itants of the earth, about five or six thousand years after the creation, might, with as fair show of reason as can now be pretended by any, object, and say, "Why was not the world created sooner?" Not so soon, therefore, as to obviate this difficulty any better than it is at present.

A. But God might have brought "all possible beings" into existence at once; which would have given a greater display of his perfections.

B. I believe that God knew exactly how large it was best to create the universe; and in what order to bring beings into existence, so as in the wisest manner to answer the best ends. And I believe he created it exactly to his mind; for he meant to please himself." Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory, and honor, and power; for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created."

And how know we, dear sir, if God thinks best to have a larger number of intelligences to behold his glory, and be happy in him, but that he judges it best not to bring them into existence till the present "grand drama" shall be finished at the day of judgment; that they may, without sharing the hazard of the present confused state of things, reap the benefit of the whole through eternal ages; while angels and saints may be appointed their instructors, to lead them into the knowledge of all God's ways to his creatures, and of all their ways to him, from the time of Satan's revolt in heaven to the final consummation of all things. And so, as the Jewish dispensation was introductory and preparatory to the Christian, so this present universe may be introductory and preparatory to one, after the day of judgment, almost infinitely larger.* That this will be the case, I do not pretend so much as to conjecture; but I firmly believe, that what is best on the whole, that infinite wisdom always has done, and always will do; and here I rest.

I will only add, that the death of Christ, and the work of our redemption, gives a display of the divine perfections infinitely

* If the divine conduct, on the present plan, is perfect in wisdom, glory, and beauty, then the present plan may be a good introduction to as many future systems as God pleases, till the whole sum of good is raised to the highest possible degree. Or, rather, the knowledge, humility, holiness, and happiness, of finite intelligences may continually augment, with the greatest celerity, through eternal ages; while system after system comes into existence under the best possible advantages for the swiftest progress in all divine improvements. But if God has missed it in the beginning of his works, there is a foundation laid for ill thoughts of him to be handed down to all succeeding systems, through eternal ages, if any such should ever be. And the damage of what is past can never be repaired. If our author's hypothesis is true, it seems as if it would be a pity that any more worlds should ever be created, to come to the knowledge of their Maker's dishonor; yea, a pity the present system ever came into being.

fuller, and shows what God is in an infinitely clearer and brighter manner, than the creation of systems. It is a small thing with the Almighty to create worlds; a work scarce worth our notice, or worthy ever to be thought of, compared with the work of redemption by the death of his Son. To be sure, God himself, who is infinitely the best judge, views things in this light. "For behold!" saith the Lord, speaking of this very thing, "I create new heavens and a new earth; and the former shall not be remembered nor come into mind."

The Son of God only spake a word, and the old creation came into being an easy work. But, for the new creation, all his glory must be laid aside; he must put on the form of a servant, groan in the garden, and die on the cross! And as his thus dying was a work infinitely greater than speaking a word, so the new creation will be proportionably more glorious than the old; as it is written, "For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth, and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind." But this greatest and most glorious of all God's works could never have been, had God interposed and prevented the existence of sin. Did you, sir, view the work of redemption in the light of Scripture, surely it must give you a different idea of God's universal plan; nor could you, if you love what God loves, think so meanly of that which to God appears so infinitely glorious.

A. But I have many arguments to prove, that it had been infinitely better, infinitely more to the honor of God, and good of the system, if sin had never been. Yet it is plain fact, God has permitted sin to be; therefore it is certain, God does not always mean to do that which is best.

B. However, according to your own concession, all your arguments do not amount to a demonstration. For you say, "that you cannot pretend to prove to a demonstration that the present scheme is not the best." But we may be as certain that infinite wisdom and perfect rectitude cannot err, as that two and two make four. Now, to attempt to confute what we are certain to a demonstration is true, by arguments we are sensible fall short of demonstration, is very weak. And to give up the infinite wisdom and perfect rectitude of the divine nature and conduct on such grounds, how can it be but inexcusable impiety? To censure the conduct of civil rulers, known to be men of superior abilities and of great integrity, when we are not under advantages to enter into the secrets of state, or to know scarce any of the reasons they act upon, is always deemed arrogant and wicked. Much more must it be so here, as we have the greatest certainty, that the Supreme Ruler of the universe is

a being of infinite understanding, and of perfect rectitude; and as we are at an infinite remove from a full comprehension of his grand universal scheme.

