preparatory to the judgment of the destruction they prayed, according great day, and the retributions of to its apparent importance, as in iteternity. Christ reigns over them self very desirable; but, that they by his providence and his Spirit, regarded the glory of the divine and is forming their characters to justice as of inore importance, and answer the ultimate design of their chose on the whole to have the less being. By the exercises of their good given up for the greater. On hearts and the actions of their this principle, I suppose Moses lives, they are preparing them- prayed for the destruction of the selves for glory, and fitting them- Egyptians, and gave thanks to God selves for destruction. When the when it was done. (Ex. 14 and end of this mortal life shall come, 15.) On the same principle, I which will come soon, and may suppose he prayed for the destruccome suddenly; it will be the same tion of Amalek, when Aaron and to them, as if the end of all things Hur stayed up his hands. (Ex. had arrived; their state will be 17.) Samuel prayed for the defixed for interminable ages Sure- struction of the Philistines. (1. ly men in the flesh, are, of all Sam. 7.) Deborah, and Barak cre tures, in the most solemn and praised the Lord for destroying the critical situation. How illy do Canaanites (Judg. 5,) and prayed idleness and sloth, dissipation and "so let all thine enemies perish, vain amusement, become rational O Lord." Samson prayed for the creatures in such a predicament? destruction of the Philistines (Judg. How weighty and worthy of uni- 16.) Hezekiah prayed for the deversal regard, the exhortations of struction of Sennacherib. (II. K. the apostles? "Redeeming the 19.) Asa prayed for the destructime-Be sober and watch unto tion of the Ethiopians. (II. Chr. prayer-Not slothful in business, 14.) Jehoshaphat prayed for the but fervent in spirit, serving the destruction of the Ammonites and Lord." PHILALETHES. others. (II. Chr. 20.) And all these prayers were heard and answered. The Psalmist often prayed for the destruction of the wicked, of which the following instances are a specimen. "Give them according to their deeds, and according to the wickedness of their endeavours: give them after the work of their hands; render to them their desert. (Ps. 28.) Let death seize upon them, and let them go down quick into hell; for wickedness is in their dwellings, and among them. (Ps. 55.) Consume them in wrath, consume them; that they may not be and let them know that God ruletb in Jacob unto the ends of the earth. (Ps. 59.) Let them be confounded and troubled for ever; yea, let them be put to shame, and perish: From the Utica Christian Repository. [Continued from page 330.] that men may know that thou, " All these prayers and praises of holy men on earth,and of the glorified saints in heaven, are right according to my principles. The good of the wicked was not disregarded or undervalued, but only made subordinate to the glory of God, which was regarded with supreme affection. And this is in exact accordance with the first pe tition in the Lord's prayer. For, when we pray, "Hallowed be thy name," it expresses a desire that all the perfections of God may be exercised in the most perfect man. ner, and displayed in the clearest light and this includes the exercise of his justice in the punishment of the wicked, as well as the exer. cise of his mercy in the salvation of the penitent. The only differ. ence I can perceive, between inspired me and us, in relation to the manner of our praying, in ref erence to the wicked, arises from the difference of our knowledge as to what is best to have done with them. When they knew what individuals it was best to have destroyed, for the glory of God's jus tice, they could with propriety make such prayers as we have seen in the case of those individuals. We cannot, indeed, make such prayers in the case of any individuals now living, because we do not know whom it is best to have sayed and whom it is best to have de stroyed. But so far as God has pointed out any, in his predictions, as devoted by him to destruction, hereafter, as in the case of Gog and Magog, and those who are to perish in the great battle of the great day of God Almighty, I perceive no difference as to the duty of the prophets and the duty of all. My principles would lead me to pray for every sinner, with faith in God's wisdom and goodness, committing him into God's hands, to save or destroy, as he pleases, choosing and believing that God would save him, if that should be best in his view; or, that he should make him a monument of his jus jce for ever, if that should be best in his view; without attempting to set up my own wisdom above the wisdom of God, by dictating to him which he shall do. be so far from joining in them, that he must feel, that, if that is heaven, he desires no part in it. Our different views of the prayer of faith not only lead us widely