fame epithet, in order to cut off all occafion of doubt refpecting the continuance of either: "Thefe fhall go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into life eternal." We are constrained, therefore, to acknowledge, that the threatening in the text includes nothing less than the everlafting mifery of the foul, under the wrath and indignation of God.

This, tremendous as it is, will be the fruit of unbelief; "He that believeth not fhall be damned." We muft not fuppofe that the unbelief here fpoken of characterizes only profeffed infidels, who openly avow their contempt of Chriftianity; for then it would by no means afford a fufficient line of diftinction between thofe that fhall be faved, and those that shall perish; feeing that there are many who profess to reverence the Chriftian revelation, while they live in a conftant violation of every duty it enjoins. If the receiving of Chrift, as he is offered in the Gofpel, be the faith that faves, then the not receiving of Chrift in that manner must be the unbelief that condemns. This obfervation is of great importance: for the generality feem to have no idea that they can be unbelievers, unless they have formally renounced the Chriftian faith their confciences are quite clear on this fubject: the guilt of unbelief never caufed them one moment's uneafinefs. But can any thing be more plain, than that the fame faith, which is neceffary to bring us to falvation, muft be alfo neceffary to keep us from con-demnation? Indeed it is fo felf-evident a truth, that the very mention of it appears almoft abfurd; and yet it will be well if we admit its full force in the point before us: for, however zealous many are to comprehend holy actions and affections in their definitions of faving faith, they are backward enough to acknowledge that a want of thofe qualities must evidence them to be in a state of unbelief: yet, till this truth be felt and acknowledged, there is little hope that the Gospel will ever profit them at all.

There is a qualifying claufe in the text which we must not leave unnoticed; and the rather, because it is added in the former, but omitted in the latter part; "He that believeth, and is baptized, fhall be faved; but he that believeth not fhall be damned." Our Lord had appointed baptifm as that rite whereby his difciples fhould be introduced into the Chriftian covenant, as the Jews had

been

been by circumcifion into the Mofaic covenant: and men's fubmiffion to this rite ferved as a teft of their fincerity, and a public badge of their profeffion. If any were inwardly convinced that the religion of Chrift was indeed of divine authority, and were not prevented by infurmountable obftacles from conforming to this rite, they must cheerfully enlift themfelves under his banners, and honour him in his appointed way; they muft "follow the Lord fully," if they would be partakers of his benefits. But, on the other hand, if they thould fubmit to this ordinance, and yet be deftitute of true faith, their baptism should not fave them; they fhould perifh for their unbelief: baptized or unbaptized, they should furely perish.

The parts of the text being thus explained, there remains no difficulty in the meaning of the whole as it ftands connected together. No words can be found that can more forcibly exprefs the folemn truth, which our Lord intended to convey: the import of his declaration is fo obvious, that we fhall not attempt to elucidate it any farther, but will proceed

II. To vindicate its reafonableness.

That men fhould be faved for their good works, or condemned for their grofs iniquities, would be thought reasonable enough; but that they fhould be faved by faith, or condemned for unbelief, feems to many to be utterly unreasonable and abfurd. But, to a candid inquirer, the equity and reasonableness of both these points may be eafily and plainly evinced.

If faith were, as fome imagine it to be, a mere affent to certain propofitions, it must be confeffed, that, to expect falvation by it were prepofterous in the extreme: but it has already been fhown that this is not faving faith. The man who truly believes, invariably comes to Chrift in this way; he confeffes with humility and contrition his paft offences-he acknowledges, from his inmoft foul, that he deserves the everlafting difpleasure of God-he renounces every hope that might arife from his comparative goodness, his penitential forrows, his future purpofes, his actual amendment-he embraces Chrift as a fuitable and all-fufficient Saviour-and relies fimply and entirely upon the promises which God has made to us in the Son of his love. This, I fay, is the believer's experience at the first moment he truly believes in Chrift. To

this we might add, that, from that moment, he lives in 2 ftate of communion with his Saviour, and exerts himfelf to the utmoft to adorn his profeffion by a holy life and converfation: but we intentionally omit all the fruits of faith which he afterwards produces, left any one thould be led to confound faith with its fruits, or to afcribe that to faith and works conjointly, which properly belongs to faith alone. Confider then a perfon coming in this pcnitent manner to Chrift, and trufting in the promises of his God; is it unreasonable that fuch a perfon fhould be -faved? Who in all the world fhould be faved fo foon as he, who implores deliverance from his loft eftate? Who fhould reap the benefits of Chrift's death, but he, who makes that his only plea and dependence? Who may fo juftly hope to experience God's fidelity, as he who refts upon his promites? Who, in fhort, fhould enjoy all the bleifings of redemption, but he who feeks redemption in God's appointed way? Surely, if it be reafonable that Chrift fhould "fee of the travail of his foul," and that God thould fulfil his own word, then is it moft reafona bic that he who believes in Chrift should be faved.