A. I grant this reasoning looks plausible, and that "some pious, conscientious persons may have been induced to believe the wisdom of God in the permission of sin" by it; but it does not convince me. For if once I should believe, that it was wisest and best in God to permit sin, most for his glory and for the good of the system, I should feel myself under a necessity to look upon sin as being in its own nature a good thing; for the glory of God and good of the system; and that God delights in it as such; and that, therefore, instead of hating sin, mourning for it in ourselves, lamenting it in others, we ought rather to esteem it as really a good and virtuous thing; and as such to rejoice in it, and even to keep an everlasting jubilee in remembrance of Satan's revolt and Adam's fall-events so infinitely glorious! absurdities so shocking, that I never can believe them.

B. And absurdities, let me tell you, that if you did but understand the scheme you are opposing, you would know, are so far from following from it, that they are absolutely inconsistent with it.

For the doctrine of the wisdom of God in the permission of sin, supposes sin in itself, and in all its natural tendencies, to be infinitely evil, infinitely contrary to the honor of God, and good of the system. For herein consists the wisdom of God in the affair, not in bringing good out of good, but in bringing infinite good out of infinite evil, and never suffering one sin to happen in all his dominions, but which, notwithstanding its infinitely evil nature and tendency, infinite wisdom can and will overrule to greater good, on the whole. So that all these objec

tions are without weight.

For sin in itself, and its natural tendencies, being just as evil as though God never meant to, and in fact never did, bring any good out of it, is as much to be hated for its evil nature and tendency, to be repented of in ourselves, and lamented in others, mourned for, watched, and prayed, and preached against, as if no good was ever to be brought out of it.

Just as it was in the affair of Joseph. It was a vile, an impious and barbarous thing, for his brethren to do as they did; hateful in itself, and in the eyes of God, and of all good beings; and to be mourned for, and lamented, and testified against, as such. It was dishonorable to God, whose authority they despised, and whose design to advance Joseph they intended to frustrate; cruel to their aged pious father, and barbarous to their brother;

and in fact, they were verily guilty; as their consciences testified, in the day of their distress. (Gen. xlii. 21.) And if after all this, contrary to their intentions, great good comes out of this affair, no thanks to them for that. They were still verily guilty; and even every whit as much to blame as ever; and had as great reason for godly sorrow, and true repentance; as is plain to the weakest capacity. I appeal to the common sense of all mankind.*

A. Sir, I am of another opinion. I affirm, that, "if sin is the occasion of greater good, in the whole, there is no reason to repent of it; for it ceases to be sin."

row."

* In Gen. xlv. 5, Joseph, speaking to his brethren, says, "Now therefore, be not grieved, nor angry with yourselves, that ye sold me hither; for God did send me before you to preserve life." Which Pool thus explains: "Be not grieved, to wit, immoderately, etc., he doth not dissuade them from godly sor"Nor angry with yourselves." In the Hebrew it is, neither let there be anger in your eyes; that is, neither excessively torment yourselves with the remembrance of the fact, neither break forth into contentions and wrath, and upbraidings of one another. "For God did send me before you to preserve life; that is, God by his wise, powerful, and gracious providence, overruled your evil intentions to a happy end, etc., which, though it doth not lessen your sin, yet ought to qualify your sorrow." See Pool on the place.