asunder in our views of the moral character of the scripture saints, and of the inhabitants of heaven, but they must lead us also, as appears to me, to different views of the moral character of the Bible itself. The Bible speaks of those men, and of their prayers and prai But my neighbour's principles must, I should think, lead him to condemn all those prayers and prai ses of holy men on earth, and of glorified saints in heaven. According to his theory, those holy men of old ought not to have prayed for the destruction of any of those sin ners. They ought to have prayedges, in terms of high approbation; for their salvation, without any if, without any expressious of submission, "with no reservation, with no hesitation," believing that it would be done. It must not be pleaded, as a justification of their neglect so to pray, that they knew, by divine revelation, that those sinners were not to be saved; for, if that is a sufficient justification, we can plead it for neglecting thus to pray for the conversion of all sianers now. We have as much evidence, from divine revelation, that all sinners are not to be converted, till after the battle of the great day, and the destruction of Gog and Ma gog, as they had in any of the cases mentioned. But my neighbour's theory is, that we are bound to pray for the conversion of every sinner, believing that it will be done. And if we cannot be excused from it, on the ground of the divine predictions, neither could they. And if it is on the whole desirable that all sinners should be saved, as it must be, if his theory is true, then it is on the whole undesirable and matter of grief that any should be lost and the songs of heaven, which have been mentioned, must be condemned also. And it appears to me, that, if his feelings accord with his theory.he must be displeased with those songs, and and conveys the idea that those prayers and praises, especially the book of Psalms, are designed for the use and imitation of succeeding ages, in their prayers and praises, as far as their circumstances agree, And the same Bible teaches us, that God has made all things for himself, of evil; that he has from eternity yea, even the wicked for the day designed some to be vessels of wrath, as well as some to be vessels of mercy; that while he softens the hearts of some, he hardens the hearts of others; and, by the means which he uses, and the efficacy which he gives them, he fits every man for the final destination for which infinite wisdom intended him. In short, the Bible teaches the doc trine of divine decrees, the doctrine of the universal providence of God, the doctrine of election, the doctrine of reprobation, and the doctrine of the endless punishment of the wicked. And it teaches that we ought to rejoice in all this, "giv ing thanks always for all things unto God and the Father, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ." this, according to my principles, is right; for the most perfect exercise and exhibition of the justice, mercy, and sovereignty of God, with that of all his other attributes, is the most desirable of all objects, All and that for which infinite wisdom and goodness contrived the plan of God; and infinite power is carrying it into effect, in all its parts. So that, though much sin and much misery are embraced in it, which in themselves considered are undesirable, yet there is no more of either than infinite goodness requires, no more than is on the whole wisest and best, and indispensable to the great end of the whole; and, therefore, no more than all good beings are bound to rejoice at, and thank God for bringing to pass, as the best means of the greater good he has in view. But all this, according to my neighbour's theory, is wrong. If it is on the whole desirable that all men should be converted and saved, so that it is our duty to pray for it without submission, then it is on the whole matter of regret that the Bible contains any such doctrines as imply that God intends to destroy any, and especially, exhortations to thank him for all things. And if my neighbour's feelings accord with his theory, I should think it must be unpleasant to him to read or hear any such parts of the Bible; and that he must wish that all such parts had been left out of the Bible, and think it would have been a much better book if they had been altogether omitted, And I should think he must be displeased when ever any such parts of the Bible are repeated from the pulpit; for they tend directly to keep people from praying as he thinks they ought to pray; since none can be lieve that it is best for God to destroy any, and that he intends to do it, and at the same time pray that all may be saved, believing it will be done. And since the Bible directs ministers to declare all the counsel of God, to take heed to the doctrines it contains, and continue in them, that dissatisfaction must be directed, not so much towards those ministers