again, "Whosoever shall receive me, receiveth not me, but him that sent me." a So, in St. Luke; "Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me, but weep for yourselves"—that is, "weep rather for yourselves." Again, "Labour not for the meat that perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life"-that is, " labour not so much for the one as for the other;" or, "labour more for that which endureth unto everlasting life, than for that which perisheth." Once more; "He that believeth on me, believeth not on me, but on him that sent

C

But, besides this method of expressing a comparison by the form of antithesis, the Hellenistic sense, which is affixed to the verb rendered "hate," removes every objection, which might otherwise arise from an application of the ideas, which accompany it in our language, to the dispensations of the Almighty. The Hebrew verb, , has a much milder sense; being merely relative and implying a less degree of preference. As I have, in another place, entered fully into this qualified sense of the verb "hate" in scripture, I shall now only bring forward a very singular confirmation of it, which is found in the third chapter of the 2d Apocryphal book of Esdras. The Apocryphal books are often valuable for the sentiments they contain, but more especially for the illustration they supply to the language of the Canonical Books of the New Testament. Unfortunately, such

a Ch. ix. 37.

d Ch. xii. 44.

b Ch. xxiii. 28. c John, Ch. vi. 27.

e Sermon XXII. Vol. I.

use cannot be made to any great extent of that now referred to, because it is preserved in no Hebrew or Greek copy; but in a few Latin, and one Arabic version. From the general colour of the style as well as matter, I firmly believe that it was written by an Hellenizing Jew, a convert to Christianity, yet retaining a strong attachment to the Law. With all the disadvantages of its existence only in a Version, some light nevertheless is thrown upon passages in the Sacred Volume; and such, you will perceive, is distinctly reflected upon the text by that, which I am about to read to you. "Now when they lived so wickedly before thee, thou didst choose thee a man from among them, whose name was Abraham. Him thou lovedst, and unto him only thou shewedst thy will: and madest an everlasting covenant, promising him, that thou wouldest never forsake his seed. And unto him thou gavest Isaac, and unto Isaac also thou gavest Jacob and Esau. As for Jacob, thou didst choose him to thee, and put by Esau: and so Jacob became a great multitude.”a

In the verses following the text, and connected closely with its argument, there is an abruptness in the introduction of quotations from the Old Testament, and an obscurity in some of the expressions, which require the sense to be dilated by a paraphrase. "What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. For He saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will

a 2 Esdr. iii. 13.

have compassion. So then, it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. For the Scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth."

You will call to mind what has been already said upon the subject of this chapter. That subject is the call of the Gentiles into the church and kingdom of God. And the call is vindicated by an appeal to the uncontrollable power of the Almighty in disposing the affairs of this world, and making nations prosperous or otherwise according to his Sovereign pleasure. The Jews argued thus: "God promised Abraham to protect and favour his descendants. We are his descendants. Therefore God must protect and favour us." But said the Apostle, "All Abraham's descendants are not protected and favoured in the same way. Ishmael was driven out to make room for Isaac, and Esau was set aside for Jacob." "Still," rejoined the Jew, "we are actually His people; He cannot set us aside without injustice." To this sort of reasoning the Apostle is replying in the verses just read to you; and you will bear in mind that the rock, upon which so many have split in expounding this chapter, has been, applying to the future destiny of individuals arguments and expressions, which referred only to the present privileges and advantages of a community; chiefly no doubt of a spiritual nature, nevertheless temporal.

a See Taylor, p. 332.

b

The substance of the verses in question is this: "What shall we say then? Is there any injustice with God in choosing one people to Himself before another, according to His good pleasure? By no means". Is not His doing so very consistent with His own words to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy' &c. ? i. e. My pardoning and receiving this people again for my church, after their heinous act of idolatry, is what I am far from being obliged to. I forgive them by an act of my own sovereign authority over all people. You see then, this national privilege of the Jews or any other people being a peculiar church is disposed of in God's own way, and as He pleases. Neither the purpose of Isaac who designed it for Esau, and willed him to prepare himself for it; nor the endeavours of Esau, who ran to hunt for venison that he might come and receive it, could place on him the blessing; but the favour of being made in his posterity a great and prosperous nation, the peculiar people of God, in preference to those who should descend from his brother, was bestowed on Jacob by the mere bounty and good pleasure of God himself". And as God thus disposes of His favours to nations, so He orders punishments upon offenders according to His own good pleasure. He may punish or pardon, destroy sooner or later. This is exemplified in the case of Pharaoh and his people, to whom He thus spake after his long and incorrigible obstinacy. this cause have I raised thee up," &c. i. e. Whereas

66

indeed you deserve to have been long ago destroyed, yet it was my pleasure to defer it, and keep you for a more exemplary destruction; while, by the very same act of sovereign power, my favour may be more conspicuously shewn to the Israelites, whom I have chosen at this time to be my people."

This visitation of Divine displeasure upon Pharaoh is expressed in terms, which have occasioned some perplexity-and before I conclude this head, I will lay before you some observations of the sagacious Dr. Hey; and refer those, who wish to see the whole question sifted more fully, to an admirable discourse of our present diocesan". "God raised up Pharaoh in order to shew His power; the plain fact was, while Pharaoh was under the rod, under any of the plagues, he was humble and submissive; when they were remitted, he exalted himself, and grew arrogant again. But though in plain language he exalted himself, yet, when the transactions were considered as a part of God's government, the expression was, God exalted him, or raised him up; by allowing him that relaxation from punishment, which occasioned his insolence. And this was very suitable to Jewish phraseology. The effect of Pharaoh's insolence was, to make God's protection of the Israelites more striking, and much more celebrated than it would otherwise have been; which is, in like manner, as a part of Divine government, thus expressed, that my name may be declared throughout all the earth.""

a Pyle.

C

C

b Bp. Blomfield, Serm. VIII. Hey's Lectures, Vol. IV. p. 46. See Wesley on this chapter, v. 17.