above application to the dropping of the stone? To me it appears like a surgeon taking and binding up a man's leg, in order to cure him of a broken back. Had he pointed the application to the similie, he should have shown, how that Jehovah held the pure unfallen creature in his hand, as the man held the stone; and how that God let go his hold, and that the creature fell in consequence, from purity to Sin, from life to death, from heaven to hell: And then shewed clearly, that this was not God's act, but the creature's own act of disobedience. Had he done this like a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, his performance would have been worth looking at.

Now from what is held forth in the above arguinents, as to God being the cause of Sin; I would ask; where is the disobedience of the creature to be found in it? It is argued, that, "God withheld the light, and darkness ensued." Could the creature by any means prevent that darkness? No; no more than he could prevent the shades of night succeeding a setting sun. It is argued, "He suspended his special agency, and the creature fell." Could the creature, under such circumstances, do any other than fall? Could he stand when his support was taken from under him? He falls in consequence of his support being removed; his fall in such case is of necessity, not of disobedience. It is argued, as another occasional cause of his fall, that "A law is given him, to be the cause of transgression." Could the creature withstand, or prevent its operating influence? No; he becomes passive under its unfrustra

ble force, in the very act of disobeying its sacred command. So that while he is compelled to disobedience by the secret operation of the law, he is condemned by that law for disobeying. It is argued, that, "He goes in the way of disobedience." Could he prevent or avoid it? When, "All other ways were shut up, and God leaving that only open, which he determined to be done." Under such circumstances, how could the creature help himself from doing otherwise than as he did? Upon such principles, the fall must have been a necessitous act; noris there room for the shadow of disobedience upon such a doctrine.

But it is argued, that the creature did it of a willing mind, and that constitutes him guilty in all that he did: They tell us, the willingness in the act, makes the Sin is own. But what says this high doctrine about the disposing of the creature's will? It holds forth, that, God decreed and immutably forefixed

"It is not the necessity of sinning, that maketh God the author of it; but it is the personal acting of it, that gives the denomination to the author of it, and that is not God but man; the man acts freely, as it is an act of his own, and from his will; and thence it is, that he is the author of the Sin committed; but God only determines, that such a Sin shall be in the world, The fault lies in men's wills. They are guilty and culpable, not because of the decrees, but because of their wills. They voluntarily refuse to consult their own welfare, and so Sin is the free and unconstrained offspring of their own wills."- EDWARDS OR the Decrees, book 1, ch. iii, p. 125.

every volition, or act of the will, without excep

tion.

Now for God to work in his creatures to will; and then to charge the merit or demerit of that willingness to the creature, does not appear to me to be God's way of acting. I well know that the word says, "Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power."-Ps. cx. 3. And that "It is God that worketh in them to will and to do of his good pleasure." But I never understood that this willingness was to be attributed to the creature's merit, but to him that made them willing. And if the sinful volitions of the creature, spring from the same source, how comes it, that the demerit of those volitions should not be attributed to the same source also?

* " Every idea, thought, and purpose, that takes place in rational spirits throughout their existence, were all fixed in bis eternal plan. Nor could the least idea, more or less, ever be admitted into, or ommitted from the grand scheme of things, but that which was worthy the highest wisdom to fix, ordain, and determine."-TUCKER, let. xv. p. 109.

Calvin also upon this point says, "We do not with the stoics, immagine a necessity arising from a perpetual concatenation and intricate series of causes contained in nature; but we make God the abettor and governer of all things, who in his own wisdom hath from the remotest eternity decreed what he would do, and now by his own power executes what he hath decreed. Whence we assert, that not only the heaven and earth and inanimate creatures, but also the deliberations and volitions of men, are so governed by his providence, as to be directed to the end appointed.-CALVIN'S INST. book 1, ch. xvi, p. 220.

Now if the volitions of the creatures were all fixed, in the determinate counsel of God, so that not the least idea, can arise, or

NINTH. Another reason for my not receiving the doctrine is, that it appears to be the doctrine of the Nicolitans for this sect, according to church history, traced and attributed their Sins to God as the cause. up This was their doctrine according to the best human authority. Mr. Brown describes both the deeds and doctrine of the Nicolitans in the following words :

It is said they used their women in common, reckoned adultery, and the use of meats offered to idols, indifferent things; they imputed their wickedness to God as the cause."-BROWN'S DICTIONARY OF THE Bible.

Now the description here given of the Nicolitan doctrine, is the very body, soul, and spirit of the doctrine contended for by high predestinarians, and that from the reformation down to the present day. Witness the lan

guage of Luther, Toplady, Tucker, &c. Luther roundly asserts the doctrine in the following words :

"God worketh all things in all men even wickedness in the wicked."—Luther, Top. vol. v, p. 210. This sentence couches the very vitals of the Nicolitan divinity. Nor is Mr. Toplady a whit behind Luther in advocating the Nicolitan doctrine.

fail to arise, in rational spirits, but what infinate wisdom fixed from the remotest eternity; then it most necessarily follow, that the first sinful volition of angels arose as the unfrustrable consequent of divine ordination; hence the angels were consigned 10 the necessity of sinning, by him who "hath from eternity decreed what he would do, and now by his own power executes what he hath decreed." According to which doctrine Sin must be the unconstrained offspriug of the divine will; which doctrine I reject as unscriptural.

"Hence (says TOPLADY,) we find every matter resolved, ultimately, into the mere sovereign pleasure of God, as the spring and occasion of whatsoever is done in heaven and earth." TOPLADY, vol. 5, p 211.

"It is certain then, (says TUCKER) that the existence of sin was the ordination of the divine will: "Sin could not have existence, without, or contrary to the divine will its being, must be a consequent of the divine purpose. ""Sin is a wise and holy ordination of God." TUCKER, L 16, p 119, 121.---L 15, 112.

Here we have the Nicolaitane doctrine expressed in plain terms, "imputing sin to God as the cause.

From these quotations it evidently appears that the doctrine has been cherished for centuries back, even in our protestant and dissenting churches, and is vindicated to this day; and it also appears that our modern Nicolaitanes as unflinchingly "impute all wickedness to God as the cause,

as ever the first founders

of the sect maintained the doctrine.

Now, I am not a Nicolaitane; nor do I take for doctrine the traditions of men, nor would I knowingly oppose any doctrine that Christ preached, or authorized to be preached, either to sinner or to saint; nor would I knowingly hold a doctrine that Christ hates, and I know that he hates the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes, for this he asserts when writing to the church of Pergamos, in language as follows. "So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes, which thing I hate. Repent; or else I will come unto thee quickly and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth. He that hath an ear to hear let him hear what the spirit saith unto the churches." REV. ii, 15. 16.

TENTH.--The discord of the assertions advanced

D