SERM. In answer to this, it is fcarce needful to XII. obferve, that the command was never executed, nor intended, on God's part, to be executed. This (though perhaps, if duly confidered, it might be of fome fervice in the case, as expreffing plainly a diflike, and not any approbation of human facrifices, yet) will not fufficiently fatisfy the objection: for, if the thing were evil in itself, it is not very material how far Abraham proceeded; it wrought in him the same vigorous refolution of mind, as if he had actually flain his fon, and therefore, if this had been a fin, the other must be so too, Here then we must deny the fuppofition, we must deny that it had been any fin in Abraham to have flain his fon, if the fame authority that enjoined, had not afterwards reftrained him.

The law of nature may be pleaded in the cafe But, for this we must look up to the Author of nature, God Almighty, who has an undoubted right and fovereignty over all his creatures. He who made them at first out of nothing, may put them afterwards in what ftate he pleases; and it is both juft and reasonable, that he who gave man life to improve it to his glory, fhould take it away again, when, and in what manner, his infinite wifdom fhall fee moft convenient; for he has an abfolute power and authority over all his creatures, antecedent

and fuperior to the law of nature, and in SER M. which the law of nature is itself founded, XII. fince we cannot poffibly find out any other adequate rule or measure of our duty but the Will of God.

And therefore, if we seriously examine the cafe, we shall find it to be equally just with him to take men away, whether by fudden death or by a lingering sickness; whether by what we call a natural, or by what we call a violent death; by the fecret workings and management of his Providence, or by authorizing fome men as the more open executioners of his judgments upon others.

And, though there had been a pofitive law, given to the fame purpose with the law of nature, forbidding murder to the fons of Noah, and declaring that whofoever fhould bed man's blood, by man should bis blood be fhed; yet, is not the reason still the fame? Is not God fuperior to the law, and free from all exterior obligations, being only determined by the happy neceffity of his nature, which is infinitely pure? The law was given for a rule and measure of our actions, who are under government, but not of his, who is fupream and absolute. When he fufpends the law, our obligation ceafes, fince all the obligation which the law can have, muft be derived from

him.

Not

SERM. Not that God's laws are perpetually alXII. terable and merely arbitrary: His nature neceffarily determines him to what is juft and good, and therefore it is obfervable in this and the like inftances, that the action enjoined does not imply any necessary turpitude or impurity with refpect to the Agent, which would be the case of adultery and intemperance, nor any defect of duty to our Creator, which would be the cafe of idolatry or blafphemy, but only fomething which concerns the perfon or property of another, where all the obligation ceases as foon as the Divine command intervenes; fince no man can have property against God, but our lives and fortunes are entirely in his hands, and at his difpofal...

And, though it would be inconfiftent with the perfect purity of the Divine nat ture, entirely to reverse those laws by which our rights are determined, and fo leave men at liberty to destroy and murder one another; yet, the cafe is very different, when God only gives fome one man a fpecial.commiflion to take away the life of fome other, which he might otherwife juftly, do in the courfe of his Providence, leaving the law, as to all other purposes, in full force, and giving no man fcope to violate it at his pleafure. And thus far of the Cafe of Abraham. Of the like kind is the

Second

Second inftance which comes now to be SERM. confidered, namely, that of the Ifraelites XII. in Egypt, who, before their leaving of that country, were directed to borrow many things of the Egyptians, without any purpofe of repaying them. For fo we read, Exod. xi. 2. that God ordered every man of the Ifraelites to borrow of his Egyptian neighbour, and every woman of her neighbour jewels of filver, and jewels of gold; which, we find by the chapter following, they obeyed accordingly *; and God gave them fuch favour in the fight of the Egyp tians, that they lent unto them whatsoever they required, and all this was meant for no other purpose but to spoil the Egyptians and enrich themselves; for they went away with the things which they had thus borrowed, and never thought themselves obliged to restore them to their former ownThis plainly was no rash action of the Ifraelites, nor owing to their hafte or forgetfulness, but deliberately forecasted and refolved upon, and warranted by a Divine command.

ers.

In answer to this, it might be
The

to observe, &c.

proper

Third inftance to be confidered, is that

Exod. xii. 35, 36.

of

The Answer to this being moftly the fame with what has been set down before, by way of reply to an

objec

SERM. of Shimei, in the xvith chapter of the fe XII. cond Book of Samuel, who, having uttered bitter imprecations against David, his rightful King and Sovereign, would have been flain for it by Abishai, but that King David himfelf reftrained him with this fmart reproof, What have I to do with you, ye fons of Zeruiah, fo let him curfe, becaufe the Lord hath faid unto him, Curfe David: Who then fhall fay, wherefore haft thou done fo? Now, it is moft apparent, that for a fubject to curfe, or offer any violence to his king is a direct breach of duty, and a transgreffion of the precepts of nature as well as Revelation. And yet David tells us, that Shimei was enjoined to curfe him by his great Creator.

But, for a full folution of this difficulty, let it be confidered,

(1.) That David fpake not this in the capacity of a Prophet, but in the defponding circumstances of one in diftrefs. "Tis natural and common for men under affliction, to be toffed with much doubt and uncertainty between the extremes of hope and defpair, fometimes to aggravate every circumstance, and double their misfortune by the view in which they reprefent it; as well as, at other times, to catch at every

objection of like kind, in the foregoing Difcourfe on Rom. xiii. 8. The Reader is referred to that, to avoid repetition. See page 245.