;J^>57orPR!A^ 
 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2009 with funding from 
 
 Princeton Theological Seminary Library 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/dialoguesonuniveOOthom 
 
DIALOGUES 
 
 UNIVERSAL SALVATION, 
 
 AND 
 
 TOPICS CONNECTED THEREWITH. 
 
 BY 
 
 DAVID THOM, 
 
 MINISTER OF BOLD STREET CHAPEL, LIVERPOOL; 
 
 AITHOR OF "the assurance OF FAITH, Oil CALVINISM IDENTIFIED WITH 
 
 UMVERSALISM," "THREE QUESTIONS PROPOSED AND ANSWERED;" 
 
 ETC, ETC; CORRESPONDING SECRETARY FOR ENGLAND TO 
 
 THE AMERICAN UNIVERSALIST HISTORICAL SOCIETY; 
 
 ETC. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 SIMPKIN AND MARSHALL: 
 
 LIVERPOOL: GEORGE PHILIP. 
 MDCCCXXXVIII. 
 
LIVERPOOL : 
 
 KIDDICK AND KERH, PRINTERS, 
 BRUNSWICK STREET. 
 
 ^^ 
 
EPISTLE PREFATORY. 
 
 TO 
 
 ROBERT THOM Esq., 
 MERCHANT AT CANTON, 
 
 IN THE 
 
 EMPIRE OF CHINA. 
 
 My truly dear brother, 
 
 It will occasion you doubtlessly no small degree of sur- 
 prise, to have your ordinary avocations broken in upon by 
 an address of this public nature. And, if surprised at 
 the address itself, how much more so at the conspicuous 
 part which, unwittingly, you have been made to play 
 throughout the following pages. 
 
 The fact is, that having for some time past contem- 
 plated the publication of a volume, which should treat of 
 certain momentous topics of a religious kind, not often 
 made the subject matter of discussion ; and having con- 
 ceived that, by adopting the form of dialogue, I was more 
 
IV. EPISTLE PREFATORY. 
 
 likely to excite interest aud make myself understood, than 
 were I to have recourse to a more didactic method of com- 
 position; the only real difficulty of any consequence 
 which I encountered, was in fixing upon the parties who 
 -should be brought forward as my speakers. To the use 
 of fictitious names, I felt strongly disinclined. The The- 
 rons and Aspasios, the Philalethes's, the Theophilus's, 
 and the Biblicus's, of a former day, did not happen to suit 
 my taste. Real personages were what 1 wanted. But 
 why violate the truth of history, by representing the illus- 
 trious dead as acquiescing in sentiments, which, in their 
 time, had not been broached ; or to which, as we gather 
 from their writings, their minds were adverse ? And what 
 right had I, without consulting tliem, to introduce living 
 characters as a portion of my machinery ? Tliis was some- 
 what puzzling. At last it struck me, that I might, not 
 only without offence, but even in such a way as to testify 
 affection and respect, bring you on the stage as one of my 
 interlocutors. And this being once resolved on, anoma- 
 lous as the procedure may appear to be, — indeed, amount- 
 ing as it does to a practical bull, — it was farther deter- 
 mined, that tlie conversations should be carried on by you 
 with myself. Tlie author of the ivhole was thus to pre- 
 sent himself to liis readers as merely the author of a part. 
 Conceiving as I do, that I am in possession of views 
 of religion of a more-than-usually important kind ; and 
 that I am capable of maintaining these against all oppo- 
 sition ; I have certainly acted the part of a superior and a 
 teacher throughout these dialogues. You, therefore, are 
 made to yield. By the arguments which I employ and 
 enforce, you allow yourself ultimately to be overcome. 
 
EPISTLE PREFATORY. V. 
 
 But have I, ou that account, assigned to you a trifliug 
 part ? Have I represented you as urging objections, of 
 th« weakness and inapplicability of which you could have 
 reason to be ashamed ? With such treatment of you, I 
 cannot charge myself. So far from putting intd your 
 mouth feeble and ineffective arguments and objections, 
 merely that I might exhibit my prowess in demolishing 
 them, I have not allowed you to express a single sentiment 
 of which the most intelligent ordinary professors of reli- 
 gion would not unhesitatingly avail themselves. Nay, in 
 opposing me, the views and notions to which you are made 
 to give utterance, are such as in the works, and from the 
 lips, of such characters one is in the constant habit of 
 reading and listening to. But while I employed you as 
 an adversary, I had to remember that you are, what among 
 the religious par excellence it is somewhat rare to meet 
 with, a candid man. Therefore it is, that you are never 
 made to carry your opposition beyond the bounds pre- 
 scribed by fair and legitimate argumentation. You are 
 never represented as violating conscience. On the con- 
 trary, I have sometimes made use of you, after being your- 
 self convinced, to assist me in explaining and enforcing 
 some of those blessed truths, which it is the grand object 
 of this book to bring under public notice. Whenever it 
 appeared to me, that a somewhat less candid and enlight- 
 ened controversialist than yourself was required to the 
 working of my plans, an imaginary Friend has been called 
 on to supply the desideratum. By the introduction of this 
 personage, besides, I have ensured a little more variety, 
 as well as a more thorough sifting and development of my 
 religious system, than if the conversations had been limited 
 to ourselves. 
 
VI. EPISTLE PREFATORY. 
 
 I could have wished to connect your name with some 
 work of greater magnitude and more consequence, than 
 even the following. It is not mere fraternal affection, I 
 trust, which suggests to me, that you are worthy of the 
 highest literary oflFering which it is in my power to present. 
 And still more important works than this have been plan- 
 ned, and partly executed by me. But why delay, until I 
 can prepare and publish them ? Besides the res angnsla 
 domi, and many other circumstances which poor authors 
 ate obliged to take into account in bringing their compo- 
 sitions before the public, can I forget the shortness and 
 uncertainty of human life, and the risque of postponed 
 intentions never being executed ? Life is fertile in pro- 
 jects, and in the glowing and glorious anticipations of 
 future doings, with which, in quick and constant succes- 
 sion, it contrives to enchant the mental eye :— 
 
 Life is a looking forward from the day 
 Of being's dawn, tlie infancy of thought ; 
 While fancy's brightest visions round us play, 
 And all the path looks fair, and fraught 
 With full-blown promises ; 
 
 But death too often steps in most unceremoniously to 
 interrupt and disappoint them; or, in the somewhat quaint 
 language of the sweet poem from which the above extract 
 has been taken. 
 
 Death records the flight of time, its doom. 
 
 And frames its epitaph, that tells the blast 
 
 All we can say of gone mortality, " 'Tis past."* 
 
 Desirous, therefore, to avoid adding mine to the stock of 
 * unfulfilled intentions,' — a species of commodity with 
 which, according to a certain puritanical writer, a place 
 which shall be nameless ^is paved,' — I have resolved to 
 
 * Angel Tlsi/s, by James Riddall Wood. Canto 2d. 
 
EPISTLE PREFATORY. Vli. 
 
 * take time by the forelock' ; and, however unworthy these 
 pages in many respects may be of your acceptance, to 
 effect, in as far as I am able, an inseparable connection 
 between your name and them. 
 
 You understand, then, my dear Robert, that besides your 
 being introduced as one of the principal speakers in the 
 following work, to you the work itself is dedicated. With 
 all its sins and imperfections on its head, it is put under 
 and claims your patronage. 
 
 Lest any should be stupid or perverse enough, notwith- 
 standing the declaimer which I have already made, to 
 suppose that the whole, or any portion, of the language 
 and sentiments imputed to you in this publication is yours, 
 I beg leave, in the most distinct manner possible, to un- 
 deceive them. In so far as you are a spokesman in these 
 dialogues, you are the mere creature of my imagination. 
 The ideas presented throughout are mine, not yours. For 
 them I, not you, am responsible. It is true, that, in former 
 days, before your first voyage to South America, we did 
 hold frequent conversations on the subject of religion; and 
 I almost think, that some of the matters treated of in the 
 first dialogue were, on more than one occasion, considered 
 and discussed by us. You were then very young; and, 
 without sacrificing in the slightest degree that independ- 
 ence of thought and character by which you have all along 
 been distinguished, you were pleased to attach an import- 
 ance to many of my views and statements, which was 
 exceedingly flattering to me. Still, I cannot charge my 
 memory with your having ever expressed yourself as, for 
 my own purposes, I have here represented you as doing. 
 One thing I know, that, at the period alluded to, the all- 
 
VUl, EPISTLE PREFATORY. 
 
 important topics treated of in the second and following 
 dialogues, had not even occurred to my mind. Respect- 
 ing them, therefore, there neither was, nor could have 
 heen, any intercourse between you and me. But a truce 
 to all this. Without any farther preface, I interpose my- 
 self between you and all the shafts of criticism. If there 
 is any fault to be found with either the matter, or the 
 manner, of these dialogues, against me, and me only, let 
 the censure be directed. 
 
 Me, me; adsum qui feci; in me convertite fernim. 
 
 You are in no respect whatever to blame. You were igno- 
 rant of the intended publication of the work; you are, up to 
 this moment, a perfect stranger to most of the sentiments 
 which it contains; you are innocent of any guilt which may 
 be conceived to attach to the leading doctrines which it ad- 
 vocates. In so far as these dialogues are concerned, I am 
 the only party to whom the critic has any thing to say, 
 and with whom he has any thing to do. The announcing 
 of the author as one of the interlocutors, at the commence- 
 ment of every dialogue, has been done of set purpose : it 
 being hoped tliat thereby all mistakes will be obviated, 
 and the circumstance of the whole having proceeded from 
 myself be kept constantly and prominently before the 
 reader's mind. 
 
 As to the assaults of criticism upon myself, J neither 
 court nor deprecate them. To me, the language of re- 
 viewers, whether making a profession of religion or the 
 reverse, is now very nearly a matter of indifference. This 
 I say, without any affectation. There was a time when, 
 owing to the natural constitution of my mind, the flattery 
 or the censures of magazines and reviews would have pro- 
 
EPISTLE PREFAI'ORY. IX. 
 
 duced a considerable effect upon my feelings. But that 
 period is long since gone past. The neglect, if not con- 
 tempt, which I have experienced at the hands of " the 
 gentle craft," with respect to some former honest and well- 
 meant endeavours to obtrude on the public notice views 
 which I know to be true, and which strike me as involv- 
 ing consequences of supreme importance, has tended to- 
 wards curing, if it has not actually cured, my expecta- 
 tions from the world. *' The disciple," I perceive, must be 
 content " to be like his master;" " the servant, to be like 
 his Lord." If religious statements be brought down and ac- 
 commodated to the mere fleshly mind, and its apprehen- 
 sions of divine things, — well. Physical and metaphysical 
 theories of a present or a future state, however foolish 
 when considered in a scriptural point of view, will, on the 
 ground of the acknowledged genius and worldly attain- 
 ments of their respective authors, be received gladly. 2 
 Corinthians xi. 19. But woe be to him, who, whatever 
 be the strength or feebleness of his intellect — whatever be 
 his ability or lack of ability — attempts to treat of and ex- 
 liibit the truth of God, in its native, spiritual, and glorious 
 simplicity. Such an one will speedily, in the neglect, the 
 insolence, or the avowed contempt of the literary demi- 
 gods of the day, be furnished with a practical comment on 
 the revealed inability of the mere fleshly mind, however 
 strong and capacious otherwise, to understand and relish 
 spiritual things. 1 Corinth: ii. 14. To treatment of the 
 kind alluded to, you are well aware that for years I have 
 been subjected, As the reward of earnest desires, and 
 repeated attempts, to draw the attention of professing 
 Christians to simpler and more self-consistent views of the 
 
X. EPISTLE PREFATORY. 
 
 scriptures than those which are commonly entertained, I 
 have been loaded with imputations of heresy, kicked out 
 of an established church, shunned by dissenters, condemned 
 by the Pharisaical, laughed at by the Sadducean, and con- 
 sidered a fitting object of neglect by all. Those produc- 
 tions of mine, in which, without affecting any false mo- 
 desty, I can say with truth, that I have brought out views 
 of a spiritual kind much superior to the clearest and the 
 best-digested of those which pass current in the world, 
 have not been deemed worthy even of a notice the most 
 contemptuous. This present work, therefore, like some 
 of its predecessors, is publislied without any great expect- 
 ation on my part of its attracting regard, and in some 
 measure careless whether it do so or not. Looking upon 
 myself as, like every other human being, a mere instru- 
 ment in the hands of Jehovah, I avail myself of every 
 opportunity which, in the course of his adorable provi- 
 dence, he may vouchsafe to me, of drawing attention to 
 those glorious discoveries of heavenly truth, of which, 
 from time to time, my own spiritually-enlightened con- 
 science has been made the passive recipient. Freely I 
 have received ; freely I give. The world in general, the 
 great, the learned, and the talented, but more especially 
 the nominally pious, will continue to treat me and my 
 sentiments with contempt. But what of that? They 
 cannot hinder one of the designs of God from being ac- 
 complished. To me it is matter of absolute certainty, that 
 with a view to some end or purpose, however trifling and 
 insignificant in the eyes of the world, the publication of 
 these dialogues must have been permitted to take place. 
 And if a few individuals, obscure and despised like the 
 
EPISTLE PREFATORY. XI. 
 
 author himself — a few of those hahes and sucklings out of 
 whose mouths their lieavenly father is pleased to ordain 
 strength — -shall derive the slightest spiritual benefit from 
 their perusal ; if thereby to them Christ and his salvation 
 shall be rendered more precious ; can a higher or more 
 important object be, by the child of God, conceived of, and 
 be, by the divine blessing, attained to ? 
 
 Observe, my dear brother, I am not complaining. Indeed, 
 I have no reason to do so. Independently of spiritual 
 considerations altogether, the kindness of friends, and the 
 wide circulation given to my books in spite of the silence 
 of reviewers, have been most encouraging. While thus 
 made instrumental in communicating benefit to some, why 
 should I discontinue my literary labours ? But success in 
 publishing is, comparatively speaking, a paltry considera- 
 tion. Nay, rejoicing in it would, under my circumstances, 
 be the indulgence of a splenetic, not of a Christian feeling. 
 The grand reason why I complain not is, that complaints 
 with regard to the treatment which he experiences from 
 the world, come with a very bad grace from a child of God. 
 Let me never forget, that Cain was the elder brother, and 
 Abel merely the younger. For in this, as in other cases 
 of a similar kind, that was not first which is spiritual, 
 but that which is natural. As the elder, and as possessed 
 consequently of the natural birthright, to Cain and to his 
 seed belong the good things of this world, as their portion 
 and inheritance. It is the inheritance of the saints in light, 
 — the inheritance thatfadeth not away, — which has been as- 
 signed to Abel, and to those who by faith are one with him. 
 This being the case, why should I, as a believer, expect 
 
 or claim from God benefits which, to the men of the world, 
 
 b 
 
XU. EPISTLE PREFATORY. 
 
 he expressly declares himself to have made over, and which 
 to them, therefore, rightfully belong ? Why should I 
 grudge them their portion ? Why should I complain that it 
 is not mine? Have they not a full and unquestionable right 
 to the pleasures, comforts, and advantages of time ; and 
 what right have I to interfere with them in the enjoyment 
 of these ? No. I do not complain. Flesh and blood, it 
 is true, — my nature as a man, — shrinks back from suffer- 
 ings and ill-usage at the hands of a world that lieth in 
 wickedness. But as a partaker of the earnest of the divine 
 nature of Christ, I reproach them not ; I return not evil 
 for evil ; I wait with patience for the resurrection of the 
 just. Luke xiv. 14. 
 
 Well am I aware, that, in the present volume, consid- 
 ered merely in a literary point of view, there is mucli for 
 criticism to fasten on. Its structure, its arrangement, its 
 composition, are far, far indeed, from being faultless. To 
 save trouble, I am ready to admit the severest indictment 
 against it, which it may please the man of taste and re- 
 fined intellect to draw up. Does he indulge in the lan- 
 guage of disparagement ? I more. Its style, I grant, is 
 dull, laboured, irregular, involved and unclassical. As 
 to matter, it abounds with repetitions. There is scarcely 
 any thing in it of the smartness and flippancy of fashion- 
 able conversation. And there is a value attached by the 
 author to doctrines, which, in the estimate of the world, does 
 not belong to doctrinal subjects at all ; and which, accord- 
 ing to ordinary professors of religion, belongs to views and 
 sentiments of a totally different description. Well : as to 
 all these and similar points, the recorded plea of the au- 
 thor is guilli/. On such grounds, he acknowledges him- 
 
EPISTLE PREFATORY. XIU. 
 
 self to lie open to censure. And what is his justification ? 
 Or has he any ? Why, he declares, that his grand, he 
 might almost say, his exclusive ohject has been, to excite 
 interest in the topics of which he treats, and to make him- 
 self understood ; and that, if in the attainment of this ob- 
 ject he shall have been successful, it will give him little or 
 no concern to find, that his style is chargeable with sole- 
 cisms and his matter with redundancy. If rendered the 
 blessed instrument of drawing attention to divine truth, he 
 will sit with perfect ease and composure under the impu- 
 tation of having assigned a disproportionate share of im- 
 portance to the subjects which he discusses. A few 
 obscure individuals, a single person, roused by his efforts 
 to investigation into the scriptures themselves, and enabled 
 to shake off the fetters of a spurious theology, constitutes 
 his reward. It is to excite in some the suspicion, that 
 there may be more in the sacred volume tlian either they 
 or their religious guides have ever yet dreamed of, that 
 has been his main object in this, as well as in all his otlier 
 publications. Are any, by his means, led on in their spir- 
 itual researches? Are any, by his means, induced and 
 enabled to assert that liberty from the thraldom of human 
 ignorance and error in regard to divine things, wherewith 
 Christ maketh his followers free ? His end, in that case, 
 is answered. To increase the love of the members of the 
 church for the scriptures being his object, he leaves to 
 others the endeavour to attach importance to themselves 
 and their productions. Quitting the use of the third, and 
 resuming that of the first person singular, I observe, that 
 much of what in the subsequent pages may carry with it 
 the aspect of deformity in matter and manner, is actually 
 
XIV. EPISTLE PREFATORY. 
 
 intentional. I repeat in a following dialogue, what has 
 been alluded to or even partially treated of in a preceding 
 one, wherever and whenever I think, that repetition is ne- 
 cessary and may be had recourse to with advantage. I 
 often of set purpose, and curiously, construct my sentences 
 after the fashion in Avhich they make their appearance, 
 wherever and whenever I conceive, that the ends of pre- 
 cision and perspicuity are most likely to be promoted 
 thereby. Intelligibility, and a desire cautiously and accu- 
 rately to define my terms on a subject where writers can- 
 not be too exact, far more than a regard to the claims of 
 elegance, have guided my pen in the composition of the 
 present work. Not that I have intentionally violated the 
 laws and domains of Priscian, or wilfully set myself in 
 opposition to classical authority. But style has been with 
 me an exceedingly subordinate consideration. Language 
 is merely my instrument for bringing under the notice of 
 fellow believers truths of the most momentous description ; 
 and never, therefore, can T persuade myself to become its 
 slave. 
 
 And now, Robert, let me turn to you, and to your con- 
 cerns. Of myself and of mine, I have already said enough, 
 and more than enough. Your progress in the acquisition 
 of the Chinese language, and in the opening up of those 
 stores of peculiar and recondite literature over which its 
 strange characters and mystic constructions have hitherto 
 thrown an almost impenetrable veil, have, you may be 
 sure, been productive in my mind of no ordinary degree 
 of gratification. Regularly and carefully are the columns 
 of the Canton Register searched by me. Often liave I 
 been amused, and always delighted and instructed, by the 
 
EPISTLE PREFATORY. XV. 
 
 letters and other communications of " Sloth" and " Dust 
 and Ashes."* The fact of your having heen able, in the 
 absence of those eminent scholars and Sinalogues, Messrs. 
 Gutzlaflf and Morrison, to conduct satisfactorily in the 
 Peking or court dialect, in behalf of a friend, the pleadings 
 in a cause tried before a tribunal of Mandarins, of itself 
 speaks volumes as to the progress which, in so short a pe- 
 riod,f you must have made in the acquisition of the most 
 singular, difficult, and repulsive of all known tongues. 
 Your praiseworthy devotion of your leisure moments, to 
 the comparatively humble task of compiling a vocabulary 
 of the Peking dialect, and also an elementary work for 
 teaching Englishmen at the same time the Peking and 
 Canton dialects, deeply interests me. This *' labour of 
 love" will not, I hope, interfere with your continuing those 
 translations from the Chinese poets, which must have been 
 to you a source of so much delight, and which indicate 
 such amazing proficiency in your Oiiental studies. Made 
 novd virtute, puer. The leading difficulties being sur- 
 mounted, the way to the inmost penetralia — the adyta — of 
 Chinese literature, now, I presume, lies invitingly open 
 before you. 
 
 When, if ever, my dear brother, shall we meet again ? 
 Shall we ever behold each other Jace to face again, while 
 sojourners in mortal flesh ? Are immense tracts of unex- 
 plored country, and wide intervening oceans, always to 
 separate us during the remainder of our brief and fitful 
 earthly career ; and always to keep you from the embraces 
 
 •Signatures adopted by Mr. R. Thom in his conespondence with the Editor of 
 the Canton Register. 
 
 f About three years and a half; chiefly spent in mercantile pursuits. 
 
XVI. EPISTLE PREFATORY. 
 
 of au aged and respected parent ? Questions like these 
 often occur to puzzle me, and cast a damp over my spi- 
 rits. Emotions springing from reflections of a similar 
 kind frequently, I have no doubt, agitate your own bo- 
 som. And who will venture to prognosticate the issue ? 
 Blessed be that God, who, hiding the future from the pry- 
 ing and curious eye of man, hath, in mercy to us his crea- 
 tures, reserved the times and the seasons in his own hands. 
 To have been able to look forward through the vista of 
 future life, and to foresee and foretell its various suff'erings 
 and its final close, would have been misery, unmixed 
 misery, indeed. Therefore, is a veil, impenetrable by the 
 eye of man, made to hang over it. Enough is it for us to 
 know, that God is love ; that the whole course of Provi- 
 dence is subject to his guidance and control ; and that 
 he is making all things to work together for our good, as 
 well as for his own glory. Let the event to you and 
 me, therefore, be what it may, it will, it must be, right. 
 Years have elapsed since you and I " met on the bridge, 
 and broke the willow twig" in concert with eacli other ; 
 and since, after having parted with you, I " your elder 
 brother" " watched the golden sail" of you " my younger 
 brother," " lessening in the distance ;"* but time has not, 
 in the slightest degree, contributed towards effacing from 
 my mind, or even impairing, the remembrance of the 
 sweet and pleasing, although melancholy scene. Often, 
 often, does it recur to me. Much do I delight to dwell 
 on it. And are my fraternal affections — my desires to 
 
 *" Elder brother," and "younger brother," are complimentary phrases in con- 
 stant use among the Chinese ,■ but here they are employed in their literal sense. 
 The other quotations are classical Chinese allusions to the parting of relations and 
 friends. — See the Canton Register of the 18th October 1836. 
 
EPISTLE PREFATORY, XVll. 
 
 look again on the face of hiin, to whom I have occupied 
 the place, and cherished the attachment, of a father, as 
 well as of a brother — to be entirely disappointed ? This 
 question it is not for me to answer. But this I can say, 
 Robert, that ' while memory holds her seat,' and the 
 pulses of nature continue to play, it will not be a small 
 matter that will be able to root out, subvert, or destroy the 
 affection borne towards you by him, who, with pleasure 
 takes this public opportunity of subscribing himself. 
 
 Yours sincerely. 
 
 In the bonds of strong earthly attachment, 
 
 D. THOM. 
 
 Liverpool, 2d May, 
 1838. 
 
DIALOGUES ON UNIVERSAL SALVATION, 
 
 AND 
 
 TOPICS CONNECTED THEREWITH. 
 
 DIALOGUE FIRST. 
 
 SUBJECT : 
 ELECTION AND THE MEANS OF GRACE. . 
 
 SPEAKERS :— AUTHOR. BROTHER. 
 
 B. Do you not call yourself a Universalist, David ? 
 
 T. I both call myself one, and am one.— Why do you 
 put the question ? 
 
 B. Because I find it difficult, I should rather say im- 
 possible, to reconcile Universalism with the doctrine of 
 election : a doctrine which I have heard you declare that 
 you hold in the strictest Calvinistic sense. 
 
 T. Wherein do universal salvation and election ap- 
 pear to you to be inconsistent with each other ? 
 
 B. Why obviously in this : — that if you maintain it to 
 be the divine intention to save only a limited number of 
 the human race, you are guilty of nothing short of a direct 
 contradiction in terms Avhen, at the same time, you assert 
 that every human being shall ultimately be saved. Elec- 
 tion of some, and salvation of all, are ideas evidently and 
 monstrously incongruous. Hold the one, and the other 
 necessarily falls to the ground. 
 
 A 
 
^ ELECTION AND 
 
 T. So have thought and reasoned men wiser, and pro- 
 founder, and more learned, than either of us, my dear 
 Robert. But this has been owing to their spiritual capa- 
 cities and attainments never having equalled the powerful 
 natural understandings with which confessedly they were 
 endowed. They were great men, but not enlightened 
 Christians. The fact is, that so far from election and 
 universal salvation being incongi'uous — nay, so far from 
 their being merely reconcileable — if the holy scriptures 
 are to possess any authority in this matter, the one actu- 
 ally implies and involves the other. 
 B. How so ? 
 
 T. Let me explain myself through the medium of the 
 answers which I know you must return to questions 
 which I am about to propose to you. — Are you not, when 
 you suppose election of some and salvation of all to be 
 inconsistent doctrines, understanding the words election 
 and salvation to ]iave one and the same meaning? Or, to 
 express myself differently, are you not understanding 
 election of some and salvation of all, to be equivalent to 
 the phraseology, election of some and election of all ? 
 B. Of course I am. 
 
 T. And are you not supposing, farther, that the salva- 
 tion of the few who are elected is the final cause, or ulti- 
 mate end, of the divine purpose? That is, that when God 
 shall have accomplished the deliverance of his chosen 
 people, his purposes of grace will be exhausted : aud that 
 thenceforward, and in regard to the rest of the human 
 family, there will be no scope except for the exercise and 
 display of everlasting vengeance ? 
 
 B. I confess that such is the view which I have 
 hitherto taken of the subject. If erroneous, how do you 
 propose to correct it ? 
 
 T. Why, by shewing you that, according to the sys- 
 tem of Uuiversalism which I hold, in the first place, God 
 
THE MKANS OF GRACE. 3 
 
 saves his chosen ones, and saves the remainder of the hu- 
 man race, in two totally distinct ways ; and, in the second 
 place, that the salvation of the elect, so far from being 
 inconsistent with, is in the course of God's adorable 
 providence rendered subservient to, the ultimate salvation 
 of the others. 
 
 B. May not all this be a mere fancy of your own ? 
 Indeed, what security have I that it is not so ? — You 
 know how fertile the mind of man is in the devising of 
 expedients by which to get rid of an acknowledged diffi- 
 culty. 
 
 T. I am far from blaming your caution, my dear 
 brother. The treatment which the inspired records have 
 met with at the hands of all sects and parties warrants, 
 nay constrains you, to exercise the utmost circumspection 
 in regard to what may be proposed to you as divine truth. 
 — But allow me to ask you : — Did not the word salvation 
 convey a perfectly different idea to the minds of those who 
 lived before the Messiah's appearance, from what it does 
 to us who enjoy the privilege of living under the New 
 Testament Dispensation ? 
 
 B. I admit that it did so. The Jews of Christ's time 
 so interpreted their ancient prophecies, as to have expected 
 deliverance from the yoke of the Romans, and their other 
 temporal oppressors : whereas, when prophecy came to bo 
 explained by the result, it turned out that deliverance 
 from that very law, which they themselves fondly hoped 
 would prove eternal, had all along been its real import. 
 But what of that ? How do you apply it to the present 
 case? 
 
 T. By making the blunder of the Jews a means of 
 suggesting to you that, in divine things, a view which is 
 currently and unhesitatingly received may, after all, be 
 very far from being a correct one. Nay, by making it to 
 suggest to you, that the notions of divine truth which most 
 
'i ELECTION AND 
 
 readily present themselves to the mind, and obtain most 
 general acceptance among the human race, so far from 
 deserving to be implicitly relied on, are almost always 
 those of which we should be most suspicious. This, how- 
 ever, by the bye. — Let me now propose another query : — 
 Was not the salvation or deliverance promised to the 
 Old Testament or temporal Israel, deliverance in time 
 from the yoke of the Mosaic law ? And is not the salva- 
 tion or deliverance conferred on the New Testament or 
 spiritual Israel, deliverance when time shall be no more 
 from the wrath to come ? That is, do we not find the 
 word salvation, when applied to the respective deliverances 
 of the temporal and spiritual Israels, to bear two totally 
 different senses ? 
 
 B. Well, I must allow that you have satisfied me of 
 the existence of two distinct salvations or deliverances : 
 a national salvation of the temporal Israel; and a salvation 
 of the spiritual Israel, of which the former was merely 
 emblematic. So far I observe and grant that the word 
 salvation has two distinct senses, and refers to two distinct 
 series of events. ^ — What farther? 
 
 T. Were not the Jews God's elect people in Old 
 Testament times ? Chosen by him from among the other 
 nations of the earth ? — This, of course, you will not deny. 
 — But now answer me, and answer me fairly : — Was the 
 election of the Jews an end, or a means to an end ? That 
 is, does it appear, from the result, to have been God's in- 
 tention to preserve them for ever in the enjoyment of their 
 peculiar external privileges and immunities ; or to render 
 their temporary possession of these privileges subservient 
 to a wider spread of the knowledge of his name, at a fu- 
 ture period of time, among the Gentile world ? 
 
 B. The latter unquestionably. Election, in the case 
 of the Jews, was but a means to an end. 
 
 T, And if so, may not the choice of a small number of 
 
THE MEANS OF GRACE. , O 
 
 the human race to the enjoyment of peculiar spiritual 
 privileges in the kingdom of Christ and of God, or to salva- 
 tion in one sense, be perfectly consistent with the wider 
 spread of the knowledge of God ultimately among the 
 children of men, or to salvation in another sense ? May 
 not the peculiar privileges of the spiritual Israel, like 
 those of the temporal Israel which was its type, be, not an 
 end, but a means to an end ? 
 
 B. I must understand you better, before I yield an 
 unqualified assent to what is implied in your query. — Tell 
 me, what do you mean by election ? 
 
 T. Choice of a smaller out of a larger number. 
 
 B. That is— 
 
 T. The choice of a certain number of the human race 
 out of the whole, by God himself, before the foundation of 
 the world, to be the objects of his special love, and the 
 heirs of his heavenly kingdom. 
 
 B. Are you serious in what you say ? 
 
 T. Why do you think it necessary to ask such a ques- 
 tion ? 
 
 B. Because if you are serious in your avowal, your 
 sentiments, with regard to election, appear to me to be 
 identically the same with those of Calvinists themselves. 
 
 T. And what then ? — My views on the subject of 
 election are certainly of the strictest and most decided 
 kind. I am satisfied that, according to our blessed Lord's 
 statement, strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which 
 leadeth unto life j and that Jew there be that find it. 
 Mattw. vii. 14. The iew who do find this gate, are per- 
 sons who have been predestined from everlasting to do so. 
 Their finding it, and entering into it, are not the result of 
 any exercise of free will on their part, or of Iheir having 
 prepared themselves in any respect whatever for the en- 
 joyment of the privilege; but spring solely from the 
 good pleasure of Jehovah himself. They discover not the 
 
6 • ELECTION AND 
 
 gate ; on tlie coiitraiy, God discovers it to them. For he 
 is found of them, when they seek him not. Isaiah Ixv. 1. 
 Rom. X. 20. Not in virtue of any merit of theirs, but in 
 fulfilment of his own gracious, everlasting, and unchange- 
 able purpose, does he cause the light of the knowledge of 
 his glory, in the face of Christ, to shine into their minds. 
 2 Corinth, iv. 6. In the reception of divine truth, the 
 election of God are thus perfectly passive. To them, as 
 predestinated and enlightened from above, is the enjoy- 
 ment of the kingdom of Christ and of God here and here- 
 after conceded. And by them, from first to last — 
 
 B. Hold — hold — you quite bewilder me. There is 
 not a single idea now expressed by you, in w^hich you dif- 
 fer from the ordinary run of Calvinistic divines. Tell me, 
 is there any point, respecting the elect, in which you and 
 they happen to be at variance? 
 
 T. None whatever, that I am aware of, in so far as the 
 origin of God's electing love, and the comparative small- 
 ness of the number of those who are the objects of it, are 
 concerned. In so far, too, as Calvinists regard and main- 
 tain the purpose of God in election to have been the dis- 
 play of his own glory, or the manifestation of his own at- 
 tributes and perfections, I am at one with them likewise. — 
 When I say, at one with them, observe, I mean with such 
 only as are consistent Calvinists. For a vast number of 
 persons who profess to adhere to Calvin's sentiments, are 
 in scarcely any one respect to be preferred to the out and 
 out followers of John Wesley. 
 
 B. This is a most sweeping censure. 
 
 T. Nevertheless it is deserved. 
 
 B. In what particular doctrinal views do professing 
 Calvinists agree with Arminians? 
 
 T. In maintaining creature free will; and representing 
 it to be in the power of sinners, if they choose, to believe 
 the gospel. Have you never noticed that many of those 
 
THE MEANS OF GRACE. 7 
 
 who are denominated, and considered to be, Calviuistic 
 preachers, are in the habit, in the course of their sermons, 
 and especially towards the close of them, of exhorting sin- 
 ners to come to Christ — of encouraging them, by a variety 
 of considerations, to make the attempt — of enforcing upon 
 them the necessity of doing so as a matter of duty — of 
 informing them, that it is their own faidt if they have 
 not yet believed the gospel — and of threatening them with 
 hell and damnation in the event of the all-important act 
 of faith, to which they are exhorted, not being performed 
 by them ? Indeed, they must set about it Avithout delay. 
 "Now," exclaim these soi-clisant ambassadors of Christ, 
 most abominably perverting scripture, " now is the ac- 
 cepted time — norv is the day of salvation." To such lan- 
 guage you must frequently have listened. And did it 
 never strike you, that thus to address their hearers was, 
 on the part of the divines in question, grossly inconsistent 
 with the leading principles of the Calvinistic theory ? 
 
 B. I have often heard exhortations and denunciations 
 such as you describe. But it never occurred to me, until 
 now, that they were inconsistent, either with Calvinism, 
 or with the nature of the gospel. — Even yet, although I 
 cannot deny that an exhortation to believe does, at first 
 sight, look like a call to the creature to elect himself and 
 become his own saviour, and does consequently seem to 
 oppose one of the leading principles of the Calvinistic 
 system, I have little doubt that the worthy men who are 
 accustomed to indulge in such exhortations would, if asked 
 to do so, be able to justify their procedure. — But how 
 would you avoid committing the fault which you impute 
 to them ? — What do you consider faith to be ? 
 T. The gift of God. Eph. ii. 8. 
 B. So do those whom you condemn. In words, at 
 least. — But what conclusion — what practical conclusion, 
 I mean — do you draw, from the circumstance of faith 
 being God's gift? 
 
8 ELECTION AND 
 
 T. Why this, — that it cannot be in the power of a 
 creature to bestow faith, either on himself, or on others — 
 that to believe cannot, in any respect whatever, be a crea- 
 ture act — and that, consequently, for one uninspired 
 creature to exhort another to believe, is for the one to be 
 chargeable with the absurdity of urging the other to per- 
 form an act that is divine, or to usurp one of the supreme 
 and unalienable prerogatives of Jehovah himself! 
 
 B. If faith then be, in no respect whatever, an act of 
 the creature, how can it be produced ? 
 
 T. Simply by God who commanded the light to shine 
 out of darkness, commanding the light of the knowledge of 
 his glory in the face of Christ, through the medium of the 
 scriptures, to shine into the heart. That is, in believing 
 divine testimony the creature is not active, but passive ; 
 he does not act, but he is acted on ; he does not put forth 
 an effort of his own, but he is the subject of the almighty 
 and sovereign power of Jehovah. Eph. i. 18 — 20. In a 
 word, he is as completely passive in the reception of 
 spiritual light, as was the natural creation when, at the 
 almighty fiat, natural light burst through the thick gloom 
 in which all things were originally enveloped. 
 
 B. There is no act of faith, then, to be performed by 
 the creature, as Roman Catholics think, and as ordinary 
 protestants, ever too prone to acquiesce in their views and 
 statements, have generally admitted. 
 
 T. Act of faith! No — yes. — That is, faith itself not 
 being an act of the creature, but a principle conferred and 
 implanted by the Creator, to believe is not an act which 
 any man, enlightened from above, can either attempt to 
 perform himself, or call upon a fellow creature to perform. 
 But where faith already exists as a principle bestowed 
 by the Creator, there from it, just as from any other prin- 
 ciple, acts corresponding to its nature will be found to 
 spring. — Faith itself is not an act: therefore, in the 
 
THE MEANS OF GRACE. 9 
 
 ordinary sense attached to the phrase, we cannot speak of 
 an act of faith. But faith is the source or parent of 
 spiritual acts : therefore, in this sense we can speak of 
 acts of faith, just as we also speak of labours of love. 
 
 B. What, under these circumstances, can a minister 
 do? 
 
 T. No more than any private Christian can. — He 
 may place the truth, as it is in Jesus, before his fellow 
 men. 
 
 B. How ? — By exhorting them to believe? 
 
 T. Most decidedly not. For divine revelation is not 
 a command to the creature to perform any act in order to 
 his own salvation, whether it be act of obedience to law or 
 of obedience to gospel, or any other conceivable act. But 
 it is simply a declaration to the creature, upon divine 
 authority, of an act which the Creator himself hath per- 
 formed. — The gospel is not a command to do, but a pro- 
 clamation of what God hath done. Be it hiown to you, men 
 and brethren, that through this man is proclaimed to you, 
 the forgiveness of sins, is its simple, uniform, and gracious 
 language. The word gospel signifies glad tidings. And 
 glad tidings to the guilty conscience upon which it takes 
 effect it is, by shewing all works of the creature superseded 
 by a gracious and glorious work of the Creator. It benefits 
 the creature, not by prompting him to act, as is the scope 
 and tendency of all the exhortations and threatenings of the 
 popular preachers ; but by producing in his mind a passive, 
 a sweet, a delighted acquiescence in the act which was 
 finished upon Calvary eighteen hundred years since by the 
 Son of God. 
 
 B. What do you say ? Do you mean to assert that 
 there is no act whatever performed by the creature in be- 
 lieving divine testimony ? That he is merely, and entirely, 
 and exclusively, passive in his reception of the truth ? 
 
 T. Even so, my dear brother. 
 
 B 
 
10 ELECTION AND 
 
 B. Is there no putting forth of any effort on his part 
 to comply with the gospel ? 
 
 T. Of none whatever. Instead of exertions to helieve 
 being stimulated by the gospel, exertions to believe are, 
 in the very act of God's conferring the knowledge of the 
 gospel upon any one, superseded at once and for ever. It 
 is true that, where the gospel is not believed in, there ex- 
 ertions to believe it are stimulated, by misapprehensions 
 of its nature, in the mere Adamic or fleshly mind. 
 
 B. You perfectly astonish me ! In the event of your 
 being right, a man can have no merit whatever in believ- 
 ing! 
 
 T. He has none. And it never was God's intention 
 that lie should have any. It was ever God's purpose that 
 the whole glory of salvation should redound to himself the 
 Creator alone : and hence, all who have been enlightened 
 from above, of course and as a matter of necessity, glory 
 only in the Lord. 1 Corinth, i. 29. 31. 
 
 B. But what, then, becomes of the creature's will ? 
 According to you, he believes unwillingly. Whereas, it 
 is expressly stated in the 110th Psalm, that Clirist's peo- 
 ple ai'e willing in the day of his power. 
 
 T. So they are. And to suppose that, in my apprehen- 
 sion, believers of the gospel in the reception of the divine 
 testimony are unwilling to believe it, is merely another of 
 your mistakes, Robert. — It is true that, at the very mo- 
 ment previous to any man's believing the gospel, he is 
 unwilling to believe it. And this, because the carnal 
 mind being enmity against God, not being subject to his 
 law, neither indeed being able to be so ; — and also, be- 
 cause the individual naturally possessing nothing higher 
 than carnal mind ; — it is absolutely impossible that there 
 should be any inclination on his part, previous to believing, 
 to receive the gospel testimony. — But the passage which 
 you have quoted says, that the people of Christ shall be 
 
THE MEANS OF GRACE. 11 
 
 willing in the day of his power. So say I. The conferring 
 upon any man of the principle of faith, which is God's act, 
 is the making of him willing ; or is the conferring upon 
 him, at the very same moment, of a new and divine will, 
 which is perfectly different from, and which necessarily 
 supersedes, the will of his natural fleshly mind. 
 
 B. In other words, if I understand you aright, it is 
 not by a man's being previously willing to believe the 
 gospel, that he actually does believe it; but it is by his 
 being given from above to believe it, that willingness is 
 imparted to him. 
 
 T. Just so. 
 
 B. What you say may be true. But it appears to 
 me that, by your theory, you do away with the use of 
 means altogether. 
 
 T. Means used by whom? 
 
 B. By human beings, to be sure. 
 
 T. And for what purpose? — Now pause and reflect 
 before you return an answer. 
 
 B. I do not see what occasion there is for this warn- 
 ing. The means of which I speak, are means of believing 
 the gospel, and thereby of participating in the great sal- 
 vation. And it certainly does appear to me, that the views 
 entertained by you, by representing the knowledge of di- 
 vine truth as heing freely — I would rather say, arbitrarily 
 — conferred by God, set aside entirely the necessity of any 
 creature using means for the purpose of becoming ac- 
 quainted with the gospel. 
 
 T. Remarkable truth ! my dear Robert. According 
 to what I have been taught by the scriptures themselves, 
 faith is arbitrarily bestowed; that is, is bestowed, not on 
 those who to the eye of mere man would appear to have 
 the best title to it, but on those who, having been fore- 
 knoiun and predestinated by God to the enjoyment of this 
 privilege before time began, are in time called to the en- 
 
12 ELECTION AND 
 
 joymeiit of it. And, tlierefore, it is never by the employ- 
 ment of what he supposes to be means of believing on 
 the part of the creature, that he is brought to Christ, but 
 always in opposition to such self-righteous efforts. In- 
 deed, it would be contradictory to the whole revealed 
 scheme of salvation, were the belief of the gospel to 
 be made to depefid, either in whole or in part, on the 
 creature's intentionally striving to believe it. It would 
 be to make belief his own act. It would be to render him 
 his own saviour. It would be to convert life eternal into 
 a reward of human merit, instead of being what it actually 
 is, the gift of God. Salvation would then be of works, not 
 of grace. To set a man who is ignorant of the glorious gos- 
 pel, upon using means of believing it, — believing?"^/// — 
 is to flatter, and second, and strengthen, the self-righteous 
 principles and tendencies of his fleshly mind, which of them- 
 selves prompt the excited conscience to put forth efforts in 
 order to be saved ; — and to try to persuade any man that, 
 in consequence of having made such efforts, he has actually 
 believed, is to do Avhat in us lies to substitute in his mind 
 a glorying in self, for that only scriptural ground of glory- 
 ing, the finished work of Christ. 
 
 It was for this reason that I warned you. — The work 
 which was finished on Calvary is that which of itself and 
 alone saves, if scripture be true. This being the case, it 
 is absolutely impossible that any thing, call it what you 
 will, can be requisite in order to salvation, over and above 
 that Avork. And yet by saying, as you yourself and 
 ordinary Calvinists do, that men must use means of be- 
 lieving, that is, use means ybr the purpose of believing, you 
 actually represent some work, in addition to the work of 
 Christ, as being necessary to salvation; and that, too, a 
 work which the creature himself must perform. This 
 creature work you interpose between the conscience, and 
 the work of Jesus the Creator. You make it the sine qud 
 
THE MEANS OF GRACE. 13 
 
 non of salvation. "The creature must use menus for the 
 purpose of believing, and thereby of being saved." O 
 Robert! why not cut the matter short, and say at once and 
 honestly with the followers of Pelagius and Arminius, that, 
 without the performance of good works by the creature,- he 
 cannot be saved. 
 
 B. But it is the work of Christ alone which saves. 
 
 T. Not, my dear brother, according to your system. 
 For if so, why call upon sinners to use means of believing, 
 or to do any thing else in order to be saved? — If it be 
 Christ's work alone that saves — and, that this is the case, 
 the whole of scripture testifies to the enlightened mind — 
 what occasion is there for the unbelieving portion of man- 
 kind performing any act or work whatever ? 
 
 B. Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word 
 of God. Rom. x. 1 7. 
 
 T. True. For the same God, who caused his word 
 to be committed to writing, causes that same word in his 
 own good time and way to reach the ears, and, what is 
 more, to be carried home to the consciences, of the destined 
 heirs of salvation. 
 
 B. Talk as you please, David, you set aside entirely 
 the use of the means of grace. 
 
 T. Means, I again ask you, used by whom ? 
 
 B. By creatures, undoubtedly. 
 
 T. So I do, Robert. And it is the glory of the gospel 
 that it does so likewise. — But, because the use of means 
 by the creature is done away with, does there remain no 
 possibility of the use of them in another and superior quar- 
 ter ? If there be no means of grace and salvation as used 
 by the creature, may there not be such means as used by 
 the Creator ? What if the scheme taught me by scripture 
 does set aside the worthless and self-righteous efforts of 
 mere creatures, in order to substitute for them a simple, 
 sovereign, and efficacious, act of the Creator himself? 
 
14 ELECTION AND 
 
 B. I do not understand you. 
 
 T. Well, I will endeavour to explain myself. — 
 
 Nothing as used by a creature is, or can be, a means 
 of salvation. And this for a variety of reasons. Such 
 as: — that salvation appertainimj to God alone is, in no 
 respect whatever, man's work^ that it is already complete, 
 and, consequently, uns,usceptible of any increase or addi- 
 tion; and that the only way in which a creature can 
 attain to the enjoyment of it is by its being freely, that is, 
 unconditionally, bestowed upon him by the Creator. Now, 
 the notion of means of salvation or means of believing, 
 which is one and the same thing, requiring to be used by 
 creatures, contradicts every one of these self-evident scrip- 
 tural principles. For no man can set about using them, 
 except on the hypothesis of salvation being in part at 
 least man's work — of its being still incomplete, without 
 the employment of such supposed means by him — and of 
 certain terms and conditions thus requiring to be fulfilled by 
 him before he can be a partaker of life everlasting. — That 
 is, salvation is proclaimed in scripture as finislied by the 
 Creator. Whereas to urge the use of means of grace and 
 salvation by creatures proceeds on the principle of salvation 
 being unfinished by the Creator, and remaining to be 
 finished by them ; or of the salvation of the Creator being 
 inefficacious of itself, and requiring to be rendered effica- 
 cious by the concurrence and co-operation of his creatures! 
 — What Christian sees not, that to prescribe the use of the 
 means of grace to a fellow mortal, is to contribute all that 
 in us lies to the confirmation in him of the principle of 
 creature-righteousness? And that, in fact, it is in no 
 small degree owing to such erroneous teaching, that men 
 ignorant of God's righteousness are induced to go about 
 to establish their own righteousness, not submitting them^ 
 selves to the righteousness of God P Rom. x. 3. 
 
 But while nothing as used by the creature is, or can 
 
THE MEANS OF GRACE. 15 
 
 be, a means of salvation, any thing or every thing as used 
 by the Creator may be so. A previous course of profli- 
 gacy ; an open and furious hatred to Christ and his cause, 
 as in the case of Saul of Tarsus ; or a religious educa- 
 tion and correct moral deportment; — however incongruous, 
 and however inconsistent with the object aimed at by some 
 of them, these various states and conditions of man may 
 to the natural mind appear to be ; — nevertheless may all 
 and equally be the means, in the hands of the Spirit, of 
 bringing the individual into those circumstances in which 
 God may see meet to reveal to him his glorious character. 
 That is, while the most careful moral training, the most 
 respectable character, and the most religious dispositions, — 
 which are generally understood to be the best preparatives 
 for believing or the most suitable means of grace, — may 
 terminate, and generally do terminate, in bitter and un- 
 compromising hostility to the gospel ; on the contrary, 
 the most awefully flagitious career, and the fiercest previ- 
 ous dislike of divine things, may all at once be brought to 
 an end by a free and unexpected manifestation to the 
 conscience of the gift of life everlasting. For Publicans 
 and harlots enter into the kingdom of heaven in prefer- 
 ence to the self righteous. — Still, however, the previous 
 career and practices of the individual who is subsequently 
 brought to the knowledge of the truth, whether moral or 
 immoral, are merely in the hands of God the remote 
 means of his believing. The direct and immediate means 
 of faith is always the manifestation to the conscience of the 
 truth itself: a manifestation which is invariably and ex- 
 clusively God's work. That is, it is the effect of previous 
 means used not by the creature but by the Creator. — It 
 may be, that a long course of fleshly piety, and a careful 
 perusal by a mere natural mind of the sacred volume, may 
 issue in the discovery of Christ Jesus. But it is just as 
 possible, nay, as the result proves, rather more probable. 
 
16 ELECTION AND 
 
 tliat they may not. And the reason is, that every effort of 
 a religious nature made by the mere fleshly mind tends 
 to exalt the creature in its own estimation, or to a result 
 exactly the opposite of that exaltation of Christ Jesus the 
 Creator which is the grand characteristic effect of the belief 
 of the gospel. The reading of the scriptures, prayer, and 
 attendance upon public ordinances, when practised by the 
 mere natural mind as supposed means of grace, so far from 
 tending to repress its self-righteous actings, constitute the 
 chief sources from which the principle of self-righteousness 
 draws its strength and nourishment. It is only when the 
 reading of the scriptures, and the hearing of sermons, 
 happen to be means of grace ordained and employed as 
 such by God himself, that they will, or can, contribute to- 
 wards and terminate in the spiritual illumination of the 
 individual. — And be it observed, so entirely is God him- 
 self alone the user of the means of grace, that even in cases 
 where persons of a previously religious turn of mind are 
 brought to the knowledge of the gospel, the truth 
 manifested to them from above is never that which they 
 were previously seeking after, but always something pre- 
 viously unknown to and unsuspected by them. God is 
 invariably ybitwt/ of them that seek him not.* The fleshly 
 mind is, in its most pious and religious exercises, tjoing 
 about to establish its onm righteousness : and if, while so 
 engaged, God shall be pleased to manifest to it, as its own 
 by his free gift, his glorious divine righteousness, it is al- 
 ways in such circumstances taken by surprise. The poor 
 deluded religionist was looking for creature righteousness; 
 — but unexpectedly the righteousness of the Creator is 
 revealed as belonging to him, by having been freely be- 
 stowed upon him. Sweetly observes John Barclay of 
 Edinburgh, in his treatise on the assurance of faith, that 
 "multitudes who, at first going forth, like Saul" were 
 
 * Rom. X. 20. 
 
THE MEANS OF GRACE. 17 
 
 seeking " lost things of lesser value, have lighted, by the 
 special direction of providence, upon the inspired servants 
 of the Lord, have received his word with joj, and returned 
 again triumphing in the infallibly assured hope of a king- 
 dom that fadeth not away." And this is true. For that 
 which the fleshly mind was employing as a means, not of 
 becoming acquainted vt-ith the salvation of Christ, but of 
 increasing its own good opinion of itself, God is, in all 
 cases where faith follows, pleased to over-rule to be the 
 instrument of disclosing to it his own glorious character. 
 Have you any conception now of the difference between 
 a creature pretending to use means of grace and salvation, 
 and the Creator himself actually doing so ? 
 
 B. Why really, if I comprehend you, David, in so far 
 as the use of means of grace by creatures is concerned, it 
 is a mere matter of chance or accident whether they shall, 
 or shall not, terminate in their reception of the truth ? 
 
 T. Precisely so, Robert. And this, because to use 
 the means of grace and salvation, no less than to accom- 
 plish the work of salvation itself, belongs to the Creator 
 alone. What to the fleshly mind appears to be a means 
 of grace when used by the creature, is actually seen by 
 him who is taught from above to be the means of fostering 
 self-righteous propensities, and thereby of drawing forth 
 tlie most deadly enmity of the creature to God. And 
 hence it is that although some of these users of the means 
 of grace as they themselves think, but in reality self- 
 righteous opposers of the revealed righteousness of Christ, 
 are, in the course of God's adorable providence and in vir- 
 tue of his everlasting purpose, brought to the knowledge 
 of the truth ; yet by far the greater portion of them are 
 left to what is the natural, and what unless sovereign 
 grace interpose is the necessary and inevitable, conse- 
 quence of their self-iighteous conduct. Continuing to use 
 the means of grace, as they fancy, but in fact persevering 
 
 c 
 
IS r.f.ECTION AND 
 
 in a course of self-vigatoous endeavours to save themselves, 
 tliey are allowed tliereby to harden themselves more and 
 more against the simple truth. — Thus, my dear Robert, it 
 is impossible for Christians, judging from any present state 
 of the mere fleslily mind, whether religious or irreligious — 
 whether using what are called the means of grace or neg- 
 lecting them — to say, that this state of mind shall, or shall 
 not, issue in the belief of the gospel. This we know, that 
 the purpose of God will always take effect: the election 
 will obtain it; allhougli the rest he blinded. Wlierever 
 God intends to save, he will always take care to bring the 
 object of Ids love into such circumstances as shall lead 
 him ultimately to an acquaintance with the truth. 
 
 B. Am I to understand you, then, as meaning that, in 
 so far as our views are concerned, it is a mere matter of 
 chance whether reading the scriptures, experiencing feel- 
 ings of anxiety respecting one's future condition, and cul- 
 tivating seriousness of outward deportment, on the part of 
 a natural man, shall terminate in belief of the truth, or 
 in the most intense hatred of it? Indeed that, of the two, 
 such exercises are more likely, humanly speaking, to have 
 the latter than the former result ? 
 
 T. Certainly. — You have exactly apprehended my 
 meaning. 
 
 B. Then what become of the directions for attaining 
 to the belief of the gospel Avhich are given in Doddridge's 
 Rise and Pmgress ? What of the elaborate statements, 
 respecting the duty of believing, which abound in the works 
 of the late Mr. Fuller, of Kettering ? And though last, 
 not least, what shall we think of Bunyan's slough of des- 
 pond, fiery law, and wicket gale experience, as they are 
 described in his deliglitful Pilgrim's Progress ? 
 
 T. Why, Robert, painful although it be to say so, yet 
 it is fact, that llie views of all the eminent men of whom 
 you speak, — in so far as they inculcate efforts to believe. 
 
THE MEANS OF GRACE. 10 
 
 and works preparatory and preliminary to believing, and 
 this as a matter of duty, — are, by the word of God our only 
 instructor and authority in such matters, decidedly and 
 thoroughly condemned. Because sometimes the self-right- 
 eous exercises of a human being terminate, by the divine 
 good pleasure, in his having revealed to him what he was 
 previously neither thinhing of nor seeking after, the 
 righteousness of Jehovah himself, — therefore the writers 
 in question would have the same revelation to take place 
 always ! Because the goodness of the Creator prevents 
 the self-righteous exercises of the creature in certain cases 
 from having their natural result, — they would, forsooth ! 
 absurdly and blasphemously make that which is purely 
 the effect of divine sovereignty, to be a rule for the crea- 
 ture to follow ! What is a mere accident, they would 
 fain represent as the essence of salvation ! — Nay, what is 
 worse, because God does, in such cases, bring good out of 
 evil, they would have the creature to do evil that good 
 might come ! Instead of pointing simply to the work of 
 Christ, as that through which alone salvation flows freely 
 to the guilty, and as that by which all creature efforts and 
 strivings for salvation are completely superseded, — tliey 
 prescribe to their deluded votaries a course of self-right- 
 eous exercises to be performed by them, as indispensable 
 to their obtaining an interest in that blessed work : and 
 thus under the guise of fleshly piety, and in a form some- 
 times more sometimes less refined, setting up creature 
 righteousness in place of and in opposition to the revealed 
 righteousness of Jesus the Creator, they do what in them 
 lies to lead their fellow men, especially the serious portion 
 of them, by what Sandeman fitly denominates, " a devout 
 path to hell." 
 
 B. Your language is too harsh, David. 
 
 T. Not more so than scripture warrants, and the ne- 
 cessity of the case demands, my dear brother. All that 
 
20 ELECTION AND 
 
 is flesh, and all that proceeds from flesh, (as every notion, 
 implying the slightest activity of the creature mind in the 
 matter of salvation, is,) stand condemned by God. 
 
 B. Salvation, then, is the result of no previous wish 
 or desire, of a spiritual kind, on the part of the creature. 
 
 T. Of none whatever. For His not of him that willeth, 
 nor of him that runneth, hut of God that sheweth mercy. 
 Rom. ix. 16. 
 
 B. What do you make of those strong wishes, those 
 intense desires, to be saved, which are so often experienced 
 by persons confessedly ignorant of the gospel ? 
 
 T. They are evidently wishes and desires, on the part 
 of those who cherish them, to find in themselves some good 
 thing, or to be able to perform some good action, whereby 
 they may recommend themselves to God, and acquire a 
 title to salvation. Good master, what good thing shall I 
 do, that I may inherit eternal life? or, what shall I do to 
 he saved? denotes the import, and is generally the lan- 
 guage, of this state of mind. But a desire to be saved on 
 the ground of some good thing found in or done by our- 
 selves, is totally different from understanding the salvation 
 of the gospel: a privilege which is conferred of free and 
 sovereign grace j and of which the persons spoken of are, 
 by the terms of your question, destitute. They want to ac- 
 quire a right to be saved: whereas faith, or a spiritual 
 view of the subject, is the passive acquiescence of the mind 
 in salvation as a blessing yreeZy, that is, undeservedly, be- 
 stowed. Salvation to persons ignorant of the truth, and 
 salvation to persons who know it, thus presenting two to- 
 tally distinct aspects, it is absolutely impossible for those 
 who are ignorant of the gospel to desire salvation in the 
 scriptural sense of the term. Indeed, it is impossible for 
 any man either as unbeliever, or as believer, to desire this 
 salvation. As an unbeliever, the salvation which he de- 
 sires is one founded in whole, or in part, on his own merits. 
 
THE MEANS OF GRACE. 21 
 
 As a believer, he desires not salvation at all ; for he finds 
 himself already in posession of it. This is the recordy that 
 God HATH GIVEN io US eternal life ; and this life is in his 
 So7i. 1 John V. 11. When to any one, for the first time, 
 there is revealed the gospel, there is revealed to him the 
 fact of his being already saved ; and this independently 
 and irrespectively of all desires, doings, and merits, of his 
 own : a fact of which he had not previously the remotest 
 conception, and his knowledge of which, instead of indi- 
 cating the progress, is itself the very commencement, of 
 spiritual principle. 
 
 B. What then, pray, are the means of grace and sal- 
 vation to the creature ? For, that there exist such means, 
 you have, if I mistake not, already admitted. 
 
 T. I know no other means of grace besides the gospel 
 itself. 
 
 B. The gospel itself! Why, all our religious folks 
 say the same thing. 
 
 T. So they do. But to the word gospel the great 
 majority of them attach a meaning essentially different 
 from that which the Holy Ghost himself hath annexed to 
 it in scripture. Their gospel is information that the crea- 
 ture may, if he please, save himself. They pretend to 
 comfort sincere and pious enquirers, perverted phrases ! 
 with the prospect, that they may attain to life everlasting 
 in the event of their bestowing upon themselves faith, or 
 of their performing some other act to accomplish which 
 belongs exclusively to the Creator. 
 
 B. What is the gospel ? 
 
 T. Glad tidings. 
 
 B. Of what? 
 
 T. Of God's being, not of his becoming, love : and 
 this as manifested, or made known to me, in the light of 
 Christ's divine righteousness, being my righteousness ; 
 and of Christ's divine life, being my life. God is love : and 
 
22 ELECTION AND 
 
 in this was manifested the love of' God towards uj, because 
 that God sent his only begotten son into the world, that we 
 might live through him. 1 Jolin iv. 8. 9. 
 
 B. To whom is this manifestation glad tidings ? 
 
 T. To myself, and to all those to whom it is so. It is 
 glad tidings, to those to whom it is glad tidings. 
 
 B. Do not mock me, my dear brother. You evade 
 my question. Yv^hat I want to he informed of is: how is 
 it that the proclamation of Jesus of Nazareth having been 
 the anointed one promised and sent to the Jewish people 
 — of his having taken away sin by his atoning sacrifice, 
 and brought in everlasting righteousness by his resurrec- 
 tion from the dead — and of his being he through whom 
 eternal life flows freely to the guilty — I say, how is it that 
 this proclamation, — for command you will not allow it to 
 be, — becomes glad tidings to any one ? — Now do answer 
 me fairly and honestly. 
 
 T. I have answered your previous questions as fairly 
 and honestly as the circumstances of the case would admit 
 of, Robert. And if you have failed to perceive that I have 
 done so, I must ever remember that divine truth is a sub- 
 ject which God, not man, is competent to teach. — Never- 
 theless with a view to oblige you, as well as to discharge 
 my own conscience, I will try if, by varying my language 
 and more fully developing the subject, I can, by the di- 
 vine blessing, render myself more intelligible. 
 
