shall not need to reason so, for I can set the objector to work if I will. But some may object? Adam and say, God would that Adam should have kept it, if Adam would; but Adam would not. Well, here is Adam's will and God's will contradicting each other in the point of eating. God's revealed will❜ forbids Adam, Adam's will is for eating. Now which must yield the point? Now if God's secret will had been like the law, Adam could never have eaten; for the revealed will or law of God can never yield; broken it may be, but yield it cannot. Now if God's secret intent was the law, it must either yield or be forced; if it yielded, the point is granted, that the secret law of God was, that Adam should eat; but if like the law, then the will of God is forced, and so God is overcome by man, and so man reigns at his own will, and God is forced to stand and look on, to see whether man will be pleased to do his law or no.

Secondly. If the revealed will of God or the law be like the secret intent or purpose, and the secret intent cannot be forced, then the law must yield, and where is sin then? So that we must say, then it was God's secret intent that he should sin, (f) or say that Adam did not sin, or blasphemously

(f) "The Deity is possessed not only of infinite knowledge, but likewise of absolute liberty of

phemously say, that God is overcome by Adam," and could never recover himself since, except it be in a few that out of free will, will serve him a little. By the bye, I think this will do'; for the secret intent can no more be forced than the law can yield to be broken.

To clear up the point farther, we must observe, that all the intents of God were all for the exaltation of his own glory in Jesus Christ. Rom. xi 36, For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things. Therefore whatsoever he

will; so that whatever he does or permits to be done, he does and permits freely, and of his own good pleasure.

Consequently it is his free pleasure to permit sin, since without his permission, neither men nor devils can do any thing; now to permit is at least the same as not to binder. Though it be in our power to hinder if we please, and this permission or non-hindrance, is certainly an act of the divine will. Hence AUSTIN says, "Those things which seemingly thwart the divine will, are nevertheless agreeable to it; for if God did not permit them, they could not be done; and whatever God permits, he permits freely and willingly; he does nothing, neither suffers any thing to be done against his own will."And LUTHER observes, "That God permitted Adam

4

to

he has purposed in himself, is and shall redound to its end.

all for his glory, But in respect of

the subject of this law, his intent was not to hinder Adam to eat: no, this intent to let him eat was diverse. As for his intent or purpose. towards the vessels of wrath, he never intended to them any good, therefore the fall was not for their good, though they cannot complain of injustice in God; but in respect of the elect, it was for their good, the event proves it; there

fore

to fall into sin, because he willed that he should so fall."

Although the will of God, considered in itself, is simply one and the same; yet, in condescension to the present capacities of men, the divine will is very properly distinguished into secret and revealed; thus it was his revealed will, that Pharoah should let the Israelites go, that Abraham should sacrifice his son; and that Peter should not deny Christ but as was proved by the event, it was his secret will that Pharoah should not let Israel go, Exod. iv. 41: that Abraham should not sacrifice his son, Gen. xx. 12 and that Peter should deny his Lord, Matt. xxvi, 34..

The will of God, respecting the salvation and, condemnation of men, is never, contrary to itself; he immutably wills the salvation of, the elect, and vice versa : nor can he ever vary or deviate from

fore we may perceive that our parents were reaching at the secret will of God, not believing that he forbad them for good, but to keep them from the good, and that was a lye; for had he not forbidden them, they had never come at it; so we see that they believed a lye in this also; and this has as deep impressions upon us, as any one of that seal, (Adam's disobedience.) Jesus Christ has had this laid on him too. Psalm xxii. 8,

Matt.

his own will in any one instance whatever, so as that that should be done which he willeth not, or that not to be brought to pass which he willeth: Isaiah xlvi. 10, My council shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure. Psalm xxxiii. 12, The council of the Lord standeth for ever, and the thoughts of his heart to all generations. Job xxxiii. 13, 14, He is in one mind, who can turn him? and what his soul desireth, even that he doth, for be performeth the thing that is appointed for me, and many such things are with him, Eph. i. 11, Being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things, after the council of his own will. Thus for instance, Hophni and Phineas hearkened not to the voice of their father, who reproved them for their wickedness, because the Lord would slay them, 1 Sam. ii. 25. And Sihon king of Heshbon would not receive the peaceable message sent him by Moses, because the

Lord

Matt. xxvii. 43, He trusted in God, let him deliver him. Here is the reflection.

Now one argument more.

First. If Adam was made in God's image, then God's will was uncapable of being forced; the former is true, also the latter.

Secondly. If Adam's dominion over all creatures below his nature, to dispose of them at his will, was part of God's likeness, then God had power over every creature to dispose of them at

his

Lord God hardened his spirit and made his heart obstinate, that he might deliver him into the hands of Israel, Deut. ii. 26, 30. Thus also, to add no more, we find that there have been and ever will be some, whose eyes God blindeth, and whose hearts he hardeneth, i. e. whom God permits to continue blind and hardened, on purpose to prevent them seeing with their eyes, and understand with their hearts, and to hinder their conversion to God, and spiritual healing by him, Isaiah vi. 9; John xii. 39, 40. Because God's will. of precept may, in some instances, appear to thwart his will of determination, it does not follow either, 1st. that he mocks his creatures, { on 2d. that they are excusable for neglecting to observe his will of command.

Ist. He does not hereby mock his creatures, for if men do not believe his word, nor observe