth commandment, Thou shalt not kill. The kings of the earth, giving their kingdom to the beast, was a fulfilling of the secret will of God, nay, he put it into their hearts to do it; and yet, giving the beast that support, power, homage, and worship, they did, were an open violation of the laws of God.

3. It is urged †, that, according to this sense of the words, "This disobedience could not be objected to them as their crime; unless compliance with the will of God be so; and it be a fault to be such as God, by his immutable counsel and decree, hath ordained we should be; or it should render men criminal and obnoxious to punishment, that they have not made void God's absolute decree, or have done what that made it necessary for them to do." I answer, that God's decrees, as they do not infringe the liberty of man's will, so they do not excuse from sin. The selling of Joseph was according to the purpose and decree of God, who, as he meant, so he over-ruled it for good; yet it was an evil in his brethren, and so they meant it; and, therefore, might be justly objected to them as their crime. The Jews, when they crucified Christ, did no other than what the hand and counsel of God determined before to be done; and yet, by their own wicked hands, they crucified and slew him. God's determinations and decrees about this affair, neither exempted them from being criminals, nor from being obnoxious to punishment.

2dly. The meaning of these words, agreeably to Dr. Hammond's sense of them, is said to be this: "That the unbelieving Jews, being disobedient to the gospel so clearly revealed, and by so many miracles and distributions of the Holy Ghost confirmed to them, were appointed, as the punishment of that disobedience, to fall and perish; for, so the Hebrew word chasal, and the Greek προσκόμμα and σκανδάλον, import, namely the ruin and the fall of them who stumble at this stone." But, let it be observed, that the phrase, to stumble at Christ, and the word, is not expressive of their punishment, but of their sin, being disobedient. As, to stumble at the law, Mal. ii. 8, is to offend against, break and transgress it; so to stumble at the word, or gospel, is to blaspheme and contradict it, reject and put it away, as the Jews of old did, being disobedient, left and given up to the infidelity and hardness of their hearts. To stumble at the word, and to stumble at Christ, and to be offended in him, or at him, are one and the same thing; and the latter always signifies a crime, and not punishment, Matt. xi. 6, and xiii. 57, Mark vi. 3, Luke vii. 23. The sin of these persons is expressed by stumbling and falling: and their punishment by being broken; Isa. viii. 14, 15, Matt. xxi. 44. So the Hebrew word כשל, signifies to stumble and fall; that is, to sin; see Prov. xxiv. 17, Hos. xiv. 1, Mal. ii. 8. Hence מכשול עונם the stumbling-block of their iniquity, that which is the occasion of sin, Ezek. vii. 19, and xiv. 3, 4, 7. So the Greek words προσκόπτω, προσκόμμα, προσκοπή, Rom. ix. 32, 33, and xiv. 20, 21, 2 Cor. vi. 3, Σκανδαλίζω and σκανδάλου, Matt. xviii. 6-9, Rom. xiv. 13, 21, 1 Cor. viii. 13. after all, this sense of the words pleaded for, proves a fore-appointment of some to punishment, as the fruit of disobedience; which is that part of reprobation, commonly called predamnation, we contend

for.

And,

3dly. It is said *, *, "The words will fairly bear this sense; to them that believe, belongs ἡ τιμὴ, the honour (of being built upon this cornerstone into a spiritual house), but, to them that are disobedient (belongs that of Psalm cxviii. 22), and (also to them he is) a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them that stumble at the word, Εἰς ὃ καὶ ἐτέθησαν, for which also these stones were laid, or put, the corner-stone for the building up of believers, the stone of stumbling for the disobedient to stumble at." But it should be observed, that the cornerstone, and the stone of stumbling, are one and the same stone; and, therefore, it could not, with propriety, be said of that stone, for which also they were put or laid. Besides, "the word τιθέναι, as Dr. Hammond observes, is ordinarily used for appointing and ordaining, and being applied to God, doth often signify his decree, or destination; thus John xv. 16, Acts xiii. 47, 1 Thess. v. 9." And here, his decree and appointment concerning reprobates, as appears from the antithesis in ver. 9. Moreover, admitting that Christ is here said to be laid, or put, as a stumbling-stone for the disobedient to stumble at; since he is said κεῖαθαι εἰς πτῶσιν, to be set, that is, as the abovementioned Doctor observes, decreed by God (the same that τίθεαθαι, to be set or ordained here), for the falling of many in Israel, Luke ii. 34. I say, admitting this, the sense will be much the same, whether we suppose Christ is set or put, that is, ordained, decreed, and appointed, to be a stumbling-stone for men to stumble at; or, whether they are ordained, or appointed, to stumble at him; that is, to despise, refuse, and reject him, through infidelity.

