ARGUMENT TWO - God Desires Obedience
ARGUMENT TWO
Of this we shall be more convinced, if we consider with what vehemence, and in what pathetic expressions God desires the obedience and reformation of his people. Thus when the Jews said to Moses, 'speak thou to us all that the Lord shall speak to thee, and we will hear it and do it;' (Deuteronomy 5:27-29)' God answers, 'they have well said all that they have spoken; (mi jitten) tis deoei Oh that there were such an heart in them that they would fear me and keep all my commandments -always!' Can it rationally be imagined that he himself, who so passionately desires they might have, and thus enquires who will give them this heart, should himself withhold from them what was absolutely requisite that they might have it? Could he approve their willingness to hear and do his commandments, and yet himself deny them grace or strength sufficient to perform them?
i " Who will give that there may be in them such an heart? is" says the bishop of Ely, "an expression of the most earnest desire; but withal signifies that if what he had done for them would not move them to fear and obey him, it was not possible to persuade them to it. Not but he could miraculously work upon them (by an irresistible or unfrustrable operation) says Maimonides and change their hearts, if he pleased, as he miraculously changed the nature of other things; but if this were God's will to deal with them after this fashion, there would have been no need to send a prophet to them, or to publish laws full of precepts and promises, rewards and punishments, by which, says He, God wrought upon their hearts, and not by his absolute omnipotence."
Again, can it enter into the heart of man to conceive this, — God was not so desirous of their reformation and obedience as to do all that was requisite on His part to procure it, and so to give them means sufficient for the performance of their duty, when after all His unsuccessful labors that it might be so, he breaks forth into such ardent wishes, ' O that my people had hearkened to me, and Israel had walked in my ways! Even that Israel whom, for rejecting me, I have now given up to her own heart's lusts; Oh that thou had hearkened to my commandments, says God to that obstinate people, whose neck was an iron sinew, unit their brow brass,'(Isaiah 48:4, 18)
Now can these expressions come from one who had from all eternity decreed their reprobation, and consequently the denial of means sufficient to enable them to do what he thus wishes they had done?
Can there be any doubt of the sincerity or ardency of Christ's desire of the welfare and salvation of the Jews when his eyes first wept over Jerusalem, arid then his mouth utters these words, ' Happy hadst thou been hadst thou known in this thy day the things belonging to thy peace; but now they are hid from thine eyes’ they are so now, therefore they were not always so. For Christ here plainly takes it for granted that the people of Jerusalem in the day of their visitation by the Messiah, might have savingly known the things belonging to their peace; since otherwise,
I know not how our Savior’s tears could be looked on as tears of charity and true compassion. And either his assertion, that they might have been happy, would have been contrary to truth; or his trouble, that they had not known the things belonging to their peace, must have been trouble contrary to the decree of his Father; both which are palpably absurd. And seeing the will of Christ was always the same with the will of the Father, it follows also that God the Father had the same charitable affection to them, and so had laid no bar against their happiness by a decree of preterition, or been wanting in any thing on his part requisite towards their everlasting welfare; and then it must be certain that an unfrustrable operation being not vouchsafed to convert them, it was not necessary to that end.
Of this we shall be more convinced, if we consider with what vehemence, and in what pathetic expressions God desires the obedience and reformation of his people. Thus when the Jews said to Moses, 'speak thou to us all that the Lord shall speak to thee, and we will hear it and do it;' (Deuteronomy 5:27-29)' God answers, 'they have well said all that they have spoken; (mi jitten) tis deoei Oh that there were such an heart in them that they would fear me and keep all my commandments -always!' Can it rationally be imagined that he himself, who so passionately desires they might have, and thus enquires who will give them this heart, should himself withhold from them what was absolutely requisite that they might have it? Could he approve their willingness to hear and do his commandments, and yet himself deny them grace or strength sufficient to perform them?
i " Who will give that there may be in them such an heart? is" says the bishop of Ely, "an expression of the most earnest desire; but withal signifies that if what he had done for them would not move them to fear and obey him, it was not possible to persuade them to it. Not but he could miraculously work upon them (by an irresistible or unfrustrable operation) says Maimonides and change their hearts, if he pleased, as he miraculously changed the nature of other things; but if this were God's will to deal with them after this fashion, there would have been no need to send a prophet to them, or to publish laws full of precepts and promises, rewards and punishments, by which, says He, God wrought upon their hearts, and not by his absolute omnipotence."
Again, can it enter into the heart of man to conceive this, — God was not so desirous of their reformation and obedience as to do all that was requisite on His part to procure it, and so to give them means sufficient for the performance of their duty, when after all His unsuccessful labors that it might be so, he breaks forth into such ardent wishes, ' O that my people had hearkened to me, and Israel had walked in my ways! Even that Israel whom, for rejecting me, I have now given up to her own heart's lusts; Oh that thou had hearkened to my commandments, says God to that obstinate people, whose neck was an iron sinew, unit their brow brass,'(Isaiah 48:4, 18)
Now can these expressions come from one who had from all eternity decreed their reprobation, and consequently the denial of means sufficient to enable them to do what he thus wishes they had done?
Can there be any doubt of the sincerity or ardency of Christ's desire of the welfare and salvation of the Jews when his eyes first wept over Jerusalem, arid then his mouth utters these words, ' Happy hadst thou been hadst thou known in this thy day the things belonging to thy peace; but now they are hid from thine eyes’ they are so now, therefore they were not always so. For Christ here plainly takes it for granted that the people of Jerusalem in the day of their visitation by the Messiah, might have savingly known the things belonging to their peace; since otherwise,
I know not how our Savior’s tears could be looked on as tears of charity and true compassion. And either his assertion, that they might have been happy, would have been contrary to truth; or his trouble, that they had not known the things belonging to their peace, must have been trouble contrary to the decree of his Father; both which are palpably absurd. And seeing the will of Christ was always the same with the will of the Father, it follows also that God the Father had the same charitable affection to them, and so had laid no bar against their happiness by a decree of preterition, or been wanting in any thing on his part requisite towards their everlasting welfare; and then it must be certain that an unfrustrable operation being not vouchsafed to convert them, it was not necessary to that end.
Comments