N. B. Joseph's brethren had been for some time in external circumstances very distressing; their minds full of heaviness and grief from that quarter; and they ready sometimes in their anguish to be angry at, and upbraid one another, for what was past; which kind of grief was not of the nature of godly sorrow; and this was what Joseph referred to. He would not have them grieve and afflict themselves in that sort; for that all was brought to a happy issue. He did not mean to dissuade them from godly sorrow. He knew, the more they saw of the wisdom, holiness, and goodness of God in this affair, the more would they love him, and loathe themselves, and mourn after a godly sort, that they had endeavored to counteract him. The more beauty they saw in God's scheme, the more would they hate their own, which was designed to frustrate his.

God's scheme was to advance Joseph, etc. Their proud hearts could not endure it. They viewed him as having a native tincture of vanity. They envied him, and wanted to keep him down, and laid a scheme for it, which God overruled, directly contrary to their very hearts. Now for them to look upon God's scheme as glorious, must imply in its very nature, that they looked upon their own scheme with the utmost abhorrence; which must suppose deep humiliation and sincere repentance. They could not really and heartily like God's scheme, without a sincere abhorrence of their own. Nor can any one being in the system heartily like God's scheme in permitting sin in general, without a sincere abhorrence of sin in general; and a hearty desire that all sinful schemes may be frustrated, just as this was, which Joseph's brethren had laid; for this is God's design. Had Joseph's brethren, before they were deeply humbled, been let into God's scheme, to see what he had done to advance their brother, their envy would have revived; and they felt an inclination to lay some new scheme to take him down. They must be deeply humbled, before they would heartily approve God's scheme, and be willing to bow to Joseph. But let their proud hearts be humbled, and they love their brother as they ought; and they would be glad to see him exalted, and would be ashamed to think of what they had done, and cheerfully pay him the honor which was his due. So a perfectly humble and holy temper would lead us perfectly to acquiesce in God's universal plan, which is designed to exalt God, and make all his happy subjects feel their comparative nothingness, to the highest possible degree, that God may be all in all. See this illustrated at large in my Sermons.

B. You affirm so, it is true; but it is impossible, if you will consider the case, that you should believe so. Pray, tell me, was it not a sinful thing for Joseph's brethren to sell their brother, or for the Jews to crucify the Lord of glory, because God, in both cases, contrary to their design, brought great good out of these great evils? I appeal to your own conscience.

A. Nay, but if you appeal to me, I must frankly tell you, that if greater good is brought out of evil, we are not to be sorry, but rather to rejoice that we have sinned. This principle I take for granted, as self-evident. And on this hypothesis I build my reasoning.

B. Then, it seems you think, that Joseph's brethren had no cause to repent of their sin, in attempting to frustrate God's design to advance their brother; because, in spite of all their malice and envy, God overruled all they did to bring about his designed advancement to the best advantage. Their sin, you say, "God in infinite wisdom overruled for the advancement of Joseph; the preservation of Jacob and his family; and a train of the most happy events to the church of God, from that day to this." To which you add, "It must be confessed, much of the divine power, wisdom, goodness, etc., was displayed in bringing so much good from such treachery." Therefore Joseph's brethren ought, instead of sorrow, rather to "keep an everlasting jubilee," in remembrance of their malice, envy, cruelty, and impiety, exercised in that deed. This is one of the "pernicious consequences," not of mine, but of your own scheme. Nor can it be got rid of, as to those instances of sin, which you acknowledge God has overruled to greater good. And as you own "you cannot prove to a demonstration but that greater good will finally be brought out of all sin, in general; so upon your scheme you cannot be certain, that you or any other sinner has reason to repent of sin. You do not know, as yet, whether to be sorry or glad. Yea, according to you, "it is above your, or perhaps any human talents," to decide this question. Therefore, upon your scheme, all sinners must put off their repentance, until, by some new revelation from heaven it is declared, that God never will overrule all to greater good. And as soon as ever we are assured, that God does not intend to overrule all things to his glory and to the good of the system; then, and not till then, must we begin to be sorry that we have sinned; that is, to be sorry that we have not sought the glory of God and good of the system with all our might. But why should we be sorry now, for, if God does not seek his own glory, why should we? If he does not aim at

VOL. II.

11