who obey its directions, as towards the Bible itself, which contains such doctrines, and gives such directions. I might extend these remarks, and show other points of difference, to which our respective views of the prayer of faith appear to me inevitably to lead. But, for the present, I will forbear; and conclude, by repeating my earnest request, that if my neighbour does not admit the consequences I have mentioned, he would show why they do not necessarily follow from his theory, as they appear to me in evitably to do. GAMMA. From the Evangelist--an extract. RELIGIOUS DECEPTION. It is a common art of the advocates of error, and perhaps the one of all others which they most suc cessfully practice, to pervert the language of scripture, and then appropriate it to their own use. Having taking a scripture phrase, and attached to it such a meaning as suits their purposes, they pass it off upon the credulous as Bible truth; and then bring to its support abundance of scripture testimony, wrested in the same way, which has the appearance, and nothing but the appearance, of giving countenance to their scheme, In this way it happens, that the advocates of error use much of the same language which is used by the friends of truth, and lead many to think that they do believe and teach a great deal of truth; so that some well meaning people, who intend to take the Bible for their guide, are led to think favourably of their sentiments in general, and to suppose that the difference between them and the friends of truth is not very essential, and it may be to conclude, that one believes only a little more than the other. Now, this is often the very thing the advocates of error wish people to believe, at first, in order to gain their confidence, and prepare the way for their real sentiments to be in sinuated into the mind, without creating an alarm, which might defeat their designs. And such is the view which the scripture gives us of the arts of deceivers and seducers. They are represented as creeping into houses, privily bring ing in damnable heresies, using feigned words, creeping in una wares, sowing tares while men sleep, and practising cunning craft iness whereby they lie in wait to deceive. And Christians are ward ed to beware of these arts of deceivers, that they be not led away with the error of the wicked, and fall from their own steadfastness. Such terms as total depravity, regeneration, divine sovereignty, election, and reprobation, commonly convey to the minds of those who have been accustomed to their use among Calvinists, an idea that the person who uses them must be, nearly, if not quite, Calvinistic in sentiment. But it is a fact, which ought to be more extensively un derstood than it is, that these terms are used occasionally, and some of them frequently, by men who reject, and labour unceasingly to de stroy, every doctrine which Calvinists use them to express. This fact can be easily ascertained by asking any such man to explain what he means by these terms, if he will but be frank in his explanation. The term regeneration, for instance, is used by all who profess to believe the Bible, because it is a scripture term. One means by it a physical change, wrought in the soul by divine power, in which the creature is wholly pas sive, and which enables him to love God. Another means by it a moral change, in the affections only, wrought by divine power, but one in which the creature is active, and begins to love God. Another means, the removal of the burden of guilt, by an assurance of pardon. Another means, the removal of the fear of punishment, by embracing the doctrine that all will be saved. Another means, water baptism, by which the relations of the individ ual are changed, and he is brought into cexion with the visible church.nother means, that change which a heathen experiences in becoming convinced of the truth of the Christian religion. In all these senses, and perhaps more, the term regeneration is explained, and used, by different classes of people who call themselves Christ. ians. It is, therefore, ascertaining nothing, as to a man's views of scripture truth, to hear him say, he believes the doctrine of regeneration. He may say this, and speak largely of the importance of this great Bible doctrine, and urge it upon his hearers, and insist upon the necessity of being born again, in order to enter the kingdom of God, and quote a multitude of passages of scripture in support of it; and after all, not let us know, unless he gives us some explanation, whether he is a Calvinist, an Arminian, an Antinomian, an Arian, a Socinian, a Swedenborgian, or a Universalist. And probably, if he has a design to deceive us, he will use such terms as we do, without a particular explanation of them; and represent the difference between him and us, as not very essential, till he gains our confidence, and prepares the way to instil his poison by degrees, in a cov |