consists of a chain of divine purposes, with the execution of them; and that the works of an almighty hand, which come under the notice of creatures, are but the fulfilment of divine determinations, existing from eternity in the perfect and all comprehending mind of God. But that he should purpose the things he does, before the doing of them, is not peculiar to himself. It is common to all. voluntary agents. But the purposes of men are changeable, like themselves. With them, one determination gives place to another totally opposite. Joseph's brethren first determined to make a sacrifice of him by imbruing their own hands in his blood; and afterwards they superseded this resolution, or purpose, by another to sell him into the hands of strangers for a perpetual bond-servant. Judas also, after he had purposed to render his divine master subservient to his covetousness, repented of this determination, and resolved, if possible, to undo what he had done. Since things appear to the eyes of men under such different and contrary aspects, at different times, it is not strange, that their purposes should, often times, be contradictory to each other; that, at one time, they should concert plans, and form resolutions,, to be overthrown by others to come after them. This, however, forms a trait in the character of man, which must for ever prove fatal to all his pretensions to such confidence as debars all fear. Where you see a man relinquishing a measure, to-day, which he had,

gravely and formally, entered upon, yester day; or even growing doubtful concerning it; you instantly cenclude, he is not much to be relied upon. You will not choose such an one as a depositary for some of your more precious and valuable interests. You will be apt to call to mind the following proverb;

My son, fear thou the Lord and the king; and meddle not with them that are given to change For their calamity shall rise suddenly; and who knoweth the ruin of them both." And if mutability in one's purposes is a serious objection to any very close connection, or fellowship, with him, particularly in matters of weight and importance; it will, by an easy transition of thought, become perfectly clear to us, that God is, in no measure, entitled to our confidence, if he be capable of any change in his purposes.. If he do not:

eternally purpose exactly the same things, where is his immutability? His character is. ruined beyond retrieve, not only if he disan-. nul one determination by another, but also if a single new determination enters his heart at any time.. This would imply a strong imperfection, that he was not aware, from. the beginning, of all the possible reasons and occasions for action, that might occur. Whatever purpose Jehovah ever did, or ever shall, form, or execute, of that purpose it cannot be true, that it was ever out of his mind.. This would prove that he is not immutable, and, consequently, that he is unworthy to be revered and honoured as God. Such changea

bleness, as we are now speaking of, implies a great extent of imperfection. It implies a sad deficiency,in point of knowledge,or of mental conception; for no one can be liable to pass from, one series of purposes to another, or to form any new determination, unless a new apprehension, or view, of things has taken place in his mind. Things must appear differently to us from what they once did, or our resolutions will continue the same they then were. If there are any alterations in the purposes of God, it must be because he does not always view things in the same point of light. Nothing can lead to it, except it be a more enlarged, or a more contracted, understanding. The idea of a change in any of the divine purposes must reduce the Deity, therefore, exceedingly low. It would

break up that broad and most ample foundation for our confidence and hope, which is ́laid in his eternal and adorable perfections. It was no change in the purposes of God that occasioned his saying, "My Spirit shall not always strive with man-and-I will destroy man, whom I have created, from the face of the earth, both man and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air for it repenteth me that I have made them." Neither should it be imputed to this, that the Lord said unto Moses, "I have seen this people, and, behold, it is a stiff-necked people: Now, therefore, let me alone, that my wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may consume them; and I will make of

thee a great nation." Neither does it argue any thing of this changeableness, that when Moses prayed thus, "Turn from thy fierce wrath, and repent of this evil against thy people, the Lord repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people." There is no alteration of a divine purpose supposed in the words following, "Wherefore the Lord God of Israel saith, I said indeed, that thy house, and the house of thy father,should walk before me for ever: but now the Lord saith, Be it far from me; for them that honour me I will honour, and they that despise me shall be lightly esteemed." When Nineveh was warned of her danger, and sought to avert the threatened destruction by humiliation and amendment of life, it is said, "And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not." In this affair there was no change in the purposes of God; neither was there in the case of Hezekiah's having his life lengthened out, fifteen years, after "the prophet Isaiah the son of Amoz, came to him, and said unto him, Thus saith the Lord, Set thine house in order; for thou shall die and not live." the foregoing instances the expressions would seem to denote, that God had formed determinations, which he was afterwards induced to relinquish. Were this to be admitted as the fact, or agreeable to the real meaning of the texts, the words of our text could no

In

longer hold good, "I am the Lord, I change not. But how is it that the Lord repented that he had made man, and would therefore, destroy him? that he thought to extinguish Israel in the wilderness, but, at the intercession of Moses, repented and preserved them? Instead of leading us to a particular consideration of divine determinations, these cases serve only to exhibit the dealings of Provi dence, upon certain occasions, as different from what they would have been, had the occasions been different. Destroying a thing, is, in a sense, repenting of its existence, or manifesting an opposition to its existence. Such was it with God, as to the case of the ante-diluvians. Destroying them was a repenting of their existence, or well-being, though determined upon from eternity. But how can the purposes of God be esteemed uniform and inviolable, when contrary things are spoken of and applied to the same subject? as in the cases of Eli's house and the Ninevites, and also of Hezehiah's sickness. "I said indeed that thy house should walk before me for ever; but now the Lord saith, Be it far from me. In forty days shall Nineveh be destroyed; but the Lord repented him of the evil and did it not." &c. To understand and receive these statements correctly, we must make distinctions, such as the following.

1. Whatever is stated conditionally, or upon some certain proviso, cannot be meant to point out a determination of providence ;