proof of a literal return of the Jews to There is neither male nor female, he their own land, that I may devote a little does not mean to say, that in the chrisattention to some objections which seem tian church the distinction of sex is lost: to exist in the mind of the learned writer Nor did he mean to say, that the place referred to above. which males and females hold in the 1. He objects against a literal restor-church of Christ is in every respect the ation of the Jews to the promised land, same; for he tells us in another place, That the same prophecies, which fore-that a woman is not to teach or rule in tel this restoration, also foretel the ob- the church. But though there should servance of the institutions of sacrifice, be servants and masters to the end of new moons, the passover, &c. To time, as well as men and women, still this it may be replied, that the New- they are all one in Christ Jesus. The Testament makes it evident that the English and French may remain distinct sacrificial institutions are done away by nations in the Millennium, and the one the offering of the one sacrifice for sin. live in England, and the other in France, Therefore those prophecies, which pre- and yet be so joined together in the dict the observance of these ceremonial truth, and in love, as to be one in Christ rites in the Millennium, must be under- Jesus. If the Jews should be restored stood in a figurative, and not a literal to Canaan, and should there look on sense. But it is not pretended, that it Him whom they pierced, and mourn. is any where revealed, that the Jews If they should embrace the gospel docshall not return again to the land of prom-trines and simplicity of worship, they ise; therefore the passages which predict their return may be understood in a literal, and not a figurative sense. And from some of the passages which we have already introduced, it appears pretty evident, that the predictions of the return of the Jews in the latter days, were so phrased as purposely to convey the idea of a literal return, and to guard us against understanding them in a figurative

sense.

will be as much prepared to coalesce with the Gentile nation, as the Gentile nations are with one another. Thus, they will all become one in Christ Jesus.

3. It is objected against a literal return of the Jews, that the posterity of those who embraced christianity in primitive times, and since that period, aré swallowed up with Gentile christians, and are not now known to be descendants of Jacob; why then is it not prob

2. It is objected against the literal re-able that this will be the case with those turn of the Jews, that the apostle says concerning the New-Testament church, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female, for ye are all one in Christ Jesus." I do not see how this passage militates at all against a literal return of the Jews to the land in which their fathers dwelt; or to their living together in that land, as a distinct nation, through the Millennium, or to the end of the world. In the passage now be- 2ndly. It seems most likely that the fore us, the apostle says, There is nei-restoration of the Jews to their own ther bond nor free. It is certain from land, will take place before their conhis epistles that in his day these two version to christianity. After their res classes of men existed in the christian toration, and after the destruction of church, and he made separate addresses those enemies who sought to destroy to them both. And he did not, I con-them, it is said, "Lo the house of Israel clude, in the passage before us intend to say that the distinction between masters and servants was about to come to an end. We know, that when he says,

Jews, who shall be converted at the commencement of the Millennium.

Ans. 1st. We can by no means with certainty infer this from tha.. God did not say, that those Jews who embraced christianity, should be kept distinct; but he has foretold the literal restoration of those Jews who until the time of the || Millennium should remain in unbelief, and who have been known to the world as the literal seed of Abraham.

E

shall know that I am the Lord their God, from that day and forward.” Ezek. xxxix. 22. If they are to be restored as mere Jews, the objection now before us loses its force.

4. It is objected that if the Jews are ing suggests another difficulty. He says, kept a distinct nation, and should be dis" If the Jews should be established in tinguished by external visible honors, it their own land, how would it be possiwill have a tendency to excite envy and ble, without either a constant miraculous other unchristian feelings, and so tend to interposition of God, or such a wall of produce a schism in Christ's body. partition as was formerly established in To this it may be replied, that merely circumcision and the other peculiar rites holding the sentiment, that the return of of the ancient Jewish religion, to prethe Jews to their own land, is real, and serve them a distinct nation?" This not figurative, has nothing to do with difficulty does not effect the question athis objection. I have no doubt but bout their return to Palestine. Two that the Jews in the Millennial church, men may agree on this point that they will have such honors as the converted will actually return, and yet disagree apersecutor of Tarsus had, who said, he bout their being kept a distinct people was less than the least of all saints, be-in the same manner that they have been cause he persecuted the church; but kept in times past. One of them may who at the same time viewed himself believe that after their return they will honored of God with exceeding abunnot be kept a distinct people any more dant grace, by which he was made not a than the French or Dutch, and yet not whit behind the chiefest of the apostles. || doubt of their return. As in the beginning of the christian dispensation, the converted Gentiles were considered as wonderful monuments of divine grace; so in the beginning of the Millennium, converted Jews may be thought the most distinguished monuments of mercy. But as to any external visible honors, of a wordly nature, peculiar to the Jewish nation, I pretend to know nothing of them.

