God has "chosen us in Christ before the foundation of the world that we should be holy and without blame before him in love; having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself according to the good pleasure of his will." * * * "Having made known unto us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself; that in the dispensation of the fullness of times, he might gather together, in one, all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on earth, even in him." Some apply the above to the elect. But it embraces all things in heaven and earth, which are to be gathered together in Christ, and be new creatures. In addition to this we will introduce two more passages "Who hath saved us, and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began." "In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began." In these scriptures we are assured _first_, that God chose us in Christ, before the foundation of the world--_second_, that he saved us according to his own purpose and grace before the world began, and _third_ that he promised eternal life before the world began. These things being embraced in his original plan, and purpose, their performance is therefore certain as that the whole plan of God will be carried unto execution. There is, in my humble opinion, a strange inconsistency in the common doctrine. They contend that on account of the transgression of our first parent, all mankind were fallen creatures and even came into existence totally depraved. To show the justice of God in the constitution of our nature, they contend that Adam was our covenant head, and had he maintained his original purity, we would also have stood perfect in holiness, and no one would have had any reason to complain. Now since Adam has fallen, and involved us in ruin, it is equally just in God that we should share the fate of our covenant head in the one instance as in the other. But if we make use of this same argument in relation to Christ, the second Adam--if we contend that he was the covenant head of every man, that the covenant was not made for _this_, but for the _future_ world--that this covenant of grace being made between the Father and the Son, was to stand independent of man-- that eternal life was promised and given us in him before the world began--that as our covenant head, he resisted all temptations, and perfectly fulfilled the law--that he died, and appeared alive beyond the tomb free from temptation, and in a holy and immortal constitution. If we contend for this, making use of their own arguments, saying that it is just as rational that we should appear in the image of Christ in the future world as that we should come into this world in the image of Adam, they will pronounce the argument so