, 1844-01-06

III
"utable' and Interchangeable as alleged.
n II God has decreed all thing.
winch nave heretofore taken place, dc
now and will hereafter take place
men ne decreed that the reformation
should take place, with which Calvin
hu'her, and others were concerned.
Then II Calvin, Luther, and indeed
all the men in the Universe, had fould
ed their arms and sat downin apathy.
'he reformation would have taken
PIace-in fact if your doctrine is true.
II would have taken place in spite o.
aII their violent efforts to the contra.
ry, If they had made such efforts.
This being the case, then why CO
you say that Calvin, and Luther, tore
down the strong hold Of papal su,
premacy. and broke the sf.ackles Of
C~hrlstendom. But if these il!us,ri-
Gus men could endure the persecution
OF Cardinals, Kings, and Popss, for
the truth sake, we ought not to com.
plain of smaller abuse from small er
men. Sir, | contend that if YOUR
doctrine is true and invaluable, as al
legged, then those men had no agency
n tie matter at all, and consequently
entitled 10 no honor for their labour
IN the great work Of moral reform. be-
cause II your doctrine is true, those
men were machines propelled by the
iorce of fate, which they could no
more resist than they could change
or alter, n Of Gods eternal de-
crees-and so far as it regards abuse.
J am quite sure that | never did in
dulge in it, because some few OF the
many very respectable and pious
members of the same church to which
| belong, are believers in the doctrine
of predestination, and because ] con
slider 1t Inconsistent with prudence
and discretion. And now we will
examine your ~fa!laciou, &c~ontradic-
tory doctIine of decrees-it is this
in so many words: "Gca from all e.
ternity did by the most wise and no.
~ councils Of lis own will, freely
and MECHANICALLY, ordain whatsoever
comes To p~ass--yet. thereby, neither
is God the author of sin, nor is VIC
lence offered 10 the will Of the crea-
ture. nor IS the contingency Of the
second causes taken away, but rath,
er established" This is only a part
of ii however, bat if YOU will insist
IN n discussion, and Will promise to
conduct it On Your part with c~iyiitv
and common courtesy will endeav-
ar 20 prove that The doctrine above CT.
ted. and also the remaining part of it.
which ! have no, now time to attend
to, is ''rositiycly absurd and totally
untrue.
Sir, contend without any kind OF
vanity on the subject, that the part Of
your creed here noticed, embraces
not only a contradiction in language
but a positive absurdi,y relative to
the contingency Of the second eau
ses. Sir, | cannot imagine how any
individual conversant with scripture,
can believe that this doctrine is CON
with it.
Sir, if the decree is Interchangeable
as you sly that il is, and if it is ua-
alterably fixed immutabIe, and etern-
al, then the Idea that there IS contIn-
yency or uncertainty about it, is per
recily novel and ridiculous.
Sit, il you are correct, | contend
hat The DEGREES Of God are as firm as
The throne on which he sits, and a.
Interchangeable as the duration and ex
s;ence OF God himself is everlasting.
You admit this and cling to it with an
llicctronate reliance and enthusiasm
never excelied--nnd you also insist
hat the number of the elect is there
ore so certain and definite, that it
.annot either be increased or dimin-
shed-yet you tell US lin view of this
ormidable difficulty that God is moi
he author of sin, nor is violence Of $