 The gospel, or glad tidings of salvation freely bestowed 
 through Christ Jesus, is read of and heard by thousands 
 who understand it not. And this, for the two following 
 among other reasons : — 
 
 First. From the total inability of tlie mere fleshly or 
 Adamic mind to comprehend it. To a man who is pos- 
 sessed of no higher principles than those which lie derives 
 from his natural parents, the gospel always and necessarily 
 appears in the light of a command urging him to do some- 
 
TOE i\il:ans of grace. 23 
 
 tiling, or to possess sometliing, before he can attain to an 
 interest in the great salvation. Taking this view of the 
 matter — and, in his natural state, ro other is he qualified 
 'to take — of course the death of Christ alone speaks no 
 peace, communicates no joy, to him. The gospel, or glad 
 tidings of tlie work which Jesus finished on Calvary, is no 
 gospel in his apprehension of things. What he himself 
 must do to be saved, is the question to obtain an answer 
 to whicli tlie wliole bent of his mind is directed. And an 
 answer which imports that he himself must do or feel 
 something in order to salvation, is the only notion of gos- 
 pel which, v/hile in a natural state, lie has or can have. 
 But, in the second place, the grand and fundamental 
 reason why by far the greater part of those who hear the 
 gospel never understand it is, that it is not God's intention 
 for them to do so. While he will have mercy, upon whom 
 lie will have mercy j whom he will he liardeneth. To the 
 bulk of mankind God's declarations concerning Christ, 
 and the work which he hath accomplished, not being, 
 addressed, convey no real and scriptural, and consequently 
 no joyful, meaning. They hear not the joyful sound. — 
 But while to such persons it is not given to know the mys- 
 teries of the kingdom of God, to some 27 is given to do so. 
 All that happens in the case of the latter is that the gos- 
 pel becomes, by divine power and in virtue of the divine 
 purpose, gospel or glad tidings to them. The eyes of 
 their understandings are opened by God himself, without 
 any assistance derived from themselves, nay in opposition 
 to all their previous views and tendencies; and tliey are 
 thus enabled to comprehend what to them formerly was dark 
 and mysterious. Having had ears given to them, they hear. 
 God, they find to their great surprise as well as delight, is 
 addressingthem, or becomingthe witness to their conciences. 
 And this, by revealing to them his own character; or by 
 making them acquainted with what he himself is in the 
 
24 ELECTION AND 
 
 light of the nature, offices, and work of his well beloved 
 Son. For it is by giving them to see the Son, that he 
 gives them likewise to see himself the Father. — This is not, 
 however, to bestow on them the knowledge of a mere ab- 
 stract proposition. God, in causing them to know Jesus, 
 causes them to know him as one with themselves, and 
 themselves as one with him; — and to know that, in virtue 
 of this inseparable union subsisting between him and them, 
 they possess in him righteousness and life everlasting. 
 They discover it to be the import of the divine record or 
 testimony, that God hath given to them eternal life; and 
 that this life is in his Son. 1 John v. 11 . In the light 
 of this fact they are enabled to discover, upon divine au- 
 thority, that they are condemned and dead in the first, 
 fleshly, and creature Adam; and that the previous con- 
 demnation and death were indispensably necessary, and 
 have been rendered subservient, to the justification and 
 life of which they now partake with their heavenly and 
 uncreated Head. God thus appears to them as love, in 
 having taken away from them, through the transgression 
 of Adam, a paltry and creature life; that he might, through 
 the righteousness of his own dear Son, make them to enjoy 
 with himself life everlasting. That is, the divine testi- 
 mony, as glad tidings, does not barely speak peace to 
 them, by shewing them, that they have pardon of sin and ac- 
 ceptance with God through Christ Jesus : but it does more; 
 for it inspires them with joy that is unspeakable andfidl of 
 glory by shewing them, that they derive through the 
 second Adam privileges infinitely more glorious than 
 those which they forfeited in the first. 
 B. In one word — 
 
 T. The gospel becomes gospel or glad tidings to any 
 one, in consequence of God giving the favoured individual, 
 at one and the same moment, to apprehend both its truth 
 and his own personal interest in it. When God con- 
 
THE MEANS OF GRACE. 25 
 
 descends, through the medium of his testimony concerning 
 the Lord Jesus, to speak to the conscience of any one, at 
 that moment the individual knows that he himself is by 
 God spoken to. 
 
 B. And the single unsupported testimony of Jehovah, 
 concerning the work of Christ, accomplishes all this ? 
 
 T. Yes. Rather, Jehovah himself accomplishes all 
 this, by carrying his testimony concerning Christ Jesus 
 and the work which was finished on Calvary, with al- 
 mighty and irresistible power, home to the conscience. 
 
 B. By what means ? 
 
 T. Merely by causing the person to whom he bears 
 testimony, to see it to be true; and true, not on the 
 ground of external evidence, but in the light of the pure, 
 spiritual, and divine evidence, which is contained in, and 
 beams forth from, itself. In faith there is nothing more — 
 and there is nothing less. 
 
 B. If I have caught your meaning, David, every per- 
 son to whom the divine testimony concerning Christ Jesus 
 is rendered effectual by God himself, knows that he hath 
 been enlightened from above. 
 
 T. And why not? Can that be gospel or glad tidings, 
 which is not gospel or glad tidings to the individual him- 
 self ? Can that salvation inspire me with joy that is un- 
 speakable and full of glory, in which I do not know 
 myself to have a personal interest ? When light, whether 
 physical or mental, is shining, can I, if in the one case 
 the eyes of my body or in the other the eyes of my un- 
 derstanding be open, remain unconscious of the fact ? 
 Whatsoever doth make manifest is light : Eph. v. 13: and 
 if the divine testimony as light cannot, when it shines into 
 the mind, manifest itself, what else, pray, is it fitted to 
 make manifest or throw light on ? — Besides, Robert, con- 
 sider, that if the religion of the living and true God can 
 leave any species or degree of uncertainty, as to his future 
 
 D 
 
26 ELECTION AND 
 
 and everlasting well-being, in the breast of him by whom 
 it has been believed in, it can neither be essentially differ- 
 ent from, nor possess any real superiority over, the various 
 religions of Paganism. These religions affected to hold 
 out to their votaries the prospect of the probable enjoyment 
 of an Elysium hereafter. A probability, greater or less, that 
 we may be happy hereafter, is the sum and substance of 
 the hope imparted by Christianity, if we are to trust to our 
 spiritual guides. Thus, in that most essential feature of 
 representing the hope of future hapjuness to be merely 
 probable and conditional, do the religions of heathen 
 antiquity, and what is commonly supposed to be the re- 
 ligion of Christ Jesus, completely agree. And why, if 
 this were true, should I prefer the one to the other ? — Do 
 you happen to remember the sneering remark of Lord 
 Byron, in reference to this very subject, which appears in 
 one of his published journals, and which has been selected 
 by me as the motto of the fourth chapter of my work on 
 the "Assurance of Faith" : — "According to the Christian 
 Dispensation," that is, according to the views of it which 
 had been presented to his Lordship, "no man can know 
 whether he is sure of salvation — even the most righteous — 
 since a single slip of faith may throw him on his back, 
 like a skaiter, while gliding smoothly to his paradise. 
 Now, therefore, whatever the certainty of faith in the facts 
 may be, the certainty of the individual as to his happiness 
 or misery, is no greater than it was under Jupiter." And 
 Lord Byron was right, in so far as what passes by the 
 name oi faith in Christianity is concerned. But he spoke 
 as he did, because he was not himself personally a partaker 
 oixhdii faith which is the substance of things hoped for, 
 the evidence of things not seen. Heb. xi. 1. — Faith, Robert, 
 IS the result of God himself speaking, and bearing witness, 
 to the conscience. And wherever it has a place, we ex- 
 perience what the talented peer whose words I have just 
 
THE MEANS OF GRACE. ^ 
 
 quoted never did, and what thousands of those who pro- 
 fess to be christians never do, that if we receive the witness 
 of men, the witness of God is greater : 1 John v. 9 : that 
 is, that if mere human testimony with regard to natural 
 things has been productive, in innumerable cases, in our 
 minds of something like absolute certainty ; the testimony 
 of God with regard to life everlasting, as freely bestowed 
 upon us through the Son of his love, has, by his own di- 
 vine and spiritual illumination, been productive in our 
 minds of absolute certainty itself. 
 
 B. Supposing what you assert to be true, the scriptures 
 cannot be a revelation to all. 
 
 T. "What ! Are you merely, for the first time, begin- 
 ning to entertain a suspicion of this fact ? — The scriptures 
 never were, and''never were intended to be, a revelation 
 to all. They are a revelation to the members of the church 
 of the living God only. The words that I speak unto you, 
 says Christ addressing his disciples, they are spirit, and 
 they are life. John vi. 63. Extraordinary, indeed per- 
 fectly unaccountable, would it be, did we not know the 
 total ignorance of divine things under which the fleshly 
 mind of man labours, that down to the present day the vast 
 majority of those who profess to be Christians should never 
 have even suspected the limitation of the scriptures to the 
 election of God alone. And yet the book itself abounds 
 witli intimations to this effect. He that halh cars to hear, 
 LET HIM HEAR, says the Lord Jesus, in Mark iv. 9. And, 
 to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be 
 saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of 
 Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours j 1 Corinth, i. 
 2; as also, to them that have obtained like precious faith 
 with us, through the righteousness of God, and our Saviour 
 Jesus Christ ; 2 Peter i. 1 ; are specimens of the language 
 employed by the inspired apostles in addressing their epis- 
 tles. Can words more strictly confine to his believing 
 
28 ELECTION AND 
 
 family, that revelation of himself which through the me- 
 dium of the scriptures God hath heeu pleased to vouch- 
 safe, than those to which I now call your attention ? 
 
 B. My dear fellow, to recur to the subject from which 
 my last observation diverted you, if your views be well 
 founded, all I have to say is, that very few indeed can be 
 believers of the gospel. Few, if any, of our most eminent 
 Christians will venture to declare, that they know them- 
 selves to be personally interested in tlie work of Christ 
 Jesus. And none that are modest and circumspect would 
 venture to do so, until after having been able to discover 
 in themselves unequivocal marks and evidences of their 
 being in a regenerate state. 
 
 T. Strange to tell ! Robert, in what you now observe, 
 you are, without intending it, pronouncing a most decided 
 scriptural eulogium upon my sentiments, and an equally 
 decided scriptural condemnation of those which are com- 
 monly held and professed. — Christ hath positively declared 
 that his people are "few" in number, and ''a little flock." 
 The apostles, especially the apostle Paul, have frequently 
 dwelt on, and still more frequently alluded to, the smallness 
 of the number of those who are the children of faith. It 
 is only "a remnant that shall be saved," says Paul, quoting 
 from Isaiah, in Romans, ix. 27 : and, pursuing his quota- 
 tions from the same prophet, he adds, " Except the Lord 
 of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we had been as Sodoma, 
 and been made like unto Gomorrha." Verse 29. Indeed, 
 even independently of express information afforded us to 
 this effect, the smallness of the number of those by whom 
 the gospel is believed in might have been fairly enough 
 argued from the circumstance of faith being denominated 
 precious:* that which is common, not deserving the epithet. 
 
 As to your remark about the inability of those who are 
 commonly regarded as eminent Christians, to speak with 
 
 ♦ 1 refer ii. 7, 
 
THE MEANS OF GRACE. 29 
 
 certainty of their own personal interest in salvation, you 
 are perfectly correct. And surprising, indeed, would it be 
 were the state of matters otherwise. Modestly and circum- 
 spectly waiting, as such persons do, until they shall liave 
 discovered in themselves some good quality, upon the 
 strength of which they may fancy themselves the especial 
 favourites of the Most Higli, they either, like the stupid 
 countryman, in the fable alluded to by Horace, find that 
 the current of evil in themselves streams on for ever ; 
 
 Labitur et labetur in omne Tolubilis tevum ; 
 
 leaving them, till the end of their days, in the same state 
 of expectancy and incessant disappointment: or, contriv- 
 ing to delude themselves with the idea that they have 
 performed the requisite condition, or have discovered in 
 themselves the long-sought-for excellence, they sink into 
 a state of religious lethargy, and go down to the grave with 
 a lie in their right hands. — To very few, indeed — the tenth, 
 or teil tree, spoken of by the prophet Isaiah, vi. 13. — it is 
 given from above to see, that they possess in the righteous- 
 ness of Jesus of Nazareth itself, made known to them by 
 the scriptures and theirs in consequence of their oneness 
 with the performer of it, a righteousness which as divine 
 has swallowed up all their creature guilt and depravity ; 
 and thus (qw indeed are there to whom is necessarily im- 
 parted the absolute certainty of life everlasting. 
 
 B. David, David, how severe you are; and how 
 restricted in your notions of what constitutes genuine 
 Christianity ! 
 
 T. Say, rather, my dearest brother, how consistent 
 with scripture, and with that very system of Calvin which 
 is so dreadfully misrepresented — so vilely caricatured — 
 by numbers of its professed adherents. If, with all Cal- 
 vinists, 1 hold it to have been God himself tvho elected his 
 people before time began; I do not, in the very same breath, 
 with some, shall I not rather say the majority of them, re- 
 
30 ELECTION AND 
 
 present it — strange inconsistency ! — to be his people who 
 elect themselvesin time. No. liofGod are all ihln(js, through 
 him are all things likewise. Rom. xi. 36. If he foreknew 
 and predestinated his people, he also calls them. Ibid. viii. 
 29, 30. If it was he who made choice of them in his Son, 
 it is he who carries that gracious choice into effect. Their 
 being brought to the knowledge of the truth, is merely the 
 rendering of their election effectual.' — Thus, in my appre- 
 hension, all is of God. As the election is of him, so is the 
 calling likewise. It is not that a part of salvation belongs 
 to the Creator, and a part to the creature ; but tliat the 
 whole appertains to the Creator alone. — And as God calls 
 his elect, so are they, when called by him, made to hear 
 him. They were previously dead in trespasses and sins : 
 but in consequence of God's calling them, they become 
 spiritually alive. Such persons do not, like numbers who 
 would fain pass for Christians and Calvinists, remain du- 
 bious as to the voice of God having penetrated to their 
 consciences, and as to the truth of God having enlightened 
 their understandings. So far from this, his people, al- 
 though previously dead, having heard the voice of the Sou 
 of God, live ; John v. 25 ; and know that they are alive. 
 Rom. viii. 15, 16. 2 Corinth, v. 1 — 5. We know that the 
 Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding 
 that we may know him that is true, 1 John v. 20, is at 
 once the apostle's language and their own. The un- 
 changeable character of Jehovah as love having been 
 opened up to their minds, in the light of the person and 
 work of his well-beloved Son, they are all children of the 
 light and €f the day — know that they are so, in consequence 
 of the thick darkness by which the were formerly sur- 
 rounded having passed away — and walking and rejoicing 
 in the light of faith here, they all in due time attain to, 
 and are satisfied with, the light of glory hereafter. 
 
 B. In the matter of salvation, then, the creature is 
 entirely a passive recipient. 
 
THE MEANS OF GRACE. 31 
 
 T. He is so, most assuredly. Were it otherwise, the 
 glory of salvation would be shared by the creature with 
 the Creator. According to the gospel scheme, the whole 
 glory of salvation redounds, as it should do, to the Creator 
 alone. Of him, and through him, and to him, are all 
 things : to whom he glory for ever. Rom. xi. 36. — But 
 come, Robert : do you now comprehend what my senti- 
 ments are, better than you did when we first entered on 
 this conversation ? 
 
 B. I think I do. " The elect," according to you, "are 
 comparatively few in number — were chosen by God in 
 Christ before the world began — can receive no augmenta- 
 tion — lire in due time called by God himself — and are 
 brought to the knowledge of the truth, not in consequence 
 of any efforts or preparations to believe it made by them- 
 selves, but in spite of their natural, necessary, and increas- 
 ing, hostility to it. Means of grace and salvation are 
 such as used by God, not by them. For it is he who 
 takes care to place them in the circumstances in whicli 
 they hear the gospel ; as well as he who, by his own al- 
 mighty and sovereign power, renders the gospel beard by 
 them effectual. And the gospel is not a command to the 
 creature to believe or to do any thing else ; but is a pro- 
 clamation, rendered effectual to the elect, of what God is, 
 manifested in the light and through the medium of what 
 God in Christ hath done." — So far well. Still, liowever, I 
 wonder how you contrive to reconcile all this with univer- 
 sal salvation ! How, holding such views, you can suppose 
 both the elect, and the non-elect, to inherit the kingdom 
 of God! 
 
 T. Stop, Robert. You have never heard me either 
 say, or insinuate, that the non-elect shall enter into God's 
 kingdom. 
 
 B. Have I not ? Then I beg your pardon for my 
 precipitancy. 
 
32 ELECTION AND 
 
 T. So far from holding the notion which you have 
 just now imputed to me^ of all entering into the heavenly 
 kiugdom, on the contrary, I believe upon divine authority, 
 that except a man he horn again, he cannot see the Mngdom 
 of God. John iii. 3. Now as the elect alone are born 
 again, the elect alone do, or can, in my apprehension, see 
 that kingdom. 
 
 B. This is to me "'confusion worse confounded." I 
 cannot comprehend you at all — You say, that the whole 
 human race shall be saved. At all events, to give you 
 the benefit of your own distinction, ihat even the unre- 
 generate or non-elect portion of them shall be saved in a 
 certain sense. Do you not ? 
 
 T. Well. I admit that I do. 
 
 B. If so — if all are to be saved — how can that happen, 
 except in consequence of all being introduced, at one pe- 
 riod or another, into the heavenly kingdom ? 
 
 T. What if the salvation of the unregenerate, such as 
 it is, should be connected with the termination of the king- 
 dom of Christ Jesus as mediator? What if kins^dom 
 should signify kingly power? 
 
 B. Explain yourself. 
 
 T. If Christ's kingdom shall terminate, as scripture 
 assures us it shall do, in the ultimate subjugation or sal- 
 vation of the unregenerate, then it is plain that they 
 cannot enter into that which, at the very moment of their 
 subjugation, comes to an end. And if kingdom means 
 kingly power, as from numerous passages of scripture it 
 may be easily proved in many cases to do, then it is also 
 plain that, although exercised by the elect as reigning 
 with their Head, it can never be exercised by those who, 
 so far from reigning, are reigned over. 
 
 B. O ! I apprehend you ! You make the salvation of 
 the elect to consist in their being brought into the kingdom 
 of God, and in their being thereby privileged to reign as 
 
THE MEANS OF GRACE. 33 
 
 kings with Christ : Avliereas, in your conception of matters, 
 the non-elect never reign, but are the subjects of the reign 
 of Christ and his people. 
 
 T. You have caught and expressed my meaning very 
 accurately, Robert. 
 
 B. But will scripture bear you out in all this ? I 
 much doubt it. — With your permission, I would hear more 
 of this subject. It deeply interests me. 
 
 T. As I have an engagement at this hour, we must in 
 the mean time break off. But, if you have no objections, 
 we may resume our conversation to-morrow. 
 
 B. With all my heart. 
 
 END OF THE riRST DIALOGUE. 
 
DIALOGUE SECOND. 
 
 SUBJECT : 
 
 JESUS THE SON OF ADAM AS WELL AS 
 THE SON OF ABRAHAM. 
 
 SPEAKERS :— AUTHOR. BROTHER. 
 
 B. Since parting with you yesterday, I have been 
 thinking over the subject-matter of our, to me, very in- 
 teresting conversation. The result of my reflections I 
 may state to you has been, that many difficulties, insuper- 
 able difficulties, appear to me to stand in the way of the 
 reception of your theory. Among others, the express de- 
 claration of the inspired writer, in the second chapter of 
 the Epistle to the Hebrews, verse 14th : Of the seed of 
 Abraham he, Jesus, taketh hold. I translate the passage 
 according to the marginal reading, in order to anticipate 
 and satisfy any objections which you miglit make, and 
 make reasonably enough, to the supplementary words 
 which are inserted in the authorised version. — Now, my 
 dear brother, how do you reconcile this statement of the 
 apostle, which necessarily excludes all except Abraham's 
 spiritual descendants from an interest in the blessings of 
 salvation, with the notions of Universalists ? 
 
JESUS THE SON OF ADAM ETC. 35 
 
 T. Do you happen to remember the words of the apos- 
 tle Paul, which occur at the end of the third chapter of his 
 Epistle to the Galatians ? 
 
 B. I do. If ye he Chrisfs, then are ye Abraham's 
 seed, and heirs according to the promise. 
 
 T. Very accurately quoted. Well ; is it not plain, 
 from this declaration, that any human being, by becoming 
 a spiritual descendant of Christ, becomes thereby ipso 
 facto, according to the apostolic reasoning, a descendant 
 of Abraham likewise ? 
 
 B. Certainly. But, then, it is only believers of the 
 truth who, as Christ's spiritual descendants, do, or can, be- 
 come, through him as the channel, spiritual descendants 
 of Abraham. 
 
 T. That is to beg the question, Robert. Undoubtedly 
 if none but believers of the truth could become Christ's 
 descendants, none but believers of the truth could spirit- 
 ually become Abraham's seed. But what, if the whole 
 human race can be shewn, in one way or another, and at 
 one period or another, to have a spiritual descent from 
 Christ? — Would not the establishment of this fact, establish 
 at the same time the descent of the whole human race, 
 through Christ, from Abraham ? 
 
 B. Unquestionably. 
 
 T. This very fact is what I am prepared from scripture 
 to prove. Believers are in one and a peculiar sense — the 
 rest of the family of man are in another and a general 
 sense — connected with, and descended from, Christ. And 
 thus are both classes of human beings connected with, and 
 descended from, Abraham. 
 B. Indeed ! 
 
 T. It is true, nevertheless, however much you may be 
 startled at the assertion. — But before proceeding to the 
 proof of it, answer me this question : — Upon what authority 
 do you and I know the truth of what is contained in the 
 scriptures ? 
 
36 JESUS THE SON OF ADAM AS 
 
 B. Upon tliat of their divine testifier alone. For, I 
 am satisfied, tliat it is only a divine witness who is com- 
 petent to prove divine truth. — It heiug impossible for God 
 to receive testimony from man, that is, for the declarations 
 of the superior to be proved or corroborated by the inferior ; 
 all that is divinely true must, from the very necessity of 
 the case, be of the nature of light, that is, must be self- 
 evident to the mind into which it has been introduced. 
 To say that God himself becomes the witness to the con- 
 science of a believer, and that divine truth shines in a 
 believer's conscience by its own light, must be synonymous 
 modes of expression. 
 
 T. Admirably conceived and expressed, my dear 
 Robert. — Then, upon the principle stated by you, when 
 faith comes to have a place in our minds, we believe in 
 the existence of the persons spoken of in the scriptures, 
 and in the truth of the facts therein narrated, not on the 
 ground of our knowing any thing about them otherwise, 
 but solely on the ground of the revelation concerning them 
 which God hath vouchsafed to us. 
 
 B. This, of course, is implied in my position. 
 
 T. To proceed. — We know of the existence of Adam 
 and Abraham, and of the relationsliip in which they stand 
 to their respective posterities, solely upon the authority of 
 the information with which we are furnished by the holy 
 scriptures. 
 
 B. This is granted. 
 
 T. According to these scriptures, Adam is the head, 
 source, or progenitor, of the whole human family. 
 
 B. Yes. For God haih made o/his one blood, all na- 
 tions of men, for to dwell on the face of the earth. Acts 
 xvii. 26. 
 
 T. And from the same scriptures we learn, that 
 Abraham is the ancestor of the Jews, a portion of the hu- 
 man family. 
 
 B. True. 
 
WELL AS THE SON OF ABRAHAM. 37 
 
 T. Now, Robert, to come somewhat nearer to the point 
 at which I am aiming. You admit that our blessed Lord 
 was, according to the flesh, Abraham's descendant ? 
 
 B. Certainly 1 do. — Go on. 
 
 T. And that he was also Adam's descendant ? 
 
 B. As Abraham's descendant, he was of necessity also 
 Adam's descendant. — Who denies all this ? 
 
 T. No man professing any regard whatever to the 
 sacred volume will deny this. But many are found to 
 deny the obvious and necessary inferences to which it 
 leads. — As Abraham's descendant, had not the Lord' Jesus 
 a natural fleshly connection with the whole nation of the 
 Jews ? Were not all the members of the Israelitish com- 
 munity his kinsmen according to the flesh ? 
 
 B. Most assuredly they were. 
 
 T. And as the descendant of Adam, must not Jesus 
 have had a natural and fleshly connection, — more remote, 
 I confess, than that which he had with the Jews, — still a 
 natural and fleshly connection, with the rest of the human 
 race? — In other words, as you seem to hesitate about return- 
 ing an answer, must not Jesus, as Adam's descendant, have 
 been connected with all the rest of Adam's descendants ? 
 
 B. Stop. Let me think. — The idea which you have 
 just suggested is perfectly new to me. — I cannot deny 
 that Jesus must have borne some sort of relationship to all 
 mankind. He was a partaker of flesh and blood. That 
 is, of the nature of Adam. That is, of the nature which is 
 common to every human being. — Well : your demand is 
 reasonable. I do allow, at the risque of whatever conse- 
 quences may follow from the admission, that as the Lord 
 Jesus stood in a near fleshly relationship to Abraham's 
 natural descendants, so he had also a remoter fleshly con- 
 nection with the rest of the human race. 
 
 T. Do not be afraid of my drawing any improper in- 
 ferences from your concessions. I am content, for the 
 
38 JESUS THE SON OF ADAM AS 
 
 present, to do little more than echo your own words, and 
 say : — Jesus, as Abraham's descendant, bore a close fleshly 
 relationship to the Jews ; and, as Adam's descendant, bore 
 a remote fleshly relationship to the rest of the human race. 
 The fact of a fleshly connectiou having been admitted by 
 you to subsist between Jesus and every human being is 
 enough for my present purpose. 
 
 B. But you aim at deducing a conclusion favourable 
 to your own system from all this. 
 
 T. Most assuredly I do so. But it is such a conclu- 
 sion as, from the candour which you exhibit — a quality 
 rarely to be met with in religious polemics, — I am not 
 without hopes of carrying you along with me in. — Mark 
 the point of our mutual agreement. It is that, whether 
 nearer or more r-emote, the connection subsisting between 
 Jesus on the one hand and Jews and Gentiles on tlie 
 other, of which we now speak, is but a fleshly one. 
 
 B. Here we are agreed. 
 
 T. But there is likewise a spiritual relationship sub- 
 sisting between Jesus and human beings. — Is there not ? 
 
 B. Between Jesus and certain human beings. You 
 know that the subject-matter in dispute between us is, as 
 to whether this spiritual relationship be confined to a {ew, 
 or extend to all. 
 
 T. Well. There is, however, such a thing as a spiritual^ 
 as distinguished from a natural or JiesJily relationship. 
 
 B. There is. 
 
 T. Now answer me, — and answer me with the same 
 delightful fairness which you have all along exhibited, — 
 does the spiritual relationship, the existence of which you 
 admit, proceed upon the same principles upon Avliich the 
 natural one does ? 
 
 B. Propose your question in some other form. 
 
 T. I will. Is it upon the principle of fleshly descent 
 that God confers a spiritual relationship? Or, is it upon 
 some other principle? 
 
V/ELL AS THE SON OF ABRAHAM. 39 
 
 B. Upon a totally clifFereut principle, to be sure. The 
 enjoyment of the privileges of the earthly Canaan, was 
 connected with ajteshly descent from Abraham. Whereas 
 spiritual privileges are bestowed of pure, free, sovereign, 
 grace. Those who are the recipients of them are born, 
 not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of 
 man, but of God. John i. 13. 
 
 T. So far, good. You admit, then, that it is not the 
 descendants of Abraham according to the flesh, hwi certain 
 individuals chosen by God from among Jews and Gen- 
 tiles, who become partakers of spiritual privileges througli 
 Christ Jesus ? 
 
 B. I do. 
 
 T. And do you remember any particular appellation 
 given to the persons thus privileged, in the New Testament 
 Scriptures? — To express myself in a somewhat different 
 manner: Are such persons represented as being really 
 and substantially, what another class of persons were only 
 figuratively ? 
 
 B. I understand you. — The persons upon whom the 
 principle of faith in Christ Jesus is conferred, are spoken 
 of and treated as the true Israel of God. They constitute 
 the real, as contra-distinguished from the typical, Jews. 
 And this, because he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly ; 
 neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh : 
 but he is a Jew wjiich is one inwardly, and circumcision 
 is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter, 
 whose praise is not of men, but of God. Rom. ii. 28, 29. 
 Well, now that I have admitted believers in Christ Jesus 
 to constitute the true Jews — the spiritual Israel — what 
 then ? 
 
 T. Why, to call your attention to the manner in which 
 the members of the spiritual Israel are brouglit to the en- 
 joyment of their special divine privileges. Have you ever 
 considered that that manner is twofold ? 
 
40 JESUS THE SON OF ADAM AS 
 
 B. I have not. Indeed, I am not sure that I com- 
 prehend your meaning. 
 
 T You shall not remain long at a loss with regard to 
 it. — Was not Jesus the descendant of Abraham according 
 to the flesh ? 
 
 B. He was. 
 
 T. Then Jesus, as having been Abraham's j^esA/y de- 
 scendant, must, by making believers of the truth or the 
 spiritual Israel his own descendants, impart to them, in 
 some sort, a fleshly connection with Abraham likewise. 
 They are Clnist's seed; Christ was Abraham's fleshly 
 seed : therefore, in becoming Christ's seed, they are seen 
 to acquire, through him, a kind of fleshly connection with 
 Abraham himself. — You remember the passage which 
 you have already quoted: If ye he Christ's, then are ye 
 Abrahams seed. Gal. iii. 29. Thus you perceive that 
 believers inherit their spiritual privileges, not independ- 
 ently of, but in connection with, a species of fleshly 
 relationship which, through Christ, they bear to Abraham 
 himself. They are not themselves Abraham's fleshly de- 
 scendants; but they are descended from him who was 
 Abraham's fleshly descendant. 
 
 B. So I perceive. 
 
 T. Thus, then, the first way in which believers of the 
 truth become partakers of their spiritual privileges, is act- 
 ually through the medium of 2i fleshly relationship subsist- 
 ing between them and Abraham. They are the seed of 
 him, who was himself of the number of Abraham's j^es/^^y 
 seed. — But it is not in this way alone, or principally, that 
 their spiritual privileges redound to them. For they 
 do not inherit them merely on the ground of their being, 
 in a certain sense, Abraham's fleshly seed. 
 
 B. By no means. Abraham's fleshly seed, properly 
 speaking, they are not. That seed still exists, and, from 
 spiritual privileges, are utterly and for ever excluded. A 
 
WELL AS THE SON OF ABRAHAM. 41 
 
 gulph is interposed between them and salvation which, 
 by them as Jews, never can be passed over. Luke xvi. 26. 
 Believers, or the spiritual Israel, I acknowledge, taught 
 by the hint which you have just given me, attain to the 
 heavenly inheritance through him who was Abraham's 
 fleshly descendant ; and yet they attain not to it as them- 
 selves fleshly descendants of Abraham, but as having been 
 begotten again of incorruptible seed, even by the word of 
 God, Christ Jesus, which livelh and abideth for ever. 1 
 Peter i. 23. 
 
 T. I observe that you apprehend completely my mean- 
 ing as to the twofold manner in which believers become 
 the spiritual Israel : first, as descended from Jesus, who 
 was himself Abraham's fleshly seed; and, secondly, as 
 descended from Jesus by a spiritual, not by a natural or 
 fleshly, generation. — Having observed and admitted this 
 double connection wliicli believers have with Abraham, a 
 fleshly and a spiritual one ; and this double medium 
 through which they inherit their peculiar and glorious pri- 
 vileges ; have -you no suspicion of the consequences to 
 which the fact conducts us ? 
 
 B. None whatever : if, by the consequences to which 
 you allude, you mean consequences favourable to the theory 
 of Universalists. 
 
 T. Have you not expressed yourself satisfied, that the 
 Lord Jesus had a fleshly connection with the Gentile por- 
 tion of the family of man, as well as with the Jewish por- 
 tion of it ? The connection in the latter case althougli 
 more close, not excluding that in the former case although 
 more remote ? 
 
 B. I certainly have. 
 
 T. Have you not also been satisfied, that the blessings 
 which are conferred through Christ Jesus are spiritual -, 
 the persons who are the recipients of them being the true 
 Israel, that is, the anti-types of Abraham's fleshly desceii 
 dants ? F 
 
42 JESUS THE SON OF ADAM AS 
 
 B. Unquestionably, I have stated my conviction to 
 this effect. 
 
 T. And yet, that these spiritual blessings come to be- 
 lievers, not independently of the Messiah's fleshly connec- 
 tion with Abialiam, but actually in virtue and through the 
 medium of that very fleshly connection ? 
 
 B. All this I have admitted, and still admit. 
 
 T. Having made these different admissions, does it 
 not occur to you that, in forming a connection with flesh, 
 Jesus formed a connection with a nature common to every 
 human being ; and that, if his connection with flesh is one 
 of the media through which he is enabled to convey spirit- 
 ual blessings to a few, the same connection with flesh, as 
 a connection with all, evidently opens up a channel through 
 which he may convey spiritual blessings to all ? 
 
 B. In a matter of such importance as this, you must 
 not urge me to an immediate answer. I must take time to 
 deliberate. 
 
 T. Perhaps a little variety in the way of presenting 
 the subject may assist you in your deliberations. If 
 Christ's fleshly connection with Abraham, so far from 
 obstructing, actually leads to and necessarily results in the 
 enjoyment of superior spiritual privileges by the few who 
 are Abraham's spiritual descendants ; must not his fleshly 
 connection with Adam, which, although more remote, is 
 as certain and decided as his fleshly connection with 
 Abraham, so far from obstructing, equally lead to and 
 with equal necessity result in the enjoyment of inferior 
 spiritual privileges by the unregenerate portion of the hu- 
 man race ? Besides, if the Jews find their anti-type in 
 believers as constituting the true Israel; where are the 
 Gentiles to find their anti-type, except in the rest of the 
 family of man ? A circumstance which leads me to the 
 remark, that the close spiritual connection subsisting be- 
 tween Jesus and the true Israel corresponding to, and 
 
WELL AS THE SON OF ABRAHAM. 43 
 
 being the substance of, the close fleshly connection sub- 
 sisting between him and the Jews ; it is impossible for us, 
 except in a remoter spiritual connection subsisting between 
 our Lord and unregenerate human beings, to find any 
 thing corresponding to, and the substance of, the remoter 
 fleshly connection subsisting hetween him and the Gentile 
 world. 
 
 Do you hesitate about receiving a truth so momentous 
 on the foundation of mere reasonings? You are right. 
 Well, then, listen to the way in which an inspired apostle 
 lays down, as matters of fact, the propositions which I have 
 just brought out in the shape of conclusions. The passage 
 referred to is 1 Corinth, xv. 21 — 23. After stating the 
 fundamental proposition of Christ's connection with all 
 flesh in these words, since by man came death, hy man 
 came also the resurrection of the dead ; the apostle shews 
 both the general, and the particular, spiritual results of 
 this fleshly connection, in what follows. Tlie general spi- 
 ritual result; As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall 
 all he made alive: and the particular one; Bat every man 
 in his own order; Christ the Jirst fruits, afterward, they 
 that are Christ's at his coming. That is, although through 
 Jesus, the second man, the Lord from heaven, some human 
 beings only derive peculiar spiritual benefits ; yet likewise 
 through him as the second man, and thereby as connected 
 with all flesh, general spiritual benefits unquestionably 
 redound to all. 
 
 B. Is it the import of your argument that Jesus, in 
 appearing in flesh, having taken hold of that which is 
 common to every human being, must, therefore, have taken 
 hold of it for a purpose common to every human being ? 
 That is, that having taken hold of or connected himself 
 with the nature of all, he must have done so for the pur- 
 pose of effecting the salvation of all ? 
 
 T. Not exactly. 
 
44 JKSUS THE SON OF ADAM AS 
 
 B. What then? 
 
 T. The argument is, that close fleshly connection with 
 Abraham's natural descendants, having implied close 
 spiritual connection with Abraham's spiritual descendants; 
 therefore, remoter fleshly connection with the Gentile world, 
 must have implied remoter spiritual connection with the 
 imregenerate portion of the family of man. My argument 
 chiefly turns upon that grand scriptural fact, which you 
 have more than once already admitted, that, as Jesus was 
 the Son of Adam as well as the Son of Abraham, his 
 connection with flesh is not confined to a connection with 
 Abraham's fleshly descendants, but extends, although in a 
 remoter degree, to a connection with all the descendants 
 of Adam. And it also rests upon the scriptural fact, that 
 what is fleshly is the shadow of what is spiritual and 
 heavenly : Coloss. ii. 17 : Heb. ix. 9. 23. 24 : from which 
 I infer, that a remoter fleshly connection must be the 
 type, figure, or shadow, of a remoter spiritual connection ; 
 just as a near fleshly connection on the part of Christ with 
 the Jews is, by all enlightened believers of the truth, ac- 
 knowledged to be the type, figure, or shadow, of a near 
 spiritual connection on his part with the New Testament 
 Israel. 
 
 B. I undersland your argument at any rate. — But why 
 did you object to adopting my statement of it ? Is it not 
 in reality equivalent to your own ? 
 
 T. Not exactly, as I have already remarked. For, 
 although when it is stated that as Christ took a nature 
 common to all, it must have been for a purpose common 
 to all, a grand general truth is asserted — a truth of which 
 I have availed myself elsewhere ;* yet the fact of all being 
 saved, because all had a fleshly connection formed with 
 them by Christ, is a truth different from that which I am 
 now contending for, viz. that the close fleshly connection 
 
 * In the second volume of my Assurance of Faith, chapter 6tk. 
 
WELL AS TRE SON OF ABRAHAM. 45 
 
 wliicli Christ contracted with some, pointed to a close 
 spiritual connection to be contracted by him with some like- 
 wise ; and thereby to salvation to be enjoyed by them in a 
 higher sense than it is, or can be, enjoyed by the world 
 in general. 
 
 B. You forget that the salvation of any but believers, 
 is the very point in question. 
 
 T. I am very far from doing so, my dear brother. But 
 I am not without hopes that this will not long remain a 
 matter in dispute between us. 
 
 B. There is a circumstance which, it strikes me, you 
 overlook in all your reasonings on this subject, David; and 
 that is : that Christ has a spiritual connection with his be- 
 lieving people even here ; while his connection with tlie 
 rest of the human race is, as you are well aware, at the 
 best merely a fleshly one. If he had merely a fleshly 
 connection in time with all, I could understand, and might 
 admit, the possibility of a spiritual connection existing 
 throughout eternity with all likewise. But it appears to 
 me, that the fact of a spiritual connection subsisting in 
 time between him and a few human beings, implies the 
 conferring of ad\ antages hereafter on those few, in which 
 it is impossible for the others, as destitute of the spiritual 
 connection in time, to participate. 
 
 T. So far from having overlooked the circumstance of 
 which you speak, my dear Robert, it lies at the root of, 
 and is pre-supposed in, all my scriptural reasonings. In 
 this very circumstance, indeed, of the members of the 
 Church having a spiritual connection with Christ in time, 
 of which the rest of the human family are destitute, consists 
 the nearness of the relationship in which the Church stands 
 to Christ; and is there realized in anti-type that near fleshly 
 connection which subsisted between Abraham's descendants 
 and him. — But you cannot tell how delighted I am at your 
 having proposed your objection in the tangible form tliat 
 
46 JESUS THE SON OF ADAM AS 
 
 you have done. It will enable me to bring our controversj 
 the more siDeedilv to an issue. 
 
 I know that there subsists in time merely a fleshly con- 
 nection between Christ and mankind in general. I know 
 fartlier that, while they are in flesh, he gives to his people, 
 and to his people alone, to possess, over and above that 
 fleshly connection with him which they share in common 
 with the world, a spiritual connection with him which is 
 peculiar to themselves : so that, although as to their bodies 
 and natural minds, they continue j'^es/*/?/ like others, yet as 
 to their consciences they are spiritual, having had conferred 
 on them by faith the earnest of the divine and heavenly 
 nature of the Son of God. And, in virtue of this privi- 
 lege, even now are they themselves the Sons of God. 1 
 John iii. 2. Rom. viii. 14 — 16. — Under these circum- 
 stances, as possessing a spiritual as well as a fleshly con- 
 nection with Christ while they are upon earth; and as 
 thereby essentially distinguished from those who in time 
 have merely a fleshly connection with the Lord Jesus; I 
 readily with you draw the conclusion, that a fate must 
 await believers hereafter perfectly difierent from that 
 which awaits the unbelieving world. — This, however, is 
 nothing more than what I have been all along maintaining. 
 In this possession of the earnest of spirit here, and in the 
 glorious privileges which stand connected with this here- 
 after, consists the salvation of the church of the living God. 
 Believers, and believers only, are connected with Jesus as 
 the spiritual Abraham. They only are 
 
 B. The spiritual Abraham ! What do you mean by 
 employing such phraseology ? 
 
 T. My dear Robert, are you ignorant of the fact that 
 Jesus is the anti-type of Abraham ? — The real Abraham ? 
 The true father of the faithful or believers ? — Has it never 
 occurred to you, that he whom we call Abraham was 
 merely a type or shadow of Jesus Christ, as Abraham in 
 reality ? 
 
WELL AS THE SON OF ABRAHAM. 47 
 
 B. Why — I can scarcely say that it has. 
 
 T. Wheu you consider, that it is Jesus who begets 
 again his believing people, not with corruptible seed, but 
 with incorruptible, even the word of God which liveth and 
 abideth for ever, you can scarcely fail to perceive that he 
 is the true father of the faithful. He is thus seen to he the 
 true Abraham. Abraham, as the ancestor of the fleshly 
 Israel, having been merely the type of that spiritual 
 Abraham who is the ancestor of the spiritual Israel. — But 
 this is not all. Jesus, who according to the flesh was 
 Abraham's Son, was according to the spirit Abraham's 
 Lord. And this, because he was not merely the offspring, 
 but also the root, of Abraham. He was the true Abraham, 
 not only as the ancestor of the true Israel, but as, accord- 
 ing to the spirit, the source, origin, and ancestor of Abraham 
 himself. Hence his language. Before Abraham was, I am. 
 John viii. 58. 
 
 B. All this is to a certain degree new to me. But I 
 cannot gainsay it. 
 
 T. Well, then, it is as the true or spiritual Abraham 
 that Jesus begets his chosen people, by bringing them to 
 the knowledge of the truth. Begotten of him, they are, 
 like him their spiritual ancestor, sufierers on the earth ; — 
 strangers and pilgrims here, — seeking that city which hath 
 foundations, whose builder and maker the Lord is. Heb. 
 xi; 10. But as, in due time, the typical Abraham's natural 
 descendants were brought into the earthly Canaan, so, in 
 due time likewise, are all the anti-typical Abraham's spirit- 
 ual descendants introduced into the heavenly Canaan, there 
 to abide and reign with their exalted head for evermore. 
 Rom. viii. 17; 2 Timothy ii. 12. — All this happens to them, 
 not merely in consequence of their possesing a fleshly con- 
 nection with Jesus ; for this they have in common with 
 the rest of the world : but in consequence of their possessing 
 over and above this, even while they are in flesh, a spiritual 
 
4S JESUS THP SON OF ADAM AS 
 
 connection with liim likewise. This spiritual connection 
 necessarily involving in itself the rendering of their con- 
 sciences; whicli originally were but fleshly like those of 
 others, actually spiritual even in time ; and thereby giving 
 to their originally fleshly minds, by their being made spi- 
 ritual in time, a totally different fate from the fleshly minds 
 of others which, so far from being made spiritually alive in 
 time, actually perish. 
 
 B. I fancy that I understand you. And yet, if so, you 
 are merely broaching the ordinary Calvinistic theory : or 
 something, at all events, extremely like it. You are re- 
 presenting Jesus, as the true and spiritual Abraham, to be 
 the head and ancestor of a true and spiritual Israel — they, 
 like the fleshly Israel whose anti-type they are, being a 
 body selected from the rest of the world ; and, like the 
 fleshly Israel, enjoying privileges from all participation in 
 which the rest of the human race are excluded. The 
 spiritual Abraham having begotten his spiritual posterity 
 in time by the word of the truth of his grace, you repre- 
 sent him as elevating them hereafter to heaven, the true 
 and spiritual Canaan, and the place of their blessed and 
 everlasting abode. To this state of blessedness and glory, 
 according to the view of matters taken by you, he does not 
 elevate the rest of the human race. — Tell me, have I suc- 
 ceeded in conveying your meaning ? For, let me assure 
 you, that I am most anxious neither to misunderstand nor 
 to misrepresent you. 
 
 T. You have expressed my sentiments, so far as you 
 have gone, with the utmost accuracy. 
 
 B. Then what have we, all the while, been disputing 
 about ? If Jesus, as the spiritual Abraham, save only the 
 spiritual Israel, that is, save only a limited number of the 
 human family, what becomes of universal salvation ? 
 
 T. Is not Jesus the spiritual Adam, as well as the 
 spiritual Abraham P 
 
WELL AS THE SON OF ABRAHAM. 49 
 
 B. Let me reflect for a moment. 
 T. I mean, is it not declared by the apostle Paul, in 
 one passage, Rom. v. 14, that Adam was the figure of him 
 that was lo come j and, in another passage, which appears 
 as if it had been expressly intended for an interpretation 
 of that which I have just quoted, is not Jesus denominated 
 the last Adam P* 
 
 B. Oh ! you need put yourself to no farther trouble 
 in establishing this point. I admit distinctly that Jesus 
 is the anti-type of Adam, or the spiritual Adam as you 
 seem fond of designating him. Scripture is too full and 
 express in its declarations to this effect, to leave me in any 
 doubt respecting it. — What I wanted time for was, to re- 
 flect on the inferences which you might deduce from my 
 admission. 
 
 T. Now, then, for one of these inferences. — Jesus, as 
 the true or spiritual Adam, is the Saviour of the whole 
 human race. 
 
 B. What say you ? 
 
 T. That Jesus, as the spiritual Adam, saves all. 
 B. Explain yourself. — How do you bring out this 
 conclusion ? 
 
 T. The general principle is, that as the testimony of 
 Jesus is the spirit of prophecy, Rev. xix. 10 j and as all 
 the persons and circumstances of the Old Testament scrip- 
 tures are typical or emblematic of him and of his kingdom ; 
 so there is always to be found a correspondency subsisting 
 between some leading circumstance belonging to the type, 
 and some leading circumstance belonging to Jesus the 
 glorious anti-type. To take v.hat we are now speaking 
 about as an example : — Abraham was the father of a lim- 
 ited number of the human race, upon whom peculiar 
 temporal privileges were bestowed; so Jesus, as the anti- 
 type of Abraham, is the spiritual father of a limited num- 
 
 * See 1 Corinth, xv. 45, and tlie context. 
 G 
 
50 JESUS THE SON OF ADAM AS 
 
 ber of the human race, upon whom peculiar spiritual pri- 
 vileges are bestowed. Adam, again, was the father of 
 and connected with the whole family of man, as their 
 common natural ancestor; so Jesus, as the anti-type of 
 Adam, is the father of and connected with the whole 
 human race, as their common spiritual ancestor. — To adopt 
 another mode of expressing myself: — Jesus, by being the 
 spiritual Abraham, is the father of and conveys peculiar 
 spiritual benefits to a few of manldnd ; whereas, by being 
 the spiritual Adam, he is the father of and the source of 
 spiritual benefits to every human being. Those who have 
 not peculiar spiritual benefits through him as the spiritual 
 Abraham, deriving general spiritual benefits through him 
 as the spiritual Adam. 
 
 B. Is not this an argument which you have employed 
 and urged already ? 
 
 T. Not quite the same as, although closely connected 
 with, one formerly used by me, and leading to the same 
 result. My former argument was, that Jesus, as the de- 
 scendant of Abraham, being also the descendant of Adam, 
 must have had not merely a close fleshly connection with 
 Abraham's natural seed, but also a remoter fleshly connec- 
 tion with the rest of the human race. My present argument 
 is, that while, as the spiritual Abraham, Jesus is the spiritual 
 father of, and saves after a high and peculiar fashion, a 
 small portion of mankind, who constitute the spiritual 
 Israel ; over and above this, as the spiritual Adam, he 
 must be the spiritual father of all, and must, in that char- 
 acter and capacity, be the source of a general spiritual 
 salvation which is applicable to all. 
 
 B. Can you adduce any particular passages of scrip- 
 ture where Jesus is spoken of as the anti-type of Adam? 
 and where all human beings are represented as having a 
 general spiritual interest in him as such ? 
 
 T. Most assuredly I can. As in Adam all die, even 
 
WELL AS THE SON OF ABRAHAM. 61 
 
 SO in Christy that is, as the context evidently implies, in 
 Christ as the spiritual or anti-typical Adam, shall all be 
 made alive. 1 Corinth, xv. 22. And, The first man 
 Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam 7vas made a 
 quickening Spirit. V. 45. Besides, let me refer you, for 
 full satisfaction in regard to this subject, to the argument 
 which the Apostle Paul prosecutes from the 12th verse to 
 the end of the 5th chapter of his Epistle to the Romans. 
 There you will find that Adam, as the fleshly ancestor of 
 all, stands contrasted with Jesus, as the anti-type of Adam 
 and thereby as the spiritual ancestor of all : and that the 
 efiects of the one sin of the former, as resulting to all hu- 
 man beings in condemnation and death ; stand contrasted 
 with the effects of the one righteousness of the latter, as 
 resulting to all those in whose case sin and death had 
 abounded, that is, to all human beings, in justification and 
 life everlasting. 
 
 B. But you know well the restriction of the word ally 
 in the passages to which you have alluded, to all believers, 
 which Calvinistic divines have agreed in making. 
 
 T. Perfectly. — But, in the first place, preferring, as I 
 wish to do always, a divine statement, to the assertions of 
 mere men however eminent, I am satisfied to think with 
 the apostle that as, by the offence of one, the fleshly Adam, 
 judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so, 
 by the righteousness of one, the Lord Jesus in his character 
 and capacity as the spiritual Adam, the free gift came upon 
 ALL MEN unto justification of life.* Rom. v. 18. And, 
 in the second place, having discovered from sciipture, the 
 only source of information in such matters, that there is a 
 difference between the character of Jesus as the spiritual 
 Abraham, and his character as the spiritual Adam, while 
 I acknowledge that, in his former character, Jesus only 
 
 • Some words are supplied which are not in the Greek; but the words all imen 
 occur in the original in both parts of the antithesis. 
 
52 JESUS THE SON OF ADAM AS 
 
 takes hold of and saves the true Abrahamic seed, tliose 
 who are the holy brethren, and partakers of the heavenly 
 calling, Heb. iii. 1; I am constrained, by the same divine 
 evidence and authority which have extorted from me the 
 confession just made, to rejoice in Jesus as likewise pos- 
 sessed of the latter character, or that of the spiritual Adam, 
 and as such the author of the resurrection from the dead of 
 the whole human family. 
 
 B. I readily admit, that even the unbelieving lise 
 through Christ. His voice ultimately penetrates the re- 
 gions of the tomb ; and his mighty power ultimately dis- 
 possesses it of all its tenants. death ! I will he thy 
 plague; O grave ! I will he thy destruction. This, taught by 
 the apostle in the fifteenth chapter of first Corinthians, I 
 am satisfied is the language of the Lord Jesus, and pro- 
 claims a triumph in which all participate. 
 
 T. Precious is the confession which you have just 
 made, my dear brother. But it is completely and start- 
 lingly at variance with other parts of your own theory. — 
 By admitting that even the unbelieving dead are raised 
 ultimately through Christ, you admit, first, " a connection 
 to subsist between them and him;" and secondly, that "they 
 are indebted for their everlasting existence, whatever it 
 may be, to him." In reality, I maintain no more. This 
 is the utmost extent of what I conceive to be implied in 
 Christ's being the spiritual Adam, when considered with 
 a reference to the unregenerate portion of the family of 
 man. — Jesus, as Adam's descendant, has a fleshly connec- 
 tioii^with all human beings; and as Adam's Lord, or 
 rather as the spiritual Adam, bearing a general spiritual 
 .relationship to all, all have such a general interest in his 
 salvation, as ensures to them the benefit of participating 
 in his resurrection. But Jesus, as Abraham's descendant, 
 bore a peculiar fleshly relationship to some; and as 
 Abraham's seed, or rather as the spiritual Abraham, 
 
WELL AS THE SON OF ABRAHABI. 53 
 
 bearing a peculiar spiritual relationship to some, even 
 while they are in flesh, they have such a peculiar interest 
 in him^ as ensures to them present resurrection from the 
 dead, and the present enjoyment of life everlasting. — So 
 much then for the fact, that both of us perceive and admit 
 such a connection to subsist between Jesus and all, as en- 
 sures even to the unregenerate, resurrection from the dead 
 and everlasting existence. But how do you propose to 
 reconcile the existence of this connection between Christ 
 and the unregenerate, with that other portion of your 
 theory which represents Christ as raising persons thus 
 connected with him from the dead for the purpose of in- 
 flicting upon them never-ending torments? 
 
 B. Concerning this, David, we shall talk on some 
 other occasion. In the meanwhile, having laid it down 
 as one of your leading positions, that it is as the spiritual 
 Abraham that Jesus saves the elect or spiritual Israel, I 
 want to know how it happens that, as the spiritual Abra- 
 ham, he can have a connection wdth and save the rest of 
 the human race ? You may remember that, at the outset 
 of this conversation, you seemed to intimate the fact of 
 Jesus, as Abraham's seed, saving all; and yet, in the pro- 
 gress of it, you have limited the salvation of Jesus, as 
 Abraham's seed and the spiritual Abraham, to compara- 
 tively speaking a very few. Now, how do you reconcile 
 your two statements? How do you make Jesus, as the 
 spiritual Abraham, to save aferv and yet to save all? 
 
 T. Very acutely objected, Robert. And yet the ans- 
 wer is extremely easy. Jesus saves none, except the 
 spiritual Israel, in his character and capacity as the spi- 
 ritual Abraham. This I repeat in terms the most distinct 
 and explicit. — But it is through his previously being the 
 spiritual Abraham, that Jesus becomes the spiritual Adam 
 and as such the Saviour of all. And thus»it is that, al- 
 though not immediately yet mediately, although not in 
 
54 JESUS THE SON OF ADAM AS 
 
 one sense yet in another, as the spiritual Abraham he 
 saves alL — You may remember my having given you a 
 hint to this effect ah'eady. 
 
 B. "Through his being the spiritual Abraham, Jesus 
 becomes the spiritual Adam!" Have the goodness to ex- 
 plain yourself. 
 
 T. Cheerfully, my dear brother. Through his being 
 naturally Abraham's fleshly seed, we have satisfied our- 
 selves that Jesus was also naturally Adam's fleshly seed. 
 His being the fleshly descendant of the one, having neces- 
 sarily implied his being also the fleshly descendant of the 
 other, — Just so conversely. Jesus being the spiritual 
 Abraham, and as such the father of the spiritual Israel ; 
 implies his being also the spiritual Adam, and as such the 
 father spiritually considered of the whole human race. 
 As through his being Abraham's seed, he was also Adam's 
 seed ; so through his being tlie spiritual Abraham, he is 
 also the spiritual Adam. — To express myself somewhat 
 differently: as Jesus could not naturally become Abraham's 
 seed, without becoming also Adam's seed; so no more 
 could he become spiritually the true Abraham, without 
 becoming also spiritually the true Adam. A universality 
 of spiritual connection, was as much and necessarily in- 
 volved in the immediate restricted spiritual connection in 
 the latter case ; as the universality of fleshly connection, 
 was involved in the immediate restricted fleshly connection 
 in the former case. 
 
 B. Give me some proof of this. 
 
 T. It may be proved scripturally in a variety of ways. 
 First. By means of typical allusions. You cannot have 
 forgotten the remarkable fact of the change of Abraham's 
 name, the circumstances connected with which are related 
 in the seventeenth chapter of Genesis. He was originally 
 called Abram, that is, the high or exalted father : but 
 subsequently he had conferred on him the name of Abraham, 
 
WELL AS THE SON OF ABRAHAM. 55 
 
 ov father of tnuUitudes. Neither shall thy name any more 
 be called Ahram, but thy name shall be Abraham ; for a 
 father of many nations have I made thee. Verse 5th. Just 
 so, Jesus who was exalted to God's right hand as the 
 Prince and Saviour of his church, subsequently and ulti- 
 mately appears as the Saviour of the whole human race. 
 He changes from being manifested as saving the nation 
 that is (jreatly blessed in him, to being manifested as he in 
 whom all the families of the earth are blessed. 
 
 B. Proceed. 
 
 T. Secondly. Itmay be proved by implication. Thou 
 hast put all things in subjection under his Jesus' feet. 
 For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left no- 
 thing that is not put under him. But now we see not yet 
 all things put under him. But ne see Jesus, ivho was 
 made a little lower than the angels, for the suffering of 
 death, crowned with glory and honour, that he, by the grace 
 of God, should taste death for every man. Heb. ii. 8, 9. 
 The words with which we have to do at present are : now 
 we see not yet all things put under him. That is, although 
 Jesus is destined to appear ultimately, agreeably to the 
 scope of the whole passage and the psalm from which it 
 is quoted, in his highest character as the spiritual Adam 
 or Saviour of all, we see him now only in his inferior cha- 
 racter as spiritual Abraham or Saviour of a iew. This 
 inferior character, however, is paving the way for, and will 
 ultimately run up into, the superior one. Having tasted 
 death for every man, — through saving his church, the un- 
 regenerate themselves shall ultimately appear put under 
 his feet, or saved by being subdued by him. 
 
 Thirdly. The grand truth for which I contend, of Jesus' 
 character as the spiritual Adam being necessarily involved 
 in his character as the spiritual Abraham, is also proved by 
 facts. 1. Jesus, in his conception, took hold of flesh and 
 blood, that is, took hold of a nature which is common to the 
 
Ob JESUS THE SON OF ADAM AS 
 
 wliole family of man. This he did for a purpose common to 
 all, namely, that of converting the nature of flesh and blood 
 into the nature of spirit,and thereby of subduing it to himself. 
 That is, for the purpose of manifesting himself as the spi- 
 ritual Adam. But as he accomplishes his purpose through 
 the medium of conferring upon his chosen and beloved ones 
 the earnest of spirit in time, and of thereby raising them 
 to the enjoyment of the spiritual Canaan with him when 
 time as to them shall be no more, that is, by appearing as 
 the spiritual Abraham, it is obvious, that it is through his 
 being first the spiritual Abraham, he subsequently becomes 
 or rather is manifested subsequently to be the spiritual 
 Adam. — Again, 2 : that Jesus' character as the spiritual 
 Adam, is necessarily involved in his character as the spi- 
 ritual Abraham, appears from the fact, that it is the same 
 glorious being who is the one as well as the other. All the 
 types, be it remembered, shadowed forth one and the same 
 glorious anti-type. Unquestionably, Jesus is manifested 
 as the spiritual Abraham first : a circumstance which neces- 
 sarily implies that, except by previously appearing in that 
 capacity, he could not subsequently have appeared in the 
 other ; and that it is his character as the spiritual Abraham, 
 which involves his character as the spiritual Adam, and 
 not vice versa.* But as both these characters belong 
 
 * I mean, as to the manner of development or to our apprehensions of things^ 
 For, in reality, and when we go to the bottom of the matter, it is Jesus' character 
 as the spiritual Adam or the all in all, that involves his character as the spiiitual 
 Abraham, as well as his other characters whether real or representative, and not 
 vice versa. The principle of tliis being, that the universal must always include the 
 particular, not the particular, the universal. Still, I can speak with perfect accuracy 
 as I have done in the text, both because it is the same being who is the spiritual 
 Abraham and the spiritual Adam ; and because, to us creatures, it is through the 
 development of the particular that the development of the universal tctkes place, or 
 through being manifested as the spiritual Abraham that Jesus is manifested as the 
 spiritual Adam : in other words, because, to us creatures, from the limitation of our 
 minds and the adjustment of the divine procedure and revelations in conformity 
 thereto, the particular, by appearing first and leading to the universal, appears to 
 us to include within itself the universal. 
 
 "Compare, in illustration of this, the 2nd chapter of the epistle to the Hebrews, 
 from the 5th verse downwards, with the 8th Psalm throughout. 
 
WELL AS THE SON OF ABRAHAM. 57 
 
 essentially to one and the same divine being, it is perfectly 
 obvious, that the one could not have been possessed by 
 him, without his possessing also the other; or that the one 
 character is necessarily involved in that of the other. As 
 he could not be Abraham's Son, without being also Adam's 
 Son ; so neither could he be Abraham's Lord, or the spi- 
 ritual Abraham, without being also Adam's Lord, or the 
 spiritual Adam. 
 
 B. You hold then, with ordinary Universalists, that 
 such declarations of God to Abraham, as. In thee shall all 
 families of the earth he blessed; Gen. xii. 3; and, In thy 
 seed shall all the nations of the earth he blessed ; xxii. 18; 
 refer to the ultimate salvation of the whole human race 
 through him; or, which is the same thing, through 
 Christ his seed? 
 
 T. Most assuredly. For Jesus, Abraham's seed, by 
 having had a fleshly connection with him, had a fleshly 
 connection likewise with the whole human race ; and con- 
 versely, the whole human race by becoming in one way 
 or another, and at one period or another, Christ's seed, 
 become thereby likewise Abraham's seed. At the same 
 time, I hold this general principle of Universalists, of "a 
 connection subsisting between Jesus, Abraham's seed, and 
 the whole human race, and his salvation of the whole ac- 
 cordingly," without allowing myself to forget, or lose sight 
 of, any of the distinctions already laid down. It is through 
 Jesus, as at once Abraham's seed and the spiritual Abra- 
 ham, that the salvation, such as it is, of the unregenerate 
 portion of the family of man is ensured : and this, because 
 it is through his manifestation as the spiritual Abraham 
 or the Saviour of the spiritual Israel, that he is ultimately 
 manifested as the spiritual Adam or the subduer of all 
 things to himself; and because he is the spiritual Adam 
 or all in all, as well as the spiritual Abraham or head of 
 the church. But it is not as the spiritual Abraham, or, to 
 
 H 
 
5S JESUS THE SON OF ADAM AS 
 
 speak more correctly, it is not while manifested as the 
 spiritual Abraham, that Jesus saves all : for, while he 
 appears as tlie spiritual Abraham, he is the Head and 
 Saviour of the spiritual Israel or his believing people 
 alone. 
 
