Pray, my friend, what think you? When Joseph was in fact sold; that wicked deed actually committed; which of the two would good Jacob have chosen; either that no good should ever be brought out of that evil, or that it should be made the occasion of a hundred, or a thousand, or ten thousand times more good, in the whole, than to counterbalance the damage done to his family? Joseph's wicked brethren wished no good might come of it; but I dare say that neither the God that made them, nor the father who begat them, were of that spirit. No, God meant it unto good; and Jacob was even ravished with joy, when God's glorious designs began to open to his view.

Indeed, sir, perhaps it may be the opinion of all judicious men, that the Manichean scheme, bad as it is, is still preferable to yours. For they supposed that God would have ordered the affairs of the whole universe in the wisest, best, and most perfect manner, if he could; but he was so counteracted by the evil principle, that he could not; so that even they believed that God's intention was good. But you think God never designed to do what he knew was most for his glory, although he could have done it with infinite ease, and had not one motive against it, but all possible motives, of infinite weight, for it. But want of natural power is not a defect so ill, by infinite odds, as want of moral rectitude.

Yea, my friend, what if it should be thought that your scheme is little, if any, better than downright atheism? To be sure, if if your scheme is true, all religion is overthrown. For if God has suffered infinite evil and mischief to come into his own world, a world absolutely under his government, in which he doth according to his pleasure, absolutely without any good end; yea, contrary to his better judgment, and when he could easily have hindered it; he is infinitely far from being of our author, "we ought to be disposed to acquiesce in the account of this matter which we have from him who cannot err, in the oracles of inspiration." A way of accounting for the divine conduct, that will afford "libertines" and all obstinate sinners, an "encouragement" to continue in sin, which is "infinitely worse than nothing," as this author himself must be sensible.

* If so much good was brought out of evil, in the affair of Joseph, why may it not be so as to the system in general? or why should it be thought unlikely, when it would be just like God to do it? The very unlikeliest thing that could happen, has already happened. The Son of God has died. And how gloriously that affair will issue, in which the Creator of the universe was so infinitely engaged as to become incarnate and die, I am of the opinion, never yet entered into the heart of the most exalted angel in heaven fully to conceive. And however the author of the "Attempt," like the unbelieving lord in Samaria, is ready now to ridicule the thought of such great good; yet if he may be so happy, and God grant that he may, as to be an everlasting partaker of it himself, and join in the new song which none can learn but the redeemed, I doubt not he will then be of a very different mind.

an absolutely perfect being, as has been proved; nor can any holy, truly benevolent being in the universe, heartily love him, or cordially acquiesce in his government; for it is strictly impossible that absolute evil should be acquiesced in by a good being; for it implies a contradiction. And if all holy beings cease to love God, and acquiesce in his government, there is an end to all religion.

A. But, sir, I pray you carefully to mind that I say it, and insist upon it, that "sin is not God's scheme, but a device of the devil." It is "no part of God's original scheme."

B. And I pray, sir, what do you mean by this manner of speaking? Do you mean only "that it was the devil that sinned, and not God; that other wicked beings sin, and not God; and that sinning creatures act freely, and are solely and wholly to blame?" All this is exactly true; but not at all to your purpose; for the question is not, who is it that has sinned, God, or the creature; about this there is no dispute. The creature, and none but the creature, has sinned. But the question is, why did the infinitely wise and holy Creator and Governor of the world permit the creature to sin, when he could easily have hindered it? To this question, you say nothing; only "that you do not believe that God is obliged to do, or that in fact he actually does, what is most for his own glory," which is really to give up the absolute perfection of the divine nature.

Or do you mean, "that it was God's original intention and design, that sin should never happen; and that God did all he could to prevent it; but unawares the devil laid a scheme, and overmatched the Almighty; and by craft or power brought it in, notwithstanding all God could do; and so God's scheme was disconcerted, and he disappointed, and his world in a great measure ruined, in spite of the utmost exertion of his infinite wisdom and almighty power?" Some of your readers, perhaps, may think this your meaning; but it cannot be, if you mean to be consistent with yourself; for, according to this, God did all he could to secure his own glory—which is a point you do not believe.

And yet this must be your meaning, or what you say is not at all to the purpose; for if God knew sin was likely to happen, and could have hindered it, and yet in fact did not; the whole question remains entirely unanswered, namely, Why did God permit sin?

The truth, perhaps, was, you had no distinct meaning at all, in saying, that "sin is not God's scheme, but a device of the devil."

A. Indeed, sir, I was greatly "embarrassed." Expressly to deny, that God permits sin, I durst not do. To justify his conduct, I could not; yea, I esteemed you guilty of great vanity and presumption in pretending to do it. It was my

opinion, "that no satisfactory account could be given" of the divine conduct in this affair; for I imagined, that in very deed God had not in this affair done that which would have been "most for his glory" to have done.*

B. However, I hope, by this time, you are thoroughly convinced, that whether we can find out the reasons of the divine conduct in this affair or not, yet it is of the utmost importance that we firmly believe that God has acted wisely, and in a manner agreeble to all his glorious perfections; for it is an affair of so great moment, and so infinitely interesting, that if we habitually believe that God acted contrary to his better judgment in it, we must entirely give up the absolute perfection of his nature. And if God is not an absolutely perfect being, he is not God. We may compliment him with the name, but we take away the thing. "We Christains," saith Origen, "say, that God can do nothing which is in itself evil, no more than he is able not to be God; for if God do any evil, he is not God. God willeth nothing unbecoming himself; this is inconsistent with his Godship." (See Dr. Cudworth's Intel. Syst., p. 874.) Agreeable to Holy Scripture, "He cannot deny himself." "It is impossible for God to lie." And if we give up the absolute perfection of the divine nature, and so ungod the deity, it will become impossible, were our hearts ever so holy, to love, worship, and trust in him as God, as an absolutely perfect being; or rejoice in his universal government, and be sincerely glad that he is at the head of the creation, and can and will do according to his pleasure in the armies of heaven, and amongst

