actual operation; and that the Saviour of mankind should also give, according to every legitimate interpretation that can be put, either upon his language or his conduct, his unqualified approbation to that which was so flatly opposed to all his doctrines!
It is saying but little of all this to affirm that it is grossly absurd!
It can appeal to no doctrine that we are aware of for its defence, unless it be the kindred absurdity that the will of God
is not the rule of right, in this sense, that it always conforms to that which, in itself, is right
, i. e., good; but that it is the rule of right in this other sense, that it is absolutely, in itself, the only rule of right; and that, in the case under consideration, domestic slavery was right for the Jews, because God so willed it, but the same thing in principle, and under similar circumstances, would be wrong for any other people, because in regard to them God had willed differently: thus assigning to Deity the power to make the wrong the right, and the right the wrong
! We regret to know that this absurd view of the Divine volitions has found its way beyond the pages of Dr. Paley
It is countenanced by some writers of eminent distinction in theology.
But to give it a definite application in any case, is all that is required for its entire refutation.
We rely with confidence on the conclusion that what God thus provided for in