ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh; how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?" That the promised land of Canaan, again, the place of rest to which Jesus (Joshua) conducted the Israelites, is a type of the heavenly rest to which our Jesus is ready to lead his followers, is understood and admitted by most Christians. That the sanction of extraordinary temporal blessings and judgments, both national and individual, under which the Jews lived, is withdrawn, and succeeded by "the bringing in of a better hope" than that of the Law, is a truth not so well understood by many Christians; there is a leaning in the minds of not a few, to an expectation of that inevitable vengeance in this world on the wicked, which was denounced under the Mosaic law; and of that temporal prosperity, as the reward of obedience, which forms no part of the promises of a religion whose Founder was crucified, and whose Apostles were, "if in this life only they had hope in Christ, of all men most miserable."

The better-instructed part, however, of the Christian world perceive the distinction in this point between the old and the new dispensations; and understand that the promises and threats of the one are applicable, figuratively only, to the other; the rewards and punishments of a future life being substituted for those of the present. There are many other points, however, which are frequently overlooked, in which the correspondence between the two systems is such as to make the former a most useful interpreter of the latter: and when we consider what a familiar acquaintance with the law, and with the history of the Jews, St. Paul had himself, and expected in his hearers, we cannot doubt that this interpreter must be perpetually consulted, if we would rightly understand his epistles.

§ 2. One only of the cases to which this principle may be applied will be noticed in the present Essay. A question, which is one of the most momentous ever agitated among Christians, may be, I think, completely set at rest by such a mode of consulting the Old Testament as has been recommended. The question I allude to, is that

relating to such as are called by St. Paul, and the other Apostles, the "Elect" or "chosen people" of God, " called out of the world to be Saints," and inheritors of eternal life, by God's favour (or grace) through Christ. It is well known that differences of no trifling moment exist among Christians in their opinions on this subject. Some maintain, as is well known, that there are among the members of Christ's visible Church, two classes of persons, the Elect and the Non-elect, who are both fixed upon arbitrarily by God's eternal, immutable, unconditional decree ;--that those who are the Elect, the "called to be Saints," are regenerate, and made sons of God by his Spirit,are justified in his sight through the merits of Christ,--are sanctified, and led in the paths of Christian holiness by the influence of divine grace, and are infallibly conducted to eternal happiness in heaven and that others, on the contrary, i. e. all others, though baptized into the faith, and though they have heard the offers of the Gospel, are nevertheless non-elect, passed by, and rejected by God; and, consequently, are no less certainly doomed to everlasting perdition.

This account of the Gospel scheme is utterly

displeasing to others; who maintain that the election in question is not arbitrary, but has respect to men's foreseen faith and obedience; i. e. that God decrees to elect such as He foresees will be obedient to his commands, and passes by those whose disobedience He foresees.

No candid and well-informed student of Scrip

"Elect, according to the foreknowledge of God," is an expression sometimes appealed to in support of this view; but I think not correctly. The Apostle's design in employing it will be found, on attentive inquiry, to be this: it was a stumbling-block to the Jews, even to those who acknowledged Jesus as the Messiah, that the Gentiles should be admitted to equal privileges with themselves: the Israelites, they pleaded, had been declared to be God's peculiar and highly-favoured people; was it to be supposed that He would alter his plans? No, said St. Paul; there is no change in his plans; but He all along designed (and he cites the prophets to prove his assertion) to admit, at a future time, such of the Gentiles as would hear his call, into the number of his people this, indeed, was formerly a secret, not understood by our forefathers, and now for the first time "made manifest" to men; but the design always existed "that the Gentiles should be fellow-heirs;" the mystery (i. e. the doctrine first hidden, and afterwards revealed, which is the usual sense of the word mystery) of their election, was, of course, always known to God himself, though but lately revealed to us: they are "Elect according to the foreknowledge of God."

ture can, I think, deny, that arguments in support of each of these opposite doctrines have been alleged, which have at least some degree of plausibility at first sight.

In support of the latter system, are urged the declarations in Scripture that "Christ died for all," that "He willeth all men to be saved," &c. as well as the general tenour of the Gospel offers of salvation, which seem to leave all that heard them at full liberty to accept or reject them. On the other hand, the expressions of St. Paul especially, are urged, who speaks of men as " clay in the hands of the potter," who has power to make" of the same lump vessels to honour and to dishonour" (i. e. to humbler and meaner uses); and who speaks of the call to salvation as originating entirely in the free bounty of God, without reference to good works of ours either previous or subsequent: God hath chosen us, says Calvin, "non quia eramus, sed ut essemus sancti ;"-not because we were, nor because He foresaw that we should be, but (according to St. Paul) in order that "we might be holy in all good works."

It would be tedious and unnecessary to cite all the texts that have been appealed to by both