 B. I now understand you thoroughly. But I am struck 
 with the appearance of a very curious inversion in your 
 system as you propose it. If I have not mistaken you, 
 your theory is, that through being the spiritual Abraham, 
 Jesus becomes the spiritual Adam ; that is, he is the spi- 
 ritual Abraham, before he is the spiritual Adam. But the 
 fleshly Adam existed before the fleshly Abraham ! A 
 fact which implies that the order of the spiritual pair is 
 exactly the opposite of the order of the fleshly pair ! — Am 
 I correct in my statement of this inversion ? 
 
 T, Perfectly so. It is a very singular circumstance, 
 and connected with a general scriptural principle, never 
 hitherto noticed that I am aware of. To some remarkable 
 applications of it, I intend calling the attention of my fellow 
 believers, in a work which I am now preparing for the press. 
 Yes. The natural Adam preceded the natural Abraham ; 
 but the spiritual Abraham precedes the spiritual Adam. 
 Adam was the progenitor of Abraham ; but it is as previ- 
 ously the spiritual Abraham that Jesns produces, or rather 
 manifests himself as, the spiritual Adam. — There is no 
 way of eff'ecting a direct and immediate contact between 
 the earthly Adam, and the spiritual Adam ; in other words, 
 of bringing the two into a close and immediate approxim- 
 ation : it being through the medium of the earthly Abra- 
 ham's direct and immediate contact or connection with 
 the spiritual Abraham, that a contact or connection is ulti- 
 mately effected between the fleshly Adam and the spiritual 
 Adam. That is, to express myself somewhat after a ma- 
 thematical fashion, the two Abrahams constitute the two 
 middle terms, and the two Adams, the two extremes : the 
 
WELL AS THE SON OF ABRAHAM. 59 
 
 two extremes being brought into contact, not directly, but 
 through the instrumentality and interposition of the two 
 middle terms.* 
 
 B. Can you contrive to throw these statements of yours 
 into a different form ? 
 
 T. With the utmost ease. Naturally, the universal 
 goes before the particular ; spiritually, the particular goes 
 before the universal. Naturally, the universal or whole 
 family of man as descended from Adam, goes before the 
 particular or the family of the Jews as descended from 
 Abraham ; but spiritually, the particular or family of be- 
 lievers as descended from Jesus the spiritual Abraham, 
 goes before the universal or whole family of man made 
 new as descended from Jesus the spiritual Adam. It 
 was through being connected with the whole, that Jesus 
 became connected with a part, naturally ; it is through 
 his being connected with a pari, that he becomes con- 
 nected with the ivhole, spiritually. The whole harvest of 
 mankind is his naturally, of which he gave evidence by 
 taking immediate possession of a part, as the first fruits : 
 but it is by the waving of the first fruits, or immediate sal- 
 vation of a part, that he ultimately shews himself to have 
 taken complete possession of and saved the whole har- 
 vest spiritually. Compare Leviticus xxiii. 9 — 21, with 
 1 Corinth, xv. 20 — 28, James i. 18, and Rev. xiv. 4. 
 
 B. But although the manifestation of Jesus as the 
 spiritual Abraham, precedes the manifestation of him as 
 
 * The following may contribute to illustrate my meaning to the reflecting and 
 spiritually intelligent reader : — 
 
 Middle Terms. 
 
 Extreme. ,. *■ , Extreme. 
 
 Fleshly Adam. Fl. Abraham.— Sp. Abraham. Spiritual Adam. 
 
 Again : — 
 
 Fleshly Adam directly connected with Fleshly Abraham 
 
 indirectly and mediately connected directly and immediately connected 
 
 ■with with 
 
 Spiritual Adam. directly connected with Spiritual Abraham 
 
60 JESUS THE SON OF ADAM AS 
 
 the spiritual Adam; and although thereby the spiritual 
 particular appears to include the spiritual universal; your 
 meaning must be, that it does so to our apprehensions 
 merely. For in reality, in this case as in every other, 
 the universal must include the particular, not the particu- 
 lar the universal. In reality, it must be in consequence 
 of Jesus being essentially the spiritual Adam or head of 
 all, that he is previously manifested as the spiritual Abra- 
 ham or head of a part ; and not vice versd. 
 
 T. This cannot be denied : nor is it in the slightest 
 degree inconsistent with the theory to which you have 
 been listening. — It is unquestionably as the spiritual Adam, 
 that Jesus is the all, and in all : and as in him, in this 
 character, all manifestations of him whether real or re- 
 presentative are included ; so from him, in this character, 
 all such manifestations of him must in reality proceed. 
 This, however, is a view of matters applicable, not properly 
 speaking to our present^ but to our future, apprehensions 
 of things ; rather let me say, applicable, not to \h.e fleshly, 
 but to the spiritual mind : in the order of divine manifest- 
 ation, or in the development of the character of the Lord 
 Jesus to beings situated and constituted as we are, the 
 progress being, as we have already stated, from Adam, to 
 Abraham ; — from Abraham, to Jesus as the spiritual Abra- 
 ham; — and from Jesus as the spiritual Abraham, to Jesus 
 as the spiritual Adam. Let us, while in flesh, be content 
 to be raised gradually, in our apprehensions of divine 
 things, from the spiritual particular to the spiritual univer- 
 sal ; leaving the attainment of full, and accurate, and com- 
 prehensive, ideas of the particular as included in tlie uni- 
 sal, until we shall see Jesus as he is. 
 
 B. I think I may almost venture to form a guess as 
 to what your sentiments are respecting the Bereans, or 
 followers of John Barclay of Edinburgh, to whom I know 
 you are much attaclied; as well as respecting the other 
 
WELL AS THE SON OF ABRAHAM. 61 
 
 sects and individuals who, in consequence of having by 
 divine grace been enabled to see Jesus as their divine 
 righteousness, have had their consciences purged from 
 guilt, and been rendered partakers of the earnest of life 
 everlasting. Do not you consider that, although they have 
 been begotten again by the incorruptible seed of the word, 
 they are nevertheless standing still at a view of Jesus as 
 the spiritual Abraham; not having had the eyes of their 
 understandings sufficiently opened from above — not having 
 been sufficiently enlightened — to be able to contemplate 
 him also as the spiritual Adam P 
 
 T. Certainly I do. And since you seem disposed to in- 
 dulge in conjectures you might, with equal truth, have sup- 
 posed it to be my opinion of a large proportion of ordinary 
 Universalists, (not of all, for blessed be God, many of them 
 know and love the truth as it is in Jesus,) that they have 
 never even been raised so high as theBereans; — that they 
 have never even been enabled, with them, to take a scrip- 
 tural view of Jesus as the spiritual Abraham. The great 
 mass of Universalists draw their conclusions in favour 
 of their leading doctrine chiefly, if not altogether, from 
 observing the subsistence of a fleshly connection between 
 Jesus and the whole human race; (in which respect, 
 by the way, their sentiments are superior to those of 
 the Bereans;) but they do not seem to understand that, 
 although this fleshly connection was requisite as the basis 
 of and as preliminary to all the subsequent divine proce- 
 dure, it is, nevertheless, not through this fleshly connection 
 directly that salvation takes place. This class of persons, 
 alas! but too numerous, do not seem to understand, that it 
 is directly through the medium of the revelation of Jesus 
 as the spiritual Abraham to the members of the spiritual 
 Israel, and through their primary salvation thereby both 
 here and hereafter; and only indirectly through the me- 
 dium of the fleshly connection subsisting between Jesus 
 
62 JESUS THE SON OF ADAM, ETC. 
 
 and all human beings; that the grand step is taken, by 
 which the secondary and subordinate salvation of the unre- 
 generate portion of the human family by Jesus as the spi- 
 ritual Adam is ensured and accomplished. It is ignorance 
 of this, existing in their minds in connection with errone- 
 ous conceptions of the character of Jesus as the God-man, 
 of the doctrine of election, and of the intermediate state, 
 which vitiates the system of the great majority of the 
 American Universalists. Other circumstances, concern- 
 ing which I may speak to you at some future period, long 
 since caused me to reject as a whole the sentiments of 
 the followers of Elhanan Winchester. 
 
 B. Many thanks to you for the information with which 
 you have furnished me. My mind is far from being in all 
 respects satisfied as to the correctness of your theory. But 
 you have certainly cleared up my views as to the following 
 points: — First. That Jesus, as having been the Son of 
 Adam no less than the Son of Abraham, had a connection 
 with flesh which, so far from having been confined to tlie 
 natural descendants of Abraham, extended to the whole 
 human race. Secondly. That this fleshly connection of 
 Jesus with all, necessarily implies some purpose of his 
 incarnation which is common to all. Thirdly. Tliat 
 Jesus is at once Abraham's fleshly descendant, and the 
 spiritual Abraham; Adam's fleshly descendant, and the 
 spiritual Adam : or, in other words, that he is at once Abra- 
 ham's Son and Abraham's Lord; Adam's Son and Adam's 
 Lord. And, lastly, that, in point of order and time, he ap- 
 pears as the spiritual Abraham before he is manifested as 
 the spiritual Adam. — Some other statements of yours, 
 without actually convincing me, have made a considerable 
 impression on my mind. — As I presume that you will not 
 refuse me the pleasure and advantage of again conversing 
 with you on this interesting subject, till we meet again, 
 adieu. 
 
 END OF THE SECOND DIALOGUE. 
 
DIALOGUE THIRD. 
 
 subject: 
 THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 SPEAKERS :— AUTHOR. BROTHER. FRIEND. 
 
 F. Robert acquaints me that he has been recently hold- 
 ing some interesting conversations with you on the topic of 
 universal salvation. Have you any objections to my be- 
 coming a thirdsman on this present occasion, when, it seems, 
 you intend prosecuting the consideration of the subject ? 
 T. None whatever. 
 
 B. I felt confident that my brother would hail with 
 pleasure your accession to our party. 
 
 F. Thank you, Thom. I had myself a pretty strong 
 conviction that, in joining you, I should not be deemed 
 an intruder. — Now, Gentlemen, proceed. 
 
 B. I leave it to you to begin. Having in some mea- 
 sure exhausted my own objections to my brother's system, 
 I want to hear those which may have occurred to other 
 minds as impediments to their reception of it. 
 
 F. Very well. Be it so. — Robert has furnished me 
 with a general sketch of the questions discussed by you 
 
04 THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 at your last meeting. It seems that on the natural or 
 fleshly connection subsisting between Jesus and the whole 
 human race ; and on the fact of Jesus being the anti-type 
 of Adam as well as of Abraham ; you founded, what ap- 
 peared to my young friend here to be, a very plausible 
 argument in favour of the ultimate salvation of all. That 
 is, as he reported matters to me, of the salvation of some, 
 in one sense ; and of tJie rest, in another. I confess my- 
 self to have been forcibly struck by some of your observa- 
 tions as related by him to me. — But there are circum- 
 stances involved in every theory of Universalism of which 
 I have ever heard, or of which I can form any conception, 
 which appear both to him and to me to constitute insur- 
 mountable obstacles to our thorough acquiescence in your 
 sentiments. For instance : your system evidently leads 
 to the confounding of the righteous with the wicked. 
 
 T. This is a heavy charge. But, perhaps, you will 
 have the goodness to state how it does so. 
 
 F. By representing the righteous and the wicked as 
 undergoing one and the same fate. Now you know that 
 scripture has denounced a woe against those who justify 
 the wicked, as well as against those who condemn the 
 righteous. 
 
 T. What, if the leading characteristic of my system 
 should be, the making of a complete distinction between 
 the righteous and the wicked ; and the representing of 
 them as experiencing two perfectly diflferent fates ? — But 
 come. As I suspect your ignorance of what is meant, in 
 scripture phraseology, by the righteous and the wicked, it 
 may not be amiss for me to try whether my suspicion be 
 well founded or not, by first of all denying the existence 
 of any righteous human beings. There are none righteous 
 among mankind. 
 
 F. Do you really mean to deny the division of human 
 beings into the righteous and the wicked ? 
 
THE TWO LAWS. 65 
 
 T. Instead of answering you in my own language, 
 I prefer borrowing, for the occasion, that of scripture. 
 There is none righteous, no, not one. There is none that 
 doeth good, no, not one. Both passages, quoted from the 
 Old Testament, occur in the third chapter of the Epistle 
 to the Romans. — You see that, in reiterating, as I now do, 
 my denial of the existence of any righteous human beings, 
 I do no more than the word of God itself warrants. 
 
 F. Oh ! I comprehend your meaning. I admit that 
 no human beings are righteous in themselves. 
 
 T. That is, in other words to admit, that human be- 
 ings as such constitute the wicked. For to say that no 
 human beings are in themselves righteous, and that all hu- 
 man beings are in themselves wicked, are necessarily con- 
 vertible modes of expression. Thus, then, whenever God 
 speaks of the wicked, in the largest and most extensive 
 sense of which the term is susceptible, he intends thereby 
 Adam and all his natural posterity. 
 
 B. Why do you hesitate about making the required 
 concession ? If none of the natural posterity of Adam be 
 righteous, then of necessity all of them must be wicked. — 
 There is no possible way of evading this conclusion. 
 
 F. I allow its correctness. 
 
 T. Then mark what follows. As by the language of 
 scripture just quoted, and by your own admission, it is 
 established, that none of the human race as such and of 
 themselves are righteous; then if, notwithstanding this, 
 any of the human race shall be found righteous, it must 
 be in consequence of their occupying some other relation, 
 standing in some other character, and possessing some 
 other nature, than that of mere human beings. 
 
 B. This is unquestionably true. 
 
 F. You observe that your brother is merely stating, in 
 negative but equivalent terms, the doctrine inculcated by 
 the apostle in the 3rd chapter of the Epistle to the Ro- 
 
GO THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 mans, from which he has ah-eady quoted. For, after having' 
 proved man's destitution of creature righteousness and con- 
 demnation before God, the apostle proclaims and triumphs 
 in the existence of a divine righteousness, in virtue of their 
 union with the performer of which, Christ Jesus, he re- 
 presents some of the very persons who are guilty in them- 
 selves, as nevertheless standing righteous and accepted in 
 the sight of God. 
 
 T. Thus far, then, we have proceeded with a thorough 
 understanding of each other. — Now prepare yourself for 
 two questions which go to the bottom of our present sub- 
 ject: — 1st. If righteousness be not an attribute of the 
 creature Adam, but of the Creator Christ Jesus ; and if 
 it be by making them one with himself, that the Creator 
 renders any of tlie human race righteous ; then, as it is 
 persons possessed of human nature who constitute the 
 wicked, must it not be persons possessed of the divine na- 
 ture who constitute the righteous ? 
 
 F. Evidently. 
 
 T. 2ndly. As human beings, who are by nature 
 wicked, may nevertheless by grace, even while they con- 
 tinue human beings, possess in their consciences by faith 
 the earnest or first fruits of the divine nature — have we not 
 thus, in the case of believers, an instance of one and the 
 same class of persons exhibiting at one and the same 
 moment two distinct and perfectly opposite characters ? 
 Are not the same persons in one capacity, or as Adam's 
 descendants, wicked; and in another capacity, or as Jesus' 
 descendants, righteous ? 
 
 F. Granted. 
 
 T. Observe — for I have no wish to entrap you to ac- 
 quiesce in a view which you have not maturely considered, 
 — observe, that when we speak of believers, we speak of 
 persons in whom the two apparently discordant principles 
 of wickedness and righteousness meet. In other words, the 
 
THE TWO LAWS. 67 
 
 very same individuals can be spoken of with perfect truth 
 as both wicked and righteous. They are wicked, as one 
 with Adam ; they are righteous, as one with Christ. 
 
 B. This is so clear that there is no possibility of 
 doubting or gainsaying it. 
 
 F. So say I likewise. But what is the conclusion 
 which your brother is driving at by all this ? 
 
 T. You shall not remain long in suspense respecting 
 that. 
 
 You remember, my good friend, that you represented me 
 as confounding the wicked with the righteous ; and this, 
 by assigning to both a common fate. In the few words 
 which we have already exchanged with each other, my 
 object in part has been to satisfy you, that you had formed 
 an erroneous estimate of my views and principles. First. 
 While, borne out by scripture, I deny the existence of a 
 principle of righteousness in human nature, I do not deny 
 the existence of an essential and eternal distinction between 
 wickedness and righteousness : rejoicing, indeed, in the 
 discovery, that the divine nature is, what human nature 
 neither is nor can be, essentially righteous. — Secondly. 
 While 1 maintain that all human beings as such are wicked, 
 and that consequently between one class of human beings 
 and another, considered as such, there is no difference be- 
 fore God; I maintain equally, that there is a difference 
 between some human beings, as having had the righteous- 
 ness of Christ revealed to them by faith as their righteous- 
 ness, and as having been thereby constituted righteous as 
 to their consciences before God, — and the remainder of the 
 human race, as continuing wicked, or what they originally 
 were, by continuing destitute of the kno\\ ledge and posses- 
 sion of this divine righteousness. — And, lastly, while I 
 have maintained that all human beings as such are wicked, 
 and stand condemned before God ; I have equally main- 
 tained, that wherever the principle of divine righteousness 
 
68 THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 revealed to faith, or the nature of Christ, exists, there ac- 
 ceptance with God, as necessarily connected with it, exists 
 likewise. — In one word, I deny the existence of righteous- 
 ness in the creature : but I assert the glorious fact of the 
 creature being made a partaker of righteousness in the 
 Creator. Can you after this, with any fairness, represent 
 me as confounding the wicked or Adam's descendants, 
 with the righteous or Christ's descendants ? or, after my 
 averment that the former stand condemned, and the latter 
 justified, before God, represent me as holding that the 
 fate of the one is the same as that of the other ? 
 
 But it is not the mere defence of myself, and justifica- 
 tion of my own system of religion — a very paltry matter — 
 that I have had in view by engaging in these conversa- 
 tions. To be useful to you, and to promote, God willing, 
 the cause of truth, this, this, has been my chief aim. You 
 have, if I am not mistaken, by means of your admissions, 
 furnished me with the means of rendering you and others 
 some service. It is evident that up to this time you have, 
 in common with the great bulk of religious professors, been 
 conceiving of the righteous and the wicked as two classes 
 of mere human beings. The object of my questions and 
 remarks has been to suggest to you, that as Adam's nature 
 is the wicked nature, and as Christ's nature is the righteous 
 nature, therefore, the distinction between the wicked and 
 the righteous is not, properly speaking, a distinction between 
 two classes of Adam'' s descendants , but between the descen- 
 dants of Adam and the descendants of Christ. And, as 
 closely connected with this fact, I have wished to suggest 
 to you also — taking as the basis of my so doing, what you 
 have admitted to be tlie case of believers upon earth, viz. 
 that they have by faith the earnest of the divine nature in 
 their consciences, and that they are thus at one and the 
 same moment possessed of the two distinct characters of 
 wicked and righteous — I say, I have wished to suggest to 
 
THE TWO LAWS. 69 
 
 you, taking your admission as my ground-work, the fal- 
 lacy of a principle which I know is regarded by you as 
 an impregnable axiom, " that it is impossible for the 
 unregenerate portion of the family of man, as now confes- 
 sedly vficke^^ultimately to become righteous and be saved." 
 
 F. I understand you. From the admitted circum- 
 stance of believers of the gospel possessing, at one and the 
 same moment, the characters of wicked and righteous — 
 wicked, in one respect, and righteous, in another — wicked, 
 as descended from the first Adam, and righteous, as des- 
 cended from the second — you want to anticipate an ob- 
 jection which you conceive I might make to the ultimate 
 salvation of the unregenerate portion of the family of 
 mankind, grounded on the fact of their being at the pre- 
 sent moment wicked. 
 
 T. Not an objection which you might make, but one 
 which you actually have made. For on what, except on 
 this principle, does your representation of me as confound- 
 ing the wicked with the righteous proceed ? — Certainly, 
 as wicked the unregenerate are not saved. But no more 
 so are believers. As wicked, that is, as descendants of 
 the first Adam, and in so far as they are partakers of his 
 nature, they perish just like others. The body in them is 
 dead, because of sin. Rom. viii. 10. This circumstance 
 of believers being naturally wicked, as being partakers of 
 Adam's nature, does not, however, prevent them from be- 
 coming supernaturally righteous, as partakers in their 
 consciences of Christ's nature. The spirit in them is life, 
 because of righteousness. Ibid : — Now my argument is 
 this: — If the terms wicked and righteous are, in the case 
 of believers, applicable to one and the same class of indi- 
 viduals, viewed as standing in the two distinct and sepa- 
 rate relations of descendants of Adam and descendants of 
 Christ Jesus; is it any thing more than an extension of 
 the same principle to say, that the rest of the family of 
 
70 THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 mau who as bearing the image of the earthy man are 
 wicked here, shall nevertheless as bearing the image of 
 the heavenly man be righteous hereafter ? 
 
 F. In spite of all you can plead in your own behalf, 
 you involve yourself in the conclusion, that God saves the 
 Avicked. 
 
 T. No more, I repeat, than I do in maintaining that 
 God saves his believing people. For they, although ori- 
 ginally wicked and children of wrath even as others, are 
 nevertheless in Christ Jesus the objects of his love, and 
 the partakers of his saving grace. The fact is, that nei- 
 ther the believing, nor the unbelieving, are saved as 
 wicked or as Adam's descendants. The spiritual benefits 
 which they respectively reap come to them in and through 
 the righteousness of the Son of God alone. And we thus 
 argue, that if wickedness or Adam's nature, in the case of 
 believers, cannot of itself interfere with and hinder their 
 enjoyment of salvation in the highest sense of the term; 
 no more can wickedness or Adam's nature, in the case of 
 unbelievers, of itself interfere with and hinder their enjoy- 
 ment of salvation in an inferior sense of the term. — Ob- 
 serve, I never maintain that the unregenerate portion of 
 the family of man are saved as wicked. On the contrary, 
 as wicked they perish. It is in and through their con- 
 nection with Jesus Christ the righteous, that salvation 
 comes to either the regenerate or the unregenerate portion 
 of the human race. 
 
 F. What you hold, then, is — for I am most solicitous 
 to apprehend your meaning — that, as in believers appear 
 united the two distinct and discordant characters of wick- 
 ed and righteous ; wicked, as descended naturally from 
 Adam, and righteous, as descended spiritually by faith 
 from Christ Jesus ; it is thereby proved, that there is no 
 incompatibility between one and the same class of individ- 
 uals being wicked in one sense and in one respect, and 
 
THE TWO LAWS. 71 
 
 righteous in another. And, therefore, in maintaining that 
 the unregenerate portion of mankind, those who live and 
 die wicked or partakers of Adam's nature only while 
 here, are destined ultimately, through the putting forth of 
 that power of Christ by which all things are made new, to 
 appear righteous hereafter — you conceive yourself to be 
 merely contending for an extension of the principle, of 
 which we have already recognized the existence in the 
 case of the regenerate. Both in the case of the regen- 
 erate, and in that of the unregenerate, you argue that the 
 very same beings who, as descended from Adam, are pos- 
 sessed of a wicked nature, and are therefore punished j 
 are also spiritually descended from Christ Jesus, the second 
 Adam, and, as divinely righteous in him, live for evermore. 
 They appear in the twofold character of wicked in the 
 first Adam, the man of the earth, earthy; and righteous 
 in the second Adam, the Lord from Heaven. 
 
 T. I can have no objection whatever to this statement 
 of my views. 
 
 F. To me your ideas come home invested with all the 
 freshness of novelty. 
 
 B. Tell me what you mean exactly by the terms right- 
 eous and wicked, David ? You have frequently employed 
 them in the course of this conversation ; and I should like, 
 if agreeable to you, to have an accurate and intelligible 
 definition of them before we proceed farther. 
 
 T. By the wicked nature, I mean the nature which 
 disobeys divine law. By the righteous nature, the nature 
 which obeys divine law. — Adam, as having had a nature 
 which necessarily violated the law of God, was the wicked 
 man. Jesus, on the other hand, is the righteous man, as 
 having been possessed of a nature which constantly and 
 necessarily yielded obedience to the law of his heavenly 
 father. Thy lam, says he, addressing God in the language 
 of prophecy, is within my heart. Psalm xl. 8. That is. 
 
72 THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 ** love and conseciuent obedience to thy law constitute my 
 very nature." 
 
 B. So far I comprehend you. But I am still to a 
 certain degree at a loss. How was it that the natures of 
 Adam and Jesus respectively were made known and ex- 
 hibited ? To what law, or laws, were the two men sub- 
 jected? — My reason for putting these questions is my 
 conviction, that of the nature of any being we can know 
 nothing, except as it is developed in outward actions. 
 Upon this principle, of the respective natures of Adam and 
 Jesus we can form no idea, except as these were made 
 manifest in their external conduct. Now, is it by means 
 of one and the same law, or of different laws, that the 
 characters of Adam and the Lord Jesus, as essentially dis- 
 tinct from each other, are brought out and presented to 
 our notice ? 
 
 T. A very proper question, Robert, and one which 
 goes directly to the point. — But before I answer it, have 
 the goodness to inform me, whether you conceive Adam 
 when he was first created to have been a spiritual man ? 
 
 B. He was not. As he proceeded from God's hands, 
 he possessed merely a pure creature or soulical nature ; 
 and, in this way, he stood contrasted with, as well as was 
 the type of, the Lord Jesus who was possessed of a divine 
 and spiritual nature. 
 
 F. What say you? Was not Adam originally a 
 spiritual man ? 
 
 B. Are you really so ignorant as to put this question ? 
 Adam a spiritual man ! Why, if he had been so, he could 
 not have been the type or figure of the Lord Jesus, as the 
 apostle Paul informs us he was, Rom. v. 14. The Son 
 of God was the spiritual man. But suppose our first pro- 
 genitor also to have been spiritual at the period of his 
 creation, and mark what follows. In that case, instead of 
 Adam being the figure of the Creator, Christ Jesus, as from 
 
THK TWO LAWS. 73 
 
 the circumstance of his having been a creature he couhl 
 be only, you actually confound him with the Creator ! A 
 being possessed o( jjiue soul or fleshly mind, as Adam was, 
 might be the type or figure of a being possessed of spirit 
 or spiritual mind, as Christ was : but how could a spiritual 
 being become the type of a spiritual being ? Does not 
 the idea carry absurdity branded on the very forehead of 
 it ? — My dear sir, we must take care not to imitate the 
 practices which we condemn in Unitarians. By represent- 
 ing the Lord Jesus as a mere man like ourselves, that is, 
 by dragging the Creator down to the level of the creature, 
 they confound the Creator with the creature. But if we 
 represent Adam as having been originally spiritual, — that 
 is, if, by ascribing to him an attribute which belongs to 
 Christ Jesus, we elevate the creature to the level of the 
 Creator, — are we not chargeable with the equally gross al- 
 though opposite error, of confounding the creature with 
 the Creator? — The truth is that the notion, so common 
 among religious characters, of Adam having been origin- 
 ally a spiritual, that is, a divine being, is fraught with the 
 most absurd as well as unscriptural consequences. Of 
 some of these my brother here has given a succinct, and to 
 me a satisfactory, view, in his Three Questions proposed and 
 answered: in which he has demonstrated from scripture, 
 that Adam's mind naturally was a pure soulical or crea- 
 ture mind merely, and as such the figure of Christ's spi- 
 ritual or divine mind ; and that, if the opposite theory be 
 persevered in, oi Adam's mind having been originally spi- 
 ritual, it must be at the expense of representing Christ to 
 have come into the world, not to elevate us to a state of 
 glory and happiness infinitely superior to that which Adam 
 originally possessed, but merely to carry back and restore 
 us to the state and circumstances of the already forfeited 
 terrestrial paradise. 
 
 F. Well, I must look farther into this matter. There 
 
 K 
 
74 TIfE TVvO LAWS. 
 
 certainly appears at first sight, such a difference between 
 representing Adam as spiritual, and thereby the type of a 
 spiritual being ; and representing him as soulicalavidJieshlT/, 
 and thereby the type of a spnritual being ; as is in favour 
 of your brother's view and your own. — In the meantime, 
 you have begged your brother to inform you, whether 
 Adam and Jesus were subjected to the same divine law. 
 I wait impatiently to hear his answer to your question. 
 
 T. The answer is ready. Robert having acknowledged 
 the existence of a distinction between Adam's nature, as 
 having been merely soulical or creaturely ; and Christ's 
 nature, as having been spiritual or divine ; I now observe, 
 that as their respective natures were different, so also 
 were the laws respectively addressed to them. — To Adam 
 the creature there was addressed but one law, and that 
 couched in the form of Hi prohibition. Its tenor was: Of 
 every tree of the garden, thou mayest freely eat ; but of 
 the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shall not 
 cat of it; for in the day that thou eatest thereof, thou shall 
 surely die. Gen. ii. 16. 17. This prohibition imposed 
 upon Adam a restraint of the slenderest and most trifling 
 kind. He was, to use the words of Milton, 
 
 For one restraint, Lord of the world besides. 
 
 And to this he was subjected, with a view to bring out 
 and develop, in a way the most convincing, the vanity 
 and worthlessness of the nature with which he was orio;in- 
 ally created. Had numerous, strict, and rigid, prohibitions 
 been enforced, they might have been objected to on the 
 ground of their having put human nature to too severe a 
 trial. But a prohibition infemng a restraint so slight was, 
 in the event of its being violated, admirably fitted to evince 
 the essential, total, and irreconcil cable, opposition of human 
 nature to God. And violated it was, as soon as the suit- 
 able temptation was presented. The event manifesting, 
 that the mere mind of flesh was, even in its best estate^ 
 
THE TWO LAWS. 75 
 
 enmity against God; that it was not subject to the law of 
 God, neither, indeed, could be, Rom. viii. 7. — But when 
 Jesus, the second Adam, the Lord from heaven, made his 
 appearance in flesh, he found already addressed to him, 
 and imposed on liim, a law of a very different description 
 from that which had been issued to his natural ancestor. 
 Instead of one prohibition imposing a restraint of a trifling 
 kind, he found himself subjected to a law which imposed 
 every conceivable species of prohibition, and addressed to 
 him every conceivable species of command. A law which 
 demanded obedience at all times, and in all places — of 
 heart, as well as of life — and the ultimate sacrifice of him- 
 self — as well as abstinence from all evil during the whole 
 period of his abode upon earth. A law of the greatest ex- 
 tent of requirement, as well as the most complete intensity of 
 operation; and which made no allowance or provision for 
 failure, even the slightest. A law, in a word, which was 
 searching, dreadful, and fiery; and which demanded a 
 nature corresponding to itself in him who should under- 
 take its accomplishment. Such is the law to which Jesus 
 of Nazareth, as the Christ or Messiah, was subjected. 
 The following is its summary: Thou shall love the Lord 
 thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and ?vith 
 all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour 
 as thyself. Luke x. 27. — Thus we perceive — 
 
 F. Pardon the interruption, my dear Sir. I may not 
 exactly understand you. But you appear to me to inti- 
 mate, that the law enjoining perfect love to God, and 
 equal love to man, was addressed to Jesus the Messiah 
 alone. And, consequently, that it is not addiessed to, and 
 is not obligatory on, ordinary human beings. — Perhaps, T 
 have mistaken you. If so, you will set me right. 
 
 T. In supposing me to say, that the command to 
 love God supremely, and his neighbour as himself was 
 addressed to the Messiah alone ; and never was by God 
 
76 THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 addressed to, or rendered obligatory on, any of the hu- 
 man race besides ; so far from misunderstanding me, you 
 have exactly apprehended my meaning. 
 
 F. You perfectly astonish me ! 
 
 B. Indeed, David, to tell you a truth, this is one of 
 those flights in which I suspect you will be found to have 
 mounted on Icarian wings. — Do you really expect any 
 one who believes the truth of divine testimony, to repose 
 confidence in your assertion, that it is not incumbent upon 
 us to love God and man ? 
 
 T. That I may be thoroughly understood, I repeat the 
 substance of what I actually have said, and of what the 
 sacred volume bears me out in maintaining. — There are 
 only two laws represented by the scriptures as ever having 
 been issued by God to man. Not to all men indiscrimin- 
 ately ; but to the one and the other of these two men, the 
 typical Adam, the creature, and the anti-typical or real 
 Adam, the Creator : and this, because in these two men 
 the whole family of man is, either naturally as in the for- 
 jner, or spiritually as in the latter, summed up. The first 
 of these two laws was issued to the natural Adam in the 
 garden of Eden, in the terms which I have already quoted 
 from Genesis ii. 16. 17; the second of them was the law 
 to which the spiritual Adam, the Lord Jesus, was subject- 
 ed during the period of his abode upon earth. The first 
 of these laws consisted of a prohibition ; of the tree of the 
 Icnowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it : the se- 
 cond, of a command ; thoti shalt love the Lord thy God. 
 The first enjoined abstinence from a single transgression ; 
 the second prescribed the most perfect, undeviating, and 
 comprehensive, love to God and man. The first or the 
 prohibition, in the event of its being violated, was to be fol- 
 lowed by the infliction of punishment ; the second or the 
 command, having had annexed to it a promise, was, in the 
 event of its being fulfilled by obedience even unto death, 
 
THE TWO LAWS. 77 
 
 to result ill tlie enjoyment of a positive and eternal reward. 
 The former of these laws was violated, by Adam, the crea- 
 ture; the latter of them was kept — gloriously kept, indeed, 
 for thereby rvas it magnified and made honourable — by 
 Jesus, the Creator. By means of the breach of the former 
 law, sin and death entered ; by means of the fulfilment 
 of the latter, righteousness and life everlasting were intro- 
 duced. In a word, the violation of the first or prohibitory 
 law, by Adam the creature, was subservient or introduc- 
 tory to perfect obedience to the second law or law of com- 
 mand, by Jesus the Creator. — Am I so far understood ? 
 F. Understood, most assuredly. But I have not yet 
 recovered from the surprise into which I was thrown by 
 your statement, that to love God and his neighbour is not a 
 duty incumbent on every human being. 
 
 'J\ And it will probably deepen and strengthen your 
 surprise when I inform you, that not only is there no ob- 
 ligation imposed by God himself on mere human beings 
 naturally to love him with all their heart, soul, strength, 
 and mind, and their neighbours as themselves, but that, in 
 no state or circumstances whatever, can mere human 
 beings become the subjects of such a command. — If I am 
 not mistaken, my worthy friend, what I have just remark- 
 ed has tended still further to increase your perplexity. 
 
 F. Were it not, Thom, that I might appear to be un- 
 courteous, I would say, that I am strongly tempted to ques- 
 tion the sanity of the man who is capable of making an 
 assertion such as that which I have just listened to. — A 
 mere human being under no obligation to love God and 
 man ! Nay, incapable of being brought under such an 
 obligation ! Pooh ! Nonsense ! 
 
 T. And yet, nonsensical as the idea may appear to 
 you — and insane as you may conceive the mind to be 
 which is capable of entertaining it — it is nevertheless true. 
 Nay, what is more, the whole doctrine of human salvation 
 
78 THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 hinges on it and is involved in it. — But not to keep you 
 any longer in suspense, allow me to ask you : — Have you 
 ever reflected on these words, occuring in the eighth chap- 
 ter of the Epistle to the Romans, and already referred to 
 by me. The carnal mindy or mind of flesh, is enmity against 
 God ; for it is not subject to the lam of God, neither, in- 
 deed, can he? Verse 7th. 
 
 F. Yes, I have. 
 
 T. You admit then, I presume, that the carnal mind, 
 or mind of jiesh, there spoken of, is the mind of every hu- 
 man being naturally ? 
 
 F. I do. 
 
 T. Very well. — Permit me now to call your attention 
 to certain consequences of what you have admitted. The 
 mind of every man naturally, you allow, is spoken of in 
 the passage quoted ; and in it, you observe, it is declared, 
 that not only is that mind so opposed to God as in point 
 of fact to disobey his law, but as even to labour under a 
 total incapacity of obeying it. It is not subject to the law 
 of God; NEITHER, INDEED, CAN BE. — Now reflect on, 
 and then ansAver, the following question : — Is it likely, 
 think you, that God who, as possessed of infinite wisdom, 
 must know this entire inability of the fleshly mind to obey 
 any law of his, and as a being of perfect love must be in- 
 capable of mocking his creatures, should have required 
 from men an obedience which, from the very constitution of 
 their nature, they were unable, because unqualified, to 
 render? 
 
 F. I cannot answer you positively. It does appear to 
 me, looking at the matter abstractly and speaking can- 
 didly, not to be likely, that God should have issued a com- 
 mand to love himself supremely, and their neighbours as 
 themselves, to mere human beings: a command which, 
 from the constitutional and indestructible enmity of the 
 fleshly mind to himself and his law, behoved necessarily 
 
THE TWO LAWS. 79 
 
 to be disobeyed. — Notwitlistaiiding this, however, facts, 
 especially scriptural facts, must carry it over all our pre- 
 sumptions and reasonings. Indeed, is it not one of your 
 favourite dogmas, that God issued the original prohibition 
 to Adam, with the full certainty that he laboured under as 
 complete an incapacity to comply even with it, as he did 
 to obey that law requiring perfect love to God and equal 
 love to man, the issuing of which to him and his descend- 
 ants is the matter now in question ? 
 
 T. Glad am I, my dear friend, that you have brought 
 the discussion to a tangible point. We can now grapple 
 with it easily. — It is fact, that God did issue the original 
 prohibition to Adam, in the garden of Eden, with the full 
 knowledge and certainty that that prohibition would be dis- 
 obeyed. Adam, at his creation, as having been of the 
 earth, earthy, possessed nothing more than jfleshly mind ; 
 however pure and free from transgression that fleshly 
 mind may originally have been. Now the intention of 
 God was to shew what Adam actually was. To bring out to 
 view what fleshly mind was incapable of doing. To make 
 manifest that in his best natural estate, w^hether consider- 
 ed with reference to his mind or his body, maw 7vas altogether 
 vanity. With this view the paradisaical law, or prohibi- 
 tion recorded Gen. ii. 16. 17, was issued. And the breach 
 of that law, as you are vvell aware, speedily followed. — By 
 this one transgression was the divine purpose answered; 
 and the fleshly, and therefore worthless, nature of man's 
 mind evinced satisfactorily once for all. And by this one 
 transgression, as a sufficient index or expositor of that en- 
 mity to God which is essential to and characteristic of 
 their common nature, was the whole human race brought 
 in guilty before God: upon all of them, as possessed of 
 this same common guilty nature, sentence of sufi*erings and 
 death having, in Adam the source of it, been pronounced. 
 Dust thou art, and unto dust thou shalt return. Gen. iii. 19, 
 
80 THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 Now, ill circumstances like this, why suppose the whole 
 human race to have had imposed upon it any other divine 
 law? — As a whole, mankind were already guilty. As a 
 whole, they were already suhjected to sufferings and death. 
 Why, then, issue to them any other law? Cui bono? — 
 If they could not obey a law imposing a restraint so slight 
 and trifling as that which was addressed to Adam did, 
 much less surely a law which required perfect love to God 
 and man. And as they already stood guilty before God, 
 and subjected to all the possible consequences of creature 
 guilt, to what end issue to them a law the breach of whicli 
 could be attended with no additional punishment? — As al- 
 ready guilty and condemned before God, they neillier were 
 in a situation to receive anotlier divine law, nor could llieir 
 breach of any other law have rendered them worse than 
 they actually were. And shall God be supposed, in issu- 
 ing to mere man another law, to have done what under 
 the circumstances of tlie case would have been perfectly 
 superfluous, and, consequently, a manifestation not of per- 
 fect wisdom but of egregious folly ? 
 
 But this is not all. Important as the facts and consi- 
 derations just mentioned are, and slightly observed and 
 reflected on as they have been, they do not constitute the 
 real and complete answer to your objection. That answer 
 is found in one of those beautiful, and yet somewhat occult, 
 proofs of divine wisdom which, to but a few highly favour- 
 ed ones of the Lord, it has been given hitherto to perceive. 
 It is this. Human nature, although unable to obey the 
 law of God, nevertheless behoved to have that law, in the 
 form of a restraint of the slenderest description, once issued 
 to it ; and this, with a view to evince its weakness and 
 wortlilessuess, to bring its original condition to an end, 
 and to open up the way for a higher and more glorious 
 state of things being introduced. This divine law, how- 
 ver, behoved not to be a command. And this, because a 
 
THE TWO LAWS. 81 
 
 command leaves no alternative. Commands require to be 
 obeyed, and make no provision for disobedience. If, then, 
 a command had been issued to Adam originally, the wis- 
 dom of God would have been open to impeachment ; see- 
 ing that he would have enjoined an obedience which man 
 could not render, and would have left himself unable to 
 make any provision for the consequences of misconduct. — 
 But no. Not to a command, but to a prohibition^ accom- 
 panied with the denunciation of a penalty in the event of its 
 being violated, was the first man, and in him all his natu- 
 ral posterity, subjected. That is, the divine law imposed 
 upon him, as being a prohibition, involved in its very na- 
 ture an alternative. It was not necessarily to be obeyed : 
 for, on the very face of it, provision was made for cer- 
 tain consequences to ensue in the event of disobedience 
 taking place. This alternative, which is connected neces- 
 sarily Avith every prohibitory law,* having, in the case of 
 the first law given to Adam, pointed to that very result 
 which it was all along intended should follow. — Contrast 
 this with the second law which, I maintain, was imposed 
 on the Lord Jesus. It is a command. There is on the 
 face of it no alternative. Thou shalt love the Lord thy 
 God supremely, and thy neighbour as thyself, is its impe- 
 rative language. There is no provision here made for 
 failure. And why ? Because no failure could by any 
 possibility take place. It was addressed to the Creator, 
 the Lord from heaven ; and by him it behoved necessarily 
 to be fulfilled. — Can these remarks be understood, without 
 carrying along with them the conviction that, not merely 
 did the strictness, and severity, and extent of requirement, 
 of the second law, and the fact of the violation of the first 
 law by Adam having already brought in the wliole human 
 race as guilty before God, prevent the possibility of the 
 second law being issued to mere creatures ; but that the 
 
 * Nulla lex sine sanctione. 
 L 
 
82 
 
 TEE TWO LAWS. 
 
 second law being couclied in the form of a command, a 
 form of law wliicli left no alternative, and thereby differing 
 from the first law given to Adam which, as a prohihilion, 
 was attended with an alternative, of itself and without any 
 additional reasonings points to the Creator, and not to the 
 creature, as its fiilfiller ? 
 
 Thus, tlien, the fact of God's having issued one law, 
 Iiaving given one proliibition, to Adam, with the full and 
 entire certainty tliat Adam would disobey it, — and this, 
 that he miglit tlierehy make manifest what human nature 
 was, andjustify himself in the treatment to v.hich he might 
 see meet to subject it, — so far from laying the foundation 
 for a second or any farther law being given to mere man, 
 actually rendered tlie issuing of any such second law to 
 mere man an absolute impossibility. There was but one 
 object or purpose for wliich a second law could be issued 
 by God, and tliat was, that it might be obeyed ; and that, 
 by obedience to it, tlie effects of the disobedience of the for- 
 mer law by Adam the creature, and in him by tlie nature 
 j>ossessed by every creature, might be, not merely counter- 
 balanced, but done away with, swallowed up, and obliter- 
 ated. Now this required that the second law should be 
 given, not to a mere creature, but to one possessed of the 
 nature of the Creator ; and that 
 
 F. Before proceeding farther, allow me to enquire, if 
 there does not exist a very great resemblance between your 
 sentiments, and those of Mr. Robert Owen, formerly of 
 New-Lanarlv, with regard to the state and circumstances 
 of human beings naturally ? — Mr. Owen considers man to 
 be so decidedly the creature or slave of circumstances, 
 that it is impossible for him to be anything else than what 
 he actually is, or to exhibit any other character than what 
 is impressed on him. According to that gentleman and 
 his abettors, man is what his organization, temperament, 
 education, and the other causes whicli from the cradle to the 
 
THC TWO LAV/S. 
 
 83 
 
 grave are constantly operating upon him, make him to he; 
 and can, hy no possihility, he different. — Now you seem to 
 me to regard man as heing so completely enslaved hy his 
 fleshly constitution, as to he totally incapahle of rising a- 
 hove it ; and as heing ohliged to act always and of ne- 
 cessity in suhordination to it : therehy presenting, to my 
 mind, a very strong and marked resemhlance hetween the 
 views entertained hy Mr. Owen and your own. 
 
 B. I may just venture to anticipate what my hrother 
 has to say in answer to you hy remarking, that in what- 
 ever respects there may appear to he an approximation on 
 the part of his sentiments to those of Mr. Owen, the points 
 in which that gentleman and he agree, are few and trifling 
 in comparison of those with regard to which they differ. — 
 There can he no very great identity of views hetueen two 
 men, the one of whom regards human nature as capahle of 
 heing carried out to such a degree of perfection, as that 
 sin and misery shall ultimately he hanished from the world ; 
 and the other of whom heholds in human nature a princi- 
 ple of which sin and misery are necessarily such constitu- 
 ent parts, that they are likely to he exhihited in a far more 
 marked way in a future period of the world than they have 
 ever yet heen, and are destined to he expelled from it only 
 hy the destruction of tliat nature itself. — But my hrother 
 wishes to act fairly. And, therefore, if he find Mr. Owen 
 or any other man ))ropounding a sentiment which, in the 
 light of scripture, he knows to he true, he will never, 1 am 
 confident, reject it merely on account of the quarter from 
 which it may proceed. 
 
 T. Thank you, Rohert, for your good opinion of me. 
 What you descrihe is precisely the case just now. Mr. 
 Owen, without heing aware of it, has seized, and in some 
 measure taken his stand on, one most important scripturiil 
 principle ; and his ordinary antagonists, without heiiig 
 aware of it, are attacking him in his stronghold. In such 
 circumstances, of course, he has them at an advantage. 
 
84 THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 Let me, however, in order to obviate all mistahes, ex- 
 press my views with respect to human nature in my own 
 language ; and then, let those who are conversant with 
 Mr. Owen's writings, and competent to the task of insti- 
 tuting a comparison between our respective sentiments, 
 judge how far they coincide or the reverse. 
 
 I am satisfied that the nature of every being constitutes 
 the law of that being : in other words, constitutes the au- 
 thority to which the being is in all its powers, faculties, 
 and propensities, subject. Proceeding upon this principle, 
 as the nature of the cat and that of the dog constitute the 
 laws to which these animals respectively are subject ; so 
 does the fleshly nature of man constitute the law to which 
 he naturally and necessarily, both as to body and mind, 
 is subject likewise. Indeed, the principle is of such uni- 
 versal application, that the nature of God constitutes the 
 law, the only law, which the Supreme Being himself recog- 
 nizes and obeys. — But to return. Adam's body was first 
 created, and then his mind, as we learn from Gen. ii. 7 ; 
 and the same progress, from the previous existence of body 
 to that of mind, takes place, as we know, in all his des- 
 cendants. Tliat is, man was originally of the earth, earthy; 
 or had first imparted to him a body composed of earthly 
 materials, with which a mind suitable to its earthly nature 
 was afterwards associated. The mind was thus, by its 
 very creation, made to depend on the body ; and man 
 owed an allegiance to the law of flesh, or to the constitu- 
 tion of his fleshly nature, before by any possibility he could 
 owe an allegiance to any other law. Flesh is man's law- 
 giver and rightful monarch ; and, from the law of flesh, 
 he can by no efforts of his own — no means of his own de- 
 vising and executing — withdraw himself. To a being thus 
 situated, that is, thus previously owing allegiance to the 
 law of flesh as the law of his nature, one law of God, in the 
 &liape of the prohibition imposed on Adam, was addressed. 
 
THE TWO LAWS. 85 
 
 Atid this, not to render our natural progenitor subject to 
 divine law, or to evince his capability of ever becoming so; 
 but to make manifest the utter impossibility of his nature 
 ever being subjected to divine law, in consequence of its 
 having been previously subjected, and of the allegiance 
 which therefore it owed, to the law of flesh. Of this, the 
 one transgression of Adam afforded ample and sufficient 
 evidence. It shewed that his mind, as fleshly, was not 
 subject to God's law; neither, indeed, was able to be so. 
 That, as fleshly, its very nature constituted a law of sin 
 and death: requiring, merely, the imposition on it of a 
 divine prohibition in order to bring out and display what 
 it actually was. 
 
 For this purpose, then, divine law entered, not that it 
 might be obeyed by fleshly mind, but that the total ina- 
 bility of fleshly mind to obey it might thereby become 
 manifest. The law entered, that the offence might abound. 
 And what the fleshly mind of man originally was, it con- 
 tinues still. Just as much and as essentially opposed to 
 God, and just as unable to keep any law of his, however 
 slight and apparently trifling in its requirements that 
 law may be, now, as when in paradise it manifested its 
 hostility to the law of God in the transgression of our first 
 parents. 
 
 F. What say you. Thorn ? Human beings unable to 
 keep any divine law ! Surely you are joking. 
 
 T. I am perfectly serious. My authorities are, first, 
 the language of scripture which informs me, that the mind 
 of flesh, that is, the mind of every human being naturally, 
 is neither subject to God's law, nor able to be so; and, 
 secondly, what as a matter of fact is observed by every en- 
 lightened Christian, that when evil is avoided by the mere 
 fleshly mind, it is never in subordination to the law of 
 God, or in consequence of its having been prohibited 
 by divine authority, but always in consequence of some 
 
so THE TWO LAV/S. 
 
 injaiy sustained, or of the apprehension of some injury 
 likely to he sustained, hy the individual himself were he to 
 transgress it. It is thus the principle of selfishness, as 
 essentially and necessarily the principle of fleshly mind; 
 not a regard to God's law as such, a principle which never 
 dwelt except in the breast of the Son of God himself; 
 which dictates and produces all that abstinence from evil 
 by which mere human beings are distinguished. 
 
 F. Dear me! what sad havoc you do make among 
 the petitions of our Church! Supposing you to be right, 
 why put up such prayers, as, ''Lord have mercy upon us, 
 and incline our hearts to keep this law;" or, "grant that 
 this day we fall into no sin ?" If the human mind be, as 
 you allege and as you think scripture proves, unable to 
 obey any divine law, then it must appear to you absurd, 
 if not blasphemous, for people to be continually asking 
 God for that which he hath told them cannot be, and 
 which consequently he never intends to bestow. 
 
 T. Were I to consult my natural feelings, I certainly 
 would be provoked to smile at the idea of creatures pray- 
 ing to be enabled to fulfil a law, which hath been already 
 and gloriously fulfilled by the Creator Jdmself ! Jesus, 
 by his obedience unto death, became the end of the law for 
 righteousness, unto every one that believeth ; and yet, for- 
 sooth! this very law. although ended by him the Crea- 
 tor, nevertheless, in their apprehension, remains and re- 
 quires to be fulfilled by themselves mere creatures ! — But 
 ridicule is not the sentiment which, in the believing mind, 
 a consideration of this subject has a tendency to beget. 
 How painful to think that thousands of those who call 
 themselves Christians, and therel)y profess to believe di- 
 vine testimony, in praying to be enabled to fulfil God's 
 law, are praying for that which could only be conceded to 
 them at the expense of the truth of God ! The same 
 scriptures which declare, that Christ hath yielded an en- 
 
TPIE T^TO LAWS. 87 
 
 tire and satisfactory obedience to the law of God, declare 
 that it is utterly impossible for man under any circum- 
 stances whatever to obey it: notwithstanding which, pro- 
 fessors of Christianity go on from Aveek to week, and day 
 to day, preferring their petitions in a manner the most 
 serious and devotional, tliat it may be granted to them to 
 comply with its requirements. By asking God to enable 
 them to fulfil a law which he informs tliem has already 
 been maf/uified and made honourable, as well as brought 
 to an end, by ///'>.• o?z'// well beloved Son; and which, he 
 likewise informs them, they never can fulfil; thus at one and 
 the same moment pouriug contempt upon Christ the fulfiller 
 of it, and calling God a liar ! Can we, taking into account 
 all the circumstances of the case, entirely resist the suspi- 
 cion that, in connection with gross ignorance, deep-grain- 
 ed hypocrisy must in many instances prevail in the minds 
 of those by whom such supplications are presented ? 
 
 But to pass on. If I have been understood, my agree- 
 ment with Mr. Owen, in so far as the present subject is 
 concerned, extends no fartlier than to the admission, on 
 my part, of man being naturally the slave of his fleshly 
 constitution ; and of the various influences to which he is 
 subjected, during the whole of his life-time. In concluding 
 from the constitutional fleshliness, and therefore selfish- 
 ness of man, his incapability of having had addressed to 
 liim a command to love God supremely, and his neiijhbour 
 as himself- — the power of observing such a command im- 
 plying the possession of a generous, even the divine nature, 
 which human beings as such have not — I hold a view in 
 which Mr. Owen and his friends may or may not acqui- 
 esce. It is enough for me, after stating the scriptural 
 facts, that man's nature is fleshly and selfish, and as such 
 unable to obey divine law; and that this was sufficiently 
 and satisfactorily evinced by his violation of the original 
 prohibition; from thence to argue that, as under sucli cir- 
 
88 THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 ciimstances no other law, especially none inferring condi- 
 tions so strict and severe as those of exhibiting perfect love 
 to God and equal love to man, was in the case of mere 
 creatures required, so to mere creatures no other law, 
 especially none answering to this description, was by our 
 Heavenly Father addressed. 
 
 B. Do you not think, David, that, in the event of the 
 doctrine upon which you are now insisting being correct, 
 a more direct and simple way of establishing it, than by 
 mere inferences however strong, cogent, and undeniable, 
 might be had recourse to ? Why do you not at once pro- 
 duce vouchers from the word of God in favour of it ? 
 
 T. You are merely anticipating, my dear brother, 
 what it has been all along my intention to come to. The 
 inferential argument has been thrown in, merely by way 
 of a preparative for tlie direct proofs which are to follow. 
 These direct proofs I am now ready to propound and sub- 
 stantiate. 
 
 F. If you can establish, by direct scriptural evidence, 
 that the command to love God, with all his heart, and soul, 
 and mind, and his neighbour us himself, was addressed to 
 the Messiah alone; that is, that, as the second law, it was 
 imposed only on the second man, the Lord from heaven; 
 then, it is plain, I must submit. To accomplish this, how- 
 ever, is a task which I guess, as our transatlantic brethren 
 say, will occasion you no small difficulty. 
 
 T. There is nothing, my dear friend, like making the 
 attempt. Fortuna favet fortihus, you know, as we learned 
 and used to repeat in our school-boy days. 
 
 Permit me, however, before adducing my arguments, to 
 state what it is that, in maintaining the second law to 
 have been imposed on the Lord Jesus alone, I do not as- 
 sert: or, rather, permit me to make certain concessions, 
 to all the advantages connected with which you are most 
 heartily welcome. I do admit that, to the Jewish people. 
 
THE TWO LAWS. 89 
 
 the law issued from Mount Sinai was given iu the three 
 following senses: — 1st. It was, with all the prophecies 
 which were to succeed and which indeed constituted a 
 portion of it, temporarily entrusted to them, in the charac- 
 ter of custodiars, depositaries, or stewards ; to be by them 
 kept and preserved until he who was the subject of whom 
 Moses in the law, and the Prophets did write, should make 
 his appearance; and then to be by them handed over to 
 him as the rightful heir and proprietor, because fulfiller, of 
 the whole. Unto them were committed the oracles of God. 
 Rom. iii. 2. 2dly. God having been the temporal monarch 
 of the Jewish nation, or that nation having been what is 
 termed a theocracy, it received the law of Moses as the 
 code or system of statutes to which, during the period of 
 its subsistence as a nation or kingdom of this world, it 
 was to be subject. That is, the Mosaic institutions were 
 given to the Jews, not in their real and spiritual sense, or 
 with any view to their reaping spiritual benefits from the 
 obedience which they might yield to them; but merely in 
 the same way, and on the same principles, as the legisla- 
 ture of any country finds it necessary to impose laws on 
 those who are subject to their sway. What the laws of 
 England are to us, the laws of Moses were to the Jewy 
 as inhabitants of the land of Canaan. Tliis falling to be 
 remarked, farther, in explanation of what I have just hint- 
 ed, that the laws in question, although emanating from 
 God and not from man; and although all typical, emble- 
 matic, or shadowy, of belter tilings to come; in so far as 
 they had to do with the Jews, as a nation of this world, 
 had only a temporal meaning, were only directed to tem- 
 poral purposes, and could be enforced by nothing higher 
 than temporal sanctions. Imposed on the Jews, in this 
 sense, the law of Moses was only to continue in force 
 until he, to whom it was realty given, should accomplish 
 it; and, in this sense, it came to them, not properly speak- 
 
 M 
 
90 THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 ing as the law of God, but as the law of Moses, a creature 
 like themselves, their temporal and typical king. If we 
 hear the voice of the Lord our God any more, we shall die. 
 — Go thou near, said the Jews addressing Moses, and hear 
 all that the Lord our God shall say; and speak thou 
 UNTO us all that the Lord our God shall speak unto thee, 
 and we will hear it, and do it. And the Lord heard the 
 voice of your tvords, (Moses is reminding his countrymen 
 of what had happened at a previous period of their history ,J 
 fvhen ye spake unto me, and the Lord said unto me, I have 
 heard the voice of the words of this people, which they have 
 spoken unto thee: they have well said, all that they have 
 spoken. Dent. v. 25. 27. 28. — In the 3rd and last place, the 
 law delivered from Mount Sinai having been spiritually, that 
 is really given to Christ Jesus, I have now to observe, 
 that the nation of the Jews had one real command, and 
 one real command only, addressed to them by God: a 
 command, however, which was not to take effect, and was 
 not to become obligatory upon them, until after the second 
 law, or the law given from Mount Sinai to Jesus the 
 Messiah or Mediator, had from him received its accom- 
 plishment. That command was to believe on him, as the 
 end, object, and fulfiller, of their law ; and thereby to en- 
 ter into the enjoyment of the privileges and blessings which 
 should be connected with his mediatorial kingdom. The 
 command of which we speak is thus quoted by the apostle 
 Peter : For Moses truly said unto the fathers, a jjrophet 
 shall the Lord your God raise up unto you, of your breth- 
 ren, like unto me : him shall ye hear in all things, whatso- 
 ever he shall say unto you. Acts iii. 22. That is, the Jews 
 were commanded to recognize their inability as creatures 
 to fulfil divine law; and that divine law, as such, had never 
 in reality been issued to them; in the light, and through the 
 medium, of recognizing its fulfilment by Jesus of Nazar- 
 eth, the Son of God. The onlv real command addressed 
 
THR TWO LAWS. 91 
 
 to them was this, not to obey divine law themselves, but 
 to believe in it as obeyed by him to ivlwm alone that law 
 really had been given. This command was no more in- 
 tended to be obeyed by them, than was the prohibition 
 originally imposed on Adam. But the object of God in 
 issuing it was, to elicit a view of the inability and worth- 
 lessness of human nature which law, couched in its pro- 
 hibitory form, had been insufficient to bring out. Man- 
 kind, it remained to be evinced, were just as unable to 
 seize on blessings, by means of their fleshly minds, when 
 these were placed apparently within their reach; as they 
 had already shewn themselves to be, by means of the same 
 minds, to escape from curses. Hence, as the original pro- 
 hibition to abstain from eating of the fruit of the tree of the 
 knowledge of good and evil, was given to Adam, in order 
 to bring out the inability of human nature to avoid evil; 
 the subsequent command to believe on Jesus, as he to 
 whom divine law had been addressed and by whom it had 
 been fulfilled, was given to the nation of the Jews, in order 
 to bring out the inability of human nature to comprehend 
 and delight itself in what is good. — But of this I may 
 speak afterwards. 
 
 F. Your last remarks strike me forcibly. "They begin 
 to open up to me a view of the subject to which I have 
 been hitherto an entire stranger. 
 
 T. Having so far cleared my way, 1 now state my 
 proposition as follows: — 
 
 Tliat the law which was issued from Mount Sinai, or 
 the law which, as the second, stands distinguished from the 
 first which was given to Adam in paradise, was imposed 
 on the Messiah alone. 
 
 That the Lord Jesus, was subject to this law, is plain 
 from the apostolic declaration, that he was made under the 
 law ; a law which, as appears from the context, was that 
 which is summed up in the requirement of perfect love to 
 God, and equal love to man. 
 
92 THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 That this law was imposed on the Lord Jesus alone, is 
 manifest from a variety of considerations. Such as, 
 
 1. That the second person singular is employed in it, 
 just as it was in the original prohibition addressed to Adam. 
 Thou shall love the Lord thy God, with all thy heart, and 
 with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all 
 thy mind, and thy neighbour as thyself, enjoins on one man 
 the introduction of everlasting righteousness : just as. Of 
 every tree of the garden, thou mayest freely eat j but of 
 the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shall not 
 eat of it J for in the day that thou eatest thereof, thou shall 
 surely die, having been addressed to one man, paved the 
 way for that transgression in the consequences of which 
 all the members of the human family are involved. 
 
 2. The apostle declares that Jesus, as the Christ or 
 Messiah, was the end of the law ; Rom. x. 4 ; that is, 
 the person to whom it was addressed, and whom it all 
 along contemplated as its object, no less than he by whose 
 obedience it actually received its accomplishment. 
 
 3. The law is spiritual. Rom. vii. 14. That is, it has a 
 nature and involves a meaning, totally diflferent from, and 
 infinitely superior to, what by the mere carnal mind it is 
 apprehendecl to have. It appears, to the fleshly mind, 
 merely to prohibit transgression ; whereas in reality it 
 required purity of nature, as well as righteousness of per- 
 formance : it appears merely to prohibit external evil ; 
 whereas in reality it condemned the murderous, covetous, 
 and impure thought, no less than the gross outbreakings of 
 iniquity : it appears to speak to and require the obedience 
 of a creature ; whereas in reality it addressed itself to 
 and demanded the obedience of the Creator. When 
 opened in its spirituality, that is, in its reality to the 
 apostle, he found such a difference between its require- 
 ments and his own performances, or rather unsuccessful 
 attempts at performance, that, as spiritual in itself, he saw 
 
THE TWO LAWS. 93 
 
 it neither was, nor could have been, imposed on him as 
 carnal ; but must have been issued to, and must have 
 required the obedience of, one whose nature corresponded 
 to its own. TJie law, having been spiritual, could not 
 require the obedience of one who was carnal, sold under 
 sin : but must have been intended for, and addressed to, 
 the Son of God alone; who, although coming in the likeness 
 of sinful flesh, was nevertheless possessed essentially of a 
 spiritual nature, and thereby condemned sin in the flesh. 
 