SECTION IV.

For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Saviour Jesus Christ.-JUDE, ver. 4.

THE apostle, in this text, speaks of some persons, perhaps the followers of Simon Magus, or other immoral heretics, who had privily crept into houses, and unawares into the churches, and, perhaps, into the ministry, and had insinuated themselves into the affections of the people; and yet were ungodly men, did not worship God sincerely, and according to his appointments, misinterpreted the gospel of the grace of God, translated it to a wrong use, and abused the design of it, yea, denied both the Father and the Son. Now these persons were of old, that is, from all eternity, as Dr. Manton on the text observes, before ordained to just condemnation for their wickedness. These words may be considered then as a proof of reprobation, or of God's appointing some men to damnation before they had a being. In answer to this it is said *,

1. "The verse in the Greek text runs thus: Some ungodly men, turning the grace of God into lasciviousness, have entered into (the church) of whom it was before written, that this should be their sentence or punishment." But, to this version of the text may be objected, that besides the transposing of the words, and dropping part of the character of these men, the word πάλαι, of old, is entirely neglected. Nor does the verse in the Greek text run thus : περὶ ὧν προγέγραπται τοῦτο τὸ κρῖμα, of whom this sentence or punishment was before written; but, οἱ πάγαι προγεγραμμένοι εἰς τοῦτο τὸ κρίμα, who were of old before written to this condemnation.

2. "That this cannot be meant of any divine ordination or appointment of them to eternal damnation before they had a being, is evident; because it cannot be thought without horror, that he, who is the lover of souls, should appoint any, much less the greater part of them, to inevitable destruction before they had a being." But, where does the horror of this doctrine lie? Does it lie in the appointment of men to damnation before they had a being? If there is any divine ordination or appointment to it, it must be before men have a being, eyen from eternity, since no new appointment, decree, purpose, or ordination is made by God in time. If election is from eternity, reprobation must be so too, since there cannot be one without the other. If some were chosen before the foundation of the world, others must be left, or passed by as early. If some were appointed unto salvation from the beginning, others were appointed unto wrath or were of oldמו שוריא from the beginning, as the Syriac version renders the word (compare this with 2 Thess. ii. 13, Prov. viii. 22), fore-ordained to condemnation. Or, does the horror of it lie in this, that this appoint

Whitby, p. 22; ed. 2. 21.

ment is ascribed to the lover of souls? Why may it not be thought without horror, that he, who is the lover of souls, should appoint some men to eternal damnation for sin before they had a being, as well as hate Esau before he had done any evil, and yet loved Jacob before he had done any good? Or does it lie here, that God should appoint the greater part of men to damnation? But the question before us is not, whether God has appointed the greater or lesser part of mankind to destruction for sin, but whether he has appointed any; and, if he could appoint any, he could appoint many, yea, all mankind; as he did the whole body of apostate angels, without any impeachment of his wisdom, justice, or goodness. But perhaps the horribleness of this doctrine is thought to lie here, that God has appointed men as creatures, without any consideration of sin, unto eternal damnation. If this was our doctrine, I should not wonder that it should be thought of with so much horror and detestation; but this is a most vile misrepresentation of it. For, though the Supralapsarians do not premise the consideration of sin to the act of preterition, or God's leaving and passing by some, when he chose others; yet both they, and the Sublapsarians premise the consideration of sin to predamnation, or God's appointing men to destruction. We say, God damns no man but for sin, and that he appointed to damn none but sinners. And cannot this be thought of without horror? Our author himself owns it, as will quickly appear.

