Rowland Hill was criticized for preaching election and yet exhorting sinners to repent, and was told that he should preach only to the elect. He replied that, if his critic would put a chalk‐mark on all the elect, he would preach only to them. But this is not the whole truth. We are not only ignorant who God’s elect are, but we are set to preach to both elect and non‐elect (_Ez. 2:7_—“_thou shalt speak my words unto them, whether they will hear, or whether they will forbear_”), with the certainty that to the former our preaching will make a higher heaven, to the latter a deeper hell (_2 Cor. 2:15, 16_—“_For we are a sweet savor of Christ unto God, in them that are saved, and in them that perish; to the one a savor from death unto death; to the other a savor from life unto life_”; _cf._ _Luke 2:34_—“_this child is set for the falling and the rising of many in Israel_”—for the falling of some, and for the rising up of others). Jesus’ own thanksgiving in _Mat. 11:25, 26_—“_I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou didst hide these things from the wise and understanding, and didst reveal them unto babes: yea, Father, for so it was well‐pleasing in thy sight_”—is immediately followed by his invitation in _verse 28_—“_Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest._” There is no contradiction in his mind between sovereign grace and the free invitations of the gospel. G. W. Northrup, in The Standard, Sept. 19, 1889—“1. God will save every one of the human race whom he can save and remain God; 2. Every member of the race has a full and fair probation, so that all might be saved and would be saved were they to use aright the light which they already have.”... (Private letter): “Limitations of God in the bestowment of salvation: 1. In the power of God in relation to free will; 2. In the benevolence of God which requires the greatest good of creation, or the greatest aggregate good of the greatest number; 3. In the purpose of God to make the most perfect self‐limitation; 4. In the sovereignty of God, as a prerogative absolutely optional in its exercise; 5. In the holiness of God, which involves immutable limitations on his part in dealing with moral agents. Nothing but some absolute impossibility, metaphysical or moral, could have prevented him ’whose nature and whose name is love’ from decreeing and securing the confirmation of all moral agents in holiness and blessedness forever.” (_g_) The decree of election implies a decree of reprobation.—Answer: The decree of reprobation is not a positive decree, like that of election, but a permissive decree to leave the sinner to his self‐chosen rebellion and its natural consequences of punishment.