If it be asked what is the practical use of our believing in a literal return of God's ancient covenant people to their own land; it may be answered; First. It exalts our views of the faithfulness of the God of Abraham and of Isaac and of Jacob. He made a grant of that part of the earth, called the land of Canaan, to Abraham and his seed, when the land was full of people, and Abraham was 5. Against the actual return of the without any seed. But Abraham beJews to their own land it is objected, lieved God and the event proved that his that the thing is well nigh impossible-faith had sufficient ground to rest upon : that it must require miracles to effect it, for he who had promised did not fail to as in the days of Joshua, &c. perform. For their many and great

To this objection an answer is furnish-provocations he at length caused them ed, Zech. viii. 6." Thus saith the Lord of to be carried captive from their own hosts, if it be marvellous in the eyes of land. That part of the covenant people the remnant of this people in these days, which belonged to the kingdom of Jushould it also be marvellous in mine eyes saith the Lord of hosts." The God of Israel is a wonder-working God, even when he does not work what are usually termed miracles. Very wonderful things have taken place in our day;|| and still greater wonders must be wrought, to introduce the latter-day glory of Zion.

dah, was restored after a captivity of seventy years-not only restored to favor, but restored to the land of promise. This was a great display of divine faithfulness. It is now more than seventeen hundred years since the Jews were dispossessed of the promised land; if therefore, after this long captivity they shall be again restored not only to favor, but to the same inheritance, it will strikingly display the faithfulness of the God of Abraham.

With respect to the actual return of his ancient covenant people to the land of their possession, the only question which ought to exercise our attention, is this, Secondly. Our belief of a literal restoWhat has God said about it? Has he ration exalts our conceptions of the said they shall return? Then make no power of Jehovah. It is one of the doubt but that he will bring it to pass. principal objections of the learned wriThe writer on whom we are remark-ter, whose difficulties we have undertak

en to remove, that a literal restoration is this glorious event will take place.— well nigh impossible. We acknowledge But before it can take place, christians the difficulties are great; and it is cal-must more earnestly desire it, and more culated to exalt our views of the won- fervently and unremittingly pray for it. der-working power of God, to believe that a literal restoration will take place. While christians pray that the Jews may be restored to their own land, they do not pretend to know how it will be accomplished; but they know that they pray to him to whom all things are possible. They know that he is never at a loss to make his counsel stand, and to do all his pleasure.

Ye spiritual children of Abraham, remember his natural seed,-pray that their long continued blindness may be removed, and that they, with you, may behold the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world.

A DISQUISITION ON ROMANS IX. 19.

Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yel find fault? for who hath resisted his will?

Thirdly. Those who believe in an actual return of the tribes of Israel to the THIS is the most plausible and the land of promise, view this as an event most common objection, that ever has of great magnitude to support the truth been made against the divine agency in of divine revelation, Their being kept the production of moral exercises in the a distinct people in all their dispersions human heart. Those who deny, that is a standing monument of the truth of God operates immediately upon the the Bible. And what a striking attes- hearts of either saints or sinners, rely tation to its truth will be produced, by || upon this objection to support their opinthe gathering together of this people ion. Those who allow, that God soffrom the four quarters of the earth, and tens the hearts of some, and hardens the re-establishing them in the land given to|| hearts of others, instantly fly to this obtheir fathers by a grant from the high jection, to excuse them for not loving, Possessor of heaven and earth. This and even for actually hating God. The will be an event more calculated to ex- careless and secure urge this objeccite the attention of an unbelieving||tion, to excuse their carelessness and seworld, than their mere restoration to the covenants of promise,

a

curity; and the awakened and impressed urge this objection to excuse their obI would suggest the thought that it is stinacy and. unbelief. All classes of sinmatter of some importance, that ners consider this objection as their christians should be united in their be-strong hold, to which they can always lief on this subject, lest their prayers for the children of Abraham should be hindered. The matter of their return to the land of Canaan, and to the city of Jerusalem, is so fully believed by many, that when they pray for them, they very naturally express themselves in a way which implies their belief of this: But they, who do not believe in such a restoration, will rot feel prepared to unite in such petitions.