3. It is said *, that "the word κρίμα relates not to sin, but punishment, the fruit of sin; so Mark xii. 40, Rom. ii. 3. Now, God ordaineth none to punishment but sinners and ungodly men; and such, by the text, these persons are here styled." To which may be replied, that, though the word κρίμα, in the passages referred to, and in many others, signifies damnation, yet, elsewhere, it relates to things criminal; a sinful blindness and hardness of heart, which God sometimes leaves persons to: so when our Lord says t, εἰς κρῖμα, for judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not might see, and that they which see might be made blind. Thus, these persons in the text, having gone great lengths in sin, were given up to a reprobate mind to do things not convenient; to neglect and despise the worship of God, abuse the gospel, and deny both the Father and the Son. Now, εἰς τοῦτο τὸ κρίμα, to this judicial blindness and hardness, they were of old before ordained. This is a sense of the words which cannot easily be confuted, and is, indeed, acknowleged by the Remonstrants. But, however, we are willing to allow that κρίμα here relates to punishment, and not sin, as in the parallel place, 2 Pet. ii. 3. And we say, with our author, that God ordains none to punishment but sinners; only we say, that this ordination was from eternity, and this is the doctrine of the text, and which we contend for.

4. It is observed §, that "these were men of whom it was before written or prophesied, that they should be condemned for their ungodliness, as by Enoch, ver. 14. And, that this also is the import of the word προεγράφε, Rom. xv. 4, Gal. iii. 1. The writers and interpreters on the Arminian side are pretty generally agreed that these words refer to some prophecy concerning these men, somewhere or other in Scripture, but are not agreed about the particular passage. Some think the apostle * has a regard to the parallel place in 2 Pet. ii. 1-3; but if he had this in his view, he would never have said that they were of old, a long while ago, before written or prophesied of; since, according to the common calculation, that epistle of Peter's was written in the very same year as this of Jude's. Besides, Peter says, at the time of his writing, that the judgment of these men was of a long time, that is, had been long ago pronounced, and did not linger. Others think †, that reference is had to the prediction of Christ, in Matt. xxiv. This is, indeed, carrying the prophecy further off. But then, as no such persons are described there as here, so neither is there any mention of their punishment or condemnation. Others, as our author supposes, that the apostle respects the prophecy of Enoch; this, indeed, was of old. But, though it is true that Enoch prophesied of these persons, yet, as his prophecy was never written, that we'know of, and, therefore, these men could not be said to be fore-written of in it; so it is easy to observe, that the apostle speaks of this prophecy as something distinct from these persons being fore-written to condemnation, when he says, ver. 14, and Enoch also prophesied of these. Besides, as Vorstiuss, a writer on the other side the question, observes, "It is all one whether we understand it, that these men were of old appointed and designed by God to this condemnation; or, whether this condemnation was of old written concerning them in the Old Testament." Since such a prophecy concerning them must be founded upon an antecedent, divine ordination and appointment. Nor is prophecy the import of the word προεγράφε, especially in Gal. iii. 1, and only regards things, and not persons, in Rom. xv. 4. And here intends, not their being fore-written in any of the books of Scripture, but in the book of God's eternal purposes and decrees.

SECTION V.

And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him; whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb, slain from the foundation of the world. REV. xiii. 8.

With 2 Cor. iv. 3, 2 Thess. ii. 10-12, 1 Cor. i. 18, Rom. ix. 18. THE learned || writer attended to, observes, that Dr. Twiss confesseth that the Scriptures speak fully of election, sparingly of reprobation, in most places; yet, some passages we have, saith he, which give light and evidence to both alike. The passages referred to are, for the one, Acts ii. 47; Matt. xxiv. 24; Acts xiii. 48; Luke x. 20; Heb. xii. 23. For the other, 2 Cor. iv. 3; 2 Thess. ii. 10—12;1 Cor. i. 18; Rom. ix. 18; Rev. xiii. 8, and xvii. 8. Now, to all these