This author speaks of "resting in the natural and easy account we have of this affair in the sacred Scriptures, and of finding satisfaction and repose therein, which he supposes "the heart of every good man does." But, pray, what rest, what repose, what satisfaction, can he, or any man of common sense, “good,” or "not good," find in believing, that in this affair God has done "what was in fact not most for his own glory?"—which he thinks is the true state of the case. And when he was so "embarrassed" himself, why should he desire to embarrass others likewise? And after so serious and repeated professions, that he meant to propose his thoughts with the greatest modesty and humility, why did he, instead of a serious answer to the late President Edwards's reasonings on this subject, to which I had referred, rather cry out, "Boasted metaphysics"? "Several professors in the Dutch universities have sent him their thanks" for that book; and how could the "modest, humble temper" of this gentleman prompt him to ridicule what the learned world so much admire? He had a right to answer it, if he could; but if he could not, to ridicule it will but render himself ridiculous, and it is a pity he should not know it. The candid reader is desired carefully to peruse what Mr. Edwards has said on this subject, in his book on Freedom, &c., p. 252-267.

the inhabitants of the earth. Yea, it would be a thing infinitely desirable, that some better being, some absolutely perfect being, might be in his place and take his throne. And so your scheme really justifies a spirit of discontent and rebellion throughout all God's dominions. But this idea of the divine majesty, which is harbored in many a heart in this apostate world, is of the nature of blasphemy, the abominable thing which God's soul hates, and ought to be entirely rooted out of our minds.

A. "I think it of much greater importance for us to endeavor to get sin out of the world, than fruitlessly to inquire how it came in."

B. A great part of the wickedness of this God-hating world consists in hard thoughts and hard speeches against God. (Jude 15.) Therefore "sin cannot be got out of the world" till men are brought to think well of God, and of all his ways; at least, so far as to put an implicit trust and confidence in him, as an absolutely perfect being, fit to be at the head of the universe, and to have the management and ordering of all the affairs of the whole system in his hands.

It is in vain to pretend to make men holy, without love to God; for it is the first and greatest part of holiness, to love God; and the chief foundation of all religion. And it is impossible men should love God while they habitually believe that there is no God—that is, no being of absolute perfection at the head of the universe, ordering all things in the wisest and best manner. (Ps. xiv. 1, 2.)

A. Sir, I did think my "Attempt" an unanswerable piece; and that I had a good right in the most public manner to call upon you to "retract." But, "upon the whole, I think myself under the strongest engagements to make the most grateful acknowledgments for so distinguishing a favor as your reply to my remarks." Indeed, the permission of sin has always appeared to me as an unaccountable affair. I could never see how God could do it, consistent with his own glory or the good of the system, or consistent even with his own perfect happiness; as a being of infinite benevolence, I thought, must have had "greater pleasure" if sin and misery had been forever unknown in his world; therefore, I thought that "sin was not God's scheme, but a device of the devil." And because it is plain fact, that God has not hindered the devil from doing all this mischief, as he might easily have done, I have been led "to doubt whether God does in fact, and so whether he is obliged," from the absolute perfection of his nature, "to do what is most for his glory." You see my whole scheme, and you have

replied to the whole and every part of it; but if, after all, I should feel not satisfied, what shall I do?

B. I will tell you, sir, what to do; and may the Lord give you a hearing ear, and an understanding heart.

1. Be firmly persuaded, that not the devil, but God, and God alone, is the absolute governor of the world.

Reason teaches, that God never will, and never can, voluntarily give up the government of his own world into the hands of his greatest and most avowed enemy, the devil. And if the devil is one of God's creatures, as God himself has taught us in his word, he is so inferior to the God that made him, as to be in his hands, as the clay is in the hands of the potter, absolutely at his control; unable by power or policy to bring any thing to pass, but by the permission of the great God, who from heaven hath declared, saying, "My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure;" and whose schemes cannot possibly be disconcerted by the united powers of earth and hell. Nay, the powers of darkness are so entirely at the control of the Almighty, that Satan could not touch holy Job, or any part of his substance, nor so much as put a lie in the mouth of Ahab's lying prophets, without the divine permission; nor could the affrighted devils so much as enter into the herd of swine, till our Savior said, Go. How then could the devil seduce our first parents, and break up God's original plan, and ruin his new-made world, in spite of the utmost exertion of infinite wisdom and almighty power?

The whole tenor of divine revelation leads us to believe that the providence of God extends to all things which come to pass. If the devil or wicked men were not under the divine control, we should have reason to fear them; but our Savior assures us, they cannot hurt a hair of our heads without God's permission, whose providence extends even to the very sparrows, a bird so insignificant, that two of them were sold for a farthing; and much more to the concerns of men, who are of more value than many sparrows; and he enjoins his disciples, in the belief of this, not to fear the most cruel persecutors; but to fear God only: for, says he, "the very hairs of your heads are all numbered." And, indeed, wicked men, so absolute and universal is the divine government,are, according to the language of Scripture, which is the language of God's heart, in God's hand, as a rod, an axe, or a saw, and as much at his control. (Isa. x. 5, 15.) And, therefore, St. Paul, viewing things in this light, taught Christians, in his day, to consider all their persecutions as coming from the hand of their heavenly Father, and designed by him as kind, loving chastisements, for their