To conclude this essay, which has been protracted beyond its expected limits, let me ask the prayers of Gentiles in behalf of the Jews. They were broken off from their olive tree, that you might be graffed in. But they, if they abide not in unbelief, will be graffed in; for God is able to graft them in again. Their ingathering will be life from the dead. The time draweth nigh when

retreat as their last and safe resort. It is of great importance, therefore, fairly and fully to remove this objection against the doctrine of divine efficiency, which is so reproachful to God, and so injurious to those who make it. But since the whole force of this objection lies in its ambiguity, it is necessary, in the first place, to explain it with accuracy and precision.

To ascertain the true import of this objection, let us look back to the connexion in which it is introduced. The apostle had been speaking of God's conduct in calling in the Gentiles and rejecting the Jews; and had represented him as bringing about this event by sof lening the hearts of believers, and hardening the hearts of unbelievers. To illustrate this point, he mentions the instance of Pharaoh. "What shall we

say then! Is their unrighteousness with || sy to see, that no man can be said to be God? God forbid. For he saith to Mo-compelled in any case, unless he is eises, I will have mercy on whom I will ther constrained, or restrained, contrary have mercy, and i will have compas-to his will. This is the only proper meansion on whom I will have compassion. ing of COMPULSION; and this is preciseSo then it is not of him that willeth, nor ly what the objector means by asking, of him that runneth,but of God that shew" Who hath resisted his will!" He supeth mercy. For the scripture saith un-poses,that sinners may endeavor to resist to Pharaoh, even for this same purpose the will of God,while he is hardening their have I raised thee up, that I might shew || hearts, but notwithstanding all their enmy power in thee, and that my name deavors, they are compelled to be hardenmight be declared throughout all the ed. And do not those, who make this earth. Therefore hath he mercy on objection at the present day, mean the whom he will have mercy, and whom same thing by it? When they ask, how he will he hardeneth." Having thus plain- can we be to blame, if God hardens our ly asserted Gods immediate agency in hearts? Do they not mean to ask, how softening the hearts of saints, and in har- can we be to blame for the hardness of dening the hearts of sinners, he introdu-our hearts, if God compels us to be harced the strongest objection, which he dened contrary to our will? Do they supposed any one could possibly make not mean to say, that the act of God in against the doctrine he had taught? Thou hardening their hearts must be an act wilt say then unto me why doth he yet find of compulsion, by which he either refault? for who hath resisted his will?" strains them from being what they wish This is as much as to say, that if God to be, or constrains them to be what they does indeed harden the hearts of sinners, do not wish to be? It is undoubtedly then he compels them to be hardened, true, that every person, who objects aand they cannot help being what they gainst God's hardening the hearts of sinare; which is totally inconsistent with a- ners, objects against it as implying the ny criminality on their part. Here it is exercise of compulsion on God's part.necessary to form a clear and just idea He must mean to complain of compulof compulsion. This implies two things, sion in this case, because this is the only constraint, and restraint. A man is ground of objection, and a solid ground, compelled to act when he is constrain- if it be true. Who ever felt himself to ed to act contrary to his will. Dan blame for doing what he was constrainiel was compelled to go into the Den of ed to do, contrary to his will? Or wholions because he was constrained to go ever felt himself to blame for not doing in, contrary to his will; and Joseph was what he was restrained from doing concompelled to go into Egypt because he trary to his will? Did a good man ever was constrained to go there, contrary to blame himself for not attending public his will. In all cases of constraint, there is worship, when he was restrained from compulsion; because the will of the per-attending, contrary to his will? Or did son constrained is opposed to the power a martyr ever blame himself for going that constrains him. But a man may to the stake, when he was constrained be compelled by restraint as well as by to go, contrary to his will? No such constraint. Thus Jeroboam was com-case ever happened. Compulsion is alpelled to let the prophet go, when his withered hand effectually restrained him from acting agreeable to his will. Paul and Silas were likewise compelled to stay in the prison, so long as their feet were made fast in the stocks, which, contrary to their will, restrained them from walking. In every instance of restraint, there is compulsion; because the will of the person restrained is opposed to the power that restrains him. It is now ea

