Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? shall the thing formed say unto him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay of the same lump to make one vessel unto honor, and another unto dishonor? What, if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much long suffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of his mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory?" The case of Pharaoh is here introduced, to prove and illustrate the doctrine of reprobation, as the counterpart to the doctrine of election. Pharaoh's fate proves, that God has in fact reprobated some of the human race. And God's conduct towards him illustrates his conduct towards all the vessels of wrath, who shall be fitted for destruction, in distinction from his conduct towards all the vessels of mercy, who shall be fitted for salvation. This same Apostle teaches, in various other passages in his writings, that God has reprobated all, whom he has not elected. He says to the Thessalonians, "God has not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ." Here he supposes, that all, whom God has not appointed to salvation, he has appointed to wrath. Again he says to the Romans, "Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained, and the rest were blinded. According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear, unto this day. And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap and a stumbling-block, and a recompence unto them. Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway." His meaning

is, let every thing serve to blind and harden reprobate sinners, and fit them for final destruction. The Apostle Peter represents the doctrine of reprobation in direct contrast with the doctrine of election. He says to christians in general, "Wherefore also it is contained in the Scripture, Behold, I lay in Zion a chief cornerstone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded. Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner, and a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them that stumble at the word, being disobedient, whereunto also they were appointed." Our Savior, likewise, in the course of his preaching, taught the doctrine of reprobation in plain and pointed terms. He publicly called Judas before his death, "the son of perdition." He told some of his obstinate hearers, that he came into the world to save the elect, and to destroy the non-elect. "Jesus said, For judgment I am come into the world: that they which see not might see, and that they which see might be made blind." And it appears that his miracles and preaching had this effect upon those, who were given up to a reprobate spirit. "But though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on him; That the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed? Therefore they could not believe, because Esaias said again, He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart, that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them." Scripture facts and declarations give us no more room to doubt, whether God has reprobated some, than

whether he has elected others; nor whether he will eventually destroy all the reprobate, than whether he will eventually save all the elect. Though multitudes may dislike the doctrine of reprobation; yet none have a right to say, that this solemn and important doctrine is not plainly revealed in the Scriptures of truth.

2. This instance of Pharaoh removes all the objec tions which ever have been, or which ever can be made against the doctrine of reprobation. Many have exerted the whole force of their minds, to devise plausible objections against this unpalatable doctrine. But all that has been or can be said against it, stands refuted by the fate of Pharaoh: he was a reprobate.

It is said, if God has reprobated a certain number of mankind, then he can have no other end in bringing those persons into existence, than merely to destroy them; which is totally inconsistent with true benevolence.

Though God always intended to destroy Pharaoh, yet he had a wise and benevolent design in giving him existence. He meant that he should act an important part on the stage of life, and be greatly instrumental in promoting the benevolent designs of providence. This God told him before he destroyed him. "For now will I stretch out my hand, that I may smite thee and thy people with pestilence; and thou shalt be cut off from the earth. And in very deed for this cause have I raised thee up, for to show in thee my power; and that my name may be declared throughout all the earth." God made Pharaoh for himself, as well as for the day of evil. And he would not have made him for the day of evil, had it not been necessary, in order to declare his own glory. God has the same end to answer, by bringing all the non-elect into existence. He intends they shall be the means of dis

playing his own glory, both in time and eternity. And what, if God, willing to shew his wrath, and make his power known on the vessels of wrath, bring them into existence for this noble and important purpose, who may or ought to object? The glory of God is the highest and best end he could propose in the creation of the world. And if he originally intended, and will finally make the non-elect subservient to this end, his benevolence will as clearly appear, in reprobating some to eternal perdition, as in electing others to eternal life.

It is said, the doctrine of reprobation is inconsistent with free agency, because it implies, that God has decreed all the actions of those, whom he has appointed to destruction; which lays them under a fatal necessity of pursuing the path to ruin.

This objection is contrary to fact. Pharaoh was a reprobate. His actions were decreed and predicted. God foredetermined and foretold how he should act; and he did act according to the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God. But it appears from the whole history of his life, that he acted as freely and voluntarily as any other man in the world. Did he not act freely in commanding the midwives to destroy every male among the Hebrew children? Did he not act freely in refusing to obey the messages of heaven, by the mouth of Moses? Did he not act freely in appointing task-masters to increase the burdens and distresses of the children of Israel? Did he not act freely in confessing his faults to Moses, and in begging him to intercede for him at the throne of divine grace? Did he not act freely in forbidding Moses to see his face any more? Did he not act freely afterwards, in not only permitting, but urging the Israelites to leave his kingdom? And after they had left it, did he not act freely

in pursuing them into the Red Sea, where he finished his course and met his fate? It is impossible to conceive, that Pharaoh should have enjoyed more liberty or moral freedom, than he actually did enjoy, while performing those very actions, which were the appointed means of his destruction. He acted freely and voluntarily all his life, under a divine decree, and under a divine influence. Though God hardened his heart, yet he hardened his own heart, and freely walked "in the way to hell, going down to the chambers of death." Here, then, it appears to be true in fact, that the doctrine of reprobation is perfectly consistent with free agency. The case of Pharaoh is exactly similar to the case of all other reprobates. And if the decree of reprobation did not destroy his moral freedom, it cannot destroy the moral freedom of any one of the nonelect.

It is said, the doctrine of reprobation is inconsistent with the use of means. If God has decreed that any should finally perish, it is vain and absurd to use any means in order to their salvation.

This objection is founded upon the preceding, and if there is no foundation for that, there is none for this. If the decree of reprobation does not destroy free agency, then it does not destroy the use of means. If reprobates remain free agents, then there is a great propriety in treating them as such, and in exhibiting before them all the motives of the gospel, to lead them to repentance. But it is sufficient to say, that God used means with Pharaoh, to bring him to good, though he had determined to destroy him. He admonished him of his duty and of his danger; he visited him with mercies and judgments; he employed Moses and Aaron, and even his own subjects, to persuade him to submission; and he delayed to cut him off from the earth,