« ForrigeFortsæt »
perused it, when it was first published : but, though I am very well pleased with the spirit, and, in some respects, the ingenuity of its author ; yet, I cannot but say, that it has left me, as to my sentiments, just as it found me. Whatever it may be owing to ; those objections, which he has urged against the doctrines I have ventured to appear in the defence of, and which are now, it seems, insuperable difficulties in the way of his receiving them, seem to me, I must own, to be either such as may be easily removed, or such as are founded upon a wrong representation of those doctrines. The objections indeed of that writer to which you have referred us, are only those which occur, page 15-23, several of which at least have, if I mistake not, been sufficiently obviated in the foregoing letter. But that which he himself seems to consider as the most irrefragable of all, and which alone therefore I think it needful at present to take notice of, is what we meet with p. 14, it is in short this ; That the doctrine of the necessity or expediency of our Lord's dying as a sacrifice or propitiation for the sins of the world, supposes, that persons may be obnoxious:
to the divine justice, and stand in need of an expiation for their sins at the same time that they are, being truly penitent and res formed, objects of his favour and approba tion. But to this it is needless for me, as you must be sensible, to attempt an an: swer; as it has already receivedi a very good one from yourself. For as the obs jection we meet with in your 164th para. graph, which is this ;; If we repent and * reform are we not in a fit state for par
don? and will not God pardon; when "we are most properly qualified to receive
forgiveness? Sincere repentance must; ' in itself, render sinners the objects of the divine mercy. What need then of the atonement of Christ:??-- As, I
As, I say, this objection is evidently the same with what we meet with in the forementioned page of the pamphlet under consideration ; so the answer, which you have made to it in your 165th paragraph, will as plainly serve for an answer to the other. For as this latter objection is equally strong (if it be strong at all) against the necessity or expediency of making atonement for the sins of the world, in whatever way we suppose that atonement to be made ; so your answer is manifestly such as to take away its force,
as well with regard to me, as to yourself.