A denial of all agency;--or an assertion of a world of agents that never act, but are always acted upon, and yet without any one being that acts;--this is the hybrid of Death and Sin, which throughout this letter is treated so amicably! Another fearful mistake, and which is the ground of the former, lies in conceding to the Materialist, 'explicite et implicite', that the [Greek: noumenon], the 'intelligibile', the 'ipseitas super sensibilis', of guilt is in time, and of time, and, consequently, a mechanism of cause and effect;--in other words, in confounding the [Greek: phainomena, ta rheonta, ta mae ontos onta],--all which belong to time, and cannot be even thought of except as effects necessarily predetermined by the precedent causes, (themselves in their turn effects of other causes),--with the transsensual ground or actual power.
After such admissions, no other possible defence can be made for Calvinism or any other 'ism' than the wretched recrimination: "Why, yours, Dr.Priestley, is just as bad!"-- Yea, and no wonder:--for in essentials both are the same.

But there was no reason for Fuller's meddling with the subject at all,--metaphysically, I mean.
Ib.p.

95.
If the unconditionality of election render it unfriendly to virtue, it must be upon the supposition of that view of things, "which attributes more to God, and less to man," having such ascendancy; which is the very reverse of what Dr.Priestley elsewhere teaches, and that in the same performance.
But in both systems, as Fuller has erroneously stated his own, man is annihilated.

There is neither more nor less; it is all God; all, all are but 'Deus infinite modificatus':--in brief, both systems are not Spinosism, for no other reason than that the logic and logical consequency of 10 Fullers + 10 X 10 Dr.Priestleys, piled on each other, would not reach the calf of Spinoza's leg.

Both systems of necessity lead to Spinosism, nay, to all the horrible consequences attributed to it by Spinoza's enemies.