could but sin, "It must be received by faith."- If reason cannot see, how sin was the ordination of the divine will, and God not be the Author, worker, or abettor of it, when "he worketh all things without exception even wickedness in the wicked." "It must be received by faith."

But can faith believe such glaring contradictions? can it receive and embrace such confounded lies? If it can it is but human faith. Divine Faith, that holy supernatural principle never set its seal to a lie, since the world began. Divine faith bears soul convincing evidence to divine realities, not to lies; faith does not deal in lies and cunning craftiness, but in truth and true godliness; renouncing from the heart the hidden things of dishonesty. Faith is a sterling principle, that detests imposition and lying forgeries uttered in the name of the Lord. Faith delights in God's word ; here it lives, and walks, and works by love divine, here its bow abides in strength, and its arms are made strong to draw the string, and its sight made clear to hit the mark. Divine faith will make a man bold to defend truth, and expose lies, in the face of opposition and public reproach. Divine faith, will make a man honest for God, yea, even to turn king's evidence against his own soul. Divine faith, has ever stood an unflinching witness for God in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation; nor have the tyrants of the earth, with all their rage and enmity, been able to suppress or tame its noble courage.

ELEVENTH. Another objection for not receiving the doctrine of the divine ordination of Sin, is, its want

of scripture authority. There is no scriptural evidence for asserting that God decreed the existence and entrance of Sin. The doctrine is based upon stoic philosophy, logical argument, perverted scripture and human assertions. But as for a "Thus saith the Lord," for the doctrine, there is no such thing to be found between the backs of the bible. Mr. T-R, after wenving a spider web upon this subject, winds it up by saying :—

"It is certain, then, that the existence of Sin was the ordination of the divine will, for if God had not determined its existence, it could not have had being; unless we suppose Sin to be greater than God." TUCKER, 1. xvi, and xvii. Mr. T -R says again.

"Does, or can, any thing come to pass, and the Lord command it not? And if it is not his will to prevent it, it must be his will to permit it: and consequently it has being because it is his will it should." -TUCKER, 1. vii, p. 49.

The above language of Mr. T-R, forms a fair sample of all the material evidence that can be produced in support of the doctrine; as it couches human assertion, stoic philosophy, logic and perverted scripture. As" can any thing come to pass, and the Lord command it not?" The question may be answered upon scriptural authority in the affirmative, there can. As it is written, "They built the high places of Baal, which are in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through fire unto Molech; which thing I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind that they should cause Judah to Sin," JER. xxxii, v. 35.-" Who is he that saith, and it cometh to pass, when the Lord commandeth it not."

-Lam., iii, 37. Mr. TR has twisted the passage from 'saying,' to 'doing,' in order to make it look like a proof for the doctrine. Little shiftly tricks are despicable in any cause, but especially in divinity. The apostles did not work by slight of hand, they renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, they handled not the word of God deceitfully; their loins were girt about with truth.

But to notice the arguments of another advocate for the doctrine; namely, Dr John Edwards. This great divine after a proofless disquisition upon the point, asserts, that,

"God did from all eternity decree the commission of all the Sins of the world, because his permissive will is his true and real will."-EDWARDS, on the decrees, b. 1, c. iii, p. 104.

And the best evidence that the learned Doctor is able to produce to support his assertiou, is, that Sin is committed, and God not preventing it; which is the best proof that can be produced to show that Sin is decreed.

"For (says the Dr.) the event of things is the best comment on God's decree. When we see things come to pass, we may safely conclude that it was preordained that they should come to pass."-Ibid b. 1, c, i, p. 32. And again says the Doctor.

"He might have hindered the fall, but he would not. The reason was because he had decreed their fall, as we may gather from God's creating the tree of good and evil before their creation, Gen. i, 3. and from the actual suffering of Sin in the world ever since, we conclude, that God decreed and enacted the sufferance of it. We see that God leaves men to themselves, and to their own lusts and vile inclinations which could not be unless he had from eternity purposed to

permit Sin to be in the world. For this is an unquestionable maxim, that he could have prevented the being of Sin, if he had thought good to do so; and therefore seeing he did not, we may gather thence, that it was his will, and consequently his decree, that Sin should be permitted. For what God actually doth or suffers to be done, we may gather what he had decreed to do.-If therefore God suffers Sin (which is agreed by all) he wills it, he decrees it." DR. JOHN EDWARDS on the decrees, b. 1, ch. iii, p. 102.

Now I would ask, is there any thing that amounts to a proof in all this? The basis of the doctrine is drawn out, and gathered from, this "could prevent and would not." From this the Dr. extracts the decreeing of the fall, "he might have hindered the fall, but he would not; the reason was because he had decreed the fall." But where is the Dr's authority for asserting that God had decreed the fall. His scripture reference upon this important point is wanting, and the deficiency of divine evidence leaves his assertions destitute of Divinity. Hence the deficiency is supplied by inferential argument; as 1st, "we may gather from God's creating the tree of good and evil before their creation, &c." 2nd, "we conclude that God decreed and enacted the sufferance of Sin." 3rd, "we may gather thence, that it was his will, and consequently his decree, that Sin should be permitted.” 4th, "I do not see any good reason why we may not safely assert, that God willeth the permission of Sin," 5th, "for what God actually doth or suffers to be done we may gather what he had decreed to do." 6th, "if therefore God suffers Sin, he wills it, he decrees it."

Now the whole of this argument betrays the sandy

foundation of the doctrine, as it evidently shews that the learned Doctor can produce no scripture testimony for asserting the divine permission of sin, the willing of sin, or the holy ordination of sin; all his assertions and conclusions, are entirely made upon inference, and principally based upon this maxim, viz. "He could prevent, and would not." Upon this he asserts that God decreed all the sins in the world, and then refers us to the sins committed as a confirming proof of their being decreed. "For" says the Dr. " when we see things come to pass, we may safely conclude it was pre-determined that they should so come to pass."

But many of what are termed divine decrees are evidently of human origin, and man's device; For even the Dr. himself has told us of things being decreed, which never did, nor ever can come to pass. His own language shall speak for itself on this point.

"From the holy scriptures" says the Doctor, "we learn that all the world, even the whole race of Adam were in a salvable state at first, and God originally designed their happiness as appears by his creating Adam and Eve, (who were the representatives of all mankind) in his own image, and placing them in paradise, and giving them the Tree of Life, which was a symbol of that life and bliss which they were to enjoy. But God by another act of his eternal decree, which was secondary and collateral, purposed to permit our first parents to transgress his law and deface his image. Whence it appears, that the primary thing designed by God, was the happiness of man, and the contrary is provided by man's wilful defect and declention. It never was his principle design, to make man miserable. The first and ORIGINAL DECREE of God was to make them happy, witness the example of our first parents. Thus God wills not the death of a Sinner, thus he wills all