With respect to the condemnation of unbelicvers, we readily acknowledge that that alfo would be unreasonable, on a fuppofition that unbelief were nothing more than a diffent from certain propofitions, through a want of fufficient evidence to eftablifh their divine authority. But unbelief is a fin of the deepeft dye; and the perion who is under its dominion is in a flate as offenfive to God as can well be conceived. For, in the first place, he rejects that which has been established by every kind of evidence which a revelation from heaven can adınit of: and, in rejecting it, he fhews that he is lifted up with pride and prefumption: for he not only takes upon him to fit in judgment upon God, but denies his own ftate to be fo dangerous and depraved as God has reprefented it. If he acknowledges himself to be a finner, he ftill feels neither his guilt nor his helplefsnefs as he ought, but " goes about to cftablith a righteoufiefs of his own, inftead of fubmitting to the righteoufhefs of God." That wonderful method which the infinite wifdem of God has contrived for the reftoration of our fallen race, he accounts "foolifhncfs;" and fubftitutes what he efteems a fafer and better method of his own. The most stupendous difplay of divine love and

11

mercy

mercy that ever was. or can be exhibited, he difregards; and thus, both " tramples under foot the Son of God, and does despite unto the Spirit of Grace:" yea, to use the language of an infpired Apoftle, he "makes the only true God a liar;" for whereas God has faid, that "there is no other name whereby we can be faved, but the name of Jefus, or any other foundation than that which he himself has laid," the unbeliever directly contradicts him, and unequivocally declares his expectation, that there is and thall be fome other way of acceptance with him. Now is it unreafonable that fuch a perfon fhould be punished? that fuch a defpifer of God fhould be left without any part in the believer's portion? Let us only apply the cafe to ourtelves-If a child thould pour contempt upon the wifeft counfels of his parents, and queftion the truth of their mott folemn proteftations, thould we not think him worthy of his parents' difpleafure? would not we ourfelves, in fuch a cafe, manifeft our difapprobation of his conduct? Who then are we, that we fhould infult GOD thus, and do it with impunity? Who are we, I fay, that, when we are at liberty to withhold a bleffing from an ungrateful fellow-crcature, or to inflict a punishment on him adequate to his offence, we should not be in like manner amenable to God? If any fay, " We acknowledge the finfulness of unbelief, but think the punishment of it too fevere;" I answer, God himself is the beft judge of the malignity of fin; and he has denounced death, eternal death, as the wages due to every fin: much more therefore may it be inflicted for unbelief; fince there is no fin to complicated, nor any that fo effectually precludes even a poffibility of falvation: we may purge away any other fin, by a believing application to the blood of Chrift; but by unbelief we reject the only remedy provided for us.'

Hoping that the reafonablenefs of our Saviour's declaration has been fatisfactorily proved, we come

III. To display its excellency.

While the Gospel of Chrift is mifreprefented and oppofed by man, the angels, who are incomparably lefs interested in its provifions, are ever contemplating it with adiniration and joy. And, if it were better understood amongst us, it could not but meet with a more favourable reception; for it has innumerable excellencies, which

render

render it worthy of univerfal acceptation. Let us examine a few of its leading features.-In the firft place, it clearly defines the way of Jalvation. Take any other way of falvation that ever was devifed, by repentance for inftance, or by fincere obedience; what inexplicable difficulties occur to our view! for, who can tell what degree of repentance will fatisfy God for our breaches of his law, and be a fufficient price for heaven? Who can mark out the line which fhall be drawn between thofe that fhall be faved and those that shall perish? Who can tell what fincere obedience means? It cannot mean the doing what we will, for that would put a murderer on the fame footing with an Apostle: and if it mean the doing what we can, where is the man that can be faved by it? Where is the man who has not violated it in ten thousand inftances, or who does not violate it every day of his life? Who can truly fay that for any one day he has mortified every finful habit as much as he could, exercifed every holy affection as much as he could, and practifed every fpecies of duty as much as he could? And if we cannot but acknowledge that we might have done more, who fhall fay what degree of infincerity may be indulged without violating the law of fincere obedience? On all fuch plans as thefe we are utterly at a lofs; we are at sea without a compafs. But take the doctrine laid down in the text, and the way of falvation is fo plain, that "he who runs may read it." Let any man afk himself this question, Do I believe in Chrift? Let him purfue the enquiry fomewhat farther, Do I feel myself a guilty, helpless, condemned finner? Do I renounce all dependence on my own wifdom, ftrength, and righteoufnefs? Do I fee that there is in Chrift a fulness fuited to my neceffities? And do I daily, with humility and earneftnefs, beg of God that Chrift may be made unto me wifdom, and righteoufnefs, and fanctification, and redemption?" These queftions are eafy enough to be refolved; and by the anfwer which confcience gives to them we may know affuredly whether we be in the way to heaven or to hell. And who does not fee how great an excellency this is in the Gospel-falvation? Who does not fee how ftrongly this circumftance recommends the doctrine in our text?

Another excellency in the Gospel is, that it is equally fuited to all perfons in all conditions. Had any felf-righteous methods