ways inconsistent with blame. Those, who object against God's hardening the hearts of men, mean to make a reasonable, solid, unanswerable objection: and, therefore, they mean to say, that, if God does harden their hearts, he compels them to be hardened. This is saying something pertinent and forcible; for if it be true, that God does exercise compulsion in hardening the heart, then there is good reason to ask, Why doth

he yet find fault? For who hath resisted 2. God cannot compel men to be his will ?" sinful unless they all the while choose to be holy. It has been shown, that compulsion always implies either constraining, or restraining inen, contrary to their

The way is now prepared to inquire, whether there is any just ground for this objection against the divine agency in hardening the hearts of sinners. Cer-will. Where there is no constraint, nor

tainly there is not the least ground for it, if God does not use any compulsion in hardening their hearts. And here the following things deserve a serious, critical, and impartial consideration.

restraint, contrary to the will of a person, there can be no compulsion. If sinners do not choose to be holy, then they can never be restrained from being holy; and if they always choose to be sinful, then 1. It is generally allowed, that the they can never he constrained to be so. divine agency, in softening the hearts of It would be absurd to say, that a man is men, does not imply compulsion. In constrained to do what he chooses; or stating the objection, the apostle seems that he is restrained from doing what he to take it for granted, that there is no com- does not choose. If sinners do not in any pulsion in God's softening the hearts of case choose holiness, then they cannot saints. Thou wilt then say unto me, why in any case be restrained from it: and doth be yet find fault? For who hath re- if in all cases they choose sin, then in sisted his will? He had just before said, no case can they be constrained to it. that" God hath mercy on whom he will But it clearly appears from scripture, have mercy." That is, he softens the that sinners always hate holiness, and hearts of whom he will, by taking away love sin: hence it is utterly impossible their stony hearts and giving them hearts that they should be constrained to love of flesh. But he introduces no one as sin, or restrained from loving holiness. objecting against this; because he sup- Was Hazael constrained to sin, when posed it would be allowed by all, that God told him by his prophet, that he God may soften the hearts of believers, would destroy the life of his prince, and without the lest degree of compulsion. reign in his stead? Or was it possible, And it is now universally granted, by that God should compel him to that cruthose who acknowledge a special divine el and inhuman deed, so long as he operation in the conversion of sinners, chose to do it? It is absurd, therefore, that God uses no compulsion in softening for sinners to say that they are restrainand changing their hearts. But if God ed from holiness, or constrained to sin, uses no compulsion in softening the while they actually love sin and hate hearts of saints, why should it be suppo-holiness. If they would only keep in ed, that he uses any compulsion in hard-view the meaning of their own objecening the hearts of sinners? In softening tion against God's hardening their hearts, the hearts of saints, he is repesented as they would be condemned out of their making them new creatures,creating them | own mouths, and silenced by their own anew in Christ Jesus, and exerting the feelings. What can be more inconsissame mighty power, that he exerted in tent than to complain, that they cannot raising Christ from the dead. These ex-resist the will of God, when they do not pressions plainly imply, that he actual-desire to resist it? or to say that they ly produces new and holy affections in are compelled to sin, when they love to their hearts. But if he can produce new sin, and roll it as a sweet morsel under and holy affections in the hearts of saints, their tongue ? without compulsion; what ground is 3. The effect produced by the divine there to suppose that he must use com-agency in hardening the hearts of sinpulsion in producing any moral affec-ners, demonstrates that there is no comtions in the hearts of sinners? If God pulsion in it. The effect produced is a can soften the hearts of men without free, voluntary choice. God makes compulsion, it must be supposed, that them choose to act in the very manner he can harden them without compulsion. in which they do in all cases act. We This is plain and intelligible to every have an account of many whom God capacity, and deserves great attention actually hardened; and all appear to upon this subject.