 4. Which are a shadow of things to come ; but the 
 body is of Christ. Coloss. ii. 17. That is, a vast num- 
 ber of shadows, or shadowy representations, of law was 
 imposed on the nation of the Jews ; but the law itself iu 
 its truth, reality, and substance, was given to Christ alone. 
 And his obedience even unto death, not the ceremonial 
 observances and ritual sacrifices of the Jews, fulfilled the 
 larw. See this point thoroughly cleared up in the 9th and 
 10th chapters of the Epistle to the Hebrews. 
 
 5. From the 12th verse to the end of the 5th chapter 
 of the Epistle to the Romans, an argument is prosecuted 
 which must, even to a mind that is but superficially en- 
 lightened from above, settle the whole controversy. I 
 allude to the distinction between one sin and c%e righteous- 
 ness which is there laid down by the inspired writer, and 
 made the foundation of all his reasonings. Now the 
 whole force scope and import of this distinction turn on 
 the fact, that the law of God was imposed on the Mes- 
 siah alone. If imposed on more than the Lord Jesus, 
 then there might have been more than one righteousness ; 
 and consequently the analogy between Adam and Christ 
 w^ould have been destroyed. But as the law given forth 
 in Paradise was imposed on one man alone, and thereby 
 admitted of but one violation ; no mere human being ever 
 since having bad it iu his power to sin after the similitude 
 of Adam's transgression : so the second law issued from 
 
94 THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 Mount Sinai was imposed on one man alone likewise, and 
 thereby admitted of but one obedience, or of carrying into 
 eflFect but one righteousness ; no man possessing even the 
 opportunity of obeying after the similitude of Christ's 
 righteousness. Not more certainly did the possibility of 
 but one transgression, imply the giving of the first law to 
 Adam alone ; than did the possibility of but one righteous- 
 ness, imply the giving of the second law to the Lord Jesus 
 alone. He who hath not been enabled to perceive this 
 plain and obvious fact, must make a strange jumble of 
 the apostolic reasoning in the passage referred to. 
 
 B. Somehow or other, David, I am impressed with the 
 conviction, that you have not yet adduced what you deem 
 your strongest arguments in favour of the proposition you 
 contend for. Have you not other arguments in reserve ? 
 
 T. Why, to be sure, I conceive that without having 
 recourse to insulated texts, or even to statements which 
 admit of but one satisfactory explanation, such as are those 
 to which I have just directed your notice, the case may be 
 sufficiently made out by placing before you the following 
 broad, unequivocal, and undeniable facts : — 
 
 First. Jesus alone possessed the nature which was ca- 
 pable of ful€lling divine law. — This argument, although 
 cursorily treated of already, deserves to be still further 
 insisted on and developed. — Adam, as essentially and 
 inherently fleshly, shewed himself unable to comply with 
 the easiest of all conceivable injunctions, by sinking under 
 the most trifling of all conceivable temptations. That is, the 
 mere nature of flesh was overwhelmed by the touch of the 
 little finger of a law which was inherently divine. The 
 prohibition in itself was spiritual, as proceeding from him 
 who is Spirit; but the first Adam to whom it was address- 
 ed w^as fleshly, or possessed of a nature which, as the 
 sequel proved, was totally unable to comply with it. — But 
 Jesus was the Creator, or Lord from heaven, manifest in 
 
THE TWO LAWS. 95 
 
 flesh. His mind therefore, as spiritual or divine, was 
 qualified both to receive and to fulfil a law which, like 
 himself, was spiritual or divine likewise; — was qualified to 
 bear, not the little finger merely, but the entire weight of 
 divine law when laid upon it in all the extent and inten- 
 sity of its demands. The law of God and the Lord Jesus 
 were thus perfectly suitable to each other. — Divine law 
 had hitherto been requiring obedience in vain ; for crea- 
 tures possessed not a nature qualified to meet and satisfy 
 its demands. But now appeared a being in whom were 
 combined all the powers, faculties, and dispositions, requi- 
 site to yield it entire satisfaction. Nay, even to magnifij 
 it and make it honouriihle. Having thus found in Jesus 
 of Nazareth the being who alone was qualified to obey 
 divine law, why should we look elsewhere for others to 
 whom that law was addressed ? 
 
 Secondly. The Lord Jesus proved that he was the 
 only being to whom properly speaking the law of Moses 
 had been addressed, not merely by his having been the 
 sole possessor of the qualifications requisite for obeying it, 
 but also by the fact that he himself alone actually did obey 
 it. The law, whenever previously supposed by ordinary 
 human beings to have been addressed to them, had been 
 warning them of their mistake, by their continually finding 
 that it was weak through thejlesh j or that they were unable 
 to obey it, on account of the inherent weakness of their 
 fleshly nature : but at last God, by sending his own Son in 
 the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, having condemned 
 sin in the flesh, shewed to all who were rendered capable of 
 understanding the subject, that to Jesus the Lord from 
 heaven, and not to any of the ordinary descendants of 
 Adam, had that law all along been addressed. On the 
 cross, the Lord Jesus himself said, it is finished; intimat- 
 ing, that having obeyed the law of God completely himself, 
 he left neither power nor opportunity for any one to obey 
 
96 THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 it after liim: and by the apostle Paul it is declared, that 
 Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one 
 that helieveth j intimating, that as Christ was the person to 
 whom alone divine law had been addressed, and by whom 
 alone that law had been fulfilled, he was the end of it, or 
 it found its end or accomplishment in him ; and that as 
 divine law no longer exists, his righteousness or fulfilment 
 of it, and not any personal obedience yielded by themselves, 
 is that in which his believing people stand perfect and ac- 
 cepted before God. Now it seems to me self-evident, 
 that a law which remained unfulfilled until Jesus of Na- 
 zareth made his appearance, and which was so completely 
 obeyed by him as to have had all its claims exhausted and 
 to be consequently incapable of being obligatory since upon 
 any one, must, upon the principle of God doing nothing 
 in vain, have been all along intended for our blessed Lord 
 alone. — But all other evidences of the law from Mount 
 Sinai having been issued to the Lord Jesus only are, in 
 my apprehension, superseded by. 
 
 Thirdly, the fact, that the very purpose for which a second 
 law was issued, necessarily implied its having been given, 
 not to a creature, but to the Creator manifest in flesh. — 
 Concerning* the first law it has been shewn, that it was 
 imposed on a creature, not that it might be obeyed, but in 
 order to bring out and make manifest the inability of the 
 creature to yield obedience to it. This was an experiment, 
 however, which could not be repeated. Divine wisdom 
 forbade it. The result of Adam's transgression rendered 
 it unnecessary. In the event of another law being pro- 
 mulgated, it must have been with a view, both to do away 
 with the effects of the breach of the first, and also to ac- 
 complish the ulterior purposes for which that breach had 
 taken place. Sin, although it had entered, could not be 
 permitted to retain a permanent station in the dominions 
 of Jehovah. And it could not have been permitted to en- 
 
THE TWO LAWS. 97 
 
 ter at all, except with a view to the infinitely glorious re- 
 sults of which its temporary entrance and reign were to be 
 productive. In a w^ord, the very reason why a second 
 law behoved to be issued was that it might, by being 
 obeyed, swallow up and obliterate the first ; and all the 
 melancholy and disastrous consequences to which the first 
 had given birth. Now a purpose like this could not have 
 been answered by imposing the second law on a creature. 
 Besides the fact, that by a creature it might, as in the for- 
 mer case, have been violated ; creature obedience, even 
 if rendered, could neither have swallowed up Adam's 
 transgression, nor paved the w^ay for the introduction of a 
 more glorious state of things. God's purpose was not to 
 counterbalance evil with good ; but to overcome evil and 
 swallow it up in good. Who sees not that, with a view to 
 the accomplishment of this latter object, the second law 
 behoved to be imposed, not on a creature^ but on the 
 Creator ? That it required, not to demand obedience from 
 a mind of flesh, but to exact it from a mind of Spirit ? — 
 And that God did so, is exactly what I maintain. I say, 
 that the second law was given, not to any of Adam's ordi- 
 nary descendants, but to Jesus of Nazareth, the Lord from 
 heaven : that, by his divine obedience, creature transgres- 
 sion might be, not merely counterbalanced, but obliterated ; 
 and creature transgression shewn to be subservient, not to 
 the restoration of creatures to the state in which Adam was 
 originally formed and placed, but to the elevation of them 
 to heaven itself; and thereby to the yielding to God of a 
 revenue of glory from the righteousness of his own Son, 
 Avhich from no other source could have accrued. 
 
 F. What do you understand by the law of God having 
 been given spiritually to Christ? 
 
 T. By spiritually, I mean really, given to him. Given 
 to him, not in the letter or sense which strikes the mere 
 fleshly mind ; but in the spirit or sense which the law it- 
 
 N 
 
98 THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 self really bore, and which, from his mode of fulfilling it, 
 we learn it to have borne. — Let me take as an illus- 
 tration of my meaning the ten commandments. The whole 
 of the Old Testament Scriptures no doubt constituted law 
 to Christ; for he was the word made Jlesh : but the ten 
 commandments will sufficiently answer my purpose. 
 
 Before, however, pointing out the spiritual fulfilment of 
 these commandments by the Lord Jesus,(whichl will do very 
 briefly, and in the way of hints which you may prosecute 
 and fill up at your leisure,) I beg leave to submit the fol- 
 lowing observation : — that, although the law imposed on 
 Adam was merely prohibitory, not demanding obedience, 
 but forbidding disobedience ; on the contrary, the law im- 
 posed on the Messiah was both prohibitory and impera- 
 tive : that is, it not only forbade to him what was wrong, 
 but it also ordained and required, at his hands, what was 
 right. And it is through having yielded obedience to the 
 law of God in this latter way, tliat the glory of the Lord 
 Jesus principally makes its appearance. He obeyed the 
 law not merely as jyrohibiting disobedience, the form in 
 which divine law had been originally issued to man ; but 
 as a command or series of commands enjoining obedience, 
 a form in which divine law never was, and never could 
 have been, issued to mere man. 
 
 The subsequent commentary will, as much as possible, 
 combine representations of the fulfilment of divine law by 
 Christ, both in its prohibitory and its commanding forms. 
 
 The four first commandments respect the duties or ob- 
 ligations under which our Lord came directly to his Hea- 
 venly Father. 
 
 I. Thou Shalt have no other Gods be- I. The Lord Jesus abstained from the 
 fore (or besides) me. worship of self, the object of every mere 
 
 man's idolatry naturally; and worshipped 
 the Lord his God, serving him alone. 
 Matt. iv. 10. 
 
 II. Thou shalt not make unto thee II. He abstained from every mode of 
 any graven image, or any likeness of any worshipping even the living and true 
 
THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 thing that is in heaven above, or that 
 is in the earth heneaih, or that is in 
 the water under the earth. Thou shalt 
 not bow down thyself to them, nor serve 
 them : for I the Lord thy God am a jea- 
 lous God, visiting the iniquity of the 
 fathers upon the children unto the third 
 and fourth generation of them that hate 
 me : And shewing mercy unto thousands 
 of them that love me, and keep my com- 
 mandments. 
 
 III. Thou shalt not take the name of 
 the Lord thy God in vain : for the Lord 
 will not hold him guiltless that taketh 
 his name in vain. 
 
 God, which the scriptures did not war- 
 rant, and which man might have devised : 
 having yielded obedience to this com- 
 mand of his heavenly father, by fulfilling 
 all the narratives, types, and prophecies 
 concerning himself wliich were contained 
 in the Old Testament Scriptures, or by 
 fulfilling all the Old Testament scrip- 
 tures ; the only way in which God could 
 have been obeyed, and thereby worship- 
 ped, by the Messiah. 
 
 III. He abstained from every breach 
 of the obligations under wliich he had 
 come, especially from the breach of that 
 all-comprehensive obligation undcrtalcen 
 by himself, Lo ! I come to do thy will, O 
 God! Hebrews x. 7. 9. : and, as having 
 assumed the name of Jehovah, or, in 
 other words, as claiming to be the Mes- 
 siah, God manifest in flesh,he shewed by 
 every action of his life, and especially by 
 his obedience unto death, that he had laot 
 taken the name of God in vain. 
 
 IV. Until our liOrd's resurrection from 
 the dead, or during the six remarkable 
 aeras preceding that period, his father 
 had been iLwrking, and he also worked; 
 John V. 17; but from the period of his re- 
 surrection, which shewed his work com- 
 plete, he- discontinued working, having 
 entered into his rest, as God did into his ; 
 Hebrews iv, 10 : and now, instead of work- 
 ing in the way of obedience to law, or 
 allowing his church to perform works of 
 obedience to law, which would be to vio- 
 late the spirit of the commandment, he 
 is engaged in bringing the members of 
 his church by faith into the enjoyment 
 of the sabbath or rest, from creature works, 
 upon which he liimself hath entered. 
 Hebrews iv. 1 — 11. 
 
 So much for those obligations under which Jesus, as tlie 
 Messiah, came to his Heavenly Father directly. The fol- 
 lowing commandments respect the obligations which he 
 took upon himself in regard to both God and man. 
 
 V. Honour thy father and thy mother : V, Jesus abstained from dishonouring 
 that thy days may be long upon the land equally God his father, and earth, or 
 which the Lord thy God giveth thee. human nature, his mother: on the con- 
 
 IV. Remember the sabbath day, to 
 keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, 
 and do all thy work : but the seventh day 
 is the sabbath of the Lord thy God : in 
 it, thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor 
 thy son, nor thy daughter, thy man ser- 
 vant, nor thy maid servant, nor thy cattle, 
 nor thy stranger, that is within thy gates. 
 For in six days the Lord made heaven 
 and earth, the sea, and all that in them 
 is, and rested the seventh day : where- 
 fore the Lord blessed the sabbath day, 
 and hallowed it. 
 
100 
 
 THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 VI. Thou shalt not kill. 
 
 VII. Thou shall not commit adulteiy. 
 
 Till. Thou shalt not steal. 
 
 trary, he honoured his father, hy yielding 
 such an ohedience to the law of God, as 
 magnified it and made it honourable ; and 
 by affording to God an opportunity of 
 glorifying his justice and mercy, as well 
 as all his other perfections, in the salva- 
 tion of man, through his own obedience, 
 death, and resurrection from the dead ; 
 and he honoured his mother, by elevating 
 beings possessed originally of a nature of 
 flesh, to the possession through himself of 
 the nature of God. He hath, therefore, 
 the fullness of blessing, even life at God's 
 right hand for evermore. 
 
 VI. He abstained from murder ; for 
 he came not to imitate Adam in incur- 
 ring hlood guiltiness, Ps. li. 14., by de- 
 stroying men's lives : Luke ix. 56. : on 
 the contrary he came that we through him 
 might have life, and that we might have it 
 more ahimdanthj. John x. 10. In Adam 
 all die ,• but in Christ, as possessing the 
 very opposite of the murderous character, 
 shall all be made alive. 1 Cor. xv. 22. 
 
 VII. He abstained from adultery ; for 
 although the Old Testament church was so 
 guilty, as to have justified him in break- 
 ing off his connection with her merely by 
 giving her a writing of divorcement, he 
 was pleased to dissolve the union by the 
 shedding of his own most precious blood ; 
 a crime in the perpetrating of which she 
 was the main instrument : and he obeyed 
 the command positivelj-, by becoming, 
 through his resurrection from the dead, 
 married to another, even to that church 
 which has an everlasting comiection with 
 him, and thereby brings forth fruit unto 
 God. See Rom. vii. 1 — 6. — More briefly : 
 liaving formed a temporary connection 
 with man by appearing in flesh, Jesus 
 obeyed this commandment, by dissolving 
 the connection through his own death, 
 before giving to man that new and more 
 glorious connection with himself which 
 is destined to last for evermore. 2 Cor- 
 inth, v. 21. 
 
 VIII. Jesus abstained from stealing 
 or robbery of every description ; al- 
 though he accounted it no robbery to he 
 
THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 101 
 
 IX. Thou shall not bear false witness 
 against thy neighbour. 
 
 X. Thou shall not covet thy neigh- 
 bour's house, thou shall not covet thy 
 neighboui-'s wife, nor his man-servant, 
 nor Ms maid-servant, nor his ox, nor his 
 ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's. 
 
 equal with God, yet abstaining, while in 
 flesh, from all assertion of his riglits as 
 the Lord from heaven, or from all vio- 
 lent seizure of the blessings of life ever- 
 lasting : on the contrary, having been 
 content to earn the joys of eternity for 
 himself and others as wages, through his 
 obedience unto death. Phil. ii. 6 11. 
 
 IX. He abstained from bearing false 
 witness against his neighbour, whether 
 Jew or Gentile; thatis,he abstained from 
 bringing any charge against human be- 
 ings and human nature, which facts did 
 not warrant: on the contrary, as the truth, 
 he always spoke what was true of man, 
 as well as of God ; testifying of the for- 
 mer, that his works were evil ; and of the 
 latter, that he sent not his Son to condemn 
 the world, hut that the icorld through him 
 might he saved. 
 
 X. He abstained from the coveting of 
 all earthly honours and advantages, and 
 from the desire of all gratifications which 
 were only to be obtained and enjoyed at 
 the expense of others; refusing to he 
 made a king, and having not even where 
 to lag his head : and all this because he 
 came, not to he ministered unto, but to 
 minister; not to covet or possess the things 
 of time, the portion of the children of men, 
 but to give his life a ransomjbr many; and 
 thereby to bestow on the children of men 
 his own portion, even the glories of eter- 
 nity. 
 
 A summary of the ten commandments, as fulfilled by 
 Christ, may be thus stated : — 
 
 I. TABLE. 
 
 Jesus, 1, worshipped, by obeying, God; 2, in his own 
 prescribed way; 3, without failure in the minutest point of 
 duty; and, 4, having entered into his rest, without leav- 
 ing occasion for the performance of any additional act of 
 obedience ; a course of procedure whereby that rest or 
 sabbath would have been violated. 
 II. TABLE. 
 
 Jesus, 5, honoured not only the Creator, but also the 
 creature; 6, by conferring upon the latter his own life; 7, 
 
102 THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 through dissolving in himself the connection of the crea- 
 ture with this present world, and imparting to it a higher 
 connection ; 8, not seizing violently, hut paying the ne- 
 cessary and stipulated price for, the favours thus conferred; 
 9, illustrating thereby the perfect truth of God, in render- 
 ing the execution of deserved punishment upon the creature, 
 consistent with his becoming the participator of heavenly 
 blessings; and, 10, the wliole issuing in, not the desire to 
 receive or the actual reception of any thing by the Crea- 
 tor from the creature, but in the bestowing of every thing 
 by the Creator upon the creature. 
 
 B. My attention has been drawn lately to the reason- 
 ing of the apostle Paul, in the latter part of the third 
 chapter of his Epistle to the Galatians. Am I right in 
 conjecturing, that it bears a very close affinity to the sub- 
 ject which we are at the present moment discussing ? 
 
 T. The facts of the case completely bear you out in 
 your conjecture. Nothing can be more marked than the 
 manner in which the passage alluded to by you represents 
 the second law, or law of love, as having been addressed 
 and limited to the Messiah alone. A few observations 
 will suffice to render this apparent. — Have the goodness 
 to keep the New Testament open at the place, and to refer 
 to it, as I proceed. 
 
 After the apostle has shewn, in Galatians iii. 7, that they 
 which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham; 
 and hinted that as in the case of Abraham himself, so in 
 that of every other, justification takes place through faith, 
 and not through obedience to law; he anticipates and an- 
 swers an objection which might have been brought forward 
 in opposition to his statement, grounded on the fact that it 
 was not previously, but subsequently, to the period of the 
 promise made to Abraham, that the law was issued from 
 Mount Sinai. "You say," as if the objectors had thus 
 expressed themselves, "that salvation was promised to 
 
THE TWO T.AWS. 103 
 
 Abraham by grace, through faith alone ; or, in other words, 
 that he had originally a promise of its being uncondition- 
 ally bestowed on himself and others. But how is this to be 
 reconciled with the subsequent promulgation of the law ? a 
 circumstance which seems to imply that, only in conse- 
 quence of certain conditions being performed by the crea- 
 ture, was the blessing in question to be enjoyed?" To 
 this the apostle answers in substance, that the supposed 
 objectors had mistaken the purpose of God in the issuing 
 of the said law altogether. That purpose having been, 
 not to defeat the promise, or to render impossible the con- 
 ferring of spiritual blessings freely in virtue of the pro- 
 mise, but actually to enable God to carry that very promise 
 into effect. If the purpose of God in the issuing of the 
 law had been, that its conditions might either in whole or 
 in part be fulfilled by creatures, then, as if the apostle had 
 said, the law would most unquestionably have been at 
 variance with the promises of God. For a promise of 
 blessings to be bestowed unconditionally upon the crea- 
 ture, as that given to Abraham was, could never, under 
 any circumstances or by any species of management, have 
 been rendered consistent with blessings the conditions of 
 enjoying which were to be fulfilled by creatures. " But 
 what will you think," argues the apostle, "if I shew you, 
 that the law in question was never given to mere man, nor 
 intended to be fulfilled by mere man ? — By faith you are 
 to live and be saved. But a law requiring obedience 'from 
 you as the condition of salvation, would have been incon- 
 sistent with your living by faith. — Mark, then, how won- 
 drously the whole matter is arranged, and the freeness of 
 salvation ultimately and completely secured. The law, 
 the issuing of which subsequently to the promise so much 
 puzzles you, was not imposed on mere men, but on the 
 Son of God manifest in flesh. Certain it is that the law 
 is not of faith, as it ensures the enjoyment of its bles- 
 
104 THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 slugs not bv being believed in, but by being obeyed ; 
 this being its import, tbat the man that doth them, (tbe 
 works of the law,) shall live in them : and thercsfore it is 
 that Christ, as the very man here spoken of, by his sub- 
 jection and obedience to this law, hath redeemed us from 
 its curse, having been made a curse for us^ See verses 
 12th and 13th. 
 
 " Again : I admit," thus the apostle goes on to reason, 
 " that if the inheritance of spiritual blessings be by obe- 
 dience to the law, on the part of mere man, then it is no 
 more of promise. And yet, the inheritance is in reality 
 by promise : for thus God gave it to Abraham. Verse 
 18th. How is this to be made consistent with its being 
 enjoyed through the medium of law ? Only in one way : 
 namely, that the law was not given to mere men to be 
 obeyed by them, but was ordained by angels in the hands 
 of a mediator. V. 19th. That is, that the law was given 
 to the mediator to be fulfilled by him, and by him alone. 
 Upon this principle," argues the apostle, " the promise 
 having been given, not to seeds, as of many, but to the one 
 seed of Abraham, which is Christ ; the law, in like man- 
 ner, Nvas^imposed, not on many, but on one; even on that 
 same one seed to whom the promise had been given : his 
 personal enjoyment of the blessings of the promise, and the 
 enjoyment of these same blessings by us, having been made 
 to depend on the fulfilment of the law by him alone. Now 
 Jesus hath fulfilled the law thus given to him; and, by so 
 doing, hath procured to himself, as well as secured to us 
 likewise, the accomplishment of the promise. To him, the 
 enjoyment of the promised blessings was necessarily con- 
 ditional J but to us, these blessings flow unconditionally, 
 through him. The reason of the difference between his 
 mode of enjoying these blessings and ours being, that his 
 fulfilment of every condition leaves none to be fulfilled 
 by us." 
 
THE TWO LAWS. 105 
 
 " Such is an outline of the wondrous scheme of salva- 
 tion. By giving the law to Jesus, the seed of Ahraham, 
 and to him alone, that law has heen completely and most 
 gloriously fulfilled ; — and in consequence of its fulfilment 
 by him, the blessings promised through Abraham's seed 
 by faith are bestowed freely, that is, unconditionally, on 
 us. The fulfilment of the law by the Creator hath en- 
 sured the enjoyment of the blessings of salvation freely 
 by the creature. And thus the entrance of law posterior- 
 ly to the giving of the promise, so far from interfering with 
 or rendering impossible the accomplishment of the pro- 
 mise, has, in consequence of that law having been im- 
 posed on and fulfilled by the Creator, become the very 
 means of the blessing of Abraham, or the blessing freely 
 promised to Abraham, coming on the Gentiles, through 
 Jesus Christ,'' Verse 14th. 
 
 A similar line of argument is prosecuted by the apostle 
 in the lOtli chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, from the 
 3d to the 12th verses. 
 
 But enough of this. — Am I understood ? 
 
 B. For my part, I can say, perfectly. 
 
 F. Your allegation is, that as there are only, properly 
 speaking, two men set before us in scripture, viz. Adam 
 and Christ ; the former, of the earth, earthy, the latter, the 
 Lord from heaven ; the former, the type or figure, the lat- 
 ler the anti-type or substance ; the former, a creature, the 
 latter, the Creator : so there are only, properly speaking, 
 two laws represented in scripture as having been issued 
 by God to man, viz. the one consisting of the prohibition 
 as to eating of the fruit of the tree of knorvledge of good 
 and evil, which was addressed to Adam, the former of these 
 two men, in paradise -, — and the other, being the law of 
 love to God and man, which was imposed on the Lord 
 Jesus by the instrumentality of Moses and the prophets : 
 the violation of the former of these laws by Adam, having 
 
106 THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 brouglit in sin and death, and entailed npon all his fleshly 
 posterity guilt and punishment; — and the fulfilment of the 
 latter of them by the Lord Jesus, having introduced right- 
 eousness and life everlasting, blessings in which his spirit- 
 ual posterity are, by virtue of their union with him, made 
 freely and fully and gloriously to participate. 
 
 Your further allegation is, that as Adam was the wicked 
 man, so all his natural posterity, as one with him, consti- 
 tute the wicked; and tliat as Jesus was the righteous man, 
 so all liis spiritual posterity, as one with him, constitute 
 the righteous. 
 
 All this I fully comprehend. And I have made the 
 preceding statements in order to shew you that I do so. 
 
 B. But, David, there is one thing about which I want 
 to be satisfied. You have said, and I think proved, that 
 no man naturally can obey any divine law, in consequence 
 of the Jleshly mind, the only mind which human beings 
 naturally possess, being enmity against God; heiug neither 
 subject to his law, nor, indeed, able to be so : and that, 
 therefore, the law enjoining love to God and man was not 
 given to mere man naturally. You have also, in so far 
 as my feeble judgment can decide in a matter of this kind, 
 established your position, that the law of love was given 
 to Christ and fulfilled by him. Surely, however, brother, 
 not exclusively ? If I allow that mankind naturally are 
 not subject to the law which requires perfect love to God, 
 and equal love to man ; surely you will not deny, that the 
 people of Christ are spiritually subject to that law, and are 
 by grace enabled to obey it ? 
 
 T. I do deny, in the simplest, the most emphatic, and 
 the most unqualified, terms that I can make use of, that 
 any one, except the Lord Jesus, ever was, or is, or will 
 be, subject to tlie law which prescribes supreme love to 
 God, and equal love to man : nay, I go farther, and assert, 
 that no person bearing the fleslily form, ever was, or is, or 
 
THE TWO LAWS. 107 
 
 will be, capable of being subjected to tbat law, except tbe 
 Lord Jesus during tbe period of bis abode in flesb. 
 
 F. In tbe name of wonder, wbat do you mean, Thom? 
 
 T. Just wbat I say ; tbat, according to tbe sacred 
 volume, to tbe law imposing tbe obligation to love God 
 and man, no one, except Cbrist, ever was, or will be, or 
 can be subjected. And as tbe law was given to Jesus 
 alone, so be became the end of it ; or tbe law came to an 
 end in liim by means of bis fulfilment of it. Wben tbe 
 Creator manifest in flesb exclaimed, it is finished, be left 
 notbing for us creatures to add to bis work. His obedience 
 to tbe law of love is our rigbteousness : a rigbteousness 
 wbicb, as divine, is susceptible neitber of increase nor of 
 diminution. — Can I express myself more distinctly or in- 
 telligibly, in reference to tbis matter, tban I bave done ? 
 
 B. Certainly not : only I sbould like to know liow you 
 reconcile your denial of God's law being obligatory upon 
 believers, witb tbe language of tbe apostle in tbe eigbtb 
 cbapter of tbe Epistle to tbe Romans, tbat the law of the 
 spirit of life in Christ Jesus, hath made me free from the 
 law of sin and death. Does not tbe inspired writer mean 
 to say here, tbat be was set free from one law, by being 
 brought under the obligation of another law P Is not tbat 
 other law the law of love P And, is not tbe privilege 
 which he here asserts as his own, common to him with all 
 the members of the specially-redeemed family ? 
 
 T. Really, brother, you put me to my mettle. You 
 come at once, and admirably, to the point; and that is 
 saying a vast deal more tban can be affirmed with truth of 
 nine hundred and ninety nine out of every thousand theo- 
 logians, or would-be theologians, with whom one is ordin- 
 arily brought into contact. 
 
 In answer to your queries : — Do you happen to remem- 
 ber a remark made by me some time since — a remark con- 
 cerning a subject as to which, I observed, I so far agreed 
 
lOS THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 with Mr. Robert Owen, who has been unconsciously 
 borrowing his notion from scripture — that the nature of 
 every being constitutes the law to whicli that being is 
 subject ? That as the natures of the rat, the cat, and the 
 dog, are the laws to which tliese animals respectively are 
 subject; so the fleshly nature of man is the law to which he 
 is originally and exclusively subject ? A xiew for which I 
 confess myself indebted to the teaching of tlie Holy Ghost, 
 through the medium of the truths opened up in the 7th 
 and 8th chapters of the Epistle to the Romans. 
 
 B. I both remember your statement as to the nature 
 of every being constituting the law of that being, and I 
 cheerfully acquiesce in it. But how does it bear upon our 
 present subject ? 
 
 T. This I now proceed to shew you. 
 
 Assuming as true the principle which you have just ad- 
 mitted, the nature of Adam was the law of Adam, and the 
 nature of Christ in flesh was the law of Christ in flesh. 
 Adam's nature consisted in subjection to the law of flesh, 
 and opposition to the law of God ; whereas Christ's nature 
 consisted in subjection to the law of God, and opposition to 
 the law of flesh. The reason of this difference being, tliat 
 earth was the origin of Adam's nature, heaven of Clu'ist's 
 nature ; the former having been of' the earth, earthy, the 
 latter the Lord from heaven : and that, therefore, to earth 
 or flesh as his sovereign, the former was subject ; while to 
 heaven or spirit as his sovereign, the latter owed alleg- 
 iance. As the nature of Adam was fleshly, the law, the 
 only law, to which he was or could be subject, was the 
 law of flesh ; whereas the nature of Jesus having been spi- 
 ritual in the form of fleshly, the law, the only law, to which 
 he was or could be subject, was spiritual, or the law of 
 God adapted to the fleshly form. — I speak just now of 
 the Son of God as manifest in flesh. And my object is 
 to shew, that as Adam's nature, which was fleshly, consti- 
 
THE TWO LAWS. 109 
 
 tuted the law to which Adam was subject ; so the nature 
 of Christ, while on earth, which was spiritual in the fleshly 
 form, constituted the lam to which Christ, while on earth, 
 was subject. Speaking of his earthly nature, then, as a 
 nature essentially subject to tlie law of God, and as thereby 
 distinguished from the nature of Adam which was a nature 
 essentially subject to the law of flesh, Jesus could with 
 truth say, addressing his Heavenly Father, Tliy law is 
 within my heart ; that is, " as spiritual myself, subjection 
 to thy law which is spiritual constitutes my very nature." 
 But, strange as ignorance of it may appear, it is never- 
 theless a fact not generally known, that the Lord Jesus as 
 appearing on earth, and as reigning in heaven, has two 
 perfectly distinct natures ; or, rather, that the one nature 
 of the Lord Jesus has appeared under two perfectly distinct 
 forms. First, under an earthly form; and secondly, un- 
 der a heavenly one. — The earthly form of the nature of 
 the Lord Jesus was peculiar to himself. This is a fact 
 which not one soi-disant divine in a thousand has ever 
 even suspected ; and hence the blunderings respecting the 
 subjection of believers to divine law with which all, or 
 nearly all, systems of theology are over-run and render- 
 ed ridiculous. The earthly form of Christ's nature was 
 subject to divine law ; but this state of subjection was be- 
 gun and ended with liimself. It commenced when he be- 
 came incarnate ; it was brought to an end when lie ex- 
 pired on the cross. He sacrificed it, in sacrificing him- 
 self. And as sacrificed, as terminated in him, it was 
 never afterwards either to be resumed by himself, or to 
 be conferred by him upon others. — With the second, or 
 heavenly form of his nature, it was that Jesus arose from 
 the dead ; and it is with this second, or heavenly form, 
 that he lives and reigns for evermore. This second, or 
 heavenly form of his nature, is not subject to divine law ; 
 because it is lovej or the very principle of divine law itself. 
 
110 THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 Subject to divine law he appeared in tlie first form of his 
 nature, that is, while in flesh ; but in love or the heavenly 
 form of his nature, has subjection to divine law or the 
 earthly form of his nature, (through tlie medium of his 
 death, resurrection from the dead, and ascension upon 
 high,) been swallowed up. As subjection to divine law 
 was the temporary form of his nature while on eartli ; so 
 love, or a state of triumph over law as well as sin and 
 death, is the form of liis nature now and for evermore. 
 
 Now it is the earnest of this second or heavenly form 
 of liis divine nature which the Messiah, through faith, com- 
 municates to us his chosen people. He makes us partakers, 
 as to our consciences, of his own present nature. Ephes. ii. 
 5. 6, Tlie reason being, that the earthly form of his na- 
 ture, as having been sacrificed on the cross and swallowed 
 up in liis resurrection, no longer exists ; and, therefore, is 
 not in his power to bestow. Hence it is, that when a spirit- 
 ual view of the resurrection of Christ is by himself caus- 
 ed with power to enter into, and take possession of, our con- 
 sciences, the nature ofjieshly mind is, in so far as the divine 
 communication extends, absorbed and swallowed up in the 
 nature of spiritual mind. Previous subjection to the law 
 of flesh, (not subjection to the law of God, for that was 
 peculiar to Christ when on earth,) is swallowed up in 
 love ; sense of sin, is swallowed up in divine righteousness; 
 and fear of death, is swallowed up in the knowledge and 
 possession of life everlasting. John xi. 25. 26. That is, 
 the very same effects which took place in the resurrection 
 of Christ, take place through faith in our consciences. 
 As, in Christ's resurrection, creature principles were swal- 
 lowed up in such as are divine; subjection to law, in love; 
 sin, in righteousness; and death, in life everlasting: so in 
 our consciences, through faith in his resurrection, creature 
 principles are swallowed up in such as are divine likewise; 
 law sin and death, in love righteousness and life everlast- 
 
THE TWO LAWS. Ill 
 
 ing. We are not through faith in Christ's resurrection made 
 subject to divine law ; but we are thereby made partalers 
 of a resurrection spirit, as in us the earnest of a new di- 
 vine and heavenly nature or principle, Ephes. i. 1 7. — 
 20. Indeed, see from i. 17, to ii. 12. 
 
 In this way, then, the entering of spiritual views into 
 our minds does not render us subject to divine law, and 
 lay Its under obligations to fulfil it, as is commonly but 
 erroneously supposed : seeing that, if it did so, it would 
 impart to us, not the form of the nature of Christ now, but 
 the form of the nature which he had while he was upon 
 earth; and, besides, would compel us to attempt becoming 
 our own saviours, instead of enabling us to rejoice in that 
 salvation which he himself hath accomplished. On the 
 contrary, the entering of spiritual views into our minds, 
 being the manifestation to us of our necessary and indes- 
 tructible union with Christ ; and, consequently, of his 
 righteousness being our righteousness, and of liis life 
 being our life ; but, above all, of his complete fulfilment of 
 divine law having superseded the necessity and even pos- 
 sibility of our being called on to fulfil divine law ourselves; 
 we find ourselves, not as Christ on earth was, subject to 
 divine law, but as Christ now is, raised above law : partalc- 
 ers in earnest of the present nature of him, in whom it hath 
 pleased the Father that all the fulness of grace and truth 
 sJiould dwell. And thus the new mind, or earnest of the 
 divine nature which is imparted to our consciences, is a 
 law to us, not in tlie sense of our being as partakers of 
 human nature subjected to divine commands; butin the sense 
 of the spiritual discoveries made to us constituting in us a 
 new nature : the nature of every being constituting, as we 
 have seen, the law of that being. The nature of Adam 
 wliicli we originally have is, as our nature, a law of sin 
 and death, because it constrained Adam to sin and die; 
 and the nature of Christ as exalted to glory, which by 
 
112 THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 grace is bestowed on us who believe, is, as our nature, tlie 
 law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus, because it con- 
 strains us, as alive with our liead and with him raised 
 above prohibitions and commands, to live not unto our^ 
 selves, but unto him that died for us, and that rose again. 
 2 Cor. V. 14. 15. See also Ephes. ii. 5. 6. 
 
 If understood in the remarks which I have made, it will 
 appear, that the manifestation to us of Christ as having died 
 and risen again, or the imparting to us of the earnest of the 
 spirit of life, is a law to us, just in the very same sense in 
 which any other nature is« law to the being who is possessed 
 of it. That is, as the nature of every being is in it a law 
 not restraining from any thing, but constraining it to pro- 
 duce effects and exhibit phenomena corresponding to that 
 nature; so faith, or the earnest of the divine nature, is in 
 us who believe a law, not restraining from something upon 
 which that nature is bent, but constraining us to bring 
 forth fruits and act in a manner corresponding to that 
 nature. As that which is born of the flesh, or under the 
 influence of the law of fleshly nature, is flesh; so that 
 which is born of the spirit, or under the influence of the 
 law of spiritual nature, is spirit. John iii. 6. 
 
 To present in an abridged form what I have just said 
 in reference to this matter. — There are three intelliorent 
 
 o 
 
 natures, and, consequently, three laws, to which intelligent 
 beings have been, are, or may be, subject, set before us in 
 scripture : — 1. There is the nature of Adam, consisting 
 in subjection to the law of flesh. 2. There is the 
 nature which Christ had while upon earth; consisting in 
 subjection to the law of divine prohibitions and commands. 
 And, 3, there is the nature which Christ has now; 
 consisting in subjection to itself as being its own law. — 
 Now if the preceding observations have been compre- 
 hended, it must be evident, 1st, that no mere human being 
 ever is, or can be, subject to God's law as a command: for 
 
THE TWO LAWS. 113 
 
 naturally, he is subject to the law of flesh ; and spiritually, 
 he is subject to the law of love operating, not as a command^ 
 but as a principle, imparted to and dwelling in his con- 
 science by faith : Christ alone, while in flesh, having pos- 
 sessed a nature which was subject to God's law as a com- 
 mand or series of commands enjoining obedience. And, 
 2dly, that the communicating to the elect people of God of 
 the knowledge of Jesus's character as the risen and glo- 
 rified Messiah, is not the relieving of them from subjection 
 to the law of flesh, in order to make them, subject to the law 
 of God, viewed as a command or series of commands : 
 but is the swallowing up in their consciences of the nature 
 which consists in subjection to the law of flesh, in the 
 nature which consists in love or the mind of God himself; 
 which as a nature, and not by imposing upon us in opposi- 
 tion to our nature an obligation to obey commands, consti- 
 tutes the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus. — In short, 
 of the three intelligent natures, and the three corresponding 
 laws, just spoken of, believers have to do only with the 1st 
 and the 3d ; the first, naturally, and the third, superna- 
 turally : the 2d, or the nature of subjection to divine law, 
 as a command or series of commands, having been peculiar 
 to our blessed Lord during his abode upon earth ; and, as 
 such, having begun with his incarnation and ended with 
 his atoning sacrifice. 
 
 B. That is, to express your idea after my own fashion, 
 and with a view to the clearing up of my own mind in 
 regard to this profound and intricate subject, the law which 
 sets believers free from guilt, and from their previous sub- 
 jection to the law of flesh, is not a new law, in the sense of 
 its being a new prohibition or command, such as were the 
 laws imposed on Adam, and the Lord Jesus during his 
 earthly state; but is a new nature constituting, like every 
 other nature, a law to him by whom it is possessed. This 
 new nature or new law, in so far as it is conferred and 
 
 p 
 
114 THE TWO LAWS. • 
 
 possessed, by the very fact of its entering into his con- 
 science sets the believer free from his former old nature, 
 which constituted his old law. 
 
 Give me leave to make another attempt to convince 
 you, that I have apprehended your views in reference to 
 this subject. — As no human being ever had an oppor- 
 tunity of disobeying divine law, but Adam ; so no being, 
 in the form of man, ever had an opportunity of obeying 
 divine law, but Christ. Adam's guilt is not ours by our 
 disobeying divine law as he did, for no one being subject 
 to a divine prohibition as he was, no one can sin after the 
 similitude of his ti-ansgression ; but it is ours by our in- 
 heriting his nature : so Christ's righteousness is not ours 
 by our obeying divine law as he did, for no one being subject 
 to the law of God as a command or series of commands as 
 he was, no one can yield obedience after the similitude of 
 his righteousness ; but it is ours by our being made par- 
 takers of his nature. And as the nature of flesh, or nature 
 which in Adam disobeyed divine law, is the law to which 
 we are naturally and necessarily subject — which alone we 
 bring into the world with us, and which alone, unless sove- 
 reign grace interfere and prevent, we carry out with us 
 likewise ; so the nature of Spirit, or nature which in Christ 
 obeyed divine law, is that which, giving us liberty from the 
 other, brings us into sweet and pleasing subjection to 
 itself. In the very act of being made free from sin, we 
 become the servants or slaves of righteousness. Rom. vi. 
 18. As believers, we got rid of our fleshly nature as to the 
 conscience, in consequence of its having been superseded 
 by and swallowed up in a spiritual nature. And thus it 
 is the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus, or earnest 
 of the divine nature, which, being introduced into our con- 
 sciences, sets us free so far from human nature, or the law 
 of sin and death. 
 
 T. Precisely so. Blessed be God, you now perceive, 
 
THE TWO LAWS. 115 
 
 that the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus is neither 
 a prohibition or command, nor a series of prohibitions or 
 commands, addressed to a conscience still in a feshly 
 state, with a view to the improvement of that conscience; 
 (absurd, and yet common, supposition \) ; much less to a 
 conscience enUghlened and made new by grace, upon 
 which, as righteous, it is impossible for laws in the sense 
 of prohibitions or commands to be imposed ; Galatians v. 
 23 ; 1 Timothy i. 5. 9 : but that it is the present nature 
 and mind of Christ Jesus, as having himself fulfilled the 
 law of God, superinduced on the -believer s conscience, 
 or, rather, rendered the very mind, conscience, and nature, 
 of the believer ; and, like every other nature, constituting 
 in him a lam or principle to which he is, not by the will 
 or choice of his fleshly mind, but of necessity and by the 
 formation in him of a divine will or choice, gloriously 
 subject. 
 
 F. In a word, the law of the spirit of life in Christ 
 Jesus to which believers are subjected, and by which they 
 are made free from the law of sin and death, is not, ac- 
 cording to you, a divine command addressed to their 
 fieshly consciences, and requiring obedience from these; 
 but is the earnest of the divine nature as a law taking 
 hold of, swallowing up, and thereby superseding, their 
 naturally fleshly consciences ? 
 
 T. So, on the ground of inspired authority, do I main- 
 tain. Sin, says Paul addressing believers, shall not have 
 dominion over you : for ye are not under the law, as im- 
 posing a series of prohibitions and commands on a fleshly 
 nature which is unable to yield them obedience; but under 
 grace, as being partakers through faith of the divine na- 
 ture, and thereby constrained to live, not nnto yourselves, 
 but unto God. 
 
 F. Admitting for the sake of argument, Thom, that 
 all this is true, what explanation do you give of the moral 
 
116 THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 condition of those who are destitute of the knowledge of 
 the gospel ; and, consequently, of the earnest of a spiritual 
 nature ? — I understand you when you say, that Christ 
 alone was by nature subject to the law of God; and that 
 by him that law, after having been fulfilled to the very 
 uttermost, was exhausted by the sacrifice of himself. I 
 understand you when you allege that, as Christ himself, 
 having not only obeyed but exhausted and swallowed up 
 divine law, is not subject to that law now, he appearing on 
 liigh as love, the great fountain of law, and thereby law's 
 superior ; so his obedience to, or rather exhaustion and 
 swallowing up of law, becomes to those who are enabled 
 to perceive their oneness with him as he now is, their 
 obedience to, or rather exhaustion of law likewise : and 
 that thus in them, not subjection to divine law, which was 
 Christ's case on earth ; but possession of the earnest of 
 love or the divine nature, the full possession of which is 
 Christ's case now; is, in so far as their consciences are 
 concerned, their nature and the principle by which they 
 are actuated. I say, I understand all this. — But whence, 
 under such circumstances, are the unregenerate portion of 
 the family of man to draw their morality ? Indeed, what 
 foundation for the morals of ordinary, human beings does 
 your system admit of ? 
 
 T. The length to which this conversation has already 
 been drawn out, and my desire to brihg under your 
 notice one or two other important topics before we part, 
 preclude my giving you a detailed answer to your query. 
 Suffice it to say that as every man, while ignorant of 
 the gospel, is properly speaking his own god; so every 
 man's own conscience, or conviction of right and wrong, 
 is the moral tribunal to which, while so situated, he is 
 amenable. From this observation of mine you will of 
 course perceive, that I do not rank the natural conscience 
 of man so very high as writers on the subject of religion 
 
THE TWO LAWS. 117 
 
 generally do. Instead of confounding the dictates of 
 natural conscience, with the lam of God itself, I main- 
 tain, taught by the sacred scriptures, that natural con- 
 science is merely the highest form which the fleshly mind 
 of man is capable of assuming : that it is not God him- 
 self prescribing laws to the individual, but the mind of the 
 individual, as the shadow and image of the mind of God, 
 prescribing laws to itself, and judging itself according to 
 the laws thus prescribed ; and that, therefore, subjection 
 to the dictates of natural conscience, is subjection to the 
 dictates of fleshly mind merely. Observe what I say. 
 My natural conscience is merely my own mind, in the 
 exercise of its self-legislative capacity, prescribing laws 
 to itself: and although in this I observe the shadow of 
 divine authority — man being made even naturally in, or 
 after, the image of God — I am too well instructed by the 
 Holy Spirit, to confound the mere shadow of divine author- 
 ity, with the substance. — Still, natural conscience is most 
 useful, — aye, not to be dispensed with, — in the absence of 
 higher principle. Its accusings and excusings,^ as they 
 are to the mere fleshly mind its only rule of morals, 
 so do they constitute also the safeguard of society. 
 And sorry should I be to attempt to disturb or undermine 
 them, except by the proclamation of that gospel which, 
 whenever it takes eflect in any individual and not other- 
 wise, is the superseding of natural conscience, by the 
 swallowing of it up in a higher, even a divine, principle. — 
 But enough. Have you understood — 
 
 F. More puzzling theories ! It seems to me as if you 
 had determined to be a perfect QEdipus. — What do you 
 mean by alleging, that man is not amenable naturally to 
 any law but that of his own conscience ? Is he not 
 subject to the ten commandments ? Is he not subject to 
 the various laws which God hath seen meet at various 
 times to prescribe and enforce ? 
 
 * Horn. ii. 14. 15, 
 
118 THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 T. Again I must decline entering upon this subject 
 at length. Indeed, your questions have virtually received 
 an answer already. But that I may appear to exhibit no 
 defect of courtesy, and may embrace the opportunity which 
 you have thrown in my way of clearing up what may have 
 been obscure in my previous statements, I remark briefly : — 
 
 That mankind as a whole, or if you will the Gentile 
 portion of mankind, never were, and never will be, sub- 
 jected to more than one divine law. That law was the 
 prohibition which was given to Adam in Paradise, and 
 which by him was violated. Since then the Gentiles have 
 been subjected to no divine law, and never will be sub- 
 jected to any. The gospel comes, not imposing law in 
 the shape of prohibitions or commands on the conscience 
 of the believer ; but setting him free from law of this kind, 
 in consequence of imparting to him by faith the principle 
 of love, or earnest of the divine nature. And this, to the 
 degree and extent to which it is conferred, is a law to 
 him, in no other sense than that in which any and every 
 nature constitutes a law to the being who is possessed of it. 
 
 As to the unbelieving portion of the family of man, they 
 are now under no divine law. The law of Moses was never 
 addressed to them ; never imposed on them ; never, in 
 any of the senses explained by me, intended to be obliga- 
 tory on them. In a word. Gentiles have nothing wliat- 
 ever to do with this law, in the way of being subjected to 
 it. The law of Moses was confined to the Jews alone; 
 and confined to them, from the period of its promulgation 
 from Mount Sinai, to that of its fulfilment by the Lord of 
 Glory. Rather, from its original promulgation at Sinai, 
 until the final and irretrievable rejection of Jesus as the 
 fulfiUer of it, by his stubborn and unbelieving kinsmen. 
 Since that period the natural conscience of the Jew, no less 
 than of the Gentile, has been to him his only law. If, in the 
 exercise of his self-legislative capacity, either the one or the 
 
THE TWO LAWS. 119 
 
 other shall he pleased to take any of the laws which were 
 typically given to the Jews, but really imposed on Christ; 
 or to devise any laws of his own, and to impose them upon 
 himself; the obligations so imposed no doubt become laws 
 to him. But they are not laws imposed by God: they are 
 merely laws imposed by his own conscience acting as its 
 own god, and arrogating to itself the attributes and pre- 
 rogatives of divine authority. I may impose on myself 
 naturally the ten commandments; or I may attempt to 
 subject myself to the spiritual explication of them given in 
 Matthew v — vii; or I may issue to myself any other laws 
 that I please : and I may say, nay, I may fancy, that it is 
 to the authority of the living and true God I am subject. 
 But in all this I am merely deceiving myself. For it is 
 J, not God, who am all the while the imposer of such laws. 
 The whole is merely an operation of my own conscience, 
 acting as its own • legislator and its own judge. 
 
 God, in the gospel, is not imposing law, but proclaim- 
 ing his own character as love. And this, through the 
 medium of proclaiming the complete obedience to law 
 which has been rendered by his well beloved Son. The 
 gospel saves, and the gospel operates on the conscience, 
 not by imposing law in the sense of commands or prohi- 
 bitions ; but by being believed in, and thereby becoming^ 
 the earnest of the divine nature, or the law of the spirit of 
 life in Christ Jesus. 
 
 Matters thus revert to the position from which I set out,, 
 ihat upon the family of man, as a whole, never was more 
 than one divine law, namely, the prohibition addressed to- 
 Adam, imposed; and that, consequently, for human beings 
 to imagine or pretend that God is now imposing any divine 
 law upon them, over and above the nature which he has 
 given them, — except that earnest of the divine nature 
 which he bestows on his people, — is for them grossly to» 
 mistake his purpose and deceive themselves. Man, as 
 
120 THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 being naturally his own god, is naturally amenable to the 
 law of his own conscience, not to the law of God. 
 
 Having thus explained myself, allow me to propose that 
 question which I was about to do when you interrupted 
 
 me, viz. have you understood 
 
 F. Excuse me for again interrupting you. My an- 
 xiety to obtain satisfaction in regard to this all-important 
 subject must plead my apology. If I have not misappre- 
 hended you, the deliverance which Christ, by conferring the 
 earnest of the divine nature, grants to the minds of Gentile 
 believers, is not deliverance from the law of God ; for that 
 you say they are not subject to : but deliverance from na- 
 tural conscience, as the highest law of their fleshly nature ; 
 from the various prohibitions and commands which con- 
 science, in the exercise of its legislative authority, has seen 
 meet to issue 3 and from the uneasiness occasioned by that 
 violation of its dictates which conscience, sitting as judge, 
 is constrained from time to time to pronounce. 
 
 T. You have in some measure, but not quite, under- 
 stood me. Jesus grants deliverance by faith to his people, 
 1st, from the guilt of Adam's sin, the one transgression of 
 human nature ; and 2dly, from all that sense of guilt and 
 dread of future punishment, of wliich our personal violations 
 of conscience, the lawgiver of each individual's own mind, 
 have been productive. — And this deliverance is communi- 
 cated, by our being enabled to see, first, that human na- 
 ture, which had only a shadowy existence in Adam and 
 has only a similar existence in his posterity, had a real 
 and substantial existence in Christ Jesus; Rom. v. 14; 
 1 Corinth xv. 45. 47 : and, secondly, that by the com- 
 plete obedience of Christ Jesus, and by the sacrifice of 
 the nature which yielded that obedience, there have been 
 an extinction and swallowing up, not only of the real and 
 substantial human nature of our Lord, but also of our 
 shadowy human nature as necessarily involved in it, as 
 
THE TWO LAWS. 121 
 
 well as of all the effects and consequences which have 
 flowed from our possession of the shadoivy human nature. 
 Hebrews ix. 26. 1 Corinth, xv. 54. 2 Corinth, v. 4. 
 That is, human nature as it existed in Adam, and sin and 
 death with all the other effects of tliis human nature, we 
 perceive to have been mere shadows : these shadows we 
 perceive to have been taken up into, and absorbed in, the 
 substantial humanity of Christ : and, consequently, in 
 sacrificing his own substantial nature, we perceive him 
 to have sacrificed also our shadowy nature, with all that is 
 connected with it and implied in it ; just as in rising from 
 the dead, we perceive him to have raised us in himself 
 likewise. And thus it is that, as one with and involved 
 in the substantial humanity of the Lord Jesus, we see 
 that his death, was our death ; that his life, is our life. 
 Rom. vi. 3—11. Col. iii. 3. 4. 
 
 That we are delivered by faith from the condemnation 
 of conscience, as the highest part of the law of our fleshly 
 nature ; and not from the condemnation of the law of God, 
 as if that law had been the law of our nature; is plain from 
 this, that the Lord Jesus, who alone of all that wear the 
 human form was subject to the law of God by nature, was 
 delivered from that law, not by an arbitrary act of his 
 Heavenly Father, but by his being obedient unto it, even 
 unto death. A fact which evidently implies, that had we 
 ourselves been subject to divine law by nature, we could 
 iiave obtained deliverance from it only by yielding an 
 entire and personal obedience to it likewise. — Indeed, in 
 connection with this subject never let it be forgotten, that 
 the reason why the one transgression of Adam could have 
 been expiated or atoned for was, that the divine prohibi- 
 tian issued to him was not according but in opposition to 
 his nature. He owed allegiance to the law of flesh, be- 
 fore the single law of God was addressed to him. A sin 
 committed by him against a law, which was thus foreign 
 
 Q 
 
122 THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 to his nature;, was expiable ; not so, had it been commit- 
 ted by him in opposition to the law of God, as the law of 
 his own nature. 
 
 I again proceed to inquire, for the third time, do you 
 remember, and have you understood, the distinctions which 
 I have already laid down, between righteousness and 
 wickedness? and between the righteous and the wicked ? 
 F. Yes. Adam was the wicked man; and Jesus was the 
 righteous man. Adam was wicked, as having been the 
 violator of the first law, or single divine prohibition ; and 
 Jesus was righteous, as the fulfiller and exhauster of the 
 second law, or divine command to love God and man. 
 Adam's wickedness sprang from his nature having been 
 that of a mere creature, and as such unable to obey the 
 law of his own conscience, much less the law of the Crea- 
 tor ; Jesus's righteousness sprang from his having been 
 possessed of the nature of the Creator, and as such able 
 to obey the law of the Creator. Adam's wicked nature 
 is transmitted by him to all his fleshly descendants ; 
 Christ's righteous nature is shared iu with him by all his 
 spiritual posterity. 
 
 B. All this I think my brother has most clearly and 
 satisfactorily demonstrated. And he will now, perhaps, 
 have the goodness to shew us how it contributes towards 
 the establisliment of his theory of Universalism. 
 
 T. With all my heart, Robert. Indeed, in the ques- 
 tion whicli I just now proposed to our friend here, and 
 which he has so distinctly answered, I was preparing the 
 way for doing so. 
 
 It is now understood and admitted on both sides, tlien, that 
 Adam and his posterity constitute the wicked, as being 
 possessors of the nature which broke one divine law; and 
 that Christ and his posterity constitute the righteous, as 
 being possessors of the nature which kept another divine 
 law. — Now do these two heads and their two posterities 
 
THE TWO LAWS. 123 
 
 consist, thiuk you, of two distinct classes of individuals ? 
 
 F. They are, as to their natures, evidently distinct 
 from each other. 
 
 T. True. But that is not an answer to my question. 
 What I want to know is, was Adam a being totally distinct 
 from and independent of Christ ? or was he merely the 
 type figure and shadow of Christ, and as such involved in 
 him ? And are Adam's posterity distinct from and inde- 
 pendent of Christ's posterity ? or are they, as mere 
 shadows, involved in the posterity of Christ as constituting 
 their substances ? 
 
 B. I confess, David, that I do not quite understand 
 you. 
 
 T. Probably not. 
 
 F. As little, I am sure, do I. 
 
 T, Well, then, I will throw my question into such a 
 form as both of you will, in all likelihood, more readily 
 apprehend. Were Adam and Jesus both creatures ? or 
 were they both Creators ? 
 
 F. Why do you ask such a question ? Adam, for- 
 sooth, was but a creature ; Jesus Avas the Creator manifest 
 in flesh. 
 
 T. Very well. Then had the creature Adam an ex- 
 istence which was independent of that of the Creator, 
 Christ Jesus ? Or, was the existence of the former the 
 creature, involved in that of the latter the Creator ? 
 
 F. There needs no witch to answer a question like this. 
 The existence of a creature, so far from being indepen- 
 dent of, must, from the very nature of things and neces- 
 sity of the case, be dependent on and involved in that of 
 the Creator. So thought, and so reasoned, the apostle 
 Paul ; for this is his language w^hen addressing the philo- 
 sophic Athenians : Li him, that is, in the Creator, ive live, 
 and move, and have our being. Acts xvii. 28. 
 
 T. So, then, we have ascertained that abstractlv, as hav- 
 
124 THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 ing been merely a creature ; no less than as matter of fact, 
 as having been merely a figure or shadow ; Adam had not 
 an existence separate from that of the Lord Jesus, the Cre- 
 ator and substance. His existence, therefore, and that of 
 the Lord Jesus are, or rather is, in reality and at bottom 
 one and the same. And just so with the respective poster- 
 ities of the one and the other. Adam's posterity, as pos- 
 sessed of a creaturely and shadowy nature, have no ex- 
 istence, except what is dependent on and swallowed up in 
 the existence of Christ's posterity, as possessed of the divine 
 and substantial nature. In other words, Adam's posterity 
 and Christ's posterity, although possessed of two distinct 
 natures, do not constitute two distinct classes of indivi- 
 duals; but are the same class of individuals appearing 
 with two different natures, and under two different forms. 
 Wicked, as creatures ; righteous, as partakers of the na- 
 ture of the Creator. 
 
 F. Strange ! that one set of beings, should be likewise 
 another set of beings ! 
 
 T. Not more strange, surely, is the view which I have 
 just presented, than the declaration of the apostle, that 
 as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also 
 bear the image of the heavenly. 1 Cor. xv. 49. The 
 obvious paraphrase of which is, that, as we have appeared 
 in the character and capacity of the first Adam's descen- 
 dants, we shall also appear in the character and capacity 
 of the second Adam's descendants. As we have appeared 
 clothed with the nature of the creature, we shall also 
 appear clothed with the nature of the Creatorl'-^My dear 
 friend, T am sure, has no intention to assert that the Spirit 
 of God, speaking by the mouth of the apostle, was a less 
 competent judge in matters of this kind, than is either 
 be or I. 
 
 F. I must confess that the passage which you have 
 just quoted, and the doctrine which is clearly implied; nay 
 
THE TWO LAWS. 125 
 
 expressed, iu it, namely, that one and the same class of 
 persons are both Adam's posterity, and Christ's posterity, 
 had escaped my notice. But how is it that Christ saves, 
 by rendering them his posterity, those who stand condemn- 
 ed as Adam's posterity ? 
 
 T. By swallowing up their Adamic or creature nature, 
 in his own divine nature. 
 
 F. You perfectly astonish me ! According to this view 
 of matters, if I have not misapprehended you, the creature 
 nature of Adam is not saved at all ! 
 
 T. Rather say, the creature nature of Adam is not 
 saved or preserved as tvhat it is. In so far as it is a 
 creature nature, it sprang from the dust and to the dust 
 it returns. But inasmuch as this creature nature became 
 one, or rather was for temporary purposes manifested as 
 one, with the divine nature in the person of our blessed 
 Lord, it is saved, not by continuing a creature nature — 
 for as a creature nature it was sacrificed in him on the 
 cross — but by its change or conversion in him, through 
 the medium of his resurrection, into the divine nature. 
 
