in the instances on which the objection is founded, this appears to have been remarkably the case. They were indeed judgments which had been mercifully protracted. Thus we read that the possession of the promised land by Abraham or his posterity, was deferred for several generations, because "the iniquity of the Amorites was not yet full;"* although there is no reason to believe from this expression, as well as from other circumstances, that their sins were then very great.

This is further elucidated by the command given to the Israelites, to abstain from many evil practices, (some of them of the grossest kind,) of which the nations whom they were to expel were guilty. These Moses plainly mentions as the cause of their expulsion; warning the Israelites at the same time against similar conduct, which would produce similar judgments : “Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things; for in all these the nations. are defiled, which I cast out before you. And the land is defiled; therefore I do visit the iniquity thereof upon it; and the land itself vomiteth out her inhabitants. Ye shall

* Gen. xv. 16.

therefore keep my statutes and my judgments, and shall not commit any of these abominations; that the land spue not you out also, when ye defile it, as it spued out the nations that were before you.'

This subject is also placed in a clear and forcible point of view by the remonstrance of Moses, as related in the ninth chapter of Deuteronomy; where, after cautioning the people against any presumptuous conceits of their own merits, he expressly says to them: "Not for thy righteousness, or for the uprightness of thy heart, dost thou go to possess their land; but for the wickedness of these nations, the Lord thy God doth drive them out from before thee."+

The case of Agag has also been brought forward to support the objection, which we have now under consideration; but in this instance, we have again a cause assigned for the judgment executed: "As thy sword hath made women childless, so shall thy mother be childless among women." From this expression there is reason to suppose, that Agag had been remarkable for his violence and cruelty, which justly brought this judgment upon him.

*Lev. xviii. 24-26, 23. + Deut. ix. 5. 1 Sam. xv. 33.

It has been alleged, that these pretensions to Divine commands were only a cloak for ambition and cruelty. But this cannot reasonably be supposed to be the case, when it is considered that these judgments were not confined to the heathen nations; but that similar ones were also threatened and executed upon the Israelites themselves. Although they were a people distinguished by many peculiar favours; yet, when they departed from the law and commandment of their God, and degenerated into idolatry and wickedness, they became the subjects of Divine retribution. Thus the prophet Isaiah expostulates with them: "Who gave Jacob for a spoil, and Israel to the robbers? Did not the Lord, He against whom we have sinned? For they would not walk in his ways, neither were they obedient unto his law; therefore He hath poured upon him the fury of his anger, and the strength of battle."* Even Moses, their leader in these supposed schemes of ambition, denounced, in the most ample manner, the judgments, which would be the consequence of their disobedience to the law of their God.-See Lev. xxvi, 14, &c. Deut. xxviii. 15, &c.

*Isaiah xlii. 24, 25.

When we consider the peculiar humility and disinterestedness of Moses, in refusing to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter; in the great reluctance with which he accepted the government of the Israelites; in preferring their forgiveness and preservation to his own aggrandizement, or that of his family; and in the sin gular liberality which he manifested, when Eldad and Medad were complained of for prophesying in the camp: when these circumstances are considered, there seems no ground whatever to suspect Moses of either ambition or cruelty. We perceive, on the contrary, the propriety of the distinguished character given of him, most probably by some pious transcriber of the Pentateuch: "Now the man Moses was very meek, above all the men which lived on the face of the earth."*

In considering the various circumstances connected with this subject, there appears to be abundant cause to acknowledge that the Lord's ways are equal; and that those judgments upon the Canaanites were not the exercise of a capricious severity; but were administered under circumstances, which perfectly

* Numbers xii. 3.

reconcile them to those principles of justice and mercy, which we consider among the most dis-" tinguished attributes of the Deity. And though, in many instances, the innocent may seem to suffer equally with the guilty; yet this is no more than is generally the case in other public calamities. Even in those most remarkable ones, the universal deluge, and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, many innocent children must have suffered with their guilty parents. In considering these cases, we should remember, that whatever public afflictions may be directed for the punishment of nations, it is to a future life that we must look for the grand distinction between individuals; when "God will render to every man according to his deeds."*

If some of those who, with myself, consider war altogether inconsistent with the Christian dispensation, should argue from the unchangeableness of the Divine nature, that the Almighty could not allow of, or enjoin practices, in one age, which are inconsistent in another; it may and ought to be observed, that in his dispensations to mankind, great variety is evident; and many things which were not only allowed, but

* Rom. ii. 6.

C