 F. Although entirely new to me, there is something 
 very striking in your theory. 
 
 T. The whole subject of salvation when tolerably 
 understood, although disclosing depths which shall never 
 be thoroughly fathomed by the creature mind, is yet seen 
 to be distinguished by a simplicity and a beauty that 
 are truly refreshing. — Adam and Jesus appear, the one 
 at the top, and the other at the bottom, of the creature 
 nature. In the former, a mere creature, it begins; in the 
 latter, the Creator manifest in flesh, it ends. To the for- 
 mer, the creature, at a period subsequent to his existence, 
 a single divine prohibition is given ; upon the latter, 
 the Creator, long previous to his appearance in flesli, an 
 obligation, in the shape of a command to love God su- 
 premely and his neighbour us himself, is imposed. By 
 
126 THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 the former, the law given to him is violated, and sin and 
 death enter ; hy the latter, the law imposing upon him love 
 to God and man is obeyed, and by means of his obedience 
 to it even unto death, that is, to the sacrifice of flesh and 
 blood in himself, righteousness and life everlasting are in- 
 troduced. By the transgression 'of the former, creature 
 righteousness came to an end, and sin thenceforward was 
 confirmed as the portion of the human family ; by the 
 voluntary sacrifice of the latter, divine righteousness also 
 came to an end, in the sense of its performer being no 
 longer subject to law and consequently no longer in a 
 capacity to obey it, but his righteousness, as complete, 
 was thenceforward confirmed as the portion of the divine 
 family for ever. Through the one transgression of the 
 former, death reigns over himself and all his posterity ; 
 through the one righteousness of the latter, grace reigns 
 to the conferring of eternal life on himself and on all his 
 posterity. Through the one transgression of the former, 
 that is, of the creature, sin and death so attach to and 
 acquire so firm a hold on the creature nature as that, 
 while the creature nature lasts, sin and death must be 
 their inevitable portion ; but by the one righteousness of 
 the latter, that is, of the Creator, the creature nature, the 
 law to which it was subjected, and the breach of that law, 
 are all so completely done away with and obliterated, that, 
 like drops of water thrown into the ocean, they are, in that 
 divine righteousness and in the divine life which is inse- 
 parably connected with it, or, in a word, in the divine 
 nature of the Lord Jesus, swallowed up and engulphed 
 for ever. 
 
 But now mark, lest there should be any misunderstanding 
 of what I have said : — 1. That the Creator does not appear 
 in flesh for the purpose of interfering with, and ob- 
 structing the execution of, the penalty of suiferings and 
 death originally denounced against transgression ; on the 
 
THE TWO LAWS. 127 
 
 contrary, he appears to sliew his conviction of the rectitude 
 and suitableness of that penalty, by undergoing it himself 
 in his pure Jlesh and blood body. Had he saved any 
 one from the penalty denounced against transgression, 
 God's truth in threatening that penalty, and his other 
 attributes, could not have been preserved inviolate. — 2. 
 As the Creator in whom all live, and move, and have their 
 being, Jesus, when he appeared in flesh, had all human be- 
 ings, or more correctly human nature itself, substantialized 
 in him : that is, he appeared as the anti-type of the first 
 Adam, whose shadowy oneness with all mankind, as inhe- 
 ritors of his nature, was but a figure of the 7'eal and sub- 
 stantial oneness of all human beings with Jesus, as their 
 Creator. Adam was the shadowy man ; Jesus was the 
 substantial man; or, rather, in one word, the man. Jesus 
 grasped, took hold of, and comprehended, as it were, in the 
 Holy thing which was conceived and born of the Virgin 
 Mary, Adam and the whole human race. — 3. Having ex- 
 hibited a fleshly nature for once in himself pure and spot- 
 less ; — having obeyed divine law, as far as he could obey 
 it while retaining his earthly life ; — Jesus then perfonned 
 his last and crowning act of obedience to the command- 
 ment which he had received of the father, by the sacri- 
 fice or destruction of his fleshly nature : the sacrifice or 
 destruction of it having been, in reality, from its having 
 been substantialized in him, the sacrifice or destruction 
 of human nature ; and that nature having thus, by his 
 death, been brought to an end in himself. In other 
 words, in sacrificing or destroying himself, he, in con- 
 sequence of their oneness with him, sacrificed or de- 
 stroyed all who are partakers of Adam's nature. — 
 And, 4, Jesus rose from the dead, not with a nature of 
 flesh and blood, but with human nature, that is, witli the 
 nature of every human being, swallowed up by himself 
 in his own divine nature. This he alone, as the Crea- 
 
128 THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 tor, was capable of effecting : the very circumstance 
 of his having been the Creator enabling him to do away 
 with and extirpate sin, not, as, seems to be the common 
 idea, by balancing his own righteousness against it ; but, 
 as is fact, by swallowing up sin as an affection of a mere 
 creature, in righteousness as a quality or attribute of 
 himself the glorious Creator. 
 
 B. How you delight me with this representation of 
 things, David ! 
 
 T. Happy am I to hear you say so, my dear brother. 
 Now you begin to apprehend why two laws were given : 
 one law to the creature, to be broken by liim ; another 
 law to the Creator appearing in the form of the creature, 
 to be fulfilled by him. Yes. It is the fact of Jesus having 
 been the Creator, and of his having as such swallowed up 
 in himself the creature nature and all that has proceeded 
 from that nature, which constitutes the glory of his salva- 
 tion. Had he been a creature, his creature righteousness 
 could have availed nothing towards the effacing of pre- 
 viously contracted creature guilt. It could merely at the 
 utmost have been a set-off against it, and have on earth 
 benefited himself. But having been the Creator manifest 
 in flesh, every thing that appertains to the creature comes 
 to an end in him. Law is ended, by liis fulfilment and 
 exhaustion of it ; sin is ended, as having been swallowed 
 up in his righteousness ; and death is ended, by its having 
 flowed into him, the ocean as well as fountain of life 
 everlasting. Nay, even the nature of the creature itself 
 is ended, as having found its appropriate euthanasia in 
 him whose nature is that of the glorious Creator. — He 
 terminates human nature, because mercy, no less than jus- 
 tice and truth, required it to die. And, having brought 
 that nature to an end in himself on the cross, he commu- 
 nicates to those who have previously been partakers of it, 
 his own divine nature : doing this, not only without any 
 
THE TWO LAWS. 129 
 
 violation of, but in tlie strictest consistency with, tlioso 
 same glorious attributes wliicli had imperiously demanded 
 the sacrifice of human nature. Having made himself one 
 with us for a time, by his appearance in flesh, he, through 
 his sacrifice of our nature, his assumption of his own, and 
 his communication of it to us, makes us one with him- 
 self for ever. In this salvation of his which consists, not 
 in the preservation or perpetuating of human nature as 
 such, but in the sacrifice or destruction of it; and in the 
 making of those who are now partakers of it new in him- 
 self, by giving them his own divine nature, all are sharers. 
 
 B. All this I fully comprehend. 
 
 T. Do you? Then let me just make a remark or 
 two concerning that salvation which is peculiar to the 
 church, as distinguished from the common salvation ; and 
 thereby bring this long and tedious conversation to a close. 
 
 You have by this time observed, that salvation is ac- 
 complished, not by the preservation of the creature nature, 
 or by one creature remedying the defects of another; but 
 by the stream of human nature flowing onwards and down- 
 wards, until at last it runs into and is swallowed up by 
 one, who, although he appears in the likeness of a creature, 
 is nevertheless the Creator himself clothed with flesh. 
 The creature nature having transgressed divine law, and 
 thereby shewn itself to be unworthy of everlasting exist- 
 ence upon earth, much less of being elevated to a higher 
 state of being,— the penalty of sufl'erings and death which 
 had been incurred by transgression, truth and omnipotence 
 take care to inflict; and the Messiah does not come in 
 any way whatever to intei'fere with it. His atonement 
 had a nobler object, than either the preservation of human 
 nature as it is, or the restoration of it to the state in which 
 it appeared originally in our created progenitor. In be- 
 coming incarnate, dying, and rising again, the grand 
 objects embraced by Jesus were, 1st, the exhibition of a 
 
 R 
 
130 THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 nature of flesh and blood, wliich was tlie embodying or 
 substantializing of sinful human nature, for once perfect 
 in himself; Rom. viii. 3; — 2dly, the sacrifice of the nature 
 thus perfected, as fitted, even in this its best estate, for ex- 
 istence only in time and upon earth; 1 Corinth, xv. 50; 
 — and, 3dly, the elevation to a higher state of existence of 
 the nature of flesh and blood thus sacrificed or destroyed 
 on the cross, by the change or conversion of it in himself, 
 and by means of his resurrection, into his own glorious 
 divine nature. 1 Corinth, xv. 54. Philip, iii. 21. To 
 express the same idea difi"erently : — the object of the Lord 
 Jesus, in undertaking and accomplishing the work of re- 
 demption, was to take away sin, by taking away human 
 nature itself as the nature which had sinned: an object 
 which could only be eff'ected by his swallowing up human 
 nature previously rendered his own, and thereby sin as 
 the necessary consequence of it and as necessarily con- 
 nected with it, in himself, as the incarnate, dying, and 
 glorified Jehovah. And this he hath accomplished. In 
 the benefit of what he hath done, all human beings parti- 
 cipate; but in two different orders, and after two different 
 fashions. 1 Corinth, xv. 22. 23. — To some, while they 
 are in flesh, and before the sentence of death can be exe- 
 cuted upon them in the ordinary way, he makes himself 
 known : thereby imparting to them his own iwesent mind, 
 even that mind of fulfilled and exhausted law with which 
 he himself rose from the dead. Eph. ii. b.'d. Such per- 
 sons thus acquiring the mind of the risen Jesus, as the 
 conqueror over sin and death, become partakers of the 
 conquering principle or the divine mind themselves; 1 
 John V. 4; and enter with him into his kingdom by faith 
 here, and by sight hereafter. 2 Corinth, v. 1 — 8. They 
 are partakers of the first resurrection. Rom. viii. 10. 11. 
 Rev. XX. 4. 5. This day, or during this period as con- 
 tra-distinguished from a future one, they are with Jesus in 
 
THE TWO LAWS. 131 
 
 Paradise. Luke xxiii. 43." — Not so, however, with the 
 rest of the human family. They follow the fate of Christ's 
 body. As for a part of three days it lay in the grave, and 
 then rose; so during time, and the future period of the 
 church's reign, they are dead and remain in their graves : 
 rising not until the dawn of the period of the second resur- 
 rection, or that third sera when Jesus appears subduing 
 all things unto himself. Hosea vi, 2. 1 Corinth, xv. 
 22 — 28. Rev. xx. 5. 6. Such persons neither have, nor 
 can have, the mind of Christ as conqueror; seeing that 
 from his kingdom, or from reigning with him, they are for 
 evermore excluded : it being their fate to be saved, not as 
 conquering, but as conquered ; not as kings, but as sub- 
 jects. They are ultimately subdued by Christ, and by his 
 church reigning with him. They live not and reign not 
 in glory, with the sons of God and heirs of Christ Jesus. 
 But at last, by the manifestation to them of Jesus, and 
 the other sons of God, — by the voice of Jesus, as that of 
 the mighty archangel, penetrating to the inmost recesses 
 of the tomb, — they start up, like all things else made new; 
 or in forms corresponding to, and which are the substances 
 of, the shadowy ones in which they appeared while upon 
 earth. 
 
 Thus, as I endeavoured to shew you, Robert, on a former 
 occasion, he who, in the salvation of his church appears 
 as the spiritual Abraham, in the salvation of all appears 
 as the spiritual Adam. And thus, with reference to the 
 topic with which this conversation opened, the same hu- 
 man beings who, either as Adam's descendants generally 
 or as Abraham's descendants specially, constitute the 
 wicked ; become either specially as one with Jesus the 
 spiritual Abraham, or generally as one with him the spi- 
 ritual Adam, righteous in him for evermore. 
 
 F. Can you state your sentiments respecting the 
 peculiar salvation of the members of the church in such 
 
132 THE TWO LAWS. 
 
 a form, as tliat I may be enabled more easily to under- 
 stand and remember tbem ? 
 
 T. I can, and it shall be done with pleasure. — The 
 interest of the elect or members of the church in salva- 
 vation, is a present interest. They find themselves, even 
 while they are in flesh, one with him by whom sin was 
 taken away, and everlasting righteousness was brought in. 
 They are saved or delivered as to their consciences, even 
 now, from sin and death ; and this, in consequence of the 
 divine righteousness and everlasting life of their glorious 
 head being manifested to them, and thereby entering their 
 consciences as their own righteousness and life. Rom. iii. 
 21 — 24 ; vi. 23 ; 1 John v. 11. 20. There is no condem- 
 nation, and no possibility of condemnation, to them as 
 being in Christ Jesus ; and as walking, not after the Jlesh 
 or principles of human nature, hut after the spirit or prin- 
 ciples of the divine nature. Rom. viii. 1. Salvation is 
 thus, as to them, a present, realized, unchangeable, and 
 indefeasible privilege and possession. — And of this salva- 
 tion their bodies too, in due time, partake. For the spirit 
 of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwelling in them; 
 he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken 
 their 7norlal bodies, by his spirit that dwelleth in them. — 
 Rom. viii. 11. 
 
 Perhaps I should add that there is a sense, and that, 
 too, a very important one, in which salvation is restricted 
 to the members of the church alone. In consequence of 
 the divine principles of love, righteousness, and life ever- 
 lasting, entering into and taking possession of their minds, 
 they are saved from the creature principles of law, sin, and 
 death. They are even already, through faith in Christ, 
 made alive : Galatians ii. 20 : and the life wliich they 
 have through faith in him, enduring for evermore ; — being 
 the substance of the shadowy existence which they derive 
 from Adam, and, as the substance, absorbing or swallowing 
 
THE TWO LAWS. 133 
 
 lip in itself Ihe shadow; — of course, they never die. John xi. 
 25. 26. — Very different is the fate of the rest of tlie human 
 family. As destitute, while in flesh, of more than Adam's 
 nature, they perish. John iii. 14 — 17. They, in the 
 sense just alluded to, are not saved. For human nature, 
 while it exists, is not in them, as in the case of the elect, 
 preserved from its ordinary fate hy being changed into the 
 divine nature ; and thereby, not as the nature of Adam, 
 but as the present nature of Christ, made to live for ever. 
 Their resurrection is not, like that of believers, effected by 
 the change into divine principles without previously per- 
 ishing, and thereby in a certain sense the salvation, of 
 what were originally creature principles ; but takes place 
 by the change ultimately of what here perished as natu- 
 ral, into what shall hereafter exist as supernatural. 
 
 B. Then, David, human nature has always been con- 
 nected with Christ. In Adam, it must have been pro- 
 duced hy, if it shadowed forth, Christ's nature ; and, in 
 Christ himself, we are merely beholding the shadow again 
 merged in the substance from which it originally proceeded. 
 
 T. Your conclusion is perfectly correct. The Lord 
 Jesus is the root, as well as the offspring, of Adam. — 
 Henceforward you will have some little notion of what 
 our glorious Redeemer intended, when he styled himself, 
 the Alpha, and the Omega j the beginning, and ihe end ; 
 the first, and the last. Rev. xxii. 13. 
 
 END OF THE THtUD DIALOGUE. 
 
DIALOGUE FOURTH. 
 
 subject: 
 ETERNAL PUNISHMENT NOT ETERNAL TORMENTS. 
 
 SPEAKERS :— AUTHOR. BROTHER. 
 
 T. Well, brother, what now do you want ? 
 
 B. To obtain some satisfaction, if I can, respecting 
 the doctrine of eternal punishment. 
 
 T. You have read, I presume, what I have written on 
 the subject in my "Three Questions proposed and answer- 
 ed," and in my "Assurance of Faith." What more would 
 you have ? 
 
 B. When I read the works to which you have alluded, 
 I had not enjoyed the advantage of listening to these oral 
 statements of yours by which I have been lately so much 
 benefited. And, besides that the fact if my own previous 
 ignorance may have in a great measure disqualified me 
 for understanding your writings, I almost fancy that, since 
 the composition and publication of your Assurance ofFaith^ 
 your own mind must have been enlarged considerably 
 in its apprehensions of divine truth. If well founded in 
 my conjecture, then by asking you questions respecting 
 
ETERNAL PUNISHMENT ETC. 135 
 
 eternal punishment, and attending to your answers, I shall 
 be put in possession of your most matured ideas on the 
 subject. This is what induces me to trouble you just 
 now. 
 
 T. Indeed, Robert, I do not know that I have much, 
 if any thing', to add to the views which I have already 
 communicated to the public, with regard to eternal pun- 
 ishment. Tlie perusal, during the interim, of several in- 
 teresting and valuable treatises on the subject of Uni- 
 versalism, in which views are advocated in many respects 
 opposed to my own, so far from shaking, has materially 
 contributed towards confirming, the leading sentiments 
 which I have long since promulgated. Such being the 
 case, why go over them again ? — Nevertheless as no way 
 of eliciting and enforcing truth is be neglected; and as 
 truth, when stated in one form, may have failed to im- 
 part that conviction of which, by the divine blessing, it 
 may be productive when stated in another; I am perfectly 
 willing, to the best of my knowledge and ability, to answer 
 any queries, respecting eternal punishment, which you 
 may think meet to propose to me. 
 
 B. I have to thank you for this indulgence; as well 
 as for the kindness and patience which in our preceding 
 interviews you have exhibited. In this conversation, or, 
 at the utmost, in another, I trust to be able to obtain so 
 much satisfaction respecting some of these weighty and 
 momentous topics which I know you to have made par- 
 ticularly your study, as to supersede the necessity of my 
 giving you any further annoyance. — This, I may say, I 
 am aware of, that you are not a believer in the ordinary, 
 and to ecclesiastics most profitable, dogma of eternal tor- 
 ments. 
 
 T. So far from believing in it, my mind rejects it with 
 abhorrence. And yet I reject it not, as is done by too 
 many, on the ground of mere human reasonings. I cast it 
 
136 ETERNAL TUNISIIMENT 
 
 from me, simply because it is a libel on the revealed char- 
 acter of Jehovah. How could I hold it, without at the 
 same time holding the truth of the Manichean doctrine of 
 the existence of two co-eternal principles of good and evil, 
 the one of which is for ever struggling unsuccessfully 
 against the other; that is, without holding that the good 
 principle, whatever might be its desires and inclinations, 
 is totally unable to extinguish the evil one ? Isaiah xlv. 
 7. 1 Corinth, xv. 26. 54. Phil. iii. 21. Heb. ii. 8. 
 How could I hold it, without denying that Christ hath 
 taTien away sin, by the sacrifice of liimself, Heb. ix. 26 ; 
 and without representing him as the confirmer, not the 
 destroyer, of tJie works of the Devil? 1 John iii. 8. How 
 could I hold it, believing and knowing as I do, upon his 
 own infallible authority, that God is love ; 1 John iv. 8. 
 16; and that, as such, he is not overcome by evil, but 
 overcomes evil with good ? Rom. xii. ult. 
 
 B. And yet a doctrine, such as is that of eternal tor- 
 ments, which has obtained so strong, so extensive, and so 
 permanent, an influence over the human mind; which is 
 acquiesced in, as if it were demonstrably true, by men of al- 
 most all sects and parties; and which is appealed to, as the 
 last and best of all sanctions, in our Courts of Judicature; 
 cannot have had a superficial origin : but must be derived 
 from the depths, and inmost penetralia, of human nature 
 itself. 
 
 T. Your observation is just, Robert. That instinctive 
 dread of future suffering by which mere human nature, 
 whenever it assumes the religious aspect, is characterised, 
 the enlightened Christian, and he only, is enabled to trace 
 to its deep-seated principles. When explored and laid 
 open in the light of scripture, it is found to have its origin, 
 first, in that sense of guilt and condemnation which first 
 entered into the human mind with Adam's one transyres- 
 sion, and which, ready to be roused into activity by the 
 
NOT ETERNAL TORMENTS. 137 
 
 slightest exciting cause, has descended as an heir-loom 
 from him to all his posterity. Secondly. We discover a 
 source of the alarm hinted at, in that principle of selfish- 
 ness, which, instead of heing a mere feature of human 
 nature as it is generally considered, actually constitutes 
 human nature itself. Man's nature, as limited, is selfish ; 
 that is, it desires every thing on its own account, and with 
 a view to its own gratification, enlargement, and everlast- 
 ing existence. But through sin, man's nature having 
 come under condemnation, and, in the cross of Christ, 
 having been destroyed ; that sense of guilt, which, 
 as has been just hinted, attaches to human nature as the 
 source of its most agonizing feelings and the harbinger 
 of its fate, acts powerfully upon the principle of selfish- 
 ness, by exciting the suspicion, that its desires of enjoy- 
 ment and immortality, instead of being gratified, are 
 destined to be inevitably and completely frustrated. And 
 liow striking to think, that the calamity thus anticipated 
 shall be realized. For nothing but destruction does await 
 human nature, or the selfish principle : those who now pos- 
 sess the human or selfish nature of Adam having their 
 nature annihilated, by its being swallowed up in the divine 
 and generous nature of the Sou of God. Thus, then, the 
 dread of future punishment which characterises all who 
 are religious upon natural or fleshly grounds, turns out to 
 be the selfish principle itself instinctively anticipating, and, 
 as a matter of course, shrinking back from, its deserved 
 and inevitable fate. Thirdly. The dread in question has 
 its "origin in that ignorance of God and of divine things, 
 under which the fleshly mind necessarily labours ; in the 
 inability of that mind to rise in its conceptions above mere 
 man, and the ideas and pursuits of man ; and in its con- 
 sequent tendency to substitute human notions, and human 
 reasonings, for the revealed truth of God. 1 Corinth, 
 ii. 14. Coloss. ii. 8. Take the following as a speci- 
 
 s 
 
138 ETERNAL PUNISHMENT 
 
 men of the almost innumerable ways in which the human 
 mind, while under the power of this invincible ignorance, 
 is prone to delude itself respecting the divine character 
 and intentions : — " Man is revengeful : therefore, God is 
 so likewise." Psalm 1. 21. — "Man cannot avenge his 
 wrongs, and at the same time render the infliction of his 
 vengeance subservient to the advantage of those who have 
 incurred it : therefore, God cannot do so either." Mat- 
 thew XXV. 24. 25. In opposition to Psalm ciii. 10 — 12, 
 Matthew V. 45, and Rom, xii. 20. 21. — " I am conscious of 
 gross and grievous violations of the dictates of my own 
 conscience, which appear to me to be violations of the law 
 of God, and for which I stand self-condemned : therefore, 
 if God deal with me, as the violators of human lav/ when 
 convicted are dealt with by their fellow men ; and if the 
 punishment which he shall see meet to inflict on me be pro- 
 portioned to his own greatness, and the number and enormity 
 of my off'encesjit must be a punishment distinguished by the 
 most intense severity, and inflicted without end." — Such 
 is a specimen of the reasonings by which the mere fleshly 
 mind, meddling with the concerns of religion, contrives, 
 under the combined influence of sense of guilt, selfishness, 
 and ignorance of divine truth, to land itself in something 
 like a conviction of the real existence of eternal torments. 
 
 B. Something like a conviction ! Then it is your de- 
 cided impression, that even those who profess to believe in 
 the doctrine of eternal torments, are not quite sure — have 
 no absolute certainty — about the matter ! 
 
 T. How should they ? Tlie doctrine is not true ; that 
 is, it hath not divine authority for its basis and warrant : 
 and therefore, it is impossible for it to be credited with that 
 absolute and infallible certainty, which can never be pro- 
 duced, except by the entrance into the mind of divine tes- 
 timony alone. — Besides, observe the workings of the human 
 mind, with regard to eternal torments, in those by whom tlie 
 
NOT ETERNAL TORMENTS. 139 
 
 doctrine is generally understood to be believed in. Every 
 natural man, however strong may be his abstract and spe- 
 culative conviction of the truth of the dogma, has a sort of 
 lurking and indefinable hope that he himself, after all, 
 may not be subjected to such sufferings. For his friends 
 and relations, and especially for his infant offspring, he 
 fondly, although secretly, cherishes a similar hope. And, 
 if a man of tolerably enlarged natural benevolence of char- 
 acter, he sometimes ventures, although with many checks 
 from conscience, and a trembling anxiety lest the latent 
 workings of his mind should be discovered, to suppose, 
 that even the whole of the human race may ultimately 
 escape the endurance of those pangs which, in the nur- 
 sery and from the pulpit, he has been taught to regard 
 as the inevitable fate of the great majority of them. Nay, 
 these suspicions of the falsehood of the doctrine occasion- 
 ally, in spite of all the precautions of our spiritual guides, 
 get vent from the press. If you have in your possession 
 that very common book, Isaac Watts' World to come: or dis- 
 courses on the joys or sorrows of departed souls at death: you 
 have only to glance your eyes over the preface, in order to 
 satisfy yourself, how doubtful and hesitating, — how absolute- 
 ly sceptical even, — reputed princes and champions of ortho- 
 doxy sometimes feel with respect to those very torments 
 which, in the exercise of their vocation, they deem it to 
 be their duty, or find it to be their interest, to urge and 
 impress on the consciences of their devotees. — It is the 
 circumstance of the doctrine in question revolting even the 
 natural mind, that has given birth to those numerous flesli- 
 ly and unscriptural systems of universal salvation, to which 
 I am as much and as decidedly opposed, as the most 
 sturdy Calvinist can be. 
 
 B. Although my faith in eternal torments is now 
 shaken, I may even say, subverted, it has nevertheless 
 long been my firm conviction that many, perhaps the great 
 
140 ETERNAL PUNISHMENT 
 
 bulk of those who oppose the doctrine, have just as little 
 real satisfaction as to the validity of the grounds of their 
 denial, as the ordinary supporters of it possess that their 
 views are true and scriptural. 
 
 T. I am pleased to have it in my power to express my 
 entire and unreserved acquiescence in the correctness of 
 your remark. Disgusting, certainly, it is to hear profes- 
 sors of religion exclaim, when the dogma of eternal- tor- 
 ments is called in question in their presence, " Oh ! I 
 wish that your views were admissible !" or *' what you 
 contend for is too good to be true :" seeing that all such 
 exclamations, besides betraying doubt as to the truth of fu- 
 ture torments, are a secret compliment paid by the creature 
 to himself, at the expense of the Creator ; it being implied 
 in them that his benevolence is, and if he had the oppor- 
 tunity of displaying it would be found to be, greater than 
 • that of the Being whose nature and character are love. 
 But if there be any thing more disgusting than this, it is 
 to find men who deny that the blessed Jesus was the Crea- 
 tor appearing in the likeness of sinful flesh, the Lot^d 
 from heaven, pretending to assert their confidence in the 
 doctrine of "universal salvation." Confidence felt by those 
 who, denying that Jesus was God manifest in flesh, and, 
 consequently, that his death was the death of man's Crea- 
 tor, neither have nor can have any notions of the enor- 
 mity of sin ! Absurd ! Impossible ! 
 
 B. Surely, you are not going to assert the doctrine of 
 the infinite nature of evil ? 
 
 T. No, most decidedly. That were indeed to repre- 
 sent salvation as an impossibility. I have been too well 
 taught in the school of Christ, to give into either of the 
 twin absurdities, first, of making sin, which is an affection 
 of a mere creature nature, to be infinite ; or secondly, of 
 holding it to be possible for one infinite, to take another 
 infinite away ! Let those who have maw capacious enough, 
 
NOT ETERNAL TORMENTS. 141 
 
 at the same time that they contradict the word of God, 
 swallow such undisguised and unmodified nonsense. 1 
 cannot. Notions of infinite evil, and of infinite evil as 
 overcome by infinite good, are not mine ; and, therefore, 
 with the blame attachable to them, and the consequences 
 deduceable from them, I have nothing whatever to do. — 
 But in avoiding Scylla, I am bound to take care that I do 
 not run myself upon Charybdis. Sin, although not an 
 infinite evil, — seeing that, if so, it must without fail and 
 without remedy have existed for ever, — is nevertheless an 
 indefinite one ; and, as such, is that which must have 
 existed for ever unless taken away by a being who was 
 infinite. A mere creature was not competent to the task. 
 Such a being is not able to act up to the dictates of his 
 own fieshly conscience, which, if on some occasions it ex- 
 cuses, on others, accuses him ; much less to act up to the 
 requirements of a divine and spiritual law ; and, in the ren- 
 dering of perfect obedience to that law, to sacrifice the 
 nature which was subject to it : thereby bringing to an 
 end and taking away, by one and the same act, both law 
 and sin for ever. None but the Creator, that is, none but 
 an infinite being, could, by the swallowing up in himself of 
 the nature of the creature, annihilate sin, which is a con- 
 sequence and affection of the creature nature : — which, 
 as proceeding from a creature, was by its very nature 
 finite ; and which yet, as committed against the law of 
 the Creator, had acquired an indefinite character, that by 
 no creature nature could have been removed or expiated. 
 Now, Robert, if you have understood me, you will per- 
 ceive that while, on the one hand, I deny the infinite na- 
 ture of sin ; because according to scripture sin has been 
 taken away, and nothing that is really infinite can be so : 
 on the other hand, I laugh to scorn the idea of any crea- 
 ture or finite being doing away with that which is, by its 
 very nature, indefinite ; and hold that, except for the in- 
 
142 ETERNAL PUNISHMENT 
 
 terposltion of tlie Creator manifest in flesli, the infinite 
 being, sin and the effects of sin must, as incapable of 
 being removed by the creature or finite being, have ex- 
 isted for ever. Indeed, were not the subject too serious 
 for ridicule, it might amuse one to think, that finite 
 beings who, by all {\\c\v fiiiite virtue, are not able to secure 
 to themselves even the continuance of a paltry finite ex- 
 istence, should nevertheless be found fancying that, by 
 such finite virtue, they may, in some way or other, be able 
 to secure to themselves an interest in an infinite one ! 
 
 B. Then sin is, in your apprehension, a very enormous 
 but not an infinite evil. 
 
 T. Tliat it is very enormous, is seen in the light of the 
 fact of what was required to take it away. " Ye were not 
 redeemed," says the apostle Peter, '' with corruptible 
 things, as silver and gold," that is, not by the means 
 of any creature, or any thing creaturely, " but with the 
 precious blood of Christ, as of a Lamb, without blemish 
 and without spot." 1 Peter i. 18. 19. And what the 
 dignity of this Christ or anointed one is, and wherein the 
 value and efficacy of his blood consisted, another apostle 
 explains to us when he says, that *' God spared not his 
 own Son, but delivered him up for us all." Rom. viii. 32. 
 But although very enormous, and far exceeding in its guilt 
 and atrocity the liveliest and profoundest conceptions of 
 the mere fleshly mind, sin is not infinite, for the best of all 
 reasons, that it has been taken away. The same death of 
 Christ, God's only and well-beloved Son, which proclaims 
 the magnitude and enormity of sin, as that which by means 
 of a less costly sacrifice could not have been expiated and 
 removed ; proclaims likewise, as a glorious and cheering 
 fact, that it hath thereby been expiated and removed for 
 evermore. Jesus hath, as a matter of fact, put away sin 
 by the sacrifice of himself : Heb. ix. 26. : or, to avail my- 
 self of the highly figurative and expressive language of 
 
NOT ETERNAL TORMENTS. 143 
 
 two of the prophets, God. in virtue of this sacrifice, hath 
 cast our sins behind his hacJc; Isaiah xxxviii. 1 7 ; nay, cast 
 them even into the depths of the sea. Micah vii. 1 9. What 
 with man was impossible, God himself hath actually ac- 
 complislied. — So that to the mind of the believer two things 
 are always presented in a close and inseparable connec- 
 tion : — 1. Sin taken away, at once and for ever, by the 
 one atoning sacrifice of the Lord Jesus ; and, 2, the enor- 
 mity of sin, as that which, by no other and no less costly 
 sacrifice, could have been done away with and brought to 
 an end. 
 
 B. You mean by all this, if I comprehend you, to as- 
 sert, that the grand exhibition of God's hatred of sin is 
 afforded in and by the cross of Christ. That, in the very 
 same way in which God pardons sin, he manifests his ab- 
 horrence of it. 
 
 T. Precisely so. And in the exact order, too, in 
 which you have stated the matter. For, it is not by first 
 apprehending God's hatred of sin, that we afterwards come 
 to apprehend his pardon of it, as the fleshly mind, ventur- 
 ing to meddle with divine things, uniformly suggests ; on 
 tlie contrary, it is by believing in sin as pardoned through 
 the sacrifice .of Christ Jesus, that we attain to scriptural 
 and spiritual apprehensions of it as that which is the ob- 
 ject of God's intensest hatred. 
 
 Nothing manifests to me more strikingly that total ig- 
 norance of spiritual matters which is characteristic of the 
 fleshly mind, than the views which mankind in general 
 cherish and express respecting sin. The common notion 
 is, — and upon this principle all our popular religious works 
 are constructed, — that men have, or at all events may have, 
 conceptions of sin before believing in Christ ; that such 
 conceptions have a spiritual origin ; and that they gener- 
 ally issue in the sinner's being thereby brought to the 
 knowledge of Christ. Now every one of these views is 
 
144 ETERNAL PUxMSHMENT 
 
 erroneous. Sanctioned by the liigliest names in " theolo- 
 gical literature unquestionably they are, but they all stand 
 condemned by the Holy Ghost. For, 1st. before being 
 enabled to perceive what sin really is, in the light of the 
 Son of God the Creator requiring to die, and actually 
 dying", in order to take it away, — my only notion of evil, — 
 the only notion of evil, indeed, which by any possibility I 
 can have, — is of something which is calculated to do a 
 serious injury to myself, and others who are mere creatures 
 like myself. That is, naturally my onl}^ standard of evil 
 is the injuries and sufferings which, in consequence of the 
 commission of it, mere creatures are made to undergo. — 
 This, however, is not to have a real apprehension of sin. 
 To conceive of it as what it really is, I must behold it as 
 displeasing to God, not as injuring the mere creature. — 
 Now it is only in the cross of Christ that the nature and 
 extent of the divine displeasure against sin become visible: 
 seeing that there only do I behold " the heel of the wo- 
 man's seed bruised," in the act of atoning for sin ; that 
 is, there only do I perceive that sin could not have been 
 expiated and removed, except at the expense of the sacri- 
 fice or destruction of the earthly life of the Creator him- 
 self. Formerly I conceived of sin as only injuring the 
 creature ; now I perceive that in order to its everlasting 
 extinction, the Creator himself, in his fleshly manifestation, 
 behoved to undergo injury. Thus does it appear, that the 
 only standard of the nature and enormity of sin, and con- 
 sequently the only means by which we can form any con- 
 ception of its real character, is the injury which, through 
 the medium of liis sufferings and death, it inflicted on the 
 Creator, or the price which he voluntarily paid to take it 
 away. 2dly. It is not true, that the notions of evil and of 
 its consequences which, previous to conversion, the mind 
 of man is capable of attaining to, are of a spiritual nature. 
 So far from this, they are merely results of the fleshly or 
 
NOT ETERNAL TORMENTS. 145 
 
 soulical mind alarmed at, and, nnder the influence of its 
 native sellEishness of constitution, shrinking hack from, the 
 endurance of personal sufferings. As connected with 
 and resulting from natural conscience, or the shadow of 
 the mind of God in the mind of man, such notions, no 
 doubt, constitute shadows of spiritual views : but they 
 are not spiritual views themselves. 3. Those views of 
 evil which the mere fleshly mind is capable of adopting, 
 do not of themselves in any case lead to Christ Jesus ; 
 that is, they never of themselves lead the individual by 
 whom they are experienced, to rejoice in that divine 
 righteousness which Jesus the Creator finished on Cal- 
 vary, as his own personal righteousness : but, on the con- 
 trary, always and necessarily constrain him, in one way 
 or another, to attempt, either by abstinence from evil or 
 by the doing of what he fancies to be good, to work out 
 and establish a righteousness of his own. Spiritual views 
 of sin imply views of the righteousness and life of God 
 manifest in flesh, as my righteousness and my life, having 
 been conferred upon me from above, in opposition to the 
 tendencies of my fleshly mind ; and, consequently, views 
 of creature sin and creature righteousness, as being alike 
 excluded from all concern in the matter of salvation : but 
 the views of sin which the fleshly mind regards as spiritual, 
 are merely views of evil as something which, although if 
 persevered in hurtful to the creature, may nevertheless 
 by means of expedients, devised and practised by myself, 
 be got rid of; and, consequently, involve in them the notion 
 that I, a creature, must, in some way or other, be my own 
 saviour. 
 
 Understanding the remarks which I have just made, 
 you cannot fail to perceive, that, previous to the manifes- 
 tation from above to any individual of Jesus as having 
 died the just for the unjust, and as having thereby taken 
 away siii from himself; — and no manifestation short of this 
 
 T 
 
146 ETERNAL PUNISHMENT 
 
 is a spiritual one ; — the notions entertained by him respect- 
 ing evil are natural, fleshly, and selfish ; calculated merely 
 to foster human pride, and to stimulate human efforts for 
 salvation : these very circumstances shewing such notions 
 to be essentially distinct from, and decidedly opposed to, 
 the views which enter into the mind, when to it is vouch- 
 safed a discovery of what sin is, in the light of the suf- 
 ferings and death which were endured by the Creator for 
 the purpose of putting sin amay. 
 
 B. According to your view of matters, I observe that 
 the knowledge of personal interest in Christ is connected 
 with, I should rather say, is necessarily implied and in- 
 volved in, the belief of the gospel. To have the know- 
 ledge of sin taken away by Christ's atoning sacrifice is, 
 if you are correct, not merely to have an apprehension, 
 for the first time, of what sin is, as that which God hateth ; 
 but also to have the conscience personally purged from a 
 sense of guilt. 
 
 T. So completely is this the case, that a profession of 
 having had the conscience personally purged, as the first 
 and necessary effect of the sacrifice and resurrection of 
 Christ revealed to it, — the profession being made in sin- 
 cerity and truth, — coustitutes the grand, the only, test by 
 which the members of the spiritual Israel are enabled to 
 recognise one another. Christ is the propitiation for our 
 sins : and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the 
 whole world. 1 John ii. 2. This we know, that when he 
 shall appear, we shall he like him ; for we shall see him as 
 he is. 1 John iii. 2. We know that if our earthly house 
 of this tabernacle were dissolved^ we have a building of 
 God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. 
 2 Corinth, v. 1. Such are a few specimens of the lan- 
 guage common to the apostles with all who are partakers 
 with them of like precious faith, through the righteousness 
 of God, and our Saviour, Jesus Christ. 2 Peter i. 1. 
 
NOT ETERNAL TORMENTS. 147 
 
 B. By following out the principles wliicli you have 
 already laid down, I think that I may almost hope to 
 form a pretty tolerahle guess as to some other sentiments 
 of yours respecting eternal torments. 
 
 T. What sentiments do you allude to ? 
 
 B. I will explain myself. 
 
 Eternal torments, if I understand the import of your 
 premises, cannot, you conceive, he maintained consistently 
 with the declarations of scripture : — 1st, because the gran- 
 dest conceivable and possible display of God's abhorrence 
 of sin has been afforded in the sufferings and death of 
 Jesus the Creator : whereas the doctrine of eternal tor- 
 ments implies, that a still greater display of the hatred of 
 God towards evil is capable of being, and remains to be, 
 afforded in the sufferings of mere creatures. It appearing 
 to you, that the glory of the cross of Christ, as exhibiting 
 sin taken away by the sufferings and death of the Creator 
 alone, would be obscured, nay, made of none effect, if, not- 
 withstanding its complete triumph over sin, there remained 
 any necessity for, or even possibility of, eternal creature 
 sufferings. — To the same objection, the systems of tempo- 
 rary and limited sufferings hereafter advocated by Chaun- 
 cy, Winchester, Stonehouse, Douglas, and others, are 
 obnoxious : seeing that they all imply the necessity and 
 possibility of some farther and greater display of the divine 
 vengeance against transgression, than what was afforded in 
 the cross of the Lord Jesus. — 2dly. Because as God hates 
 sin with a perfect hatred, this hatred must, from the cir- 
 cumstance of his possessing infinite wisdom and power, 
 terminate in its ultimate and complete destruction ; as the 
 death and resurrection of Christ Jesus clearly intimate to 
 us it has done : whereas the doctrine of eternal torments 
 implies that God, instead of destroying, bestows ever- 
 lasting existence upon that which confessedly his soul 
 hatcth. Strange to think ! that many who profess to 
 
113 ETERNAL PUNISHMENT 
 
 cherish the greatest loathing and disgust at the bare idea 
 of God having been, in any way whatever, the cause of 
 sin temporarily entering, can nevertheless gloat with the 
 utmost intensity of delight over the prospect of God's 
 perpetuating sin to eternity ! Truly this is to strain at a 
 gnat, and swallow a camel. — The only way in which popu- 
 lar religionists can evade the force of the present argu- 
 ment, is by plunging headlong into Manicheanism, and 
 asserting, that sin having once acquired an existence in the 
 universe, it is beyond the power of even God himself to 
 bring it to an end! — 3dly. Because God overcomes evil 
 witli good ; or takes revenge on evil by overwhelming it 
 with, and swallowing it up in, the infinite goodness of his 
 own divine nature; as is obvious in the resurrection, as 
 connected with the death, of the Lord Jesus : whereas the 
 doctrine of eternal torments implies, that the goodness of 
 the Creator is so completely overcome by the evil of the 
 creature, as to necessitate the Creator, if he would exhibit 
 his displeasure towards the creature at all, to indulge in 
 a low, brutal, vulgar, unfeeling, impotent, human revenge ! 
 Is this consistent with the language of him whose words, 
 when expostulating with the nation of the Jews, are, my 
 thoughts are not as your thoughts, nor my ways as your 
 ways : and, who addressing the members of his church, 
 hath said. Love your enemies ; bless them that curse you, 
 do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which 
 despitefully use you and persecute you : that ye may be, or 
 may show yourselves to be, the children of your father 
 which is in heaven ; for he maketh his sun to rise on the 
 evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on 
 the unjust P Matthew v. 44. 45. 
 
 T. To what you have so correctly stated, Robert, you 
 might have added, as still further developing my views in 
 reference to this subject^ that God having declared the 
 object of the Lord Jesus in dying to have been to put 
 
NOT ETExRNAL TORMENTS. 119 
 
 away sin by the sacrifice of himself, we impeach his vera- 
 city when we assert that, in the case of the eternally tor- 
 mented, sin remains nnput away for ever ! — that God 
 having declared that his Son was 7nanifestecl to destroy the 
 works of the Devil, we impeach his veracity when we 
 represent Jesus as raising certain human heings to sin and 
 suffer for ever ; and thereby as confirming everlastingly, not 
 destroying, sin and suffering two of the Devil's works ! — 
 and when God declares that Jesus puts under his feet, by 
 destroying, every enemy, even death itself the last of them, 
 it is ratlier too much for us creatures to turn upon the 
 glorious Creator, and impeach his veracity by roundly 
 asserting that, so far from all the enemies of Jesus being 
 put under his feet by being destroyed, he is actually con- 
 tented to share his empire with sin and Satan, by con- 
 ceding to them to reign, nay to triumph, over the greater 
 portion of the human family for ever! 
 
 B. This is now abundantly clear to me. Still, how- 
 ever, the suspicion of the possibility of torments being in- 
 flicted by God for ever on a portion of the human race, 
 will be found on examination to lurk in, and exercise an 
 influence over, the minds of many who would not chuse 
 openly to avow it. 
 
 T. No doubt. Bat I may now mention to you an 
 argument which, to him who is gifted with a very moderate 
 share of divine knowledge, and possessed of any capacity 
 whatever for reflection, must be productive of an entire 
 conviction, that the infliction of eternal torments upon man 
 is an utter impossibility. 
 
 B. What is it ? 
 
 T. A consideration of the only punishments which man, 
 constituted as in the light of scripture we discover him to 
 be, is capable of being subjected to and enduring. These 
 are three in number : — 1. He may be made to suffer and 
 die, thereby undergoing loss ; 2. he may be kept out of 
 
150 ETERNAL PUNISHMENT 
 
 enjoyments superior to those of time and sense ; and 3, 
 his very nature itself may be destroyed. — ^You cannot point 
 out to me a fourth. 
 
 B. WJiy, David, the existence of a fourth is the very 
 subject matter in dispute. Our divines, as they call them- 
 selves, are fond of representing eternal torments as a 
 species of punishment, additional to those kinds of it which 
 you have just enumerated, to which man may be sub- 
 jected. 
 
 T. Consider what, in maintaining the doctrine of eter- 
 nal torments, such persons necessarily assert ; and nothing 
 more will, I conceive, be requisite to enable you to see 
 through llieir sophistry. Tbey mean, if they mean any 
 tiling at all, that man as such is capable of being tor- 
 mented for ever. Now unlimited torments, no human 
 being, as a man, is capable in his present state of under- 
 going. This is a matter of fact. Therefore, if to these 
 torments he who is now a man shall hereafter be sub- 
 jected, it cannot be that as a man he shall undergo them. 
 If endured by him at all, he must endure them as pos- 
 sessed not of a temporary, but of an everlasting, exis- 
 tence ; that is, as possessed of properties and attributes 
 which, by qualifying him for the endurance of unlimited 
 and eternal sufferings, must be essentially different from 
 those which characterise human nature. In a word, in 
 order to undergo eternal torments he must cease to be a 
 man. 
 
 Do you understand me ? — That you may be enabled to 
 do so, I will throw my statements into another form. Let 
 me, for the sake of argument, admit, that he who is now 
 a man, and as such is incapable of undergoing more than 
 limited torments, shall nevertheless, in the event of his 
 dying ignorant of the gospel, be eternally tormented here- 
 after. Why, what in that case follows ? This, certainly. 
 That seeing he could not endure these sufferings as a 
 
NOT ETERNAL TORMENTS. 151 
 
 man, — mau's capability both of physical and mental suf- 
 ferings being limited, — it must be in some other nature and 
 character than as a man he must endure them. That is, 
 as a man he cannot endure them at all. — Do you not per- 
 ceive that, by this simple, obvious, and conclusive reason- 
 ing, eternal torments are necessarily excluded from the 
 catalogue of the punishments to which man as such may 
 be subjected ? 
 
 B. I perceive what you mean; and, am free to admit, 
 that the distinction now laid down by you had never pre- 
 viously suggested itself to my mind. — As a man, or while 
 he is a man, no human being, then, can be punished, ex- 
 cept in the three different ways which you have spoken of. 
 
 T. In one, or other, or all of these ways: — Pie may 
 be made to undergo loss, as well as to endure sufferings, 
 in his body and in his mind; he may be deprived, or, 
 rather, kept out of, enjoyments which are possessed by 
 others; and his very nature may be destroyed. 
 
 B. State distinctly, and in as few words as possible, if 
 agreeable to you, what it is that hinders the being who is 
 thus capable of being punished upon earth, from being 
 eternally tormented hereafter. I want to make myself 
 completely master of your argument. 
 
 T. My proposition is just briefly this, that ' the being 
 who is supposed to be eternally tormented hereafter, can- 
 not be a human being.'' And the medium by which I prove 
 it is, the admitted fact that man as such is capable of 
 undergoing only limited torments, — From this I argue, that 
 if you were to torment eternally one who is possessed of 
 everlasting existence, you would punish, not a human 
 being, but a being whose nature was essentially different ! 
 You would punish, not the nature by which sin had been 
 committed and the punishment deserved, but a nature 
 which had nothing whatever to do with transgression! 
 That is, according to the precious system of eternal tor- 
 
152 ETERNAL PUNISHMENT 
 
 ments, the nature from which evil emanated, and by which 
 punishment has been incurred, escapes these torments 
 altof/ether ! 
 
 B. Tliis is evident. 
 
 T. Aye! and what is still more, the nature so tor- 
 mented would be actually the nature of the Lord Jesus 
 himself! For everlasting existence is the life, not of 
 Adam, but of Christ. — Thus, by representing God as in- 
 liicting eternal torments on beings who are possessed of 
 everlasting existence, divines, actually and blasphemously 
 although ignorantly, represent God as torturing for ever 
 the nature of his own well beloved Son ! 
 
 B. But theologians make a distinction between ever- 
 lasting existence, and everlasting life. 
 
 T. So they do. But where is that distinction to be 
 met with in the word of God ? Shew it me there, and I 
 submit. Until then I conceive myself to be fully justified 
 in rejecting it as the mere coinage and offspring of their 
 own imaginations. Enough is it for me to know, taking 
 scripture for my guide, that only two men, — and two in- 
 telligent natures, as connected with and communicated 
 by these two men,- — are there presented to our notice. 
 The men are, Adam the man of the earth, earthy; and 
 Jesus the second man, the Lord from heaven. 1 Corinth. 
 XV. 47. And, agreeably to this distinction between the two 
 men themselves, are the two natures which are set before 
 us : human nature, as possessed and communicated by the 
 one ; and the divine nature, as possessed and communi- 
 cated by the other. Verse 48. In strict conformity to 
 which, those who are now possessed of, or hear the image 
 of the earthy, are represented as hereafter being pos- 
 sessed of, or hearing the image of the heavenly. Verse 49. 
 
 So much for what, on investigating the subject as it lies 
 before us in the sacred volume, we do discover. But neither 
 in the 15th chapter of first Corinthians, nor elsewhere, can 
 
NOT ETERNAL TORMENTS. 153 
 
 I encounter the slightest trace of a third man : that is, of 
 a man whose nature is neither that of Adam nor that of 
 Christ, but a nature different from that of both. The 
 existence of such a third man, and such a third nature, is 
 indispensable to the possibility of eternal torments being 
 endured. For we have seen, that neither Adam's nature, 
 nor Christ's nature, is capable of being subjected to them. 
 And if such a man and such a nature do exist, let them, 
 in the scriptures — our only authority in mattersof this kind — 
 be pointed out. Till this can be done, however, — and I 
 suspect it must be postponed till the Greek Kalends, — as 
 the existence of the third man and the third nature is a 
 gratuitous assumption — a mere hypothesis — a perfect chi- 
 mera of the human brain — it is sufficient for me, and for 
 all who with me love pure, unsophisticated, and unadul- 
 terated divine truth, to reject it. 
 
 He who asserts, that a man may undergo eternal tor- 
 ments ; and yet finds himself constrained to admit, that it 
 is a being possessed of everlasting existence, and of physi- 
 cal attributes and properties essentially different from those 
 of man, who is eternally tormented : as, on the one hand, 
 he contradicts and thereby refutes himself, by maintaining, 
 in the same breath, that it is a man and that it is not a 
 man who is thus tormented ; so, on the other, he becomes 
 indirectly an unwilling witness to the truth of the grand 
 position laid down by me, namely, that the subjection of 
 man, constituted as he is, to eternal torments, is an arrant 
 impossibility. 
 
 B. By the way, it just occurs to me, that the following 
 argument is closely connected with, if not actually involved 
 in, that which you are now prosecuting. The argument 
 is, that no being can ever deserve to undergo a more 
 severe punishment, than the nature itself of which he is 
 possessed deserves to be subjected to. — One point of coin- 
 cidence between your sentiments, and those of your anta- 
 
 u 
 
154 ETERNAL PUiMSHMENT 
 
 goiiists, is very curious. Whether I adopt your views or 
 theirs, I arrive at the same conclusion with regard to the fate 
 of human nature : for, strange to tell ! I find you both a- 
 greed in maintaining, that the nature of man has no exis- 
 tence beyond this present life ! You both, I perceive, hold 
 that human nature is destroyed. — There is no doubt a dif- 
 ference subsisting between you with respect to the manner 
 of its destruction. You allege, that this result takes place 
 in consequence of its being swallowed up in the divine 
 nature of Christ : while they, by representing the beings 
 who are tormented eternally to be possessed of everlasting 
 existence, hold, if they have any meaning at all, that 
 human nature, in the case of the unregenerate, is swal- 
 lowed up in some third nature, distinct both from the nature 
 of Adam and from that of Christ; with scriptural grounds for 
 believing in which, however, they have never yet had the 
 goodness to furnish ns. — Still it is an important fact, that, 
 "whatever may be the differences existing between yourself 
 and your opponents as to the manner of the euthanasia of 
 human nature, you areboth thus faragreed,that the nature of 
 Adam does not survive this present life : it being obvious 
 to you both, that in one way or another, either as swal- 
 lowed up in the nature of the Lord Jesus the second man, 
 or as swallowed up in the nature of some third man yet to 
 be discovered, the nature of Adam the first man is de- 
 stroyed. 
 
 Assuming the destruction of human nature, then, as a 
 settled point on both sides, the important question occurs : 
 how, consistently with justice, can a severer punishment 
 be inflicted on the being who is possessed of human nature, 
 than is inflicted confessedly on the nature itself? The 
 highest punishment of which the nature itself is suscep- 
 tible is, it appears, its destruction. Now as every being 
 must act under the influence of the nature which he has, 
 and not under the influence of a nature which he has 
 
NOT ETERNAL TORMENTS. 155 
 
 not ; and as tlie nature of man is possessed by him not wil- 
 lingly, — not in consequence of any previous volition of 
 Ids, — but in consequence of liis having been, without any 
 consent of his own, subjected to it ; how, as God is just, 
 can he who in committing evil acts under the influence 
 of the only nature which he has, and of a nature, too, of 
 which he has been a mere passive recipient, be more sev^ere- 
 ly punished than tliat nature itself is ? How can human 
 conduct whicli is a mere effect, be visited with more severe 
 punishment than is inflicted on human nature itself the 
 cause, the necessary cause, of all such conduct ? 
 
 Until it can be satisfactorily shewn to me, that a being, 
 upon whose nature as essentially sinful and worthless the 
 most ample vengeance has been taken in the utter destruc- 
 tion of it, may nevertheless be so distinguislied from his 
 nature, as himself to remain the subject of tlie most ex- 
 cruciating agonies for evermore ; and until it can be satis- 
 factorily shewn to me, likewise, that evil in its effects can 
 with justice be more severely punished than evil in its 
 cause ; I must be allowed to cherish the conviction, that 
 tlie destruction or swallowing up of man's fleshly nature, 
 — a point with regard to which, in one way or another, all 
 parties seem to be agreed, — being the greatest punishment 
 to which that fleshly nature itself can be subjected, must 
 be also the greatest extent to which, by any possibility, 
 the punishment of the being who is endowed with that 
 nature can be carried out. 
 
 T. Conclusively argued, my dear Robert. And, per- 
 haps, I cannot do better than follow up what you have 
 stated by observing, that, not only in the indirect way 
 which you have adopted, but by every conceivable species 
 of direct scriptural evidence, is death, or rather the de- 
 struction of the Adamic nature, proved to be the highest 
 l)enalty to which man as such is capable of being subject- 
 ed. — It appears by the terms of the original sentence itself, 
 
15f> ETERNAL PUNISHMENT 
 
 pronounced on occasion of man's transgression: in which, 
 so far from its being said, tliat death is to be followed and 
 consummated by sufferings, it is expressly declared, that 
 sufferings are to be followed and consummated by death. 
 Cursed is the (j round for ihy sake ; in sorro7v shall thou eat 
 
 of it all the days of thy life. In the sweat of thy face 
 
 shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the (/round: for 
 out of it wast thou talen: for dust thou art, and unto dust 
 shalt thou return. Gen. iii. 17. 19. 
 
 It appears from the contrast between the extent.of the 
 reign of sin, and that of the reign of grace, instituted by the 
 apostle Paul in the 5th chapter of his Epistle to the Ro- 
 mans : That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might 
 grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life, by 
 Jesus Christ our Lord: Verse 21 :* and from the language 
 of the same apostle, in the 15th chapter of his 1st Epistle 
 to the Corinthians ; in which he expressly denominates 
 death, the last enemy ; and speaks of it as being destroyed. 
 Verse 26. Now if death be the extreme boundary of sins 
 reign : and if deatli be the last enemy whom man has to 
 encounter ; what room, what possibility, is there of its being 
 succeeded by eternal torments ? 
 
 And, lastly, it appears with the strongest of all con- 
 ceivable evidence in the light of the fact, tliat certain 
 human beings are, by the admission of all, partakers of 
 life everlasting, This argument is perfectly invincible. 
 
 * Sin hath reigned unto death. Rom. v. 21. Not the death of Adam, the creature, 
 and of Adam's natural posterity, as is commonly but erroneously supposed; but the 
 death of the Lord Jesus, the Creator. The death of the Lord Jesus, and not that 
 of the creature, being the utmost extent and boundary, the ultima Thule, of sin's 
 reign: and in the death of our blessed Lord, sin and death being so swallowi'd up 
 and brought to an end, that sin's reign can by no possibility extend further j being im- 
 mediately and necessarily merged in, and superseded by, that reign of grace through 
 righteovisness unto eternal life, to which it has been all along and solely subservient. 
 How dare any man, professing to believe in the supreme divinity of Jesus of Nazer- 
 cth, think or say, and that, too, in the teeth of language so clear and explicit as the 
 foregoing, that sin can prolong its reign beyond the death of the Creator manifest 
 iu flesh ? 
 
^'OT ETERNAL TORMENTS. 157 
 
 Had the penalty of sin reached beyond death, or rather 
 beyond the destruction of the Adamic nature, the salva- 
 tion of a single member of the human family would have 
 been an impossibility. ^'Eternal sujSferings," say popular 
 religionists, "was the import of the original threatening, to 
 take effect in the event of the transgression being 
 committed." Well, be it so. And then, mark the con- 
 sequence. The truth of God requires the exact and com- 
 plete execution of what he has threatened : his veracity 
 being no less concerned in the execution of his threaten- 
 ings, than in the fulfilment of his promises. Let God be 
 true, although every man should be a liar. If eternal 
 torments were threatened to mankind as a whole, as such 
 persons allege, they must then be inflicted on mankind as 
 a whole. There can be no escape for any one. God's 
 truth cannot be compromised ; and the sufferings being 
 by the terms of the supposition infinite, cannot by any pos- 
 sibility be brought to an end. By all, as one with Adam 
 the transgressor, eternal torments having been incurred ; 
 upon all, as one with him, eternal torments must be in- 
 flicted. — "But, the work of Christ." — True; what of 
 that ? — " By it, sin has been taken away from the people 
 of God ; and their admission into the heavenly regions 
 rendered practicable." — What! has.. God by saving «w?/ 
 asainst whom he had denounced eternal torments, made 
 himself a liar ? Has even God been able to bring that 
 which is infinite to an end P — Ah ! the system will not 
 answer. It is thoroughly rotten. It blows hot and cold 
 with the same breath. It first makes God to threaten 
 eternal torments ; and then it attacks his veracity by repre- 
 senting him as not inflicting them. This cannot be. By 
 admitting that auij guilty creatures inherit eternal life, 
 popular religionists give a death blow to their own system. 
 Nay, they are constrained by the irresistible force of scrip- 
 ture evidence to admit the truth of a fact which, besides 
 
158 ETERNAL PUNISHMENT 
 
 overtuiTiiug their theory, opens up a door to the ultimate 
 salvation of all. For an enlightened believer is enabled 
 to remove every difficulty, as well as to explain the whole, 
 by shewing, that death, or rather that the destruction of the 
 Adamic nature which took place in the cross of Christ, 
 having been the full import of the threatening to man, 
 and constituting the utmost extent of sin's reign over him ; 
 the resurrection of the Lord Jesus from the dead, which 
 ensures the resurrection of his believing people, is also the 
 event in which sin and death, and all their consequences, 
 are to:the whole human family swallowed up for ever- 
 more. 
 
 B. You mean to say briefly that, according to scrip- 
 ture, sin did not acquire a temporary existence and reign 
 through Adam's one transgression, in order that through 
 Christ's one righteousness it might acquire everlasting ex- 
 istence, and might exercise an everlasting dominion over 
 a large portion of the human family, as is the import of 
 all popular notions respecting the subject; but that sin 
 was permitted to acquire and exercise a temporary exist- 
 ence and reign, in subserviency to that everlasting exist- 
 ence and reign of grace through the righteousness of the 
 Messiah, by means of which the existence and reign of 
 sii> unto death, and all the melancholy consequences there- 
 of, are completely and for ever superseded and swallowed 
 up. In other words, sin's reign nuto death is, not (he 
 rival of grace's reign unto eternal life, but its servant. 
 The existence of the former having been requisite, in or- 
 der to the introduction of the latter ; but the latter, in the 
 very fact of its introduction and reign, obliterating, swal- 
 lowing up, and destroying the former. Thus, instead of 
 the Manichean notion that sin and grace are, in their res- 
 pective reigns, eternal rivals, as the fleshly mind of man, 
 when intermeddling with religious topics, absurdly and 
 unscripturally supposes ; your meaning is, that sin in its 
 
NOT ETERNAL TOR3IENTS. 159 
 
 reign unto death is merely paving the way, and serving 
 as a pedestal, for the reign of grace, sin's glorious and 
 triumphant destroyer. 
 
 T. Such is precisely my meaning, 
 
 B. So far well. — But to proceed to other matters. Re- 
 jecting as you do eternal torments, is it true, neverthe- 
 less, that you hold the doctrine of eternal punishment ? 
 
 T. Yes, surely. 
 
 B. In so doing, is it your intention to dispute tlie 
 correctness of the interpretation which has been put upon 
 the Hebrew and Greek w ords commonly translatedr|l^e;-/?«^ 
 and everlasting, by Winchester and others who tiave 
 adopted the original Universalist view of the subject ? 
 
 T. By no means. Jeremiah White, in his admirable 
 work on Universal Salvation; and, since his time, George 
 Stonehouse, Elhanan Winchester, Neil Douglas, and 
 many more ; have rendered good service to the cause of 
 truth, by drawing the attention of religious professors to 
 the real and scriptural meaning of the nouns 'obv and anov, 
 and of the adjectives derived from them: these eminent 
 writers having clearly and satisfactorily proved, that such 
 words have originally and literally a reference to duration 
 as marked by stages, periods, or seras, and not to eternity 
 properly so called. But useful as their labours have been, 
 I cannot help objecting to them, that they have made too 
 much of the critical argument ; — that they have, in their 
 anxiety to press it continually into the service, rendered it 
 occasionally ridiculous ; — and that, as in the case of the last 
 verse of the 25th chapter of Matthew, they have some- 
 times had recourse to quibbling expedients, instead of 
 meeting the assaults of the popular party manfully, inge- 
 nuously, and scripturally. 
 
 B. How would you deal with the declaration, Tlicse 
 shall go away into everlasting punishment j but the righteous 
 into life eternal ? Matthew xxv. 46. 
 
160 ETERNAL PUNISHMENT 
 
 T. By at once and unreservedly admitting that, as it is 
 the same Greek word aiMviog, eternal, which occurs in both 
 clauses of tlie sentence, therefore, whatever is tlie meaning 
 of the term when applied to the life of tlie righteous, the 
 same meaning it must have when applied to the punish- 
 ment of the wicked. The duration is in both cases the 
 same. But because I admit this, it by no means follows, 
 tliat I oblige myself to adopt the ordinary fleshly interpre- 
 tation which has been put upon the passage. — It is true, 
 that if the eternal punishment be understood to be punish- 
 ment limited in its duration, so also must be the life. And 
 if the life be eternal, understanding the word eternal in an 
 unlimited sense, so also must be the punishment. For I 
 cannot bear having recourse to the usual practice of un- 
 derstanding the word eternal to have in itself an unli- 
 mited signification as employed in one clause of the sen- 
 tence, and a limited one as employed in the other. — This 
 concession, however, altliough made in the most distinct 
 and unequivocal manner, is not in the slightest degree 
 favourable to the popular theory, as a few remarks, explan- 
 atory of my meaning, may suffice to shew. 
 
 I'he interpretation of tliis passage depends entirely on 
 the sense which we attach to the word aiwviog. — If it sig- 
 nify duration as measured by seras or successive periods, 
 then the reign of the righteous or spiritual Israel must 
 last as long as, but no longer tlian, tlie punishment of the 
 wicked or uiiregenerate portion of the human family lasts. 
 That is, as during the whole of the period or periods 
 thus capable of being measured by succession, Christ as 
 the spiritual .Abraham, and his cliurch as the spiritual 
 Israel, are reigning togetlier in the spiritual Canaan ; from 
 all the enjoyments connected with this peculiar and preli- 
 minary state of things, and that during the whole period 
 of its continuance, the rest of mankind, as under punish- 
 ment, are necessarily and completely excluded. — If, how- 
 
NOT ETERNAL TORMENTS. 161 
 
 ever, aiuviog is to be understood as signifying eternal, in the 
 common acceptation of the term ; tliat is, as having a sense 
 which is absolute and exclusive of progressive duration ; 
 then must the punishment which attaches to the wicked, 
 or Adam's posterity, be of endless duration, just as the life 
 of the righteous, or Christ's posterity, is of endless dura- 
 tion likewise. But we have already seen, that the highest 
 punishment of which man, or human nature itself considered 
 as a whole, is susceptible, is its final and everlasting de- 
 struction. And we have also seen, that the whole family of 
 man who, as possessed of human nature, are represented 
 as originally one with Adam, the wicked ; are, as made 
 new, — according to the gracious and blessed declaration. 
 Behold ! I make all things new ! either in time, or when 
 time shall be no more, — represented as ultimately one with 
 Jesus Christ, the righteous. Here, then, we have the key 
 to aitiivioQy everlasting, understood in an unlimited sense, 
 and as e'qually applicable to the punishment of the wicked, 
 and the life of the righteous. The wicked, or Adam's 
 posterity as such, are subjected to a punishment of endless 
 duration, by being deprived of human nature for ever ; 
 and by having that nature, that is, by having themselves, 
 swallowed up in the divine nature of Christ : and the very 
 means by which the everlasting destruction, or everlasting 
 punishment, of their wicked nature, and of themselves as 
 wicked creatures, is effected, being by their having their 
 Adamic nature swallowed up in the divine nature of Christ ; 
 of course the everlasting punishment of human beings, as 
 Adam's posterity, or the wicked ; and the everlasting life 
 of the same beings, as changed into Christ's posterity, or 
 the righteous ; are results gloriously, necessarily, and in- 
 separably connected together, in the divine purpose, the 
 declarations of holy writ, and the experience of redeemed 
 creatures. 
 
 Opponents are welcome to adopt whichever side of the 
 
 w 
 
162 ETERNAL PUNISHMENT 
 
 alternative they please. They may understand ukuvioq of 
 itself to signify limited duration ; or they may interpret 
 it as denoting that \yhicli by its very nature is urdimited. 
 But they cannot be permitted to play fast and loose with 
 the passage. Whatever sense they ascribe to it in the one 
 clause, that same sense they must abide by in the other. 
 If, with Winchester and his followers, they say, that the 
 word here, properly speaking, is expressive of duration as 
 capable of being measured by seras or periods, that is, that 
 here it has a limited sense ; well : then, as, in that case, the 
 intermediate period of the Messiah's rei^n before his an- 
 cients gloriously, is the subject referred to in the latter part 
 of the verse; of course the complete and necessary exclu- 
 sion from all the enjoyments, privileges, and blessings of 
 this reign, and that during the whole period of its exis- 
 tence, of the unregenerate portion of the human family, 
 is what is implied in the punishment threatened in the 
 former part of it. Rut if with Calvin, Arminius, 'Wesley, 
 and others, they prefer maintaining that the word eternal 
 is here to be understood in a fidl and unlimited sense ; 
 then, as the endless punishment inflicted must be consistent 
 with the nature of man as a creature and shadow — with 
 the word of God which denounces against the wicked 
 everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord — and 
 with the atonement of Christ, as the destroyer of the works 
 of the Devil, and the swallower up of death, the last enemy, 
 in victory — it follows that, if this sense of the term be 
 adopted, the eternal punishment of the wicked, or Adam's 
 posterity, must be the eternal absorption of themselves, 
 and their sinful and mortal nature, in the righteous, im- 
 mortal, and life-communicating nature of the Son of 
 God. — " Take your choice gentlemen. . One, or other, or 
 both of these significations of the words eternal, if you 
 please. But it will be impossible for you, with the utmost 
 stretch of human ingenuity, whether you adopt the one or 
 
NOT ETERNAL TORMENTS. 163 
 
 the other, to drag in the doctrine of future torments. The 
 legs of the lame are unequal : hut God's ways and mani- 
 festations of himself are equal." 
 
 B. So, then, I am to understand you as maintaining 
 that a fate of equal duration awaits the righteous and 
 the wicked ? 
 
 T. Most decidedly. And yet, this merely in so far 
 as the adjective aiwviog, Ionian, applied to the life of the 
 one and the punishment of the other, is concerned. For 
 after the eternal or ceonian character of hoth has heen 
 ascertained to be the same, the nature of the life, and that 
 of the punishment, still remain to be considered. This 
 latter point falls to be determined, not by the attribute or 
 quality which is ascribed in common to both ; but by the 
 respective natures, and consequent capabilities, of the 
 riffhteous and the wicked themselves. Now the distinction 
 between their respective natures is obvious. Wickedness 
 is an affection of the creature ;* righteousness, of the Crea- 
 tor. The wicked, therefore, are beings necessarily pos- 
 sessed of a creature nature ; the righteous, with equal 
 necessity, possess the divine nature. What follows from 
 these self-evident premises ? Why this : that the wicked, 
 by being descendants of Adam the creature, and by pos- 
 sessing only his nature in this present life, can only be 
 punished positively in this present life ; and that any 
 punishment of theirs which runs beyond time, must be 
 of a negative kind, that is, must consist of one or other 
 of these two things, exclusion, or destruction, or both. 
 Whereas the righteous, being partakers of the divine 
 nature, are only susceptible of positive privileges, or must 
 live for evermore. — And yet the punishment which is nega- 
 tive, and the life which is positive, are both of equal 
 duration ; for, passing over the negative punishment of 
 exclusion to which a remark similar to that which I am 
 about to make is applicable, the highest negative punish- 
 
104 ETERNAL PUNISHMENT 
 
 ment of Avhigh tlie wicked, or the creature Adam's pos- 
 terity, are susceptible, being their destruction; and this 
 destruction taking place, through the medium of this 
 wicked or creature nature being swallowed up in the 
 divine nature of the second Adam, the Lord Messiah ; it 
 follows, that the conferring of eternal life upon all, by the 
 making of them to be righteous, or possessors of the divine 
 nature, is, by that complete absorption of the wicked in the 
 righteous nature which is implied in the fact, the infliction 
 and sealing down of eternal destruction, and thereby of 
 eternal punishment, upon the tvicked or creature nature of 
 man, and upon all human beings as originally possessed of 
 that nature. 
 
 B. The punishment of the wicked, that is, of Adam's 
 descendants as such, is, then, eternal — understanding the 
 word eternal in its highest and unqualified sense ? 
 
 T. It is. But their eternal punishment is not confined 
 to their eternal destruction.* They are punished eternally 
 in more respects than this. 
 
 B. What say you ? Other kinds of eternal punish- 
 ment ! I cannot now conceive of any, except of eternal 
 destruction, 
 
 T. This arises from your not having understood my 
 answer to your question respecting the sense of Matthew 
 XXV. 46 ; as well as from there being views of the subject 
 which have not hitherto " been dreamt of in your philo- 
 sophy." — The fact is, that God punishes eternally the 
 descendants of Adam as such after three different fashions. 
 In other words, there are three difi"erent ways in which he 
 inflicts a punishment upon them which, as being incapable 
 of alteration end or repeal, is thereby necessarily eternal. 
 
 B. Have the kindness to enumerate them. 
 
 T. There is, first of all, the punishment inflicted upon 
 our natural head, and through him upon us, of sufferings 
 and death ; connected with and implying deprivation of the 
 
NOT ETERNAL TORMENTS. 165 
 
 garden of Eden, and all its enjoyments. This is a punish- 
 ment attaching, not to one or to a few, but to all the 
 human family, including even the Son of God himself; 
 who came into the world subject to sufferings, condemned 
 to die, and shut out from the earthly paradise. And it is 
 a punishment which shall never cease to be inflicted while 
 a single human being remains, and which shall be inflicted 
 to the very uttermost : not only the mass of mankind, but 
 even Christ and his Church having no admission, and 
 never being able to obtain admission, into the enjoyment 
 of the natural and earthly privileges which by the first 
 Adam Avere forfeited. The loss of these, as the punish- 
 ment of the one transgression, Avas eternal and irrever- 
 sible. Against all, without exception, the gates of Eden 
 are barred for ever. And thus " Paradise regained," in 
 the sense of the earthly paradise being recovered, is a per- 
 fect absurdity as well as an utter impossibility. The 
 punishment of deprivation of the earthly paradise, and all 
 the sufferings which are connected therewitli and conse- 
 quent thereon, shall continue to be endured by man until 
 the human race shall be no more. We discover in this fact 
 one species of eternal punishment ; or of a penalty which 
 is irremediably exacted from all, and exacted for ever. 
 
 Secondly. The wicked, or the descendants of Adam 
 as such, are eternally punished, by being eternally ex- 
 cluded from the kingdom of Christ and of God. That 
 is, the same human nature which forfeited eternally the 
 state of creature purity, and other fleshly advantages, which 
 it enjoyed previous to the transgression of Adam ; hath 
 also, through the medium of another transgression of 
 which we are immediately to speak, shewn itself to be un- 
 worthy, utterly and eternally unworthy, of rising to the 
 enjoyment of a higher and heavenly state. Flesh and 
 blood, or human nature, was no more able to acquire Avhat 
 was superior, than it had shewn itself qualified to retain 
 
166 ETERNAL PUNISHMENT 
 
 what was inferior. Naj, as it could not preserve the van- 
 tage ground which it originally occupied in the garden of 
 Eden ; so, having lost that, much less was it capable of 
 rising to the inheritance of glory, honour ^ and immortality. 
 — This exclusion is complete. — It attached to our blessed 
 Lord. With j^e^/i and bloody even he could not enter into 
 his own kingdom. For Jlesh and blood cannot, under any 
 circumstances, inherit the kingdom of God. Therefore, 
 before ascending to his throne, the Lord Jesus behoved to 
 sacrifice his fesh and blood nature ; and to rise from the 
 dead with that nature swallowed up in his own divine 
 nature. — It attaches to Christ's people. With flesh and 
 blood, or human nature, they do not enter into his king- 
 dom. For, except a man be born again, he cannot see the 
 kingdom of God. Therefore, not as human beings or as 
 possessed of human nature, but as begotten again of the 
 incorruptible seed of the word, and as thereby partakers of 
 the earnest of the divine nature, are believers elevated to 
 his throne by their blessed Lord. — Thus, then, is any man 
 a partaker of human nature merely; and does he become 
 possessed of the earnest of nothing higher during his 
 earthly career ? Such an one can never enter into the hea- 
 venly kingdom. For human beings as such, that is, as the 
 wicked, having shewn themselves to be unfit for retaining 
 this present life, must still less have any meetness for, and 
 any capacity of being introduced into, the inheritance of 
 the saints in light. — But, not only so, the wicked, or human 
 beings as such, have incurred exclusion from the heavenly 
 kingdom as a punishment. That kingdom was, as I 
 shewed you in a former conversation, to come to believers 
 or the New Testament Israel, through the instrumentality 
 of the Jews or Old Testament Israel. But as the trans- 
 gression of one man, was made the means of forfeiting for 
 all human beings the original possession of the earthly 
 paradise; so was the hostility to God evinced by one nation, 
 
NOT ETERNAL TORMENTS. 167 
 
 made the means of excluding the whole human family, or 
 rather human nature as such, from the enjoyment of the 
 heavenly inheritance. And yet, as the transgression of 
 one man was overruled to be the means of bringing sal- 
 vation to mankind as a whole ', so has the enmity to God 
 of the Jewish nation been overruled to be the means of 
 communicating the knowledge of the gospel to, and thereby 
 of conferring the earnest of the divine nature upon, that 
 small number of human beings to whom the privilege of 
 being Icings and priests with their divine head is destined. 
 While, thus, by being born again from above, the posses- 
 sion and enjoyment of Christ's kingdom are bestowed on a 
 few of the human family ; and while the opening to their 
 enjoyment of this their peculiar and glorious privilege has 
 been created by the rejection of Christ and his gospel by 
 the Jews ; we are to bear in mind, that it is through the 
 medium of this very misconduct of the Jews, that a sen- 
 tence of eternal punishment, by means of their eternal ex- 
 clusion from Christ's heavenly kingdom, hath gone forth 
 against, and shall be executed upon, all who live and die 
 possessed of the principles of human nature merely. 
 
 The third and last species of eternal punishment, is 
 that which shall be inflicted on all human beings as the 
 wicked, in the shape of the eternal and irremediable de- 
 struction of themselves as Adam's descendants, and thereby 
 of the very nature which they originally possess. Human 
 nature w|is unworthy to retain its primitive state of purity 
 and happiness; — it is still less worthy of being introduced 
 into a higher state of existence ; — nay, it is worthy only to 
 be destroyed. It is fit fuel for the devouring flame of 
 divine wrath. Having been created only for a time and 
 for temporary purposes ; and having, as a medium of divine 
 manifestation, accomplished all the ends of its creation ; it 
 is finally and for ever consumed. This is the acme or 
 climax of the punishment to which it is subjected. — Our 
 
168 ETERNAL PUNISHMENT 
 
 fleshly nature manifested hostility to God, in the person of 
 Adam : for which it has been punished by the everlasting 
 forfeiture of the earthly paradise. It manifested still greater 
 hostility to God, in the persons of the Jews, when they 
 crucified the Lord of Glory, and rejected the message of 
 peace and reconciliation which was proclaimed by apostles 
 and evangelists : for which it is punished with everlasting 
 exclusion from the heavenly kingdom. And it is destined 
 to manifest, at the close of time, the greatest conceivable 
 and possible hostility to God, in a united attempt on the 
 part of all, both Jews and Gentiles, (except the ie\Y en- 
 lightened from above,) to subvert and eifface the very 
 existence of Christ's name and cause from the earth, by 
 means of human science and natural religion : for which, 
 Clirist having made his appearance the second time, shall 
 punish human beings as such, and their nature as having 
 shewn itself to be thoroughly, rootedly, and incorrigibly 
 W'icked, by everlasting destruction from the presence of the 
 Lord, and from the glory of his pojver. 1 Thessal. i. 9. 
 This will constitute the eternal punishment of Adam's pos- 
 terity, and of Adam's nature, in the highest sense of which 
 the phrase eternal punishment is susceptible ; as it will 
 involve the final, and complete, and everlasting extinction 
 from the face of the universe of that wicked and rebel- 
 lious nature, which has, in every step and period of its 
 existence, manifested itself to be enmity against God : to 
 be neither subject to his law, nor, indeed, able to be so. 
 Rom. viii. 7. 
 
 B. I clearly perceive your meaning, and so far ac- 
 quiesce in the sentiments which you have expressed. 
 There is, indeed, I am satisfied, a series of eternal punish- 
 ments to which human beings as the wicked are subjected : 
 risinsf in order one above another like a climax ; until at 
 last the whole is crowned and surmounted by the ever- 
 lasting destruction, or ultimate sweeping away, of the 
 
NOT ETERNAL TORMENTS. 169 
 
 guilty race. How simple, how perspicuous, how satisfac- 
 tory, the whole statement ! 
 
 Although this view of matters, I now remember, has 
 already, in several different forms, been brought by you 
 under my notice, or at all events suggested by you, I 
 never on any previous occasion was so struck, as I have 
 been on the present, by the fact, that all the punishments 
 which you have enumerated agree in the one grand fea- 
 ture of their being irrevocable and consequently eternal. 
 None of them has been, none of them can be, reversed. 
 The punishment of the forfeiture of the earthly paradise is, 
 I perceive, eternal : fo]-, from access and restoration to 
 that paradise, Adam and his descendants have by the 
 flaming sword ever since been debarred. The punish- 
 ment of exclusion from the heavenly kingdom is, I per- 
 ceive, eternal : for, into it no mere partaker of human na- 
 ture is or can be admitted ; entrance into it being con- 
 ceded to none, except to those who are horn again, not of 
 corruptible, but of incorruptible seed, and to whom, con- 
 sequently, has been imparted by faith the earnest of the 
 resurrection nature of the Son of God. And the punish- 
 ment of destruction is a fortiori, I perceive, eternal : for 
 the nature thus destroyed neither exists, nor can by any 
 posssibility exist, thereafter ; being swallowed up everlast- 
 ingly in the heavenly, divine, and completely triumphant 
 nature of the Lord of glory. 
 
 T. Perhaps you have not yet noticed the remarkable 
 connection subsisting between these three kinds of eternal 
 punishment, and the fact formerly hinted at by me, that 
 human beings as such are capable of being punished only 
 in three different ways. They may suffer loss — they may 
 undergo privation — and their present earthly nature may 
 be destroyed. Now mark how all this tallies with the 
 positions which have just been laid down. As expelled 
 from the earthly paradise and its comforts, men have in- 
 
 X 
 
170 ETERNAL PUNISHMENT 
 
 curretl loss ; — as excluded from the kingdom of Christ, by 
 their unbelief and opposition to his glorious gospel, and as 
 thus continuing destitute while human beings of more than 
 human principles, the majority of mankind experience 
 privation ; — and as dying, never again to live as human 
 beings, destruction, the highest punishment of which their 
 nature is susceptible, is inflicted on them. Thus the 
 three capabilities of punishment, and the three kinds of 
 punishment actually inflicted on human beings, exactly 
 coincide. 
 
 B. Well but, David, how do you reconcile the exclu- 
 sion from the heavenly kingdom of those wdio possess hu- 
 man nature merely while on earth, with the fact of their 
 being ultimately saved ? Is there not something like in- 
 consistency here ? 
 
 T. There would be inconsistency stamped on the very 
 forehead of my views unquestionably, were I to allege, that 
 human beings, although ejccluded from Christ's kingdom, 
 are nevertheless admitted into that kingdom. But I allege 
 no such thing. 
 
 B. This denial of yours again puzzles me. Do ex- 
 plain yourself. 
 
 T. Cheerfully, my dear brother. Attend to the fol- 
 lowing facts ; and, by so doing, it is to be hoped that diffi- 
 culties will vanish, and the whole subject become plain 
 and satisfactory to you. 
 
 1. Into the kingdom of God, no person whatever, no, 
 not even the Lord Jesus, enters as a human being. Our 
 Head entered into it by sacrificing his flesh and blood na- 
 ture ; and believers are introduced into it, not as partakers 
 of human nature, but as having had imparted to them by 
 faith the earnest of the divine nature. 
 
 2. Into the kingdom of God, the unregenerate portion 
 of the human race never enter at all. They have no ad- 
 mission into it in any capacity whatever, either as. be- 
 
NOr ETERNAL TORMENTS. 171 
 
 lie vers, or as unbelievers. And the reasons are obvious : 
 — The kingdom of Christ, is the kingdom or reign of 
 the divine nature. Now, of this nature, Christ and his 
 church alone are possessed. — Again. The kingdom of 
 Christ as such, that is, as the kingdom of the spiritual 
 Abraham, is destined to come to an end or expire. 1 Co- 
 rinth. XV. 24. And this, because his character as the 
 spiritual Abraham, is to be merged in his still higher cha- 
 racter as the spiritual Adam. Ibid : 28th compared with 
 22d. The object of the kingdom of the Lord Jesus, as 
 the Christ or spiritual Abraham, is the ultimate and com- 
 plete subjugation to himself of the wicked, or unregenerate 
 portion of tlie human family. When this is accomplished, 
 his kingdom expires. See the same verse. The last act 
 of it is the resurrection of the unregenerate. John v. 28. 
 29; compared with Rev. xx. 5. Now as, in raising them, 
 his kingdom comes to an end, how can they enter into that 
 which has no longer any existence ? In the very act of 
 raising them, the kingdom is no more. By what possi- 
 bility, then, can lliey be introduced into it ? — Still farther. 
 To enter into, or become possessed of a kingdom, is to 
 reign or have subjects. Now, the royal dignity, Christ 
 and his church as one with him possess. He sils as 
 king on high ; and he concedes to the members of his be- 
 lieving fkmily to be kings, as well as priests, along jvith 
 him. Rev : i. 6. They enter into his kingdom, and sit 
 down with him upon his throne. Ibid : iii. 21. And over 
 the unregenerate portion of mankind, as well as over all 
 things besides, this reign or kingdom of the spiritual 
 Head and his members extends. Thus, while the king- 
 dom in question lasts, the unregenerate are not kings, but 
 a part of what is put under the feet of the King of Zion. 
 And when the object of the kingdom to which Christ and 
 his church are elevated shall have been accomplished, in 
 the subjugation of the unregenerate, as their own king- 
 
172 ETERNAL PUNISHMENT 
 
 dom then necessarily comes to an end, by there remaining 
 none for them to reign over; so the others can never enter 
 into the reign or kingdom at all, on the same principle 
 of there then existing none over whom, as subjected to 
 them, they might exercise their sway. When, as at the 
 consummation of all things, there are no subjects, there 
 can of course be 7io kings. — Taking all these facts to- 
 gether, then, it appears, that from the kingdom of Christ 
 the unregenerate are, not for a time or for any limited 
 period, but for ever excluded. They have not the divine 
 nature, or overcoming principle, now; 1 John v. 4. 5; 
 therefore, they cannot reign : — they are not saved until 
 the expiring of Christ's kingdom ; 1 Corinth: xv. 23 — 
 28; Rev. XX. 5; therefore, it is impossible for them to 
 gain admission into it : John iii. 3 : — and they are saved, 
 not by reigning, but by being reigned over ; not as kings, 
 but as subjects; and, when saved, as none remain for them 
 to reign over, all being then put under the feet of the 
 Messiah ; 1 Corinth : xv. 28, compared with Psalm viii. 
 throughout j it is plain, that they never have the oppor- 
 tunity of being invested with the kingly dignity at all. — 
 Shall I express myself in a more intelligible manner, if I 
 say briefly, that of the peculiar salvation which is enjoyed 
 by the people of Christ, and which consists in an intro- 
 duction by him into his kingdom, the unbelieving portion 
 of the human race, as not born from above, never partici- 
 pate ? And, when at last the salvation which was finished 
 on the cross is carried into effect in their case likewise, it 
 is not by their being introduced into the kingdom of 
 Christ or made to reign with him, but by their becoming 
 the subjects of his kingdom, that this takes place : they 
 being saved, not by sitting down with Christ upon his 
 throne, and partaking with him of the kingly and priestly 
 characters, a privilege which he hath reserved to those who 
 are called, and chosen, and faithful ; but by being, as the 
 
NOT ETERNAL TORMENTS. 173 
 
 subjects of sovereigu and efficacious grace, reigned over 
 for evermore. 
 
 B. I now understand you, and have to express my 
 entire and unqualified acquiescence in your statements ; 
 because I perceive that they exactly tally with the lan- 
 guage and reasonings of the apostle Paul, in that passage 
 of the fifteenth chapter of his first epistle to the Corinthians 
 to which you have been referring. I mean, the part which 
 runs from the 22d to the 28th verses, inclusive. Christ 
 himself is raised first ; — then we have the resurrection of 
 those that are Christ's, at his coming j — and, lastly, the 
 subjugation, by means of the resurrection, of the rest of 
 mankind, is clearly the import of the latter part of the 
 passage, as well as the order of procedure of the heavenly 
 triumph. And a wonderful correspondency, I now ob- 
 serve, there is, — as you have shewn in the second volume 
 of your Assurance of Faith, — ^between the language of the 
 inspired apostle here, and that which our blessed Lord 
 himself employed in his conversation with Nicodemus, as 
 we find it recorded in John iii. 14 — 17. 
 
 Having made this admission, will you allow me to ob- 
 serve to you, that I have some doubts as to the propriety 
 of applying the phrase eternal punishment to any, except 
 the third, of the punishments which you have denominat- 
 ed eternal. The forfeiture of the fleshly paradise, and 
 the exclusion of the unregenerate from the heavenly king- 
 dom, although punishments inflicted upon all who possess 
 human nature merely, and inflicted without the possibility 
 of modification or reversal, nevertheless strike me as being 
 somehow or another limiled. I see that the third stage of 
 punishment, viz. the ultimate destruction of human beings, 
 or the swallowing up of human nature itself in the divine 
 nature of Christ, is unlimitedly eternal. But I experience 
 some difficulty in regarding the preliminary stages as more 
 than limited. Do have the* goodness, David, to try to 
 render this matter plain jtb me. 
 
174 ETERNAL PUNISPIMENT 
 
 T. I am glad tbat you have proposed your difficulty 
 with such clearness and distinctness. It is obvious, that 
 you have fully apprehended my meaning, so far as I have 
 gone. — And now, Robert, paradoxical as my language at 
 first must appear to you to be, I answer you by admitting, 
 that there is a point of view in which the two former 
 punishments to which you have alluded, nay, in which 
 even the third punishment itself, fall to be regarded as limi- 
 ted. This paradoxical mode of expression, however, pre- 
 sents no real difficulty to the spiritually enlightened mind. 
 The punishments are all of them unlimited in themselves; 
 but they are all of them limited by the nature of the sub- 
 jects upon which they are inflicted. These subjects are 
 creatures ; and, therefore, beyond the existence, or rather 
 beyond the destruction or annihilation, of the creature na- 
 ture, the punishments cannot possibly reach. To carry 
 them farther, you must suppose the uncreated or divine 
 nature itself to be punished : a manifest absurdity, as well 
 as blasphemy ; and yet, the mistake into which all those 
 who hold the popular doctrine of eternal torments neces- 
 sarily fall. — Well, then, the persons punished are crea- 
 tures ; and it is as possessed of a creature nature that they 
 either are, or can be, punished. The destruction, or rather 
 the annihilation, of their creature nature, is the acme or 
 climax of their punishment. It is, in the most emphatic 
 sense of the term, eternal punishment. — I have called it 
 the climax of punishment. And beautifully do the other 
 two steps or stages of eternal punishment appear to be 
 subservient to, to lead towards, and to terminate in this 
 last stage or climax. 1. Tlie forfeiture of the earthly pa- 
 radise and its blessings is eternal ; for it is incurred for 
 ever. It attaches to Adam's family as a whole — it is never 
 repealed — and the consequences of it are in every age 
 experienced by every human being. But the power 
 and possibility of inflicting* it evidently terminate witli 
 
NOT ETERNAL TORMENTS. 175 
 
 the existence of human beings themselves, and of this pre- 
 present world. The end of time, then, as the end of human 
 nature itself, is the boundary line of the infliction of this 
 punishment : short of wliich, however, it knows no termin- 
 ation. — 2. The exclusion of tlie unregenerate from the king- 
 dom of Christ which is never repealed, and which attaches 
 to all who live and die mere human beings without a sin- 
 gle exception, constitutes the second stage of eternal pun- 
 ishment. This stretches out much farther than the former 
 stage of which we have just been speaking. For, instead 
 of terminating with the end of this present world as that 
 stage does, it is coeval with the existence of the kingdom 
 of Christ itself. So long as this kingdom lasts, so long 
 does the exclusion from life and happiness, of those who 
 in this world have lived and died unregenerate, last like- 
 wise. Having been subject to the bondage of corruption 
 not merely while they lived on earth, but having come 
 under the power of that bondage still more decidedly 
 when overtaken by the stroke of death, under it they 
 must continue, unless and until they shall be delivered 
 from it, not by having had restoi'ed to them their bondage 
 nature, but by being made new ; in consequence of both 
 their present state of exclusion, and the present interme- 
 diate state of the church, being swallowed up in the divine 
 nature of the then completely triumphant Messiah. It is 
 only, then, the termination of the kingdom of Christ, which, 
 by bringing to an end the intermediate state of things 
 which succeeds the destruction of this present world and 
 the end of human nature itself, and by thereby destroying 
 the bondage of corruption under which the unregenerate 
 during the whole of that period continue, can bring this 
 second stage of eternal punishment to an end. — 3. There 
 is that eternal punishment which consists, not merely in 
 the swallowing up of human nature, but in the swallowing 
 up of the intermediate state'of things, the kingdom and 
 
17G ETERNAL PUNISHMENT 
 
 the exclusion from the kingdom, in tlic nature of Jesus, as 
 the spiritual Adam. This punishment of man^ — this com- 
 plete absorption of his nature — is eternal. It is the cli- 
 max, the acme, the finishing stroke given to punishment. 
 Man's fleshly nature, and sin and death as their effects, 
 thenceforward exist no more. As at once hateful to 
 God, and injurious to his creatures, they are swept away 
 from the universe. 
 
 Thus does it appear, that the end of the existence of 
 human nature itself, and nothing short of that, terminates 
 the first eternal punishment. The end of the bondage of 
 corruption, by its subjects or those who live and die unrege- 
 nerate in time being brought into the glorious liberty of the 
 children of God, terminates the second eternal punishment. 
 But the third and highest degree of eternal punishment, 
 as consisting in such a destruction of human nature and 
 of all its effects and consequences, by means of it and their 
 absorption in the completely revealed and triumphant na- 
 ture of the Son of God, as render the subsequent existence 
 of man and sin an absolute impossibility, is a state of 
 things which, unlike the two former states, can know no 
 end at all, and therefore must necessarily last for ever. 
 
 The punishments, then, are unlimited, in so far as they 
 are themselves everlasting ; but the subjects of them being 
 creatures, and, therefore, limited in their nature and dura- 
 tion, to inflict eternal punishment to the fullest extent is, 
 necessarily, at the expense of ultimately annihilating the 
 creature nature. 
 
 B. It strikes me, that I have a tolerably clear appre- 
 hension of your meaning ; and, in order to prove to you 
 that this is the case, permit me to express my views of it 
 in my own words. If wrong, you vv^ill have the kindness 
 to correct me. 
 
 In the first place, human beings as such, that is, as the 
 wicked, are subjected to three different kinds of punish- 
 
NOT ETERNAL TORMENTS. 177 
 
 meut ; all of which, from the circumstance of their being 
 unalterable and irrevocable, and, still more, of their being 
 inflicted as long as persons capable of undergoing them 
 and states in which they can be undergone exist, may 
 fitly enough be denominated eternal. Taking this view 
 of the matter, human beings are punished, first, by an 
 eternal expulsion from the blessings of the earthly para- 
 dise ; secondly, by an eternal exclusion from the heavenly 
 kingdom ; and, thirdly, by eternal destruction. 
 
 In the second place, these different punishments, al- 
 though lasting as long as the respective states in which 
 they are capable of being inflicted and endured last, are, 
 notwithstanding, of different lengths or durations, owing 
 to the different lengths or durations of these respective 
 states themselves. Thus the period during which ex- 
 pulsion from the earthly paradise lasts, can only be the 
 period of the existence of this present world : the paradise 
 itself being earthly, and the end of this world of neces- 
 sity terminating both its existence, and the liability of 
 any to be expelled from it. — Again. Exclusion from 
 the heavenly kingdom lasts as long as that kingdom, im- 
 plying subjection to the bondage of corruption on the part 
 of the unregenerate, lasts likewise ; and terminates neces- 
 sarily with the termination of that kingdom. — Whilst the 
 duration of the destruction of human nature, the highest 
 conceivable degree of punishment, can never know any 
 end : the shadowy or human nature, when swallowed up 
 in the substantial or divine nature, being swallowed up in 
 it for ever. 
 
 In the third place, each of the two previous eternal pun- 
 ishments is subservient to that which stands immediately 
 connected with it, and immediately follows it; and the 
 two first of them are subservient to the third and last one. 
 The punishment of the eternal expulsion of all human 
 beings, without exception, from the earthly paradise, is 
 
 Y 
 
178 ETERNAL PUNISHMENT 
 
 subservient to the exclusion of all who live and die pos- 
 sessed of human nature merely, from the heavenly king- 
 dom ; and the eternal exclusion of all mere human beings 
 from the kingdom of Christ, is subservient to the ultimate 
 and complete destruction both of human nature, and of 
 the exclusion itself or subjection to the bondage of cor- 
 ruption as the grand consequence of human nature, by 
 means of their being swallowed up in the divine nature of 
 the Son of God, at tlie period when he makes all things, 
 and therefore all beings, new in himself. — To explain my- 
 self otherwise : — 1. Human beings, as such, come to an 
 end with time ; their punishment of expulsion from para- 
 dise, and all its blessings, thereby ceasing : 2. the subjec- 
 tion of the unregenerate portion of them to the bondage of 
 corruption, comes to an end with Christ's kingdom ; their 
 punishment of exclusion from that kingdom thereby ceas- 
 ing : but, 3, both their expulsion from paradise, and their 
 exclusion from the heavenly kingdom, ceasing, in conse- 
 quence of their nature, and the intermediate state of things 
 which succeeds time, being absorbed in the heavenly, 
 and divine, and all-comprehensive nature of Christ, of 
 course this is a state of things which never can cease or 
 come to an end. 
 
 Have I expressed your meaning accurately and satis- 
 factorily ? 
 
 T. Perfectly so, Robert. And I may just add, in 
 illustration and corroboration of the views which you have 
 so luminously presented, that by means of the distinction 
 between the punishments of expulsion from paradise, and 
 exclusion from Christ's kingdom, taken in connection with 
 the subserviency of these punishments to what follows, a 
 full and comprehensive idea of the utter worthlessness of 
 mere human nature is afforded. — Its expulsion from para- 
 dise, points it out as unworthy to retain the inferior bles- 
 sings of its original and earthly state. Its exclusion from 
 
NOT ETERNAL TORMENTS. 179 
 
 the kingdom of Christ, points it out as still less worthy of 
 being elevated to the enjoyment of the superior hles&ings of 
 the heavenly state. — By the former, it is punished ever- 
 lastingly with loss ox forfeiture. By the latter, it is sub- 
 jected to a similar everlasting punishment of coming short 
 of ox destitution. — And, when its worthlessness has thus 
 been previously and satisfactorily established, its bondage 
 state of exclusion is brought to an end, not by restoration 
 to the state in which it existed originally, but, by what 
 affords the crowning view of its intense and essential worth- 
 lessness, its complete and everlasting absorption in the 
 nature of the Son of God.* 
 
 B. The whole of your system, if I mistake not, may 
 be comprised in the following sentence : — The object of 
 God, in all that he says and does, in all the acts and ma- 
 nifestations of himself, is his own glory. To this, the 
 creation of man originally in Adam, and his new creation 
 subsequently in Christ Jesus, are both subservient. And 
 the end is accomplished by a series of steps or stages : 
 man's natural creation state being, by the entrance of sin, 
 terminated or brought to aii end ; and the state of things 
 to which the termination of his natural creation state gave 
 rise, being itself terminated by that act of taking sin 
 away, through the medium of which all things are ulti- 
 mately new created in the Son of God. Farther : the 
 
 • Perhaps the \-iew submitted in the text, may be thus expressed and illustrated : 
 — The exhibition of the want of desert of human nature, on the one hand, to retain 
 what it once had, and, on the other hand, to attain to what it never had, and never 
 can have, has been going on constantly developing and disclosing itself more and 
 more since the first of time ; and will go on developing and disclosing itself more 
 and more until time shall have flowed into the ocean of eternity. Human nature is 
 disclosing still lower and lower, and hitherto unsuspected, depths of evil ,• and the 
 distance between the depths to which it is with rapid and constantly accelerated 
 pace descending, and the heights to which it shews itself unworthy to ascend, is 
 widening more and morej this process of descent, a.nd increase of distance, continunllj 
 going on, until at last the fulness of its unworthiness to retain inferior, and to at- 
 tain to superior blessings, having been brought out and exhibited, its final and ever- 
 lasting destruction, by its absorption in the nature of the Son of God, is the crown- 
 ing result of the whole. 
 
180 ETERNAL PUNISHMENT 
 
 Son of God liimself alone brings to an end the natural 
 creation state; and the Son of God, with his church, brings 
 to an end that intermediate state of things to which the 
 natural creation state gives birth. Is not this a fair ab- 
 stract of your theory ? 
 
 T. It is. 
 
 B. How pleasing, how beautiful, how harmonious, 
 how convincing, how strictly consistent with holy writ, is, 
 this system of yours ! The creature punished ; and yet 
 the mercy of the Creator glorified ! The sinful nature 
 destroyed ; and yet the sinner himself saved ! Tlie mem- 
 bers of the church reigning triumphant with their head; 
 and yet the object of their reign not a selfish one, but 
 that, tlu'ough the medium of its generous and efficacious 
 operation, blessings and benefits may ultimately redound 
 to the unregenerate portion of the human family ! The 
 goodness of the Creator not overcome, as is commonly 
 supposed, by the evil of the creature ; but, on the con- 
 trary, overcoming the evil of the creature, by its own in- 
 herent divine energy ! — Truly, David, this is to combine 
 the eternal punishment of the first Adam and his posterity 
 as the wicked, with the gift of eternal life to the church, 
 and through them of a new creation to the rest of the hu- 
 man race as made partakers of the nature of the second 
 Adam the righteous, in a way which no other system of 
 divine truth hitherto conceived or devised can by any pos- 
 sibility do. Its harmony — its glory — prove the system 
 which you advocate to be divine ! 
 
 T. Most gratifying is it to me to find, my dear bro- 
 ther, that the views which I have been the instrument of 
 presenting to you, have had the eifect of opening your 
 eyes to a discovery of the glory which shines forth in the 
 cross and resurrection of Christ Jesus. That you now 
 see the conquest of the Creator to be, not partial, but com- 
 plete. And that, instead of supposing our dear and divine 
 Redeemer to struggle with evil and evil doers throughout 
 
NOT ETERNAL TORMENTS. 181 
 
 eternity, unable to mould tliem to his purposes by over- 
 coming their opposition to his character and will, you have 
 been enabled to cast away from you notions worthy only of 
 a disciple of Manes, and to rejoice in the scripturally re- 
 vealed fact, that all things have been put under Jesus feet. 
 — Let me congratulate you on the change. Until now 
 it must have been impossible for you to recognise in our 
 dear risen Lord, the person to whom all power hath been 
 given both in heaven and on earth. 
 
 B. You say truly, brother. It is only since I have 
 been enabled to see sin reigning unto death, that grace 
 might reign through righteousness unto eternal life, by Jesus 
 Christ our Lord, that I have come to possess any correct 
 idea of what divine revelation is. Popular systems of 
 religion, by assuming as their basis the doctrine of eternal 
 torments, after the fashion of the antient Manicheans, as a 
 matter of necessity make sin to be the everlasting and in- 
 vincible rival of Jehovah ! Not so the scriptures. They 
 represent the entrance and reign of sin as merely subser- 
 vient to the entrance and reign of grace ; the former being 
 overwhelmed by, and swallowed up in, the glorious issue 
 to which they so astonishingly contribute. — Besides, how 
 distinctly now do I perceive the intensity of God's hatred 
 of sin displayed, not in giving it everlasting existence, as 
 the supporters of eternal torments most absurdly fancy, 
 but in destroying it. 
 
 T. To return to the subject of which we have just been 
 speaking, and which admits of almost indefinite illustra- 
 tion. — You must by this time have completely apprehended 
 the truth of the statement made by me some time since, 
 that the punishment of the ivicJced, and the life of the 
 righteous, are both eternal. There is no end to either of 
 them. The wicked are punished with everlasting destruc- 
 tion ; — the righteous are made partakers of life everlasting. 
 And yet, mark the paradox. There is a limit to the pun- 
 ishment of the wicked! — How is this? Simply, because 
 
182 ETERNAL PUNISHMENT 
 
 the wicked are mere creatures. As such, tlie highest puii- 
 ishmeut which they are capable of undergoing, is that of 
 being destroyed ; or of passing into the state of non- 
 existence from which they originally came. Everlasting 
 punislnnent cannot be everlasting torments ; for that would 
 imply the possession of everlasting life, or of the divine 
 nature, on the part of those who are subjected to them : 
 but it is everlasting destruction, or the appropriate and ne- 
 cessary fate of a wicked and creature nature ; and in this 
 way it stands contrasted with everlasting life, or that attri- 
 bute of the divine nature which is fitly conferred on Christ's 
 posterity, along with rigliteousness another attribute of the 
 divine nature. — Thus, then, the punishment of the wicked, 
 or of Adam and his posterity as such ; and the life of the 
 righteous, or of Christ and his posterity as such ; are both 
 and equally eternal. But they are not equal, in the sense 
 of their being both eternal existences. On the contrary, 
 the eternal punishment of the wicked, as being that of 
 creatures, consists in their being destroyed, or passing 
 eternally into a state of non-existence : whereas the eter- 
 nal life of the righteous, as being a divine principle, im- 
 plies on their part eternal indestructibility both of nature 
 and enjoyment. The one is eternal non-existence ; the 
 other is eternal existence. Adam's eternal punishment 
 cannot, as the punishment of a being possessed of exist- 
 ence, reach into eternity ; because, as a being, he exists 
 only in time : wbereas, the eternal life of Christ is truly 
 and in all respects unboundedj because, as a being, he exists 
 throughout eternity. The punishment of the wicked, it 
 thus appears, is boundless j but the beings themselves, 
 upon whom it is inflicted, are not so. They are bounded. 
 Their existence is confined to time. And this very cir- 
 cumstance it is which, renders them the fit recipients of 
 mercy. For, blessed be God ! the eternal punishment of 
 destruction as creatures is inflicted, not upon beings with 
 whom the divine puuisher has no connection, but upon 
 
NOT ETERNAL TORMENTS. 183 
 
 beiugs with whom, not merely as his creatures but as hav- 
 ing himself been manifested in their creature nature, he is 
 necessarily and eternally one ; and, therefore, as in the 
 very act of inflicting the punishment he swallows up death 
 in victory^ or absorbs for ever the nature of the creature 
 in the nature of himself the Creator, it so happens, that 
 the very circumstance of their eternal destruction, which 
 constitutes the eternal punishment of the beings who have 
 sinned, constitutes, likewise, the communication to them 
 of the nature of their glorious and heavenly punisher. O 
 death, I will be thy plagues ; grave, I will he thy de- 
 struction ; repentance shall he hid from mine eyes ;* ex- 
 claims the Messiah, in the glowing and triumphant lan- 
 guage of ancient prophecy : and by conferring upon the 
 sinful descendants of Adam, in the very act of destroying 
 death and the grave their bitter and uncompromising foes, 
 the everlasting possession of his own divine nature, by 
 making them new in himself, how fully and gloriously does 
 he redeem his pledge ! 
 
 Have I been successful in shewing you, that to punish 
 sin eternally, is not to give it eternal existence, but to 
 destroy, or rather annihilate it; and that to destroy or 
 annihilate it, is to make those who are at present the sub- 
 jects of sin and death, new in their divine destroyer ?f 
 
 • Hosca xiii. 14. 
 
 f The following 1 propose as a summary of the above argument : — 
 
 Christ's life is everlasting life. 
 
 The punishment of the wicked is everlasting punishment 
 
 Nevertheless the wicked as such cannot live for ever. 
 Reason of the difference. 
 
 The creature or wicked nature necessarily comes to an end j its termination being 
 necessarily the acm6 of its punishment. 
 
 Whereas the nature of the Creator necessarily lasts for ever; its everlasting ex- 
 istence being necessarily involved and implied in the fact that it is divine. 
 Conversion of the one nature into the other. 
 
 The divine nature, having become one with the creature nature in the person of 
 Jesus Christ, the destruction of the creature nature is in him effected in such a way, 
 as that the end of the creature nature is at the same time the communication of the 
 divine nature. 
 
184 ETERNAL PUNISHMENT 
 
 B. You certainly have. 
 
 T. Is tlie theme now exhausted ? or have you any 
 further questions respecting it to propose to me ? 
 
 B. I presume that, in the views of the suhject which 
 you have already presented, there are involved the princi- 
 ples upon which you ohject to and repudiate the ordinary 
 notions of Universalists respecting limited punishment 
 hereafter. 
 
 T. Undoubtedly. Ordinary Universalists, of the Stone- 
 house Cliauncy and Winchester school, appear to me 
 never to have seriously considered the following facts ; or, 
 rather, never to have had such a scriptural view of the 
 subject imparted to them, as to have enabled them to see 
 the utter impossibility of reconciling the following facts 
 with their system. 1. Limited torments are obnoxious 
 to almost all the objections which, it has already been 
 shewn, are fatal to the doctrine of eternal torments. 
 And, above all, to this, that supposing limited torments 
 hereafter whether of longer or shorter duration to be in- 
 flicted, the being enduring them could not be one pos- 
 sessed of human nature. He may be an angel, or he may 
 be a devil. Nay, he may be conceived to possess some of 
 the properties of human nature. But a human being lie 
 could not be. And as thus, by beings possessed of a nature 
 different from that which sinned, torments if inflicted for 
 countless ages must be endured, it is perfectly absurd to 
 speak of their infliction upon human beings. 2, In limited 
 torments the punishment is inflicted confessedly for a time 
 merely. Whereas, that punishment of the wicked, to 
 which according to scripture they are subjected, is irre- 
 vocable and eternal. 3. If torments contribute in any 
 respect whatever towards the salvation of the wicked, then 
 is the doctrine of purgatory introduced, and is the all and 
 alone sufiiciency of the atonement of the Lord Jesus ne- 
 cessarily set aside. 4. God is love. 1 John iv. 8. And 
 
NOT KTERNAL TORMENTS. 185 
 
 lie effects a change in the mind of the creature, or begets 
 and draws forth love from the creature to himself, not 
 by appearing armed with vengeance, but by manifesting 
 himself as what he is. That is, it is only by the manifest- 
 ation to the creature of God in his essential nature and cha- 
 racter as love, that the nature of the Creator is or by any 
 possibility can be imparted to the creature. In this, not 
 in any other way, was manifested the love of God towards 
 us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the 
 world, that 7ve might live through him. Herein is love, not 
 that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son 
 to be the propitiation for our sins. Ibid : verses 9 and 10. 
 And, as the result of this discovery made to us, it is stated 
 that we love him, because he first loved us. Ibid : verse 
 19. But in tormenting intelligent beings for ages, no 
 less than in tormenting them for ever, God could appear 
 in no other light than as an object of hatred. In other 
 words, it would be impossible for God, while inflicting 
 limited torments, to be manifested in that character of love 
 which scripture shews us indisputably and essentially be- 
 longs to him. And what then ? Why, that the inflic- 
 tion of age-lasting, no less than that of eternal torments, 
 as it is at variance with the nature, so it must be at va- 
 riance likewise with the purpose of Jehovah. — We have 
 seen that it is by manifesting himself as what he is, love ; 
 and not by manifesting himself as what he is not, an object 
 of hatred j that God, whether in time or at the close of 
 the intermediate state, overcomes and destroys the enmity 
 of the creature to himself. And all Universalists allow, 
 that the overcoming and destruction of this enmity is the 
 object which he aims at, and will ultimately accomplish. 
 But if so, why, by tormenting creatures although only for 
 ages, interpose an element which, so far from being con- 
 ducive to and productive of, is absolutely and necessarily 
 opposed to and irreconcileable with his object ? While 
 
186 ETERNAL PUNISHMENT 
 
 God is tormenting his creatures for ages hereafter, as the 
 followers of Wincliester conceive him to do, instead of 
 decreasing that view of himself as tlieir enemy which, from 
 the constitution of their fleshly minds, liuman heings na- 
 turally and necessarily adopt, he must he actually increas- 
 ing and confirming it. For, under such supposed circum- 
 stances, he must be not manifesting, but positively con- 
 tradicting his glorious character. And if, after all, the 
 change which, by the confession of Universalists of every 
 grade and description, ultimately takes place, is accom- 
 plished by the manifestation on the part of God of himself 
 as love, or as a gracious benefactor freely bestowing eter- 
 nal life, of what use, pray, in that case, have been all the 
 previous torments ? As, so far from contributing towards 
 the glorious result, they have obviously and necessarily 
 during the whole period of their infliction been retarding 
 and preventing it, is not the supposition of God's having 
 recourse to them derogatory to his character, not only as 
 love, but as a being whose perfect wisdom obviates the 
 possibility of his employing any except means at once suit- 
 able and indispensable to the end at which he is aiming ? 
 
 B. This I clearly perceive. 
 
 T. To follow out and develop this last objection, I may 
 observe : — That, by ordinary Universalists, the nature and 
 object of punishment have been entirely mistaken. Pun- 
 ishment neither has, nor can have, for its object, to ele- 
 vate any intelligent being to a higher rank in the scale of 
 existence, than that which at any given moment he occu- 
 pies. And yet, in opposition to this fundamental and un- 
 deniable principle, the class of persons to whom I allude 
 imagine that human heings (?) are subjected to limited 
 torments hereafter, as a means of fitting and preparing 
 them for their elevation to a higher state ! This is absurd. 
 In the divine administration punishment contributes, not 
 to the elevation of beings to a higher state of existence. 
 
NOT ETERNAL TORMENTS. 187 
 
 but either to the deprivation of them of a state of existence 
 which they already possess, or to keep tliem out of a state 
 of existence of which they have never been put in posses- 
 sion. Therefore, so far from its being by punishment, it 
 is always and necessarily by the conferring of the divine 
 nature, either here or hereafter, that the elevation of human 
 beings to a higher state of existence takes place. God 
 proceeds by progressive steps in the work of creation: first, 
 conferring human nature ; and then, through the medium 
 of the forfeiture of human nature by transgression, not by 
 means of tormenting Mai 7m<Mre (?) in a future and in- 
 termediate state, raising to the possession of the divine na- 
 ture in his well-beloved Son, and thereby new-creating, 
 those by whom human nature had previously been pos- 
 sessed. That is, although the punishment of the for- 
 feiture of human nature contributes indirecUy towards 
 the possession of the higher nature, seeing that, unless 
 the forfeiture had been incurred, an opportunity for con- 
 ferring the higher nature never could have arisen ; yet 
 directly nothing contributes towards the possession of the 
 divine nature by the family of man, but the putting forth 
 of the same divine creative energy, from which the exist- 
 ence of human nature itself at first emanated. To which 
 I may add, that the opportunity gained for the conferring 
 of the divine nature, by the forfeiture of human nature, — 
 the punishment to which, on account of transgression, 
 those partaking of the latter nature are exposed, Gen : iii. 
 19, — would be entirely lost, could we suppose those who 
 die ignorant of God, to be raised hereafter to the endur- 
 ance of torments of any kind : and this, because the na- 
 ture capable of enduring such torments could not, as hu- 
 man nature by being forfeited does, by the very circum- 
 stance of its passing away indirectly contribute towards 
 the conferring of a higher nature ; but would, in conse- 
 quence of the fact of its continued existence, present a 
 
188 ETERNAL PUNISHMENT 
 
 positive, necessary, and insurmountable impediment to 
 the possibility of the unfortunate individual's being taken 
 out of the state of torments, into wliich he is supposed to 
 be introduced. A nature by passing away, as human na- 
 ture does, paves the way for another nature being con- 
 ferred : but tlie nature of torments which is supposed by 
 ordinary Universalists to be superinduced upon human 
 beings hereafter, not being understood by them to pass 
 away previous and in order to the renovating process tak- 
 ing place, is by this very circumstance shewn to be either 
 the eternally tormented nature of the popular divines, or 
 an additional figment of their own imaginations.* 
 
 B. Are your objections to the doctrine of limited pun- 
 ishment hereafter, or that of Winchesterian Universalists, 
 exhausted? 
 
 T. Very far from it. Only, I have neitlier time nor 
 inclination to enumerate the whole of them. — Let me, 
 however, with a view to your satisfaction, throw out hints 
 respecting a few more. 
 
 1. Winchesterian Universalists mistake completely 
 the meaning of our blessed Lord, when he speaks of tJiose 
 who are ignorant of his will, and do it not, being punished 
 with few stripes J and of those who know his will, and do 
 it not, being punished witlt 7nany stripes. Luke xii. 47, 
 48. According to them, this refers to a future state of ex- 
 istence: where the persons chastened very severely, are 
 
 * By the way, the argument founded on God's proceeding by successive steps in 
 creation, and on his having bestowed on no being the power of elevating itself 
 above that rank in the scale of existence in which it was originally placed, is ad- 
 mirably employed by Mr. W. Scott, of Edinburgh, towards the beginning of his late 
 work, in refutation of the views entertained by Mr. George Combe, respecting the 
 power of self-improvement and self-progression which the latter gentleman supposes 
 to be inherent in human nature. This is almost the only thing which is valuable in 
 Mr. Scott's work : for, in other respects, its theology is almost as wretched and un- 
 scriptural as that of Mr. Combe. To one who has a tolerable acquaintance vnth 
 divine truth, the opposite mistakes of these two authors appear in many cases to 
 counterterpoise and be destructive of each other. 
 
NOT ETERNAL TORMENTS. 189 
 
 llie very bad ; and those upon whom fewer stripes are iu- 
 lUcted, are persons whose lives and characters have not 
 been quite so profligate. Now both parts of their inter- 
 pretation are erroneous : for, first, it is to what takes place 
 in time, or during tlie currency of the New Testament 
 dispensation, that our Lord makes allusion : and, secondly, 
 so far from the greater or less severity of the chastise- 
 ments spoken of having a reference to torments of a limited 
 nature to be inflicted hereafter upon greater or less offend- 
 ers, Jesus is pointing to such facts as, that an increasing 
 responsibility in time attaches to the communication of 
 increasing views of divine truth ; and that, consequently, 
 in exact proportion to the degree in wliich the character 
 of God is disclosed to the people of Christ while they are 
 upon earth, is the degree of sufferings which they are ex- 
 posed to and shall undergo, in tlie event of tlieir violating 
 the dictates of their spiritually enlightened consciences. 
 That is, it is persons possessed of the highest, not persons 
 possessed of the lowest, degrees of the divine nature ; it is 
 the more enlightened, not the less enlightened, followers of 
 the Lamb ; by whom the severest chastisements spoken of 
 by our Lord are liable to be undergone. The language 
 of the apostle Paul, in 1 Corinthians ixtli, from the 15th 
 verse dow^nwards, where he declares the awful temporal 
 judgments to which he exposed himself, in the event of 
 his not complying with and acting up to the high sense 
 of obligation under which he laboured, is strikingly cor- 
 roborative of the view which I take of the matter ; besides 
 affording the best comment on the words of our blessed 
 Lord. 
 
 2. The class of Universalists whose views I am at pre- 
 sent engaged in combating, by maintaining the doctrine of 
 limited torments hereafter, and the efficacy oi such torments, 
 shew themselves to be woefully ignorant of some of the 
 simplest elements of vital and scriptural Christianity. "It 
 
190 ETERNAL PUNISHMENT 
 
 is tlie vilest and most atrocious of sinners," say tliey, " who 
 suffer most severely hereafter." But what constitutes gross 
 sin, in their estimation ? " Evils which are condemned 
 by every man's conscience, and are regarded with abhor- 
 rence by the mass of society." — Alas ! little do the per- 
 sons who return such an answer know, that only one gross 
 sin, in their sense of the term, has been committed or was 
 over capable of being committed by man ; namely, Adam's 
 one transgression : which, as having occasioned the suf- 
 ferings and death of the whole human family, and as hav- 
 ing opened the floodgates to all the evils that have since 
 inundated the world, must, in point of enormity and atro- 
 city, exceed any and all of those which have subsequently 
 followed in its train. This transgression of Adam violated 
 the law of God ; whereas the vilest actions uitli which 
 ordinary human beings are chargeable, violate only the 
 law of conscience : — this transgression of his, awful as in 
 its nature and consequences it has been, was notwithstand- 
 ing pardoned ; he having been, through faith, the first 
 member of the church as he had been the first transgressor, 
 and having thereby confessedly escaped all sufferings 
 hereafter ; and if thus he who, next to the apostle Paul, 
 was the chief of sinners, escaped future sufferings, why 
 should these be visited on iniquities which, as merely the 
 consequences of his, must be of a less black dye than his 
 own ? — and, lastly, this transgression of his merely incur- 
 red the forfeiture of the life that now is ; Gen : iii. 19; 
 it being neither his original offence, nor the ordinary of- 
 fences against conscience and morality which flow from it, 
 but opposition to divine truth as made known in the gos- 
 pel, which is attended with, and followed by, the higher 
 punishment of the exclusion of human beings as such from 
 the kingdom of God. None of these facts — scriptural 
 facts, I mean — appear to have been noticed by those who 
 contend for the ordinary enormities of human nature being 
 
NOT ETERNAL T()R3IENTS. 191 
 
 visited with limited torments hereafter. Especially the 
 last of them : from which we learn, that the ordinary evils 
 of human nature, however atrocious and deserving to be 
 repressed by the arm of civil authority, are never once in 
 point of enormity to be compared witli that exhibition of 
 the devilishness and satanic character of human nature, 
 which is brought out in opposition to the gospel : — a fact 
 made manifest by the outwardly pure and spotless apostle 
 Paul, Rom : vii. 7, 8, Philip : iii. 4 — 6, and not our com- 
 mon progenitor Adam, having been the chief of sinners; 
 1 Timothy i. 15, 16; and by the vastly greater punish- 
 ment which has been inflicted on opposition to the gospel, 
 than was incurred by the transgression of Adam. The 
 latter lost Paradise, and the life that now is ; the former 
 has entailed upon the Jews, and through them upon all 
 who die ignorant of the truth, exclusion from the heavenly 
 kingdom. Besides, the persons of whom I speak do not 
 perceive that, according to their system, it is actions 
 merely which are punished ; or that God, in inflicting li- 
 mited torments upon those whom they are pleased to con- 
 sider as the guilty, is regulated in his procedure by the 
 principles of a mere human legislator or judge. Now as, 
 according to scripture, all human actions however atro- 
 cious flow from man's fleshly nature — a nature which was 
 first made manifest in and condemned for Adam's trans- 
 gression ; that is, flow from a nature which is common to 
 every human being; it obviously follows, that the nature 
 itself as the fountain must be viler than, or at all events 
 as vile as, any of those actions which, like so many streams, 
 flow from it : and that, consequently, the punishment of 
 none of these actions as being mere effects, can exceed 
 that of the nature itself which of all such actions is the 
 cause. But the sinful nature of Adam is punished by 
 being destroyed. It is swallowed up in the divine nature 
 of Christ, by his death and resurrection from the dead ; — 
 
192 ETERNAL PUNISHMENT 
 
 by the imparting of the first fruits of his heavenly nature 
 to the members of his cliurch; — and by the ultimate mating 
 of all things new in himself. And if the nature itself, 
 from which all the evil actions which liave at any time 
 disgraced and afflicted humanity, be thus itself destroyed 
 or brought to an end in Christ ; what possibility, pray, is 
 there of future torments, whether limited or unlimited, 
 being inflicted ? There being no nature to undergo them, 
 is God, with reverence be it spoken, by punishing actions 
 apart from the nature from which they spring, to punish 
 a mere non-entity P 
 
 3, and lastly. What settles the matter to my mind and 
 subverts entirely the Winchesterian hypothesis, is the fact, 
 that human nature is not distinct from tliat of Christ, but 
 is contained and involved in that of Christ. That is, Adam 
 and his posterity are not beings whose present existenee 
 is distinct from, and independent of that of Christ Jesus; 
 but beings whose existence as intelligent creatures is ne- 
 cessarily involved in, and dependent on, that of the Lord 
 Jesus the Creator. Adam was the figure of him that was 
 to come. Rom : v. 14. He was made in or after his 
 image or likeness. Gen : i. 27, compared with John i. 3, 
 and Coloss : i. 16. Nay more : in the Lord Jesus, whose 
 image or representative he was, he and all his posterity 
 live, move, and have their being. Acts xvii. 28, with Coloss: 
 i. 17. This being the case, if Adam's posterity after 
 being deprived of their present existence by death were 
 to endure torments hereafter, whether limited or unlimited, 
 it must be in consequence of their having had imparted to 
 them by the Lord Jesus a nature capable of enduring 
 such torments. That nature could not be human nature: 
 for, not only of it are they by death deprived, but it was 
 destroyed on the cross and swallowed up in the resurrec- 
 tion of the Lord Jesus ; and, besides, it is totally inca- 
 pable of undergoing such torments as it is presumed shall 
 
NOT ETERNAL TORBIENTS. 193 
 
 be inflicted hereafter. Farther : the nature in question 
 could not be that of the glorified saints ; for this would be 
 to suppose the possibility of a righteous nature being sub- 
 jected to torments. What, then, is the nature which, ac- 
 cording to Winchesterian Universalism, is to be tormented 
 for ages ? Where shall we find it ? If it exist at all, it 
 must be a nature which is neither that of Adam, nor that 
 of Christ ; but one which is called into existence for the 
 express purpose of being tormented ; and which, when it 
 has served that purpose, is, like that of Adam, to be ulti- 
 mately swallowed up in that of Christ. But is such a third 
 nature conceivable of or possible ? Must our blessed 
 Lord, as the only alternative left, be supposed, strange 
 idea ! to create a nature pro re natd, and upon it for a time 
 to inflict the torments which the destruction of human na- 
 ture itself has rendered it incapable of undergoing ? Must 
 he, in the creation of this third supposed nature, be sup- 
 posed to degrade himself to become the minister of sin, and 
 the temporary confirmer of the worTis of the devil ? Must 
 he, after creating it, pass through a second process of 
 atonement? — he crucified afresh and put to an open shamcy 
 in order to its being taken away ? But, above all, are 
 men to be permitted to indulge their own whims and va- 
 garies, in supposing the creation and temporary existence 
 of a nature like that third and tormented nature of which 
 we are speaking, without being able to produce, from the 
 inspired writings, a single statement warranting the suppo- 
 sition ? — No, no. Such creature imaginings we may un- 
 hesitatingly reject. Scripture makes mention of the na- 
 ture of Adam the creature, as the figure of, and as con- 
 tained in, the nature of the Lord Jesus the Creator. And 
 it makes known to us the passing away and destruction of 
 the former, by the sacrifice which was offered on Calvary, 
 and by the total and ultimate absorption of it in that of the 
 latter ; this constituting its eternal punishment : but of the 
 
 2 A 
 
194 ETERNAL PUNISHMENT 
 
 creation of an intermediate nature — of a sinful nature 
 Avhicli is neither that of Adam nor that of Christ, which is 
 for a series of ages to be tormented and then to be de- 
 stroyed — it breathes not a single syllable. 
 
 B. Yon have employed an argument against limited 
 torments hereafter, and against their being subservient to the 
 making of all things new in Christ Jesus, which deserves 
 to be more insisted on than I think yon have done. The 
 argument I mean is, that punishment when inflicted upon 
 human beings to the greatest possible extent, instead of 
 having for its direct object to carry them forward in the 
 scale of existence, aims directly and properly at bringing 
 tlieir present state of existence to an end. Thus, the pun- 
 ishments of the forfeiture of the earthly paradise, of exclu- 
 sionfrom the heavenly kingdom, and of the final and com- 
 plete destruction of the race, which are the three eternal 
 punishments inflicted on Adam and his posterity, are merely 
 so many means of bringing their present earthly exist- 
 ence to an end, not of elevating them to a higher state of 
 existence. Punishment, like law whose sanction it is, and 
 with which it is inseparably connected, is intended, not 
 for the righteous, but for the unrighteous. 1 Tim : i. 9. 
 And its only legitimate objects are, either to restrain 
 from evil, or, that failing, to avenge the perpetration of it. 
 It never yet constrained, it never can constrain, to good.* 
 Of this circumstance the ancient Stoics, whatever might 
 be their mistakes and blunderings otherwise, appear to 
 have had a tolerably distinct idea.f Now the fundamental 
 error of the doctrine that limited torments are inflicted 
 hereafter with a view to the bringing of the wicked to a 
 sense of their enormities, and thereby of turning them to 
 
 * See the 5tli chapter of 2d Corinthians, verses 14th and 15th, where the nature 
 of the constraining principle of love, as distinguished from the restraining principle 
 of law, is simply and beautifully set forth. 
 
 f See the Enchiridion of Epictetus. 
 
NOT ETERNAL TORMENTS. 195 
 
 God, is, tliat it assigns to puuisliment an office and func- 
 tion which to punishment does not belong. For all 
 changes from evil to (/nod, or from the possession of the 
 nature of the creature to the possession of that of the Crea- 
 tor, are effected, not by punishment however long conti- 
 nued, severe, and afflictive ; but by the new creation of 
 the individual, or by the direct imparting to him from above 
 of the divine nature. And if punishment can thus only 
 at the utmost indirectly contribute towards the elevation of 
 intelligent beings to a higher state of existence, and this 
 by being the means passively of bringing to an end the 
 slate in which they had been formerly placed, how absurd, 
 how inconsistent with fact, the notion of assigning to tor- 
 ments, in opposition to their merely restraining nature as 
 punishment, an active and constraining agency in bringing 
 to an end the moral evils of creation ; nay, how absurd 
 the notion, that a state of torments, once summoned into 
 existence hereafter, should be found actively and inten- 
 tionally contributing towards the bringing of itself to an 
 end. See Matthew xii. 24—30. 
 
 T. Your reasoning is perfectly scriptural and legiti- 
 mate, Robert. 
 
 B. My real conviction, however, of the utter impossi- 
 bility of limited tormentshemg inflicted and endured here- 
 after, is produced by the fact, that, when deprived of their 
 present earthly existence, human beings have and can 
 have no existence except in Christ. Tlie Lord Jesus 
 having, in his incarnation, taken hold of human nature ; 
 having, on his cross, sacrificed or destroyed it ; and hav- 
 ing, in his resurrection, changed it in himself into his own 
 divine and glorious nature ; there is, I perceive, no pos- 
 sibility of any human being living hereafter, except as, 
 in one way or another, participating in Christ's nature. 
 This being the case, where is the place, room, or oppor- 
 
196 ETERNAL PUNISHMENT 
 
 tunity for the infliction of future torments ? Upon Christ's 
 heavenly nature, surely, it is not meant that such torments 
 are to be visited ! — Indeed, David, it is plain to me, that 
 the doctrine of limited torments being inflicted hereafter, 
 has its origin in the most decided ignorance of such facts 
 as these : — first, that human nature has no existence, ex- 
 cept in this present world; secondly, that Jesus, in the 
 very act of talcing away sin by the sacrifice of himself, 
 took away likewise the nature from which sin derived its 
 origin ; and, thirdly, that sin, and its source the fleshly 
 nature of man, having thus been brought to an end in 
 Christ, it is a matter of absolute impossibility that sin and 
 sinners should exist to be tormented, either for ages or 
 eternally, in a future state. 
 
 T. Notwithstanding all this, in which I perfectly ac- 
 quiesce, let us do justice to those by whom the doctrine of 
 limited torments hereafter was originally broached and 
 contended for. They were the first to break ground 
 against the intrenchments of an unfounded, but apparently 
 impregnable, superstition. By them the dogma of never- 
 ending torments was first vigorously assailed. If they 
 committed mistakes, in the circumstances in which they 
 were placed, in the dawn of scriptural discovery, it was 
 but natural for them to do so. Our situation, it is true, is 
 better than theirs was. We occupy a vantage ground 
 which they did not. And, from our greater elevation, we 
 are able to take in a more extensive range and prospect of 
 heavenly and divine truth than it was their lot to contem- 
 plate. But, amidst our superior advantages, let us not 
 forget the obligations under which these men have laid us. 
 As pioneers, they have in various respects broken up and 
 removed the roughnesses of the road, and thereby facili- 
 tated our progress in the pathway of divine discovery. In 
 perusing the eloquent, original, and powerful pages of 
 
NOT ETERNAL TORMENTS. 107 
 
 Jeremy White; * — or the profoundly conceived, scripturally 
 expressed, and learned writings of Sir George Stonehouse;-|- 
 — or the more popular and instructive, hut in many re- 
 spects sadly erroneous, productions of Elhanan Winches- 
 ter ; J — or the pleasing and inartificially-composed sen- 
 tences of James Relly ;§ — or the plain and perspicuous 
 language, and vigorous sense, of the late Neil Douglas of 
 Glasgow; II — although pained to find them all maintaining 
 the untenable position of limited torments hereafter, I re- 
 joice to think that, with all their errors, such men ever 
 wrote. They were giants in this particular department of 
 theological literature. They rendered good service to the 
 cause. But their work is done. Into their labours we 
 have entered, and by their very mistakes we have profited. 
 Indeed, except for the error into which they fell respect- 
 
 • The restoration of all things: or a vindication of the goodness and grace of 
 God, to be manifested at last, in the recovery of tho whole creation out of their fall. 
 By Jeremiah White, Chaplain to Oliver Cromwell. 1st edition, London, 1712. 2nd 
 edition, London, no date. 3d edition, London, 1779. 
 
 f Universal restitution a scripture doctrine. This proved in several letters wrote 
 on the nature and extent of Christ's kingdom ,• wherein the scripture passages, falsely 
 alleged in proof of the eternity of hell torments, are truly translated and explained. 
 (It is the production of Mr., afterwards Sir George, Stonehouse, Rector of Islington.) 
 An octavo of 468 pages.' London, 1761. — Sir George was the author of other 
 works on the same subject. 
 
 X 1. The universal restoration, exhibited in a series of dialogues between a minister 
 and his friend. Wherein the most formidable objections are stated and fully an- 
 swered. By Elhanan Winchester.— The 4th edition, London, 1799, is enriched 
 with notes critical and explanatory by W. Vidler. 2. A course of lectures on the 
 prophecies that remain to be fulfilled. Delivered in the borough of Southwm-k ; as 
 also at the chapel in Glasshouse-yard, in the year 1789. By Elhanan Winchester. 
 4 vols, octavo. London, 1789. — Besides other works. 
 
 § Union : or a treatise of the consanguinity and affinity between Christ and his 
 church. By James Relly. The edition now before me is a New York one, of 1812. 
 Relly was the author of other works besides the Union, a few of which I have read. 
 What constitutes his giand distinction is, that, after having been instrumental in 
 changing his views, he was for some time the pastor and instructor of John Murray, 
 the apostle of Universalism in America. 
 
 II Mr. Douglas was the author of A version of the Psalms, with copious notes, and 
 of many other exceedingly useful works. They were published previous to the year 
 1823, when his death took place. 
 
198 ETERNAL PUNISHMENT 
 
 iiig limited torments, it is exceedingly questionable if, hu- 
 manly speaking, tlie doctrine of universal salvation ever 
 would have obtained a hearing j and if such mighty con- 
 quests, as those of John Murray in the United States of 
 America, ever would have been achieved.* — And here, 
 when speaking of those writers and speakers, whose pro- 
 ductions and labours have so materially contributed to- 
 wards the introduction and spread of correct notions re- 
 specting the future and ultimate destiny of the human 
 race, it would grieve me to pass over a work of my dear, 
 venerable, and accomplished friend, Mr. Richard Roe of 
 Dublin, entitled, A short help mid incentive to an un- 
 biassed inquiry into the scripture truth of Universalism : in 
 which, by means of a beautiful application of the system 
 of scriptural parallelism originally noticed by Bishop 
 Lowth,-j- and since so admirably followed out and deve- 
 loped by JebbJ and Boys,§ he has shewn, that tlie doc- 
 trine of universal salvation is so involved in and com- 
 bined with, as well as forms so constituent a part of the sa- 
 cred writings, as to render it a matter of impossibility to se- 
 
 * " The life of the Rev. John Murray, Preacher of Universal Salvation," is the 
 title of one of the most interesting pieces of auto-hiography which I have ever read. 
 In it there is given a succinct account of the rise and progress of Universalism in 
 the United States of America. My edition, which is that of Boston, U. S. has notes 
 and an appendix, hy Thomas Wliittemore. 
 
 f Praesertim, in praelectione 19na sui opens, inscripti, De sacr&pocsi Hehraeorum, 
 praelectiones Acadcmicae. — Oxonii, 1753 j ap. pp. 177 — 196. 
 
 \ Sacred literature ; comprising a review of the principles of composition laid 
 down by the late Robert Lowth, D.D., Lord Bishop of London, in his praelections 
 and Isaiah : and an application of the principles so reviewed, to the illustration of 
 the New Testament; in a series of critical observations on the style and structuie of 
 that sacred volume.. By the Rev. John Jebb, A.M., Rector of Abington, in the dio- 
 cese of Cashel : (afterwards Bishop of Limerick.) London. 1820. — A truly elegant 
 and scholar-like production. 
 
 § A Key to the Book of Psalms. By the Rev. Thomas Boys, A.M., of Trinity 
 College, Cambridge; Curate of St Dunstan's-in-the-west, London; author of Tactica 
 Sacra, &c. London, 1825. — The pleasure and instruction which I have derivedfrom 
 the perusal of this work, excite in me a strong desire to see Mr. Boys' Tactica Sacra, 
 which I have not yet been able to i"4-ocure. 
 
NOT ETERNAL TORMENTS. 199 
 
 parate the one from the structure of the other. My friend, 
 it is true, has since discovered, and with that candour and 
 noble simplicity which distinguish his character has ac- 
 knowledged, the mistake under which at the period of 
 composing the pamphlet spoken of he laboured, in hold- 
 ing the dogma of future limited torments. But this, in- 
 stead of detracting from, to my mind enhances the value 
 of that production, as well as of the very interesting 
 sequel by whicli it was soon afterwards followed up.* 
 
 B. Far be it from me to wish to deprive the supporters 
 of limited torments of their justly earned laurels. Indeed, 
 were judgment to dispose me to think or speak harshly 
 of their views, feeling would be apt to interfere and lift up 
 its voice in their behalf. The venerable form of Neil 
 Douglas, and the manly straightforwardness, not unac- 
 companied with sagacity, of his character, as they appeared 
 on occasion of his visits to our late respected father, fre- 
 quently rise to my recollection, and plead more eloquently 
 in behalf of himself and his tenets than the most studied 
 reasonings could do. — But truce to feeling. The doctrine 
 of limited torments hereafter is unscriptural, as well as an- 
 tiquated. It is one of the strong-holds of that system 
 which undeifies the Lord Jesus, denies all efficacy to his 
 atoning blood, and ascribes a merit to human virtue which 
 is entirely subversive of that divine righteousness in which 
 alone the creature stands perfect and accepted before God. 
 Therefore, say I, delenda est haec Carthago. While I 
 feel indebted to the advocates of limited punishment here- 
 after for the glorious truths which they have been the 
 means of bringing to light, and for their valuable and sa- 
 tisfactory ciiticisms on many passages of scripture gene- 
 rally understood in an erroneous sense, towards their lead- 
 
 * Notes in answer to certain parts of three recent publications on future punish- 
 ment, to which are added letters to the author from three beneficed clergymen. By 
 R. Roe. Dublin. 1836. 
 
200 ETERNAL PUNISHMENT, ETC. 
 
 ing sentiment itself I desire to shew no mercy. I want 
 no substitution of a protestant, for a popish, purgatory. It 
 is the blood of Jesus, and not torments endured for ages, 
 that cleanseth from all sin. — In the mean time, allow me 
 to wish you a good afternoon. 
 
 END OF THE FOURTH DIALOGUE. 
 
DIALOGUE FIFTH. 
 
 subject: 
 THE SECOND DEATH. 
 
 SPEAKERS :— AUTHOR. BROTHER. FRIEND. 
 
 T. To what circumstance am I to consider myself in- 
 debted for the pleasure of this second visit ? 
 
 F. Having learned from my friend here the particu- 
 lars of his last conversation with you, and having been 
 made to feel that your observations and reasonings in fa- 
 vour of universal salvation are not without weight, I have 
 resolved to solicit one more interview with you, for the 
 purpose of having my mind, if possible, brought to some 
 kind of satisfaction with respect to this all-important sub- 
 ject. 
 
 I find that you disclaim holding the sentiments of 
 Chauncy, Winchester, and those other Universalists who 
 have contended for the infliction of limited torments here- 
 after : you, in opposition to them, confining the infliction 
 of positive sufferings to this present life; and regarding the 
 grand punishment to which the unregenerate portion of 
 the human family is subjected after death, and during the 
 
 2 B 
 
202 THE SECOND DEATH. 
 
 period of the saints' reign, as consisting in complete ex- 
 clusion from tlie heavenly kingdom. And I find, further, 
 that, in your apprehension of things, even when raised at 
 the second resurrection, the now unregenerate portion of 
 mankind are not admitted into Christ's kingdom ; but are, 
 as subjugated by Christ and the church, made to occupy 
 the place and station of subjects for evermore. Robert 
 reports you as saying, " this portion of human beings never 
 reign, but are reigned over." — Assuming his statement 
 of your views to be correct, I understand you to hold, that 
 the sons of God, or members of the church, spoken of in 
 the eighth chapter of the epistle to the Romans, stand ever 
 distinguished from the creature, or rest of the human fa- 
 mily, mentioned in the same chapter. And that, although 
 by the reign, as consisting in the manifestation of the sons 
 of God or members of the church, the creature, or unre- 
 generate portion of mankind, shall ultimately be delivered 
 from the bondage of corruption, and introduced into the 
 glorious liberty of the children of God ; yet their deliver- 
 ance and introduction shall consist, not in their becoming 
 properly speaking sons of God themselves, but in their 
 being subdued by, united to, and made partakers of the 
 nature and liberty of those who are themselves the sons of 
 God. They are not sons of God, for these are begotten 
 again from above in time by the word of truth j but they 
 constitute the creature, or those who, through the reign of 
 Christ the Son of God, and such as have the privilege of 
 sonship with him, are ultimately made or created anew. 
 Rev. xxi. 5. 
 
 May I presume that, in this brief abstract, I have given 
 a perfectly fair representation of your sentiments ? 
 
 T. So much so, that, in so far as your statements 
 go, I have nothing whatever to add to them. 
 
 F. Tell me, is there any author, or is there any body 
 
THE SECOiND DEATH. 203 
 
 of men, by whom views similar to your own have been 
 adopted and promulgated ? — I should like much to be di- 
 rected to some standard work on the subject. 
 
 T. I am not acquainted with any writer on the subject 
 pf Universalism whose sentiments coincide entirely with 
 my own. Perhaps the nearest approach to them will be 
 found in that admirable, simple, and, upon the whole, 
 scripturally-writteu essay of James Reily, entitled. Union : 
 or a treatise of the consanguinitij and affinity between 
 Christ and his church. The union, the close inseparable 
 and eternal union, subsisting between Christ and his re- 
 deemed ones, is that circumstance to which the possession 
 of all the blessings of salvation by the members of the 
 church is by that author traced. In this view of matters, 
 I perfectly agree with him. It is to Christ's oneness with 
 us, and our consequent oneness with him, that we are in- 
 debted for both our natural and spiritual existence. It is 
 no less because we died in him, than because we live in 
 him, that we are partakers of life everlasting. — And I may 
 add, that I have no hesitation in giving this high charac- 
 ter to Relly's treatise, notwithstanding that its author be- 
 trays a good deal of crudeness and superficiality in many 
 of his notions, blunders sadly with regard to the doctrine 
 of the assurance of faith, and has by no means treated of 
 universal salvation with that boldness, and openness, and 
 comprehensiveness of statement which his premises war- 
 rant, and which, with a little extension of his plan, he 
 might have effected. 
 
 F. Is Relly's work to be procured ? 
 
 T. Not, I suspect, easily in this country. It is com- 
 mon, and, I believe, has been frequently re-printed, in the 
 United States of America. The fact of its scarcity in 
 England is curious enough when we consider, that it 
 was originally a London publication. 
 
204 THE SECOND DEATH. 
 
 B. Did not your friend Mr. Thomas C. Cowan, of 
 Bristol, republish it about ten or eleven years since ?* 
 
 T. He did ; but the edition is, I have every reason to 
 think, exhausted. — Although far from being a polished pro- 
 duction, and, in the copies which I have seen, most abo^ 
 minably pointed, the simplicity and scriptural beauty by 
 which The Union is characterised are such as must always 
 ensure to it a rapid sale, and thereby render the publishing 
 of it, if properly gone about, a safe speculation. With 
 all its defects, it is a great favourite of mine.f 
 
 B. Has no other author on the subject of Univer- 
 salism broached views which approximate to your own ? 
 
 T. About four years ago, soon after the publication 
 of my Assurance of faith, or Calvinism identified with Uni- 
 versalism, I procured, by the kindness of a friend, the loan 
 of a work by Joseph Huntington, D.D. of Coventry, Con- 
 necticut, U. S. entitled, Calvinism improved ; or the gos- 
 pel illustrated as a system of real grace, issuing in the sal- 
 vation of all men. This treatise made its appearance sub- 
 sequently to the death of its^ learned author in 1795. 
 Some account given of it by Whittemore, in his Modern 
 
 * This gentleman, I am proud to think, allows me the honour to call him friend. 
 Mr. Cowan was for many years the highly and deservedly respected minister of St. 
 Thomas's Church, Bristol, and, having seceded from the establishment in 1817, is 
 now pastor of a Baptist congregation in the same city. He is the author of A brief 
 account of the reasons ivhich have induced the Eev. T, C. Coivan, late of Trinity Col- 
 lege, Dublin, to secede from the established church ; 1817; A Sermon on the work of 
 the Holy Spirit; 1818; A Chronological, historical, and spiritual, Bible Cate- 
 chism; 1825; Correspondence between himself and the Rev. Mr. Whish ; and a 
 Lecture on the impersonality of the Holy Spirit : 1837 ; besides having repub- 
 lished, with a preface and copious notes of his own, an American work, entitled, 
 Bible News, by Noah Worcester, D.D. of Boston, in America ; 1829 ; and Kelly's 
 Union, about the year 1827. All of these works, although in several respects opposed 
 to views which are held by me, I regard as most valuable. It is exceedingly grati- 
 fying to me to think, that my dear friend, after many doubts and much prayerful 
 consideration of the subject, has had the glorious doctrine of the universal extent of 
 God's love to man, at length opened up to his mind. 
 
 f Relly held the doctrine of limited torments. In regard to this point there is of 
 course a marked difference between his sentiments and those of the author of these 
 dialogues. But the dogma is not brought out prominently in The Union. 
 
TIIR SECOND DEATH. 205 
 
 Histori/ of Universalism, and the resemblauce between its 
 title aud that of my large work, excited in me a desire to 
 see and peruse it. Many parts of it, perhaps, I should 
 say, the majority of its statements, which are proposed 
 with much clearness and force of argument, quite delighted 
 me. But it labours under many defects. The nature of 
 the fall of man its author does not appear to have under- 
 stood scripturally ; (indeed, who almost does so?); and 
 he was not able to get rid of the absurdity of supposing 
 human beings justly liable to a sentence of eternal misery, 
 which, nevertheless, is not executed upon them ! — Pleas- 
 ing, however, upon the whole, are my recollections of the 
 book. Much did I find in it corresponding to the views to 
 which I had been previously conducted by the scriptures 
 themselves. 
 
 But enough of Huntington. If I am to be confined to 
 speak approvingly of any one writer on the subject of 
 Universalism, commend me to Jeremiah Wliite. Al- 
 though considerably more than a century has elapsed since 
 the original publication of liis " Restoration of all things," 
 there is a freshness, and a novelty, and a power, and a com- 
 prehensiveness of views, about it, which bespeak a mind of 
 the most manly and vigorous description, — a mind, indeed, 
 of the first order, — and justify "old Noll's" sagacity in 
 having selected him to be one of his chaplains. — It will be 
 understood, after what I remarked to Robert in the course 
 of our last conversation, that I disagree with White, when 
 he supposes that God restores any previous state of man, 
 and maintains the doctrine of limited torments. But he 
 lived in the dawn of the subject. And, amidst all his er- 
 rors, I perceive his vigorous and spiritually-enlightened 
 mind grasping results which many of his successors in the 
 same walk of theological literature do not seem to have 
 had the slightest conception of.* 
 
 * Shall I forget Stonehouse ? Certainly not. Disagreeing with him in many 
 respects as I do, I must take this opportunity of acknowledging the vast amount of 
 
206 THE SECOiND BEATH. 
 
 F. Your sentiments, I am informed, tally amazingly 
 with those of the American Universalists, 
 
 T. So said Mr. Harris, of Glasgow, as far back as the 
 montli of April, 1828, in the course of a very friendly cri- 
 ticism on the first edition of my " Three Questions pro- 
 posed and answered," which he was kind enough to insert 
 in the Christian Pioneer-. Strange to tell ! at the time 
 when his review was published, I neither was a Univer- 
 salist, nor acquainted with the sentiments of the great ma- 
 jority of adherents to the cause of Universalism in America. 
 Tlie name of Winchester was familiar to me ; but of John 
 Murray, Ballon, Balfour, Whittemore, and the other mo- 
 dern Coryphaei of the sect, I had not even heard. To 
 which it is perliaps scarcely necessary for me to add, that 
 of the productions of the Ballon, or Impartialist school, I 
 was at the time totally ignorant. 
 
 The fact is, that, although in the spring of 1828 I was 
 verging towards Universalism, I had not then actually 
 embraced it. My Three Questions was composed and 
 originally published, not for the purpose of inculcating and 
 propagating the doctrine of the salvation of all, but chiefly 
 with a view to' relieve my own mind; and, if possible, by 
 provoking discussion to lead to my acquiring some more 
 enlarged, scriptural, and satisfactory ideas of the divine 
 character, than recent events had shewn me that either I, 
 or ordinary professing Cliristians, were possessed of. From 
 the month of February, 1826, when my mind first opened 
 to the discovery of the scriptural distinction between soul 
 and spirit* — a discovery which has been the germ of al- 
 
 information and the many other advantages which, from the perusal of his Universal 
 Restitution,a Scripture Doctrine,! have derived. The profound biblical learning, 
 the aptitude for criticism, and the fairness in argument which he exhibits, are but 
 rarely to be met with in the productions of other authors, 
 
 * This took j)lacc in consequence of the perusal one day of the 15th chapter of 
 1st Corinthians,- particularly, of verses 42 — 49. A number of events and disclo- 
 sures of diviuo truth had certainly been preparing the way for this result : among 
 
THE SECOND DEATH. 207 
 
 most all m V subsequent advances in the knowledge of divine 
 truth — I had been much exercised and agitated respect- 
 ing the fate of the unregenerate portion of the human fa- 
 mily hereafter. Owing to the state of dubiety concerning 
 the matter in which I had continued up to the time of its 
 publication, I stated, with perhaps unnecessary candour, 
 in the first edition of the work alluded to, that I then 
 wavered between the Jinal happiness, and the /utwe anni- 
 hilation, of the unbelieving. This honest avowal of mine, 
 so different from the tricky conduct of the wholesale gulpers 
 of creeds articles and confessions, drew down upon me a 
 treatment from critics and self-styled divines, which was 
 not particularly calculated to inspire me with love to hu- 
 man nature, or confidence in pretensions to superiority of 
 theological attainments set up by those who presume to 
 act as "keepers of the consciences" of her Majesty's liege 
 subjects. Indeed, astonishment at the quackery which 
 obtains and prevails on the subject of religion, was the 
 leading sentiment of which the attacks made upon me were 
 productive. The abuse of critics notwithstanding, my 
 Heavenly Father kept me, amidst much darkness and 
 great uncertainty as to what the result of my previous dis- 
 coveries was to be, reposing firmly upon what he himself 
 had been pleased to reveal to me as true from his own in- 
 fallible testimony. In this state of mind, I was destined to 
 pass nearly a whole twelvemonth. For it was not till the 
 spring of 1829, that I was brought to any settled views, 
 
 which I may enumerate, my surprise at the condemnation of views as heretical, 
 by the presbytery of Glasgow, in September, 1825, which I knew to be truths of di- 
 vine revelation ; — the previous discovery by me of Adam and Jesus as respectively 
 the heads of two distinct posterities, and as commimicating two distinct natures to 
 their respective posterities, a view brought out and insisted on by me in my Memo- 
 rial; — and the perusal of Riccaltoun's three volumes in the winter of 1825 — 26. By 
 the way, how remarkably close do I perceive Riccaltoun to have approached to 
 views which I now know to be divine, without seeming to have actually apprehended 
 them. Let me take tliis opportunity of recommending his works to the perusal of 
 the ordinary petty fry of theologians. 
 
20S THE SECOND DEATH. 
 
 and attained to any satisfaction, respecting Ihc fate of the 
 unregenerate. And, strikingly enough, the previous state 
 of suspense terminated in my embracing, neither the final 
 happiness, nor the final annihilation, of all human beings, 
 in any of tlie senses in which theological writers had hi- 
 therto decided and treated of these doctrines ; but a view 
 of the subject combining and modifying both. — Thus far 
 was I from being, as many have supposed that at the 
 time of the original publication of my Three Questions I 
 was, a Universalist. 
 
 Would you like to know what were some of the circum- 
 stances which more particularly contributed towards the 
 satisfaction and settlement of my mind with regard to the 
 extent and manner of going forth of God's love to man ? 
 
 B. I certainly would. 
 
 F. And so would I. 
 
 T. Well, then, to the conviction that there must be a 
 sense in which all the unregenerate are ultimately raised 
 to happiness, I travelled by something like the following 
 process. 
 
 In the course of my reflections, it occurred to me, that 
 it was impossible to adopt more than five notions of the 
 future state of man ; or, that five distinct notions exhausted 
 the subject. It was necessary, 1st, that all human beings 
 should be annihilated ; or, 21y, that all human beings 
 should be miserable hereafter ; or, 3dly, that only a por- 
 tion of the human race should be raised hereafter, the 
 remainder being annihilated ; or, 4thly, that all the hu- 
 man race should be raised hereafter, but a portion of 
 them, larger or smaller it matters not, to sin and suffer for 
 ever ; or 5thly and lastly, that the whole human race should 
 in one way or another be raised hereafter to a state of 
 happiness. — In considering these five supposable cases, 
 (and it is impossible to find a 6th), I without a moment's 
 delay set aside the two first, viz., that of all being annihi- 
 
THE SECOND DEATH. 20Q 
 
 lated, and that of all being raised to future misery, as of 
 course and necessarily untenable. Scripture cuts them 
 down. — Three only, then, remained to be considered, viz., 
 the 3d, 4th, and 5th suppositions. — As to the 3d, or the 
 hypothesis, that ordy believers live hereafter , the rest of the 
 human family being annihilated or continuing under the 
 power of death for ever, it quickly struck me, that besides 
 contradicting those passages of God's word which repre- 
 sent Christ as summoning to life again all who have gone 
 down to the regions of the tomb,* as being he in whom all 
 are made alive,-\ and as swallowing up death itself in vic- 
 tory, \ it would leave, in the case of some, death, which is 
 one of the works of the devil, undestroyed.§ All I saw 
 must, consistently with the holy scriptures, rise again. 
 Upon such grounds, this hypothesis fell to be rejected. — 
 As to the 4th supposition, or that which assumes Christ to 
 be the author of the resurrection of the whole human race, 
 and yet to raise some human beings to sin and suffer for 
 ever, which is commonly called the orthodox doctrine, 
 having observed that, in flat contradiction to scripture 
 which declares, that Jesus put away sin by the sacri- 
 fice of himself, Hebrews ix. 26, that his blood cleanseth 
 from all sin, 1 John i. 7, that he is the propitiation for the 
 sins of the whole world, Ibid : ii. 2, and that he gave him- 
 self a ransom for all, 1 Timothy ii. 6, it ventured to re- 
 present sin, in the case of many, perhaps of a majority, of 
 the human race, as not taken away : and that, in the same 
 spirit of opposition to divine authority which asserts, that 
 hereafter there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor 
 crying, neither shall there be any more pain ; for the for 
 mer things are passed away ; Rev. xxi. 4 ; it maintained 
 the aggravation and eternity of human sufferings : and, 
 not only so, but that, as in the former instance, it must be 
 
 * Such as John v. 25, 28, 29. f 1 Corinth : xv. 22. % Ibid : V. 51. 
 § 1 John iii. 8. 
 
 2 c 
 
210 THE SECOND DEATH. 
 
 held at the expense of maintaming that Christ, instead of 
 destroying, confirms the works of the devil; sin and suffer- 
 ing heing two of the devil's works : I say, the hypothesis 
 of which we now speak, as perpetuating sin and suffering, 
 in spite of the glorious atonement ; and as, by represent- 
 ing Christ to raise a portion of the human race to sin and 
 suffer for ever, making him to confirm sin and sufferings 
 two of the devil's works, and thereby to become /Ae minis- 
 ter of sin; necessarily cast itself out of my mind, as what it 
 was impossible to hold consistently with any regard what- 
 ever to inspired authority. — By this exclusion of the four 
 other hypothetical propositions, I was thus, as a matter of 
 necessity, tlirown upon the 5th proposition, that Christ 
 raises the ivhole human race, at one period or another, — 
 either at the first, or at the second resurrection, — either in 
 time, or when time shall be no tnore, — to be happy for ever. 
 Again : in consequence of a question addressed to me 
 by an esteemed and intelligent Christian friend in Scot- 
 land, I was led to consider, that the grand object of God, 
 in all his arrangements whether of providence or grace, is 
 self-manifestation ; or that, " for his own glory, he hatli 
 fore-ordained whatsoever comes to pass." But, of course, 
 his purpose is to manifest himself as what he is, not as 
 what he is not. And what, pray, is God ? The just God 
 and the Saviour, Isaiah xlv. Not, the Saviour and just ; 
 but, just and the Saviour. That is, just and yet merciful. 
 To exhibit himself as both just and merciful must, then, 
 be his glorious object. — But what is justice? It is giving 
 to every one exactly what is his due; especially, inflict- 
 ing upon the sinner the exact punishment which his trans- 
 gression deserves. — And what is mercy ? It is the very 
 opposite of justice, or the bestowing of eternal life upon 
 beings who, so far from having merited it, do not even 
 possess a right to retain the life that now is. — Still farther. 
 What is the perfection of justice ? It is the assigning to 
 
THE SECOND DEATH. 211 
 
 every one, without exception, neither more nor less than 
 is his due ; or, so adjusting matters, that the retribution 
 of every sinner shall not in the slightest degree either 
 come short of, or exceed, what his iniquities have deserved. 
 And what is the perfection of mercy ? It must be the be- 
 stowing upon every one, without exception, of favours to 
 which he is not in any respect whatever entitled ; or, the 
 raising of every sinner to the possession and enjoyment of 
 a life and a blessedness to which, on the ground of per- 
 sonal merit, he cannot plead the slenderest shadow of a 
 right. — Unless this view of the matter be taken, there 
 cannot be displayed in their fullest and greatest conceiv- 
 able perfection the attributes of justice and mercy. And, 
 be it remembered, that to display these, or to make himself 
 known as what he is, is God's object. Death, or the for- 
 feiture of the life that now is, is sin's wages : and, conse- 
 quently, if any sinners be visited with a severer punish- 
 ment than death, in the shape of either age-lasting or 
 eternal torments, they are the subjects of more than jus- 
 tice. Again : if only some sinners are partakers of mercy, 
 then have we a display of mercy less than perfect. That 
 is, according to the popular system, which maintains that 
 many sinners get more punishment than is their due, and 
 9, Jew sinners are raised to glory, we liave an exhibition, 
 not of perfect justice and perfect mercy, but of p)lu-perfect 
 justice and im-perfect mercy. This, however, cannot be. 
 Both attributes being perfect in Jehovah liimself, both 
 must be, and are, displayed in perfection in his dealings 
 with the children of men. And in no way can we be- 
 hold this, except by seeing, that, as justice is exhibited in 
 its highest perfection, first in inflicting upon ordinary hu- 
 man beings sufferings and death, and, secondly, in inflict- 
 ing upon the Lord Messiah, as having been made sin for 
 us, those intense agonies and that most painful and igno- 
 minious death which constitute sin's wages, or the utmost 
 
212 TIIK SECOND DEATIf. 
 
 extent of the punishment which sin deserves ; so, the de- 
 mands of justice having by the deatli of tlie Lord Jesus 
 been perfectly satisfied and exliausted, mercy is exhibited 
 in its highest perfection, first, in the present salvation of 
 the members of the church, and, secondly, in the future 
 and ultimate salvation through them of the rest of the hu- 
 man family. Justice is displayed perfect and satisfied; 
 for, as in Adam all die, so the Messiah himself, the Lord 
 from heaven manifest injlesh, submitted to die, and thereby 
 has destroyed death, by swallowing it up m\iYm9,e\( the vic- 
 torious one : and mercy is displayed perfect and satisfied ; 
 for, in or through the resurrection of Christ, as the satis- 
 fier of the claims of justice in his death, all are in their 
 several times and orders made alive. 
 
 Lastly. The argument of tlie apostle Paul, contained 
 in and presented throughout the fifth chapter of the Epis- 
 tle to the Romans, from the 12th verse to the end, com- 
 pleted my conviction. There I saw Adam and Christ 
 contrasted : the one as having, by one transgression, 
 brought death on all ; the other as having, by one right- 
 eousness, conferred life everlasting on all. Universality 
 in the application of death through the former, stands con- 
 trasted with universality in the application of life through 
 the latter. I found it impossible, by any kind of quib- 
 bling or artifice, satisfactorily to get rid of the truth pro- 
 claimed in the 18th verse: — Therefore, as by the offence 
 of one, judgment came upon all men to condemnation ; 
 even so, by the righteousness of one, the free gift came upon 
 ALL MEN unto justification of life. By what stretch of in- 
 genuity could I succeed in making all men, to signify 
 some men P It was impossible. And to have had re- 
 course to the low Arminian expedient of admitting, that 
 Christ bestows the free gift of justification upon all men, 
 merely in the sense of offering to all men the gift of justi- 
 fication J or, that he bestows on all men a justification, of 
 
THE SECOND DEATH. 213 
 
 which nevertheless «//wje« do not reap the benefit; was not 
 for a single moment to be thonght of. Besides, the mag- 
 nificent close of the chapter — the hurstof divinely inspired 
 and impassioned eloquence witli which the apostle winds 
 up the argument, and at once and for ever gives a death- 
 blow to all those Manichean schemes of supposing the 
 eternal existence of a principle of evil, by which the minds 
 of ordinary religionists are perverted from the simplicity 
 of the truth — drove before it every remnant of doubt 
 which, from previous education and deeply cherished 
 Calvinistic prejudices, might still have lurked within. 
 That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might //race 
 reign through righteousness, imto eternal life, hg Jesus 
 Christ our Lord. In other words, sin, whicli now occu- 
 pies the throne, is not the eternal rival of grace : but has 
 had a temporary and limited sovereignty conferred upon 
 it, in subserviency to its own destruction ; and to the ele- 
 vation of grace to a sovereignty which is glorious, ever- 
 lasting, and unbounded. — Oh ! how sweetly, and power- 
 fully, and eloquently has Jeremiah White treated of this 
 subject!* 
 
 F. You have hinted, that your investigations ended in 
 your embracing neither the universal happiness of the im- 
 regenerate, nor their future annihilation, in any of the 
 senses in which these apparently discordant doctrines are 
 commonly received and held ; but in a view of the sub- 
 ject in some measure differing from, and yet combining by 
 modifying both. Having informed us of the way in whicli 
 you were led to see the necessity of becoming a believer 
 in the doctrine of universal salvation, may I enquire how 
 you contrived, in your own mind, to reconcile this doctrine 
 with the idea of annihilation ? To me, the two notions 
 
 * See his Restoration of all things, pages 243—245, edition, 177!) ; or, if his work 
 shouhl not be at hand, sec a note on pages 74 and 75 of tlio second volume of my 
 A sswan ce of Fai lit . 
 
214 THE SECOND DEATH. 
 
 appear to be the very antipodes of each oilier. My cu- 
 riosity is, therefore, most vividly excited to know how you 
 were able to briug them into juxta-position. For your an- 
 swer, I look with extreme interest. 
 
 T. The fact is, that, for some years previous to the 
 period of which I speak, the suspicion had been growing 
 upon me, of human nature and liuman beings as such 
 having no existence whatever except in this present world. 
 Now in shewing me the salvation of ally the scriptures 
 shewed me at the same time the destruction of all : thereby 
 confirming the conclusion towards which I had found my 
 mind tending, almost from the very moment that I became 
 aware of the existence of tlie distinction between soul and 
 spirit. 
 
 To explain myself. — Although human beings were 
 saved, yet human nature itself, I was led to perceive, was 
 not saved and could not be saved as such. As human 
 nature, it had justly incurred sentence of death ; and its 
 only destiny, therefore, was to be destroyed. This issue, 
 owing to the truth no less than justice of God, nothing, 
 I saw, could avert. In taking hold of flesh and blood, J 
 observed that the Lord Jesus tlie Creator, and thereby 
 the anti-type or substance of Adam the creature who 
 was merely his type or shadow, had given unity to, sum- 
 med up, and, if I may so express myself, substantialized 
 human nature in himself. To express myself otherwise : 
 in Jesus, human nature and human beings as partakers 
 of that nature acquired, or rather appeared possessed of 
 a unity and a substance which, in their natural connection 
 with Adam, had been but faintly shadowed forth. Jesus 
 was the substantial man. After he had exhibited in him- 
 self this substantial flesh and blood nature perfect and 
 obedient to divine law during his eartldy career, he sacri- 
 ficed it ) that is, he brought it, both in its substantial and 
 shadowy form, in himself to an end. But the destruction 
 
THE SECOND DEATH. 215 
 
 of a flesh and blood nature in him the Creator, was at- 
 tended with a consequence which could never have resulted 
 from the destruction of such a nature in the mere creature. 
 In him it could appear in a higher form, by being trans- 
 formed through his own mighty energy into a higher na- 
 ture. This took place in his resurrection from the dead. 
 Destroyed, human nature was in Jesus ; but in Jesus, as 
 swallowed up in his own divine nature, it also lives for 
 evermore. That is, as human nature, after liaving been 
 suhstantiaUzed in him by the union whicli he formed with 
 it in his conception, it was destroyed or brought to an end, 
 by his sacrifice on the cross j but, as changed by him, 
 through the medium of his resurrection from the dead, into 
 his own glorious and divine nature, it has had conferred 
 upon it everlasting existence and happiness. — Thus was I 
 given to see, and that by the very same scriptures which 
 satisfied me of the universality of salvation, also the uni- 
 versality of ajinihilation. Human nature, although saved, 
 neither is nor could have been saved as what it is : its 
 change by the Lord Jesus into his own divine nature ne- 
 cessarily implying, that the salvation of all, and the de- 
 struction of all, incongruous as the two ideas at first sight 
 may appear, are nevertheless identical. 
 
 Truths with which, from my previous discovery of the 
 distinction between soid and spirit, I had long been fami- 
 liar, and which I had already promulgated from the press, 
 were, in consequence of my being thus enabled to appre- 
 hend the identity of salvation and annihilation, more fully 
 opened up and confirmed to me. — I saw, still more clearly 
 than before, that through Christ there was no restoration 
 of Adam's paradisaical nature : but, on the contrary, that 
 there was through him a destruction of human nature, 
 whatever form it may assume ; and a communication, to 
 those who now possess human nature, of the divine nature. 
 — I saw also, with additional force and evidence, that, so 
 
216 THE SECOND DEATH. 
 
 far from there being any principle of immortality naturally 
 resident in man, all immortality is treasured up in Christ : 
 and that it is through Christ, not through Adam, that im- 
 mortality is imparted to the members of the human family. 
 In Adam, we die j it is in Christ, we are made alive. It 
 is because Christ lives, that ive live also. — And, in a word, 
 I saw with still greater distinctness, lastly, that there is no 
 possibility of human nature as such existing except in this 
 present world : the salvation of human beings consisting, 
 neither in human nature being preserved to them, nor in 
 its being restored to them, ideas which appear to be fa- 
 vourites with the ordinary classes of religionists ; but in 
 human nature being swallowed up by, and converted into, 
 the divine nature of the Lord Jesus. With such views, I 
 need scarcely add, that eternal and even age-lasting tor- 
 ments, both of which doctrines imply the carrying out of 
 human nature beyond this present time state, as a matter 
 of course fell to the ground. 
 
 Thus, then, by acquiring a clear and consistent know- 
 ledge of Jesus as having been God manifest in jiesh, as 
 having died the just for the unjust, and as having thereby 
 brought us to God, we have necessarily combined there- 
 with in our own minds the doctrines of universal salvation, 
 and universal annihilation. Salvation — in so far as, what 
 is now in all a flesh and blood nature, exists for ever here- 
 after in all as a divine and heavenly nature, by means of 
 all things and persons through Christ being made new. 
 And annihilation — in so far as, human nature as such 
 having been united to, swallowed up in, and in this way 
 destroyed by Jesus the Lord from heaven, neither has, nor 
 can have, any existence beyond this present time state of 
 things. 
 
 F. Accept of my best thanks for the distinctness and 
 copiousness of detail, with which you have stated the pro- 
 gress of your mind in regard to this all-important subject. 
 
THE SECOND DEATH. 217 
 
 I now understand your views much better than I ever 
 did before. 
 
 B. But, David, you have said, that Mr. Harris of 
 Glasgow proclaimed you to be a Universalist, a full 
 twelvemonth before you actually became one ; and repre- 
 sented your sentiments as, even in 1828, resembling those 
 of the American Universalists. Is it fact that you agree 
 with them ? 
 
 T. Mr. Han-is' critique on the first edition of my 
 "Three Questions" appeared, as I have already stated, 
 in the Christian Pioneer for April 1828. But I did not 
 see it till the following year : a desire to peruse it having 
 arisen in my mind from finding, that it had been taken 
 notice of in some of the periodicals issued by the American 
 Universalists. Indeed, it had been the means of making 
 my name known to that body ; and of opening up a cor- 
 respondence between myself and individuals belonging to 
 it. It was, I remember, in the spring of 1829, when my 
 mind was beginning to settle into something like convic- 
 tion respecting the love of God to all, that my first com- 
 munications from America on this interesting topic ar- 
 rived I and that, for the first time in my life, I learned 
 any thing- as to the existence and progress of Univer- 
 salism in the United States. For three years, I had been 
 advancing alone; acquainted only with the names, and 
 latterly with a very few of the works, of those who had 
 treated of universal salvation in my native country. Light 
 was just dawning upon me. And it had originally entered 
 into my mind chiefly, I might almost say, exclusively, 
 from the scriptures themselves ; my discovery of the dis- 
 tinction between soul as the mind of Adam, and spirit 
 as the mind of Christ, the source of all that followed, hav- 
 ing taken place* before I had perused a single Univer- 
 
 * In 1826. 
 
 2 D 
 
218 'IHE SECOND DEATH. 
 
 salist production.* But now additional and edifying dis- 
 closures of divine truth were about to be opened up to me. 
 Mr. Harris had represented me as agreeing with the 
 American Universalists, long before I was satisfied of the 
 scriptural foundation of Universalism itself, or had even 
 heard of the existence of the body to which he alluded. 
 Henceforward, however, through the instrumentality of 
 his own review, I was to be brought into constant, and 
 pleasing, and instructive intercourse with them. From 
 the spring of 1829, until now, my communication with 
 the American Universalists has been uninterrupted. f And 
 I deem it no small honour conferred upon me, to have , 
 been considered by a body amounting to at least half a 
 million of individuals, wortliy to occupy for the last three 
 years the situation of one of their corresponding secreta- 
 ries for England. 
 
 F. The footing of intimacy on which you now are 
 with the American Universalist body, and the acquaint- 
 ance which you must now possess with their sentiments, 
 no doubt qualify you to speak with something like confi- 
 dence as to whether you coincide with them or not. 
 
 T. Certainly they do. Having received and read for 
 a period of eight or nine years, the Trumpet Magazine of 
 Boston, Masstts, edited by T. Whittemore ; and, during 
 four or five years, the Union and Messenger of New- York, 
 edited by T. J. Sawyer ; and having also, through the 
 kindness of my trans-atlantic friends, been put in posses- 
 sion of all the standard works published by the American 
 
 * I should say, during an interval of many years. For, about the years 1813 
 and 1814, T did see one or two works of the late Mr. Vidler, and I think, also, a 
 sermon of Mr. Winchester's, besides Mr. Douglas' notes on the Psalms. But I had 
 not in 1826, nor have I now, the slenderest recollection of the contents of these dif- 
 ferent publications. My conviction is, that I read them so carelessly, and with such 
 deep-rooted prejudices against the leading doctrine advocated in them, that no im- 
 pression whatever, or, if any, an unfavourable one, was made upon my mind. 
 
 f Conducted principally through John Morrison, Esq. of Chatham-street, New- 
 York. 
 
THE SECOND DEATH. 219 
 
 Universalist body within the last twenty or thirty years ; 
 including, among others, llie Antient History of Univer- 
 salism, by Ballon ; The Modern History of Uiiiversalism , 
 by Whittemore; Ballon's Treatise on Atonement; his Notes 
 on the Parables ; Balfour's First Enquiry into the scrip- 
 tural meaning of the words Shcol, Hades, Gehenna, &c. ; 
 his Secotid Enquiry into the scriptural doctrine concerning 
 the Devil and Satan ; his Three Essays on the interme- 
 diate state of the Dead; Hudson's Letters to Balfour; Bal- 
 four's Letters in reply to Hudson ; his Controversy rvith 
 Professor M. Stuart of Andover; The Life of John Mur- 
 ray; Whittemore's Notes and Illustrations of the Parables; 
 &c. &c, I flatter myself, that I am as completely in pos- 
 session of tlie views of the American Universalists as any 
 other person in this country at the present moment is ; 
 and, consequently, that I have it in my power to demon- 
 strate how far the alleged coincidence between our respec- 
 tive sentiments obtains. 
 
 B. Are not the American Universalists at variance 
 among themselves? 
 
 T. They are. About seven or eight years since, after 
 many bickerings and the exhibition of much unpleasant 
 feeling, they split into two subordinate divisions, denomin- 
 ated the Impartialists and the Resiorationists. The for- 
 mer, w ho are by far the more numerous of the two bodies, 
 deny the existence of an intermediate state of happiness 
 and misery, the infliction of temporary torments, and the 
 immortality of the soul : maintaining, that although there 
 is a distinction between believers and unbelievers in time, 
 this distinction, nevertheless, extends no farther ; the whole 
 human family, after having died, continuing until the end 
 of time in a state of unconsciousness, and then rising again 
 all at once, and without any distinction, to the enjoyment 
 of eternal life. — The latter, maintain the immortality of 
 the sold, the existence of an intermediate state, torments in- 
 
220 THE SECOND DEATH. 
 
 jiicled upon the wiclced during a longer or shorter period, 
 the reign of the saints, and the idlimate restoration through 
 them of all things by Christ. They bold the sentiments of 
 Chauncy, or rather of Winchester ; that is, of the older, 
 and, up to a comparatively recent date, ordinary Universal- 
 ists.* — It is the former class with whose views I have been 
 supposed to agree. 
 
 B. I think I have heard say, that other views of Uui- 
 versalism, besides those of which you have spoken, exist 
 and prevail in America, 
 
 T, Scarcely now : except among individuals, and 
 some of the German settlers inhabiting the interior of 
 Pennsylvania. — John Murray, who first planted the stan- 
 dard of Universalism in the United States, about the 
 year 1770, was a Rellyan in his views; and had, at one 
 time, several congregations holding or professing to hold 
 sentiments similar to his own. But since he was gathered 
 to his fathers, f Rellyan Universalism has almost entirely 
 dwindled away : the late Edward Mitchell of New- York 
 having been, I believe, the last minister in America who 
 with his congregation adhered to it. Murray's is certainly 
 and deservedly an honoured name among all classes of 
 American Universalists ; and Impartialists and Restora- 
 tionists, (would that I could say, forgetting their common 
 differences, ) have lately been striving to testify the respect 
 which they bear to his memory, by having his remains 
 taken from the place of their original sepulture, and de- 
 posited with great pomp under a tomb prepared for their 
 reception in the beautiful cemetery at Mount-Auburn, 
 
 * Even among licstorationials themselves, it would be a mistake to suppose that 
 perfect unity of sentiment exists. White Kelly and Murray were inclined to Cal- 
 vinistic, Winchester to Arminian or Pelagian notions of Christianity. Therefore, 
 when we think or speak of the class of Universalists who contend for limited future 
 torments, we must always bear in mind, that, owing to the Calvinism of some and 
 the Arminian tendencies of the majority of their number, even they cannot be coji- 
 sidered as perfectly at one among themselves. 
 
 f About twentj'-three years since. 
 
THE SECOND DEATH. 221 
 
 near Boston. But the system which Murray advocated is 
 gone. Irretrievably gone, I suspect. Impartialism, and 
 Restorationism or Winchesterianism, have completely sub- 
 verted and supplanted it. By the supporters of each of 
 these two systems certain individuals appear, by a sort of 
 tacit consent, to be recognized as leaders. Hosea Ballou 
 and Walter Balfour may be regarded as the present heads 
 of the Impartialist body; while a minister named Paul 
 Dean, and Charles Hudson the able antagonist of Balfour, 
 take the lead of the Restorationists. 
 
 F. I now know that it was to your supposed agree- 
 ment with the Impartialists that Mr. Harris alluded. 
 
 T. It was. And certainly there do exist some very 
 remarkable and interesting points of resemblance between 
 our respective sentiments. — First. We both agree in re- 
 jecting limited torments. Indeed, as far back as 1827, 
 when engaged in the composition of my Three Questions 
 proposed and answered, and a considerable time before I 
 became a Universalist, I was satisfied of the unscriptural 
 character and bearing of the doctrine of future limited 
 punishment ; and, in a note to the first edition, the sub- 
 stance of which was afterwards transferred to the text of 
 the second, I laid down the principle upon which I repu- 
 diated it. — Secondly. We both agree in rejecting every 
 notion of the atonement which, either directly or by im- 
 plication, would represent God as having undergone any 
 change in his views and purposes towards the family of man, 
 in consequence of the mediation and work of Christ. God 
 is not, through Christ, reconciled to the world ; but God 
 iSy through Christy reconciling the world unto himself. 2 
 Corinth : v. 1 9. That is, God being the I AM, the un- 
 changeable Jehovah, is not, as it were, reluctantly con- 
 strained by the Son's coming to love and deliver the hu- 
 man race ; but, on the contrary, so loved man, that it was 
 he, the Father, who sent the Son to be the Saviour of the 
 
222 THE SECOND DEATH. 
 
 world. 1 John iv. 14. His salvation of man, therefore, 
 is not in opposition to his inclinations ; but is the result of 
 the purpose which he purposed in himself before the world 
 began. Epli : i. 9. 2 Tim. i. 9. Titus i. 2.— Thirdly. 
 We both agree in rejecting the doctrine of the natural im- 
 mortalitti of man ; or, to express myself otlierwise, in re- 
 jecting the immoriaUli) of soul. My convictions in regard 
 to this point flowed legitimately and necessarily from the 
 difference between soul as a sliadfwy, and spirit as a sub- 
 stantial jwinciple, which, as I have already hinted, was 
 opened up to me in 1826. The views of the Impartialists, 
 although expressed in a manner similar to my own, are, I 
 have reason to believe, derived from other sources. — The 
 three points just mentioned are those in which there ob- 
 tains something like a perfect coincidence of sentiments 
 between the American Impartialists and myself. The re- 
 semblance, indeed, is so striking as fully to justify Mr. 
 Harris in the remark which he made. But it is curious 
 — and no less curious than true — that in regard to every 
 one of these three points my mind was completely made 
 up, long before I had seen or perused a single production 
 of the Impartialists, or had even so much as heard of their 
 existence as a body. Common candour, however, requires 
 me to say, that a subsequent perusal of the works of Bal- 
 lon, Balfour, Whittemore, and others, has furnished me 
 with many additional views and arguments of tlie most 
 valuable kind, illustrative and confirmatory of my pre- 
 viously existing convictions. 
 
 B. But you are far from acquiescing in all the notions 
 of the Impartialists respecting the subject of religion ? 
 
 T. Very far, indeed, from doing so, Robert. So great, 
 I may observe, is the discrepancy subsisting between us, 
 that I scarcely know sometimes whether as a whole to jjre- 
 fer their sentiments, or those of their quondam friends and 
 allies, but now bitter opponents, ^/ie Restoralionists. Ra- 
 
THE SECOND DEATH. 223 
 
 ther, let me say, the sentiments of such men as Relly and 
 Murray, and tlieir followers : for the modern Restoration- 
 ists appear to me to give by far too much into the com- 
 paratively low and unscriptural views of Chauncy and 
 Winchester. 
 
 My grand objection to the Tmpartialisls is based on the 
 degrading and Socinian notions with regard to the Lord 
 Jesus which, with but ievi if any exceptions, they have 
 agreed in adopting. They seem to think and act, as if to 
 reject the ordinary and unsatisfactory dogmas respecting 
 the atonement, and to plunge into the depths of Unita- 
 rianism, were necessarily identical modes of procedure. 
 Now no mistake can be greater. Upon the divinity of 
 Jesus of Nazareth — upon the fact of his having been the 
 Creator manifest in flesh — hangs suspended the whole 
 scheme of man's redemption. It was because Deity be- 
 came incarnate, or because the divine nature was dis- 
 played in a state of union with human nature, that sin 
 hath been taken away, perfect righteousness brought in, 
 and everlasting life freely bestowed. The actings, and 
 sufferings, and death, and resurrection from the dead, of 
 the Creator manifest iu flesh, constitute the only adequate 
 channel through which the life of the Creator, (for such 
 eternal life is,) can flow to the creature. Now these glo- 
 rious and all-important truths, it is evident and painful to 
 think, are neither understood nor relished by the Impar- 
 tialists. And, in some respects, this is not to be wondered 
 at. Such false, self-contradictory, and manifestly absurd 
 views of the atonement have been broached at different 
 times by professedly evangelical teachers of the religion 
 of Jesus, as are well calculated to disgust the reflecting 
 mind. But, O how distressing, when, from want of spi- 
 ritual discernment, the truths of God are loathed, put away, 
 and cast overboard, along witli the errors of man. This, 
 I am sorry to say, the Impartialists have done. Because 
 
224 THE SECOND DEATH. 
 
 men calling themselves Theologians have uttered much 
 nonsense respecting the trinity ^ their conclusion has heen, 
 in opposition to the divine testimony, that the nature of 
 Jesus, was not the nature of God manifest in the form of 
 the nature of man. Because God cannot alter in his pur- 
 poses, and because the atonement of Christ is in fulfilment 
 of not in opposition to these purposes, therefore they 
 have concluded, with the same disregard of scripture, that 
 the death of Christ, which according to them was that of a 
 mere man, must be totally destitute of what is commonly 
 understood by atoning efficacy : that is, although they ad- 
 mit his death to be a sort of a channel Wwow^x which God 
 displays his love to man, they have no conceptions of the 
 magnitude of sin as it rested on the head of the pure and 
 spotless Lamb of God ; of the weight of the curse which 
 was borne by him ; of the complete destruction or consump- 
 tion of his flesli and blood nature which the removal of 
 that curse implied ; and, above all, of the fact, that the 
 atonemeut required both the voluntary sacrifice of the na- 
 ture to which guilt attached, and the swallowing up of the 
 guilty nature and the guilt itself in a higher nature of 
 which the person offering the sacrifice was possessed ; acts 
 to which no being short of one endowed with the nature of 
 the Creator was competent. — The views of the Impartial- 
 isls, with regard to the nature of the Lord Jesus and the 
 efficacy of the atonement, are thus awfully erroneous ; but, 
 what is more, they are likewise excessively superficial. 
 This is the natural efi'ect of the way in which they go to 
 work. They reject much that is false ; but, along with 
 that, they reject also a great deal of what is true. Even 
 Walter Balfour, by far the most scriptural in his ideas of 
 these subjects of the whole of the Impartialisls, and one of 
 the lionestest men and professors of religion at the present 
 moment in America, cannot, I fear, be exempted alto- 
 gether from the charges of error and superficiality of views 
 
THE SECOND DEATH. 225 
 
 Avliich I find mjself constrained to bring against the body 
 with which he is connected. 
 
 B. Unless the Messiah had been tlie Creator himself 
 manifest in flesh, how could he, by his own act, have 
 swallowed up sin in righteousness, and death in life ever- 
 lasting ? 
 
 F. What are your views respecting the atonement ? 
 
 T. They have been already given to the public, in the 
 second volume of my Assurance of Faith, from page 100 
 to page 117. But I am perfectly willing, with some little 
 variety and condensation of statement, to repeat them. 
 
 With the American Impartialists I agree entirely in 
 maintaining, that eternal life is to us creatures, in the 
 strictest sense of the term, the gift of God ; and with 
 them, therefore, I agree in rejecting all conditions of sal- 
 vation. I care not v/liat the supposed conditions may be ; 
 whether conditions to be performed by creatures, condi- 
 tions to be fulfilled in them, or conditions to be suffered by 
 them; whether faith, or repentance, or self- denied obe- 
 dience, if these be viewed as acts performed by them : be- 
 cause the very idea oi any condition of eternal life, whether 
 great or small, whether mental or bodily, remaining and 
 requiring to be fulfilled by creatures, is necessarily and 
 irreconcileably at variance with the scripturally-announced 
 fact of the entire unconditionality to them of the blessing. 
 —But because I reject the necessity of conditions of sal- 
 vation being fulfilled by creatures, it does not follow that 
 I reject the necessity of the fulfilment of them by the 
 Creator. Indeed, the very reverse. I perceive, taught 
 by the Spirit speaking in the scriptures, that the very rea- 
 son why eternal life flows freely to me and to the other 
 guilty children of men, is that, by the Creator himself, 
 every condition of it which it is possible to understand, 
 conceive of, or fancy, has been perfectly and gloriously 
 accomplished. The law enjoining complete abstinence 
 
 2 E 
 
226 THE SECOND DEATH. 
 
 from evil; — the law enjoining perfect love to God, and 
 equal love to man ; — the law enjoining the sacrifice of a 
 substantial fleshly nature ; — was addressed, not to a crea- 
 ture, but to the Creator manifest in flesh. This law re- 
 quired to be fulfilled by him ; and upon its fulfilment by 
 him hung suspended the destinies of man. And by him 
 it was fulfilled. When he said, on the cross. It is flnished, 
 he left nothing undone which was necessary in order to 
 the creature's salvation ; nay, he left not the possibility of 
 any thing being done, of any thing being added to his 
 work, with a view to that glorious result. Divine law as 
 such had never issued the command to obey to mere crea- 
 tures ; and, even if it had, being now thoroughly obeyed 
 and thereby brought to an end by the Creator, obedience 
 to it thenceforward on the part of mere creatures had be- 
 come an utter impossibility. Thus, then, all the condi- 
 tions of the creature's becoming a recipient of eternal life, 
 having been fulfilled by the Creator himself; — those con- 
 ditions consisting in, his taking away of sin, by his taking 
 away of the nature which had sinned; his changing and 
 elevating the nature which in us is sinful and dying, by 
 raising it in himself a sinless and immortal nature ; and 
 his freely bestowing upon us, not the nature which 
 Adam originally had, or the nature which he himself pos- 
 sessed while in flesh, but the divine and heavenly nature 
 to which he himself hath thus risen, and of which he is 
 possessed for evermore ; — eternal life, although it came 
 conditionally to him, comes unconditionally to us ; and in 
 the blessings of salvation, as thus flowing unconditionally 
 to us through the fulfilment of all conditions by Christ 
 Jesus, consist the nature, glory, and eflicacy of the atone- 
 ment. 
 
 In connection with the foregoing remarks, and with a 
 view to make myself still better understood, I may state 
 farther, first, that God, through Christ Jesus, does not re- 
 
THE SECOND DEATH. 227 
 
 rait to us any portion of the punishment which he origi- 
 nally denounced against sin ; that is, does not, through 
 Christ, save us from any sufferings which we must other- 
 wise have undergone, a favourite idea of popular religion- 
 ists ; for, if so, his truth and justice would be compromised : 
 but, on the contrary, allowing the original sentence against 
 the one transgression to take full effect, he nevertheless, 
 through the medium of the atonement, bestows blessings 
 upon guilty creatures which, as not coming to them from 
 the first Adam, were not by that transgression forfeited ; 
 and which thus, without any infringement or violation of 
 truth and justice on his part, he is, through his own Son, 
 able because entitled to bestow. — Secondly. The Lord 
 Jesus thus did not, in the popular sense of the phrase, die 
 in our stead j for, if so, we needed not to die ; and, if so, 
 he may live in our stead likewise : but, on the contrary, he 
 died along with us ; by assuming our nature, the original 
 sentence having gone forth against him as well as against 
 us ; by being the Creator, having gone to the very bottom 
 of and exhausted death ; and by rising to the power of an 
 endless life, not living in our stead, as is the necessary an- 
 tithesis of the popular system, but raising us along with him, 
 and givingus to live along with him, for evermore. — Tliirdly 
 and lastly. Although in compliance with popular usage, 
 the constitution of our minds, and the language of scrip- 
 ture as accommodated to that constitution and to our pre- 
 sent situation and circumstances, I have spoken of condi- 
 tions as having required to be fulfilled by the Lord Jesus, 
 I am nevertheless fully aware, that in reality and at bot- 
 tom there is nothing conditional in the whole matter. God, 
 the Creator, is he who prescribes the conditions. The 
 Lord Jesus as one with by possessing the nature of God 
 the Creator, is he who fulfils the conditions. This being 
 the case, the blessing which is the result of the prescribed 
 conditions being fulfilled, comes freely or unconditionally 
 
228 THE SECOND DEATH. 
 
 to US. But if sOj as God is thus the all and In all of the 
 whole matter ; — salvation heiug thus seen to be his, as 
 well in Us plan, as in its execution ; — what is the enjoin- 
 ing of condUions to, and the fjdjilling of them by, the Lord 
 Jesus, but a proclamation to us, in a way suitable to our 
 present capacities, that eternal life is in no respect what- 
 ever the result of creature deservings, but solely and ex- 
 clusively the act and gift of the Creator ? 
 
 F. Have you exhausted your objections to the doc- 
 trines of the Impartialists ? 
 
 T. By no means. With respect to the following subjects, 
 they appear to me to cherish notions which are essentially 
 erroneous : these notions being at variance with views 
 which are presented to us by divine revelation. 1. As to 
 election. The display of the attribute of sovereignty by 
 God, in the selection of the members of his church, for the 
 purpose of knowing his name here and reigning with him 
 hereafter, to tlie exclusion of all others, is stigmatized by 
 them as savouring of partiality and despotism, and re- 
 jected accordingly. They seem not to understand that, 
 all hough every man stands naturally upon the same foot- 
 ing of guilt and depravity, no one being able to substan- 
 tiate a claim to salvation as a matter of right ; yet the 
 same sovereignty which assigns to the various tribes of 
 animals their respective places in the scale of natural crea- 
 tion, — none of these, previous to its formation, having any 
 title whatever to the place which it holds, — may, with- 
 out any impeachment, select from amidst a mass of 
 human beings, all confessedly destitute of any title 
 to the preference, any whom it may please to be the 
 objects of special favour. Sovereignty, no less than jus- 
 tice, is an attribute of the Most High. Justice certainly 
 requires, that, when any intelligent being shall have been 
 summoned into existence, he shall be treated according to 
 his nature. And hence, men, as having sinned, deserve to 
 
THK SECOND DEATH. 229 
 
 (lie; a fate wliicli, therefore, overtakes all. Farther: men, 
 as having- had their nature put upon them ; that is, having 
 been perfectly passive in the reception of the nature which 
 tliej have, or, in the language of the apostle, having been 
 made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him 
 who hath subjected the same ; deserve to be at one time or 
 another, and in one way or another, delivered from the 
 bondage of corruption : and ultimate deliverance is, there- 
 fore, even to the unregenerate portion of the human fa- 
 mily, the result. But this death, and this ultimate deli- 
 verance of the unregenerate, which justice demands, are 
 not inconsistent with, nay, require a display of sover- 
 eignty towards a few of the human race. For, 1st, on 
 the very same principle on which God bestows different 
 natures on different animals, ascending from the very 
 lowest up to man himself, and this without any possibility 
 of impeaching his justice, may he and does he bestow 
 upon some human beings the earnest of the divine nature, 
 a blessing to which none of them can prefer the shadow of 
 a claim or title. In so doing, he is merely advancing the 
 scale of being a step farther. Previously to the conferring 
 of faith upon some, the progress was merely from the in- 
 ferior animal natures, to man's nature as the highest ; but 
 now it is from the highest animal nature, to the divine na- 
 ture. And yet be it observed, that, although in thus be- 
 stowing the knowledge of himself , and thereby an interest 
 in his kingdom, upon some, to the complete and necessary 
 exclusion of the rest, God no doubt acts sovereignly, he 
 nevertheless does not act unjustly ; for, besides that to all 
 the wages of sin is death, God, in delivering the unbe- 
 lieving portion of the family of man ultimately from the 
 grave, satisfies the claims which all confessedly have ac- 
 quired upon his justice, by his having rendered them the 
 passive recipients of the nature which they now possess. 
 And their claims on justice being thus satisfied, what more 
 
230 THE SECOND DEATH. 
 
 would they have ? Is the creature, with every righteous 
 demand answered, to he peimitted to turn on the Creator, 
 and interfere with his sovereignty, by denying his right to 
 bestow on some, privileges to which none have any claim ? 
 But, 2dly, little do the objectors to the exercise of divine 
 sovereignty in the matter of election know, that they are 
 unwittingly opposing that which is one of the glorious and 
 necessary media of a world's salvation. In having mercy ^ 
 upon whom he will have mercy, and hardening whom he 
 will in time, our heavenly Father is actually employing 
 the only means whereby ultimately he can have mercy 
 upon all. The unregenerate portion of the human family 
 possess, we have seen, a claim upon the divine justice to 
 be ultimately delivered from the bondage of corruption. 
 This claim God answers and satisfies. But how ? Why, 
 by bringing some of the human race to know his name 
 here, and reign Avith him in his kingdom hereafter ; by 
 making use of the enmity of the fleshly mind to him, and 
 his treatment of that mind, as important elements in open- 
 ing up to his people that knowledge of his character which 
 is in them life everlasting; Rom: ix. 17, 18; and by 
 rendering their present knowledge of him, the means of 
 ultimately communicating that knowledge to, and thereby 
 rescuing from their present state of degradation and bond- 
 age, an unbelieving world. The earnest expectation of 
 the creature, or unregenerate men, waiteth for the mani^ 
 festation of the sons of God. Rom. viii. 19. Thus, then, 
 is the divine sovereignty, which is such a bugbear to the 
 mere fleshly mind, exercised, not in opposition to, but in 
 the strictest consistency with, divine justice, as well as in 
 subserviency to the purposes of divine wisdom and love ; 
 seeing that is through the conferring of the knowledge of 
 himself upon the members of his church here, and the as- 
 signing to them a kingdom with his Son hereafter, that 
 the designs of his love with regard to the rest of the fa- 
 
THE SECOND DEATH. 231 
 
 milv of man are carried into effect. John iii. 14 — 17; 
 Rom- viii. 17 — 21. 
 
 2. The Impartialists, in rejecting the doctrines of the 
 immortality of soul, and the existence of mere human na~ 
 iure as such in an intermediate state, — in doing which, I 
 am perfectly at one with them, — have rejected along with 
 them the idea of there being any existence at all to any 
 between death and the final resurrection : maintaining, 
 that the whole of mankind, without any exception, and 
 without any distinction of believers and unbelievers, after 
 slumbering in their graves until time shall be no more, 
 are at once, and upon one and the same footing, raised to 
 the enjoyment of everlasting life, at the period and by 
 means of Christ's second coming. This they do, over- 
 looking or not understanding the facts, that, according 
 to scripture, there are two resurrections, one of the just 
 and another of the unjust ; that those who as believers 
 are partakers of the first resurrection, and this, by becom- 
 ing possessed through faith of the earnest of spirit or di- 
 vine mind, never die, or have in them a principle of im- 
 mortality which ensures their continued and everlasting 
 existence ; and that this class of mankind, by being born 
 again, having Christ's nature in them and enjoying the 
 privilege of being kings and priests with him, sit down 
 with their head upon his throne hereafter, and with him 
 concur and co-operate in the subjugation of the rest of the 
 human family. Such honour have all the saints. Psalm 
 cxlix. 9. — Painful is it for me to think that, notwithstand- 
 ing the many valuable and important discoveries in the 
 sacred volume which the Impartialists have made, they 
 should never have seen that in believers is realized the 
 anti-type of the case of the Jews of old. How plain to 
 those who have received any tolerable measure of divine 
 illumination, that, as the people of Israel were selected 
 sovereignly from among the other nations of the earth, 
 that they might enjoy the earthly Canaan and many other 
 
232 THE SECOND DEATH. 
 
 valuable temporal privileges, and, above all, that through 
 them the knowledge of God miglit ultimately reach the 
 Gentile world ; so have the members of the true Israel 
 been selected sovereignly from among the rest of the hu- 
 man race, that they miglit be elevated to his throne in the 
 heavenly Canaan with their head, might enjoy with him 
 many peculiar spiritual privileges, and, above all, that 
 with him they might achieve the ultimate manifestation of 
 the character of God to a now ignorant and unbelieving 
 world. 
 
 3. In regard to what is implied in the Icnowledfje of the 
 f/ospel, or the nature of faith, Impartialists also mistake. 
 They admit that faith is a resurrection ; but such an one 
 as takes effect only in, and is confined to, this present 
 world. " It is," according to them, " a moral resurrec- 
 tion J and to the acquisition of it, as possessing powers 
 fully adequate to the effort, human beings may be ex- 
 horted." Now every one of these views stands opposed 
 to the language and doctrines of inspiration. Instead of 
 their being true, 1st, faith is never the result of efforts put 
 forth by man ; but is the free gift of God to those who are 
 the objects of his sovereign electing love : the possession 
 of it being, not of him that willeth, nor of him that run- 
 neth, hut of God that sheweth mercy. Rom: ix. 16. — 
 2dly. Faith is not a moral, but a spiritual, resurrection : 
 that is, it consists not in any improvement or elevation of 
 the principles of human nature ; but in the imparting to 
 tlie individual of the earnest of spirit, or the divine nature. 
 — And 3dly, the nature imparted in faith is not a princi- 
 ple v.'hich is confined in its existence to this present world : 
 but, as the earnest of the divine nature,* survives the 
 stroke of death jf being the means of the introduction of 
 him who is possessed of it into the kingdom and imme- 
 diate presence of Christ and of God. J 
 
 * 2 Corinth : V. 1—5. f John li. 25, 26. + Jehn iii. 5, 5. Phil. i. 21— 23. 
 
THE SECOND DEATH. 233 
 
 Many other objections to the Impartialist system occur 
 to me. But I think they may all be comprised in this: 
 — that Impartialists, as they style themselves, have not, as 
 a body, a due conviction of the weakness and worthless- 
 ness of human nature ; of the condemnation, destruction, 
 and swallowing up, of that nature which took place in the 
 cross of Christ ; of the nature which Christ confers on his 
 church, and through its members on the rest of the world, 
 being, not an improved human nature, but his own pre- 
 sent, glorious, divine nature ; and of the whole scheme of 
 salvation as originating in, and as being carried into effect 
 by, free sovereign grace. Independently of the facts of 
 their associating too much with the infidel and Unitarian 
 classes of the community, and of their ascribing to human 
 nature a susceptibility of advancement and improvement 
 which is in express contradiction to the language of scrip- 
 ture, their dislike of the glorious doctrine of election of it- 
 self would suggest to me some notion of human merit as 
 lurking in their minds. Where all are equally guilty and 
 undeserving, why, if this were believed, object to God 
 doing what he will with his own ? — I l-now the truth of the 
 doctrine of Universal Salvation. It is not with me a mere 
 opinion^ but a matter of faith. But the footsteps of the 
 special love of God to some, as subsidiary to and as ter- 
 minating in the exhibition of his character as love to all^ 
 are so clearly imprinted on every page of Revelation, 
 that, except under the influence of notions of creature 
 worthiness, and from ignorance of the nature and func- 
 tions of divine sovereignty, it is impossible for any one to 
 overlook them. God saves all : not because any human 
 beings in themselves deserve to be saved; but because it 
 is his good pleasure, with a view to the complete mani- 
 festation of his character through his well-beloved Son, 
 that all shall be saved. 
 
 2 F 
 
234 THE SECOND DEATH. 
 
 B. Mistaken as the Impartialists may be, you have no 
 inclination surely to side with the Restorationists ? 
 
 T. Why should I ? It is to the erroneous notions, and 
 manifest incongruities, originally broached and still main- 
 tained by them, that the blunders of the Impartialists are 
 in no small degree to be traced. — Restorationists have 
 represented limited torments hereafter as necessary to 
 the completeness of salvation : thereby disparaging the 
 finished work of Christ; introducing a species of purgatory; 
 negativing the freeness of the gift of eternal life; confound- 
 ing sotd with spirit, by ascribing immortality to soul or 
 mere creature principle ; and, although admitting that 
 liuman nature itself is to be destroyed at death, never- 
 theless supposing that actions which spring from that na- 
 ture may extend their influence beyond the precincts of 
 this present world. They, or at all events the Winches- 
 terians by far the larger portion of them, have, still further, 
 made the electing love of God to some, to proceed on the 
 principle of some excellence of character attained to by 
 them, or created in them; those about whom there is 
 something good, escaping the torments hereafter which 
 are supposed to be reserved in store for the rest : and all 
 this, although scripture shews, that His not by works of 
 righteousness which they have done, hut solely according to 
 his mercy that he renders the members of his church par- 
 takers of a peculiar salvation. Titus iii. 5. — No, no, ray 
 good friends : a system like that of the Restorationists will 
 not do for me. It tallies not with the inspired declarations 
 of scripture. If the peculiar salvation of the church 
 spring, not from divine sovereignty alone and exclusively, 
 but from some superiority as human beings possessed by 
 those who are saved over others ; then say I, with the Im- 
 partialists, "away with such a peculiar salvation.'' Tend- 
 inyr as it does to exalt the creature in himself, and to throw 
 into the back-ground that righteousness of the Creator 
 
THE SECOND DEATH. 235 
 
 manifest in flesh, in which alone the regenerate stand, and 
 know themselves to stand, perfect and accepted before Je- 
 hovah, it positively stinks in my nostrils. It is merely one 
 species of low, rank, disgusting Pelagianism. 
 
 F. Passing by the mistakes of these different Ameri- 
 can sects, I want to hear something of your own views 
 concerning other topics. 
 
 T. Before quitting our present subject, allow me to 
 remark, that never did the defects of the system of Im- 
 partialism strike me so forcibly, as when perusing the 
 written controversy, can'ied on in the year 1834, between 
 Dr. Ezra Stiles Ely, a professedly Calvinistic pastor, and 
 Mr. Abel C. Thomas, a Universalist minister, both then 
 residing in Philadelphia.^* Ely's views, like those of 
 many others claiming to be enrolled among the followers 
 of Calvin, are in scarcely any one respect to be preferred to 
 open and undisguised Arminianism. Thomas evinces ta- 
 lents of a very high order ; and, in a manner the most 
 courteous and creditable to himself, brings out the senti- 
 ments of his peculiar class.f But he was sadly hampered 
 by his system. While Ely, in a style of cool and easy 
 impudence, is threatening his antagonist >vith hell and 
 damnation ; Thomas, with much suavity of manner, is con- 
 tinually assuring Ely, that he (Ely) at all events need 
 fear nothing, seeing that, notwithstanding all his opposi- 
 tion to what he (Thomas) deemed to be truth, they should 
 both meet together upon exactly one and the same foot- 
 ing hereafter. Were it not for the nature of the subject. 
 
 * The entire title of the work is, "A Discussion of the conjoint question, Is the 
 doctrine of endless punishment taught in the bible ? or, does the bible teach the 
 doctrine of the final holiness and happiness of all mankind ? In a series of letters 
 between Ezra Stiles Ely, D.D. Pastor of the third Presbyterian Church, Philadel- 
 phia, and Abel C. Thomas, Pastor of the first Universalist Church, Philadelphia. — 
 New-York : published by P. Price, No. 2, Chatham square. Stereotyped by J. S. 
 Redfield. lb'3o." 
 
 f The Iiiiparlialisfs. 
 
23(5 'JHE SECOND DEATH. 
 
 tlie constant reciprocation of such compliments by both 
 parties would be inexpressibly amusing. Now, thus to 
 smooth over matters, is not the way for a Universalist who 
 knows tlie gospel, to deal with one of these free-salvation- 
 hating Pelagians. While it is a fact, and not, therefore, 
 when necessary to be concealed, that through Christ ulti- 
 mately all things shall be made new, Rev : xxi. 5, and, of 
 course, the unregenerate portion of mankind among the 
 rest ', it is also a fact, that with this subject the unregene- 
 rate as such have nothing whatever to do : seeing that of 
 it, no more than of any other divine subject, can they 
 form the slightest conception ; and that, consequently, un- 
 til the gospel be believed in by them, to discuss such a 
 topic with them, is to be guilty of casting pearls before 
 swine. Matthew vii. 6. When haters of the gospel like 
 Dr. Ely, wish to treat of the ultimate salvation of all 
 mankind, those who know and love the truth must res- 
 pectfully, but firmly, decline entering into controversy 
 with them on the subject. But, if they will push it ; and if, 
 like Dr. Ely, they will try, in the spiteful and tyrannical 
 spirit of human nature, to intimidate their opponents; they 
 must have a civil and courteous hint given to them, that 
 as, by their own admissions, they shew themselves not to 
 be born again, they must, if they live and die in their pre- 
 sent natural state, be content to be for ever excluded from 
 the kingdom of Christ and of God. In other Avords, those 
 who are so fond of dealing out eternal damnation to others 
 — whose very language smells of the fire and brimstone 
 of the bottomless pit — must have it gently suggested to 
 them, when they assume apostolic* airs and seat them- 
 selves upon their high horse, that, as ignorant of the love 
 of God to themselves personally, the only principle of the 
 divine nature in the consciences of believers, they shew 
 
 * Apostolic ! Query. Should I not rather have said Satanic ? 
 
THE SECOND DEATH. 237 
 
 themselves to be at the present moment the fitting subjects 
 of eternal punishment. Such persons must not, by any 
 neglect on our part, be allowed to run away with the con- 
 viction, that we confound the fate of the family of Christ, 
 with the fate of the rest of the world. — Now, my dear sir, 
 for your questions. 
 
 F. How do you reconcile your system with the lan- 
 guage of scripture concerning a general judgment ? 
 
 T. Rather say, with what other system than that 
 which I propound and advocate can the doctrine of a gen- 
 eral judgment be reconciled ? — Two principles are pre- 
 sented to us as now existing, and as now engaged in eager 
 and deadly conflict. Human nature or the nature of 
 Adam, as a principle of sin, stands opposed to the divine 
 nature or the nature of Christ, as a principle of righteous- 
 ness. Since the transgression of Adam and the issuing 
 of the first promise, until now, these two principles have 
 been exhibited in a state of rancorous and incessant war- 
 fare ', and in this state of mutual collision they are destin- 
 ed to continue till the end of time. Thejiesh, or human 
 nature, liisteth against the Spirit, or the divine nature ; and 
 the Spirit, against thejiesh : and these are contrary the one 
 to the other ; so that believers cannot do the things that 
 they would. Galatians v. 17. But this conflict shall not 
 last always. God is the judge. From the highest heavens 
 he beholds, regulates, and overrules all. A sentence con- 
 demning flesh and in favour of Spirit, he hath already 
 given forth ; that sentence he hath already so far carried 
 into effect in the death and resurrection of his well-beloved 
 Son, and in the communication of the earnest of Spirit or 
 eternal life to the hearts and consciences of his Son's peo- 
 ple ; and he hath assured us, that that sentence shall be 
 fully and finally executed in such a way as shall prove sa- 
 tisfactory to alL Rom: iii. 19. Rom: viii. 19. 2 Thes- 
 
238 THE SECO.XD DEATH. 
 
 sal : i. 10.* This shall take place at the period of the 
 second resurrection ; or of the raising up of those who now 
 perish in an unregenerate state. Then shall the grand 
 and long-subsisting controversy between flesh and Spirit, 
 between sin and righteousness, be definitively settled. 
 Flesh and sin, which had been previously condemned in 
 the death of Adam, in the sacrifice of Christ, and in the 
 sweeping away of the whole human race with the earth 
 upon which they tread, — shall then be condemned for the 
 last time and for ever in the complete absorption of the 
 fleshly and sinful nature, and of those who on earth were 
 possessed of that nature, in Spirit or the nature of Christ. 
 And Spirit and righteousness, which, as appearing in the 
 faith of the Old Testament church, in the person and char- 
 acter of Christ, and in the New Testament saints as en- 
 dowed with Christ's nature and elevated to his throne, had 
 in every preceding sera been the objects of divine com- 
 placency, — shall then receive sentence of final and com- 
 plete approbation, by being exhibited in their most tri- 
 umphant form, as the sole, the dominant, and, because 
 divine, the all-absorbing and self-conforming principles 
 throughout eternity. This period of the second resurrec- 
 tion, is the day; and this swallowing up of sin and death 
 in victory, that is, in righteousness and life everlasting, is 
 the manner ; in which God ivill finally judge or condemn 
 the world, by that man whom he hath ordained even Jesus 
 Christ. Acts xvii. 31. It will be a day, for it will take 
 place at the appointed sera ; a day of judgment, for sin 
 and sinners shall then be finally condemned, and right- 
 eousness and the righteous then finally approved of; and 
 a day of general judgment, for all without exception shall 
 be concerned in it. But, what is still more delightful, and 
 still more indicative of divine power, it shall be a day of 
 
 * Then every mouth shall be stopped. 
 
THE SECOND DEATH. 239 
 
 satisfactory judgment. God through his saints will not be 
 blasphemed, hut glorified ; God through them that believe 
 will not be contemned and hated, but admired in that day. 
 2 Thess : i. 10. Although God as a consuming fire sheiil 
 then appear, visiting with condign punishment and talcing 
 vengeance on them that knew not God, and that obeyed not 
 the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, and thus com- 
 pletely and everlastingly swallowing up them and their 
 fleshly and sinful nature in himself; yet he shall then ap- 
 pear also thereby making them new. Jesus, as he who 
 dwell in the bush, burning but not consuming it, shall then 
 appear dwelling in the whole human family ; whose sinful 
 and fleshly nature he burned, when he offered up himself 
 a holocaust on Mount Calvary ; but vvhom he did not 
 consume, seeing that in himself he made them new, or re- 
 produced them as possessors of the divine nature, by his 
 resurrection from the dead. It is in consequence of this 
 change, or reproduction, of all human beings in himself as 
 their heavenly Father, that the general judgment shall be 
 to all perfectly satisfactory. Millions of intelligent beings 
 are not to be left for ever weltering in flames of fire, 
 gnawing their tongues for pain, and heaping curses on 
 the Being who gave them existence, dissatisfied with their 
 fate, and incapable of regarding God in any other light 
 than that of a gloomy and revengeful despot ; as is awfully 
 and blasphemously supposed by the abettors of the popu- 
 lar creed. No : blessed be the revealed name of Jehovah; 
 he is not an impotent being. He does not weakly, like 
 the imaginary god of the Manichees, and like the god of 
 systems mis-called Christian which have adopted the Ma- 
 nichean doctrine as their basis, after having allowed evil 
 to enter into the universe, rest contented to struggle with 
 it throughout eternity, unable to overcome and destroy it. 
 — So far from this, his scriptural character is, that he is 
 the destroyer, because he is the hater, of sin and the other 
 
240 THE SROOND DEATH. 
 
 works of the devil. In the cross of Christ, he exhibits to 
 us who believe sin taken away. In the resurrection of 
 Christ, he exhibits to us sin and all its effects swallowed up 
 in the divine nature of our Lord. And this, through com- 
 municating to us by faith the earnest of the very principle 
 from which the destruction and absorption of sin have pro- 
 ceeded. And, at the period of the general judgment, 
 when all nations are convened before him, it is not to be- 
 hold sin confirmed for ever in the case of any ; — a result 
 which would imply the imperfection of Christ's work, the 
 existence of indisposition or inability or both on his part 
 to destroy evil, and above all the necessary and everlasting 
 dissatisfaction of a large portion of intelligent beings with 
 his procedure; — but it is, tliat the destruction of sin through 
 Christ, which he hath already upon earth exhibited to the 
 members of the church, may then be exhibited to all, by 
 the resurrection of those who had lived and died on earth 
 possessed only by a sinful nature, in a new and sinless 
 nature, through the manifestation to them of Christ and 
 the other sons of God : Rom: viii. 19: — this very resur- 
 rection of those who continue during their natural lifetime 
 unregenerate, being at one and the same moment con- 
 demnatory cf their former sinful nature and state, which 
 it swallows up ; an approval of the divine nature and cha- 
 racter of Christ Jesus, which as alone fitted to live for 
 ever it communicates ; and satisfactory to themselves, as 
 then possessed of a nature which, while it condemns their 
 former state of ignorance and opposition to God, is, by the 
 present enjoyment of which it is necessarily productive, 
 the means of enabling and constraining them to under- 
 stand, appreciate, and relish the whole. 
 
 F. This destruction of evil in the case of those who 
 now live and die unregenerate, and this making of them 
 new ultimately through Christ Jesus, is what, I presume, 
 you conceive to be the revenge taken on wickedness and 
 the wicked by the divine mind ? 
 
THE SKCOND DEATH. 2-11 
 
 T. Yes ; and a truly divine revenge it is. To return 
 evil for evil, would be but a vulgar and human piece of 
 procedure- It is what any creature can do. Indeed, 
 such revenge is characteristic merely of the weakness and 
 malignity of the creature mind. Suppose God to restore 
 to the wicked in a future state their present wicked na- 
 ture, and then to torment them eternally, as popular sys- 
 tems represent him to do, what is it but to degrade him to 
 a level with ordinary human beings ? With ordinary hu- 
 man beings, did I say ? Let me correct myself. Such 
 a supposition is to degrade him to a level with the vilest 
 and most loathsome of the race : for, steeped in hateful- 
 ness of the blackest die must man's mind be, which can 
 take delight in the infliction of severe and protracted suf- 
 ferings upon his fellow men. What ! Suppose the infi- 
 nite Jehovah, whose name is Love, endowed with the 
 concentrated malice and revenge of a Spanish Inquisitor ! 
 — No. We have not so learned Christ. We believe, and 
 triumph in the fact, that he will take vengeance on the 
 wicked. Vengeance helongeth unto him ; and he v.ill ex- 
 ercise it. But his revenge is, like himself, divine. He 
 will not, it is true, admit human nature, or human wisdom, 
 or human virtue, or any thing that is human, into heaven. 
 And the reason is, that, in regard to all that is human, 
 Adamic, or creaturely, he is a consuming fire. Hebrews 
 xii. idt. Christ was the great burnt-offering, in which 
 his own substantial flesh and blood nature, and human 
 nature as contained and involved in it, was, as a holocaust, 
 entirely and without reserve offered up to God. But if he 
 saves not human nature as such, he does what is far better. 
 If, in the cross of Christ, he heaped coals of fire upon it, 
 even burning coals of juniper,* and consumed it, — it was 
 that. Phoenix-like, a more glorious nature might spring 
 
 * I'salm cxx. 4. 
 
 2 G 
 
242 Till"] SECOND DEATH. 
 
 from its ashes. For, in the resurrection of Christ, he 
 she^vs himself, not overcome hj evil, as in the exercise of 
 ordinary revenge men are ; hut overcoming evil with good, 
 bj tlie conversion of enemies into friends : his revenge 
 being a species of spiritual alchymy, by which the basest 
 are transmuted into the most glorious materials. — This 
 spirit of divine revenge, is likewise the spirit of his church. 
 Its members have caught it from their head. As in him, 
 so in tliem, it is the exhibition and exercise of love. It 
 points to, it tends towards, it delights itself in, the destruc- 
 tion of the nature which is enmity against God. And at 
 last, incapable of any farther or longer restraint, it flames 
 forth in all its light, heat, and intensity, carrying before it 
 the entire consumption or destruction of all that is crea- 
 turely : but, in the very act of destroying the creaturely 
 nature and all its consequences, giving a new form, and a 
 heavenly creation, to those upon whom the revenge is 
 taken ; and this, by raising them to the evei'lasting know- 
 ledge and enjoyment with themselves of him whose na- 
 ture is love. 
 
 B. Glorious and truly God-like is this revenge, my 
 dear brother. 
 
 T. It is, Robert. We who believe the truth are now 
 necessarily either hated, or despised, or both, by a world 
 that lieth in wickedness. We complain not of this usage. 
 Nay, we have no right to complain of it. The world 
 poured obloquy and contempt on our head : and why 
 should not we be prepared for similar treatment at its 
 hands ? The world knoweth us not, because it knew him 
 7wt. 1 John iii. 1. Our business is to see, that there is 
 not excited in us thereby a feeling of unkindness and 
 fleshly resentment. For such, whenever it obtrudes itself, 
 is merely a result of our Adamic nature : and the wrath 
 of man, we know, worketh not the righteousness of God. 
 Delightful it is for us to believe, on divine authority, that 
 
THE SECOND DEATH. 243 
 
 the day of our revenge approaches. But still more de- 
 lightful to think, that our revenge shall consist, not in 
 vulgarly retaliating upon others evil for the evil which they 
 have done to us ; but in co-operating with our divine 
 head in the ultimate deliverance of these enemies of him- 
 self and us from the bondage of corruption, and their in- 
 troduction into the glorious liberty of the sons of God. 
 Rom : viii. 21. Perishing in unbelief, it is true that such 
 persons never can reign with Christ : from his kingdom, 
 they being completely and irremediably excluded. But, O ! 
 sweet consideration ! if thev cannot reigrn, at all events 
 they can be reigned over. They can be subdued to Christ ; 
 and we, as reigning with our head, can contribute towards 
 their subjugation. We can lend our aid in heaping the 
 coals of divine love upon their heads. This, this, shall be 
 our revenge. 
 
 F. You have alluded to two resurrections. By these, 
 your previous statements lead me to understand, first, a 
 resurrection of the church, or Clu'ist's peculiar people ; 
 and, secondly, a resurrection of the rest of the human fa- 
 mily. Christ, I remember, in the gospel according to 
 Luke, speaks of a resurrection of the just, which he dis- 
 tinguishes from that of the others, and which he represents 
 as the period until which the enjoyment of their peculiar 
 privileges by believers is postponed. Luke xiv. 14. 
 
 T. That there are two resurrections, is a doctrine, not 
 of one passage merely, but of the whole strain and current 
 of scripture. Of these resurrections, the resurrection of 
 the members of the church takes place, as to its first be- 
 ginnings in their consciences, in time ; and it is perfected 
 both as to mind and body at the period of Christ's second 
 coming. The Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the 
 dead dwelling in them ; he that raised up Christ from the 
 dead also in due time quickens their mortal bodies, by his 
 Spirit that dwelleth in them. Rom: viii. 11. As par- 
 
244 THE SECOND DEATH. 
 
 takers of tliis first resurrection, believers never die. On 
 the contrary, they enter with Christ into his kingclora, and 
 occupy the throne with him during the period of his mil- 
 lennium or thousand years reign. — The second resurrec- 
 tion, or that of the unregenerate, takes place at the close 
 of the thousand years reign, or of the intermediate state ; 
 during the whole of which those who are the subjects of it 
 have no manifested existence. The rest of the dead lived 
 not again, until the thousand years were finished. Rev : 
 XX. 5 — These two resurrections imply, not a res^ora/Zow to 
 life ; — for there is no restoration of Adam's life either to 
 saint or sinner ; — but the bestowing of life from above, at 
 one period or another, upon the whole of the human 
 family. 
 
 F. You hold, then, that there is no intermediate state 
 of existence, except for the regenerate. 
 
 T. Certainly. The regenerate alone are saved; while 
 the unregenerate perish. That is, upon the elect or peo- 
 ple of Christ alone is bestowed that knowledge of God, in 
 consequence of which human nature in them, even while 
 existing as such, by having a principle of immortality im- 
 parted to it, or rather by the natural conscience being 
 swallowed up in faith, the earnest of the divine nature, is 
 in a certain sense preserved from perishing. / am the 
 resurrection and the life : he that believeth in me, though 
 he were dead, yet shall he live ; and whosoever liveth, and 
 believeth in me, shall never die. John xi. 25, 26. This 
 is life eternal, that they might know thee, the only true God, 
 and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent. Ibid : xvii. 3. — 
 The consciences of others, remaining destitute of faith or 
 the earnest of the divine nature, have in them no present 
 principle of immortality ; and, consequently, such persons 
 cannot, after death, have any distinct existence, until made 
 new at the period of the second resurrection. This second 
 resurrection is, no doubt, even to the unregenerate, salva- 
 
THE SECOND DEATIf. 245 
 
 tion in one sense ; for it is the ultimate rescuing of them, 
 the suhjects of mortality and corruption, from the gloomy 
 domains of death : but it is not that salvation which con- 
 sists in being preserved from dying ; a salvation which is 
 only the portion of those to whom is imparted by faith, 
 while they are in flesh, the earnest of the divine nature, 
 and to whom thereby is conceded the privilege of being 
 partakers of the first resurrection. 
 
 F. What is the second death P 
 
 T. May I ask you to inform me, previous to my an- 
 swering your question, what you understand by the first 
 death P 
 
 F. I cannot conceive of it as any thing else than the 
 import of the sentence originally pronounced upon Adam, 
 and in him upon all his posterity. Dust thou art, and to 
 dust thou shalt return. 
 
 T. So far good. Have you ever observed the rela- 
 tive positions, in scripture itself, which the first and second 
 deaths occupy ? 
 
 F. I do not exactly understand you. The fact is, that 
 I am rather dull of apprehension in these matters. 
 
 T. Is not the first death spoken of in the book of Ge- 
 nesis, the first book of the Old Testament scriptures ; and 
 the second death, in so far at least as the phraseology is 
 concerned, in the book of Revelation, the concluding por- 
 tion of the New Testament scriptures ? And does not 
 this relative position of the two deaths, the one at the com- 
 mencement, and the other at the end, of the volume of di- 
 vine inspiration, seem to intimate, that tJie one death has 
 some sort of connection witli tlie beginning, and tJie other 
 with the consummation, of that glorious scheme which it is 
 the purpose of God by means of his word to reveal ? 
 
 F. Ihis never struck me before. Now that you 
 mention the thing, however, I cannot help noticing it. 
 
 T. The best way of ascertaining what the second death 
 
2i6 THE SECOND DEATH. 
 
 is, will be to compare together, and with other portions 
 of the sacred volume, the only four passages in the book of 
 Revelation, indeed, in scripture, where the phrase occurs. 
 'Jliese are ii. 11 ; xx. 6 ; Ibid : xiv. ; and xxi. 8. — Tak- 
 ing the two former of these passages together, it appears, 
 that the second death is sometliing by which injury may 
 be inflicted, ii. 11; but which over those who are par- 
 takers of the first resurrection, and reign with Christ dur- 
 ing the thousand years, that is, over those who overcome 
 by faith, hath no power, xx. 6. And then, looking to 
 the two latter passages, we find them conjoined with 
 figurative language which indicates, not as is commonly 
 imagined continued torment, but complete and irreme- 
 diable destruction, l^he casting of death and hades into 
 the lake of fire, which, if a mass of fire in which something 
 else may be engulphed have any meaning at all, must 
 signify the destruction of death and hades, is declared to 
 be the second death ; xx. 14 ; and individuals possessed of 
 the principles of human nature merely, as is indicated by 
 the works of the flesh which are ascribed to them, (see 
 Gal : V. 19, &c.) are also declared to be subjected to the 
 second death, or to the same destruction to which death 
 and hades had already been consigned, xxi. 8. — The im- 
 port of the whole, it strikes me, is, that human beings 
 wdio live and die possessing merely a creature nature, in 
 consequence of having nothing higher, are subjected to 
 two deaths. First. To the death which Adam and his 
 posterity, as possessors of the nature which transgressed 
 the original divine proliibition, undergo : a death which 
 consists in the forfeiture by all of them of the original pa- 
 radisaical life, and in their all returning to the dust from 
 which they were taJcen. Secondly. To the death which 
 the Jews as a nation, and which all unregenerate human 
 beings, as possessors of the nature which in them resisted 
 the divine command to believe on Jesus of Nazareth as 
 
THE SECOND DFIATH. 247 
 
 the Messiah, and consequently as inheritors of their spirit, 
 incurred and undergo : a deatli which consists in complete 
 and everlasting exclusion from Christ's kingdom ; or, in 
 the awfully emphatic language of one portion of holy writ, 
 in everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, 
 and from the ylory of his power. 2 Thessal : i. 9. Lan- 
 guage which, although at first sight apparently inconsist- 
 ent with the salvation of the unregenerate in any sense, 
 becomes plain and intelligible when we are led to see, 
 that of Jesus, as Lord and Christ, the unregenerate never 
 know any thing ; that in these glorious characters they 
 never behold him ; and that the second death to them con- 
 sists in their being as unholy, because unre/jenerate, ever- 
 lastingly excluded from the presence of the reigning 
 Messiah: Hebrews xii. 14: their ultimate salvation aris- 
 ing, not from their introduction into Christ's kingdom, or 
 from the manifestation of him to them as Lord and Christ, 
 but from that very state of exclusion itself which they are 
 made to undergo, and by which as the second death they 
 are punished, being cast into the lake of fire, and Jesus 
 being thereby manifested to them in his highest and most 
 glorious character as the all and in all. 1 Corintli : xv. 
 28. Rev : xxi. 5. 
 
 B. To meet your views of the language of scripture 
 respecting this matter, it must be impossible for believers 
 to sustain any injury from the second death. Rev : ii. 11. 
 T. And no injury from it is sustained by them. They 
 are subjected only to the first death ; or to that death of 
 the body and fleshly mind, which Adam and all his pos- 
 terity in him, by the original transgression incurred and 
 undergo. But even i\\\^ first death believers are subjected 
 to after a fashion peculiar to themselves. Prepare your- 
 selves for something which may at first startle you, and 
 appear to be incredible, but which is nevertheless true : — 
 believers actually die after the manner of Enoch and 
 
248 THE SFCONO DRATII. 
 
 Elijah. They are raised from the dead, and thereby made 
 spiritually alive as to their consciences, even while they 
 are dwellers in flesh. Eph : ii. 1 — 6. They do not die 
 first and live afterwards, as is the case with the rest of the 
 human race ; or as those who are subjected to the second 
 death do. But they live first, and, through living, die ; 
 or, in other words, in the very act of making them spi- 
 riiually alive, or rendering them partakers of the first re- 
 surrection, by imparting to them while in flesh the earnest 
 of his own divine nature, Jesus is pleased to inflict upon 
 their consciences the sentence of death originally denounced 
 against Adam and all his posterity. That is, the present 
 communication to them of the principle of spiritual life, is 
 the swalloiving up in itself of natural conscience, and 
 thereby the death, because the hilling of it. What a 
 glorious and blessed euthanasia ! — Sentence of death had 
 gone forth against the whole human family. That sen- 
 tence of course behoved to be executed. And yet, not 
 necessarily upon all in one and the same way. For it 
 appears that there are two perfectly distinct modes of in- 
 flicting it. Men may be allowed, as ordinarily happens, 
 to live and die ignorant of Christ, and thereby destitute of 
 spirituality : in whicli case as tliey perish, losing at death 
 the only principles of which while upon earth they were 
 possessed, they are necessarily shut out of Christ's king- 
 dom; or, in addition to the first, are subjected also to the 
 second death. But upon men, while naturally alive al- 
 though dead as to their consciences through Adam's one 
 transgression, God may, as happens in the case of liis 
 church, bestow the knowledge of himself, or that principle 
 of spirituality or the divine nature, which, in the very act 
 of malcing alive, also hills, as being necessarily the swal- 
 lorving up of natural principles in supernatural ones ; and 
 which, from the very nature and mode of its infliction, as 
 being to the individuals the present swallowing up of' 
 
THE SECOND DEATH. 249 
 
 dcalh in viclory, or the present introduction into Christ's 
 kingdom, renders it a matter of absolute impossibility that 
 the second death, or future exclusion from that kingdom, 
 slionld be undergone by them. The former, or the incur- 
 ring botli of the first and the second deaths, is the fate of 
 the unregenerate. The latter, or the having of the first 
 death inflicted through the medium of having conferred 
 on tliem the earnest of life everlasting, — which, by its pre- 
 sent swallowing up in them of human in the divine nature, 
 leaves nothing for the second death to prey on, — is the fate 
 of the regenerate. Thus both classes undergo the first 
 death. But after totally different fashions. For, while 
 the world in general live, througli the medium of dying 
 twice; believers die once, in the very act of being 
 made alive spiritually at once and for ever. Thus upon 
 them the original sentence of death is inflicted, by the 
 very fact of conferring upon them life everlasting. In their 
 consciences, as in an epitome or abstract, there is realized 
 in time, what shall take place ultimately upon a larger 
 scale in the case of the rest. They become by faith as to 
 their consciences nerv creatures, or a new creation : old 
 things as to them passing away, and all things as to them 
 becoming new. 2 Corinth: v. 17. The resurrection of 
 Christ, manifested to them by faith, becomes their resur- 
 rection. His mind, their mind ; his righteousness, their 
 righteousness ; and his life, their life. It is thencefor- 
 forward not they who live j but he who liveth in them. 
 Galatians ii. 20. Their Adamic nature is destroyed, as 
 well as that of others. But it is not destroyed as that na- 
 sure is in others. — Mankind in general have but one na- 
 ture upon earth, with which they part at death ; and they 
 must wait till the second resurrection before they can be 
 invested with another. Before attaining to it, they must 
 pass througli the gloomy vale of the second death. As 
 human beings, they necessarily perish. See John iii. 14 — 
 
 2 H 
 
250 THE SECOND DEATH. 
 
 16, And to them, there is no life again, until the voice, 
 the omnific voice, of Christ shall pierce the regions of the 
 grave ; and summon them forth to a state of existence 
 whicli, although it consists in their being made new as a 
 portion of the all things, is nevertheless, as to their former 
 state, a resurrection of damnation. John v. 29. Rev : 
 XX. 5. See also Daniel xii. 2. — Believers, however, even 
 while possessed of this transient earthly life, are made 
 partakers of the earnest of one which is heavenly and 
 everlasting. They require not, like the rest of their fel- 
 low men, to part with one state before being introduced 
 into another. They require not to perish, before being 
 raised up to live again. On the contrary, they are by 
 faith, even while on earth, made to possess a principle 
 which is in them the substance of things hoped for, the evi- 
 dence of things not seen. Hebrews xi. 1. This is in them 
 the realization of the earnest of life everlasting. John xi. 
 25, 26. xvii. 3. A very singular and interesting cir- 
 cumstance is connected with this state of things, namely, 
 that the human nature of believers, if in one sense de- 
 stroyed, as it unquestionably is, by being swallowed up as 
 to their consciences in the divine nature of Christ ; yet in 
 another sense does not perish, as being immortalized dur- 
 ing the subsistence of their earthly lives. John iii. 14- — 
 16. xi. 25, 26. Hence it is, that, as even now raised 
 with Christ, — as even now partakers vrith him in his 
 resurrection, — as even now seated in heavenly places 
 with him, — believers are even already spiritually alive \ 
 and, being so, are of course alive for evermore. Natural 
 death merely affords to them the opportunity of having 
 their whole persons conformed to the model or likeness of 
 their glorified head. 2 Corinth ; v. 6 — 8. 1 John iii. 2. 
 As to them to live, is Christ, that is, is to have Christ 
 living in them ; so to them to die, is gain, that is, is to 
 have the earnest of life everlasting exchanged for and con- 
 
THE SECOND DEATH. 251 
 
 verted into the full fndlion. Philip: i. 21.^ — But I en- 
 large too much on a subject, on which, from the ineffably 
 glorious views which it opens up and discloses to my 
 mind, I can seldom trust myself to speak, without running 
 the risk of becoming positively enthusiastic- 
 
 B. Now, brother, I am satisfied : and for the pains 
 which you have taken to instruct me, and the information 
 with which you have furnished me, I tender you my best 
 tliauks. A doctrine which is consistent with all that scrip- 
 ture hath revealed ; which exhibits God as at once per- 
 fectly just, and perfectly merciful, the just God and the 
 Saviour ; which points out the merit of the one divine 
 righteousness, as co-extensive in its application with the 
 guilt incurred by the one human transgression ; which ex- 
 plains how the forfeiture of their earthly privileges by the 
 typical Israel, has been rendered subservient to the 
 possession and enjoyment of heavenly privileges by the 
 anti-typical Israel ; which opens up the parallelism be- 
 tween the guilt originally contracted by Adam, running 
 on into still greater guilt contracted by the nation of the 
 Jews, — and the peculiar spiritual privileges conferred on 
 the spiritual Israel, running on into general spiritual ad- 
 vantages conferred on the whole human family ; which 
 reconciles the never-ending punishment of the nature of 
 Heshly Adam, with the never-ending life and happiness 
 which are characteristic of the nature of the Lord Jesus ; 
 which presents to us Adam's creature and therefore sha- 
 dowy nature, and sin and death the effects of it, as de- 
 servedly swallowed up in the divine and therefore sub- 
 stantial nature of Christ Jesus, which is righteous and 
 everlasting ; which teaches that sin and death entered and 
 reigned temporarily, in subserviency to the entrance and 
 glorious reign of grace, through righteousness, unto eternal 
 life, by Jesus Christ our Lord, — and to themselves being 
 thereby destroyed and swallowed up, and not, as is com- 
 
252 IIIE SECOND DEATH. 
 
 monly supposed, in order to their becoming and conti- 
 nuing rivals, formidable indestructible and everlasting 
 rivals, of our risen head ; in a word, which ascribes the 
 entire glory of salvation to the Creator, and the entire be- 
 nefit of it to the creature, is, must be, true. 
 
 F. For my part, I cannot go as far as you do, Robert. 
 Doubts with regard to universal salvation still overhang 
 my mind. But much has been said by your brother which 
 may yet contribute to dispel them, and which at all events 
 I will not speedily forget. This I frankly acknowledge, 
 that I deem many of his observations, may I not rather 
 call them discoveries, most valuable. His reconciliation 
 of the doctrine of universal salvation, with that of the com- 
 plete destruction of the wicked — doctrines vvhich are gen- 
 erally considered to be incompatible — has particularly 
 struck me. It is not merely novel and ingenious, but 
 may, after all, turn out to be the germ of views by which 
 all existing difficulties may be removed; and a system of 
 divine truth, clearer and more self-consistent than any 
 which have hitherto been propounded, may ultimately de- 
 velop itself. This I say, because it appears to me that 
 men have, up to the present time, been deducing their 
 religious sentiments from by far too narrow premises, and 
 bounding their views by these as if God had nothing far- 
 ther to reveal to his church. — Whatever may be the result 
 as to my future convictions, Thom, you have my thanks 
 for the kindness and courtesy which in the course of these 
 conversations I have met with at your hands. — Are you 
 not at present engaged in preparing for the press a work 
 on the distinction between soul and Spirit P 
 
 T. I am. But when it may be finished, indeed, if 
 ever, I cannot say. I sometimes feel ready to despond 
 about the matter. The subject involves considerations so 
 momentous, and branches out into connected and subor- 
 dinate views so numerous, indeed, one might almost say, 
 
THE SECOxND DEATH. 253 
 
 SO interminable, that had I, before beginning the work, 
 anticipated them, its length and difficulty must have 
 formed powerful reasons to deter me from the prosecution 
 of it. As it is, the manuscript is in a state of considerable 
 forwardness. 
 
 F. When it makes its appearance, I shall be most 
 happy to peruse it. Some of the ideas which you have 
 thrown out respecting the difference between soul and Spir- 
 it, both in your " Three Questions," and your " Assur- 
 ance of Faith," have not been without producing their 
 effect upon me. Many things seem to admit of being 
 easily and satisfactorily reconciled upon your principles, 
 which to me otherwise are utterly inexplicable. Adam and 
 Christ are relatively to each other type and anti-type, ac- 
 cording to scripture. Rom : v. 14. 1 Corinth: xv. 21, 
 22, 45. If so, then the mind of the one, must stand to 
 the mind of the other, in the relation of type to anti-type 
 likewise. And this, it appears to me, is the whole basis 
 of and affords the key to your system. 
 
 T. Gratifying is it to me to find, my dear friend, that 
 in expressing your inability to acquiesce thoroughly in 
 my views, and in the qualified opposition which in the 
 mean time you are obliged conscientiously to give to me, 
 you are evidently actuated by motives of the most upright 
 and honourable description. Would to God ! that all my 
 opponents were but under the influence of the same spirit ! 
 Then, instead of censuring me and casting out my name 
 as evil, without knowing what I have to adduce in behalf 
 of my theory; and solely upon the authority of others 
 who, for aught they can tell, may be ignorant, pre- 
 judiced, or interested in their opposition to me; — a species 
 of conduct which every correctly thinking mind must re- 
 probate; — they would either pronounce no opinion at all on 
 the subject, or would at least decline sitting in judgment 
 and acting as critics, until they had taken care to acquaint 
 
254 THE SECOND DEATH. 
 
 themselves thoroughly with the merits of the question. 
 8uch iugenuous procedure, however, from mankind in gen- 
 eral, and from professors of religion in particular, taught 
 bj the word of life, I have no right to anticipate. Nor 
 do I expect it. Innovation on established notions of reli- 
 gion always has been irksome to the creature mind, and 
 always will be so. Divine truth being, in its rise pro- 
 gress and consummation, the greatest of all innovators, 
 by human nature it must and will be condemned. And 
 besides this, in so far as such truth is concerned, the 
 fleshly mind of man wants relish for it, as well as ca- 
 pacity to receive it. 1 Corinth : ii. 14. Oppose it, 
 therefore, men ever must, notwithstanding that they do so 
 to their own grievous loss and detriment. Even so, 
 Father : for so it hath seemed good in thy sight. Matt : 
 xi. 26. But, although truth be rejected by the wise and 
 prudent, blessed be thy name ! that the babes and suck- 
 lings, those whom from everlasting thou hast ordained to 
 that end, are made to receive and love it. In this, thy 
 wisdom and thy power are manifest. For, not only is thy 
 purpose thus accomplished, but accomplished in such a 
 way as to shew, that the whole is of God, not of man : the 
 glory of salvation thereby redounding entire and undivided 
 to thee the Creator, and in no respect whatever to the 
 creature. Seel Corinth: i. 26 — 31, And as thus al- 
 ways has been, so thus always till the end of time will 
 be, the fate of thy word. The election receive it : the 
 rest are blinded. Rom : xi. 7. 
 
 THE END. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 Appendix A. 
 
 '' The way of the approprmting act entirely reverses the order and 
 way of God. The act supposes unconverted sinners, as laudably and 
 successfully employed in pursuing and appropriating God and his 
 salvation ; in consequence whereof, they are to become united to God 
 and accepted of him in Christ. But God's way is quite the contrary 
 of this. He pursues, and appropriates us to himself, for a peculiar 
 people, in a manner as unsought for, unforeseen, unthought of by us, 
 as the life given to the dry bones, was by the bones; an emblem of 
 our regeneration, when he gives us to believe the report concerning 
 his Son. 
 
 " So that he appropriates us, apprehends us, justifies us ; wherein 
 we are wholly passive, as we were in our first receiving of life, or as 
 Lazarus was in being quickened in his grave, when we receive by the 
 Holy Ghost, through the word, the conviction of sin, righteousness, 
 and judgment. 
 
 " But further to this purpose, for the controversy seems to hinge 
 here, we may somewhat more narrowly review two or three particular 
 places more in the New Testament, whereby it will appear manifest, 
 that there is nothing in the universe meant by justifying and savino- 
 faith, but only a pure unmingled aud passive conviction, evidence or 
 manifestation, of the alone justifying and saving righteousness of the 
 Son of God, introduced into the conscience by the Holy Spirit of 
 truth, through the medium of the word ; and that all who have this 
 
256 APPENDIX. 
 
 faith, or passive conviction, of the justifying righteousness, are not 
 only justified and saved thereby, but also perfectly assured of their 
 being so. 
 
 *' Here by way of introduction we may observe, that the Spirit of 
 truth, in discoursing to us of the things of God, never wrests a word 
 that he uses, out of the ordinary sense wherein the same is used among 
 men, in plain and ordinary conversation about things which they 
 know ; but he takes these things just as he finds them, and applies 
 them in their own proper and ordinary meaning to the things that are 
 heavenly and divine : and this will appear to be his invariable method, 
 even when using the most highly animated anJ figurative style ; much 
 more when merely reporting a plain narrative of certain most import- 
 ant matters of fact, to all, the most simple, unlearned, and ordinary 
 people in the world, as well as to the mighty disputers and scribes, 
 never varying his manner of speech. 
 
 " Now if this remark be well founded, which I leave to every man's 
 own conscience and observation at this time ; though, if it shall be 
 controverted, I doubt not but they shall be obliged to deny the scrip- 
 tures, or else to allow it ; if this single remark, I say, were attended 
 to, I appeal to yourselves, if it would not utterly and eternally over- 
 throw the appropriating act. For where is there any thing in all the 
 use or abuse of language, that would lead a man to think of using an 
 appropriating act, to obtain the benefit of any good news, that is, 
 pleasing and interesting news, which he hears, and believes to be true 
 upon the veracity of the reporter ? If the apostles meant any such 
 strange act should be exerted, in order to take the benefit of the glad 
 tidings which they preached, is it not beyond all belief, that they 
 should never hint at any such a thing, either to Jew or Gentile ? Or 
 if they have, for the sake of God and man, let the passages be con- 
 descended upon. If they exist, we may look for them in the Acts, 
 where many of their sermons, or declarations of glad tidings, are both 
 begun and ended ; and the issue and application of the whole avowed 
 by the Holy Ghost, (who spoke by them,) to be eternal life, or eternal 
 death, to every soul of man who heard the tidings then brought to 
 their ears. But read the Acts of the Apostles, — read the whole tes- 
 timony of God, from the alpha to the omega of revelation, — no hint 
 of the appropriating act of faith, name or thing, no such mystery, no 
 such use. 
 
 " But to come to particulars. Acts xiii. We hear the apostles, 
 full of the Holy Ghost, open their commission in the synagogue at 
 Antioch ; and speaking to all the people, Jews and Gentiles, as the 
 Holy Ghost gave them utterance, in a plain style, to persons promis- 
 
APPENDIX. - 257 
 
 cuously assembled, like any other congregation upon earth, who could 
 have no notion of what they were going to hear, in order to be in rea- 
 diness with their ap-propriating acts, so necessary to be exerted, for 
 seizing, in a vigorous manner, and resolutely laying hold upon the 
 benefit of the things that should be spoken, as it were with hand, with 
 tooth and nail. No such preparation, nor activity, in the least, is 
 required in the hearers ; no apparatus, nor preliminaries at all, in- 
 sisted for by the speakers, who honestly speak out what they know, 
 and what they know God will stand by. All depths, and inscruta- 
 bilities apart. 
 
 " Men and brethren, we declare unto you glad tidings : How that 
 the promise which was made unto the fathers, God hath fulfilled the 
 same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again ; as 
 it is also written, &c. Now, the resurrection of Jesus from the dead 
 implies, that he was thereby declared to be the Son of God, with 
 power, according to the Spirit of holiness. Rom : i. 4. And also, 
 that he, the promised Messiah, had fulfilled all righteousness ; and 
 that he was raised up, for a certain testimony, pledge, or token of as- 
 surance to all men, that his Father had accepted his now finished 
 work, even the work of glorifying the Father, by becoming obedient 
 to the death for the sake of his people, according as the Lord himself 
 had spoken, saying. ' He, even the Spirit of truth, shall convince the 
 world of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no 
 more.' John xvi. And again, ' I have glorified thee, Father, upon 
 the earth ; and now glorify thou me,' &,c. John xvii. And again, on 
 the cross, ' It is finished.' John xix. 
 
 " Well, having heard of the resurrection of Jesus, (and the mean- 
 ing thereof founded on the whole testimony of God,) as a plain incon- 
 testible matter of fact, prov.en by hundreds of eye-witnesses, and mi- 
 racles innumerable, as come to pass, according to all the prophecies 
 written concerning it ; the apostles proceed in their declarations still 
 in the most perfect simplicity of speech, without any the least hint, or 
 warning, that they were about to utter incomprehensible mysteries, as 
 those strange ravings most certainly are, (and Mr. Marshall,* with all 
 the appropriating friends, do really allow, that there is some strange 
 unaccountable kind of mystery m appropriation,) about appropriating 
 acts, whereby people are to hammer out for themselves a truth, where- 
 upon their eternal salvation is to depend, without any proper evidence 
 given for it in the word of God. But no such doings here : only a 
 
 • Author of The gospel mystery of sanctijication, a work highly cominend«d by 
 Hervey in his Dialogues of Theron and Aspasio. — D. T. 
 
 2 I 
 
258 APPENDIX. 
 
 plain, ' BjE it known unto you, therefore, men and brethren, that 
 through this man is preached unto you the remission of sins.' 
 
 " Now to suppose here, as almost all men do, that by the word 
 preached, or published, as it literally signifies, is meant offered or 
 proffered in any sense of those words now used among men, appears to 
 me to be even pure and unalloyed blasphemy ; especially considering 
 the use that is made of such language when applied to Christ or the 
 gospel, being a substitution of a damnable falsehood, in place of the 
 inspired word of God. Observ^e, the men who published, divulged, 
 spread abroad, told, or reported the miracles which the Lord had 
 charged them to conceal, and tell no man of, are said, in the first lan- 
 guage, to have done with regard to the matter in hand, what the apos- 
 tle did with regard to the gospel, even preached it, according to their 
 commission ; ' Go preach the Gospel.' ' Ye shall be my witnesses.' 
 ' What ye have heard in the ear in secret, proclaim ye upon the 
 house-tops.' Accordingly, they knew what they had to do ; and you 
 never find them, (as our modern preachers, under the character which 
 they have assumed, of Reverend Ambassadors J saying, ' We offer 
 unto you the gospel : We make an offer of Christ unto you : Will 
 ye accept oi proff^ered grace upon gospel terms '?' No, verily. The 
 apostles left all such kind of traffic and negociation to the father of lies, 
 and the other right reverend and holy fathers, papists or protestants, 
 who make merchandize of the souls of men. 
 
 " What then say the apostles ? ' We preach Christ and him cruci- 
 fied : We declare unto you glad tidings : We certify you of the gos- 
 pel.' Preaching, declaring, and certifying , lead us directly to the 
 saving truth ; but offeriiig, proffering , and such like, lead us away 
 from the TRUTH, to the doing of something ourselves, under the no- 
 tion of accepting terms, embracing offers, and complying with 
 proffers. Whence I infer, what I think I have proven, that the for- 
 mer way of speaking is of God, and leads to God ; but that the latter 
 is of the devil, and leads men away from God to the devil. 
 
 " So now we fix upon it, \hdii preaching precisely s,\gm^es publish- 
 ing or spreading abroad any matter of fact, by telling it. Preaching 
 the gospel, then, is just declaring what the gospel is ; and when the 
 apostles produced their infallible proofs, that their tidings were true, 
 they left God to have mercy upon whom he would have mercy, and to 
 harden whom he would harden : if men were not converted, the 
 apostles were clear of their blood ; and if men now preach the same 
 doctrine of the apostles, without mixture, addition, or diminution, 
 honestly as they did, those men are clear of blood, as the apostles were. 
 
 " But if men must needs to move a step beyond the apostles, and 
 
APPENDIX. 259 
 
 instead of leaving men with the declared truth, proceed over and 
 above to give directions for conversion, how to attain a saving i?i- 
 terest in Christ, 8fc., doing as thousands have done, to set aside the 
 truth, they must even take their chance and lot with the spirit by 
 whom they are led. For most assuredly, except they repent, and re- 
 turn* to the simplicity of the gospel, they must die in their sins ; and 
 poor comfort will it be to them if they perish, to find hell filled with 
 the multitudes of those whom they have deceived, whether gone be- 
 fore, or following after them. 
 
 " Lord in heaven ! awaken the deceivers and the deceived, whom 
 thou wilt awaken, to hear the apostles. How sweet is the joyful sound ! 
 How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of them who bring glad 
 tidings of great joy, which are to all people!" — J. Barclay's Assur- 
 ance of faith vindicated, ^^.bO — 54; 3d edition. Glasgow, 1825. 
 
 Appendix B. 
 It is well known to many, that, for a considerable number of years, 
 I have set myself, both from the pulpit and the press, in decided and 
 deadly opposition to the popular notion, of good hojye towards God 
 with regard to future happiness, being in any respect whatever 
 derivable from observation of the workings of the human mind. 
 The work of Christ Jesus proclaimed in the divine testimony, and the 
 character of Jehovah revealed thereby, are, I have maintained and do 
 maintain, the only, the unsupported, and the certain foundation of 
 every believer's hope of life everlasting. Popular religionists, the 
 genuine descendants of the Pharisees of old, while they pretend to 
 ascribe to the death and resurrection of the Son of God, some portion 
 of the divine comfort which those who are justified by faith expe- 
 rience ; nevertheless take care to introduce creature righteousness, and 
 discoveries of creature excellence, as sharing to a certain degree, with 
 God's testimony, the honour of imparting consolation to the guilty 
 conscience, and upholding the consolation so imparted : thereby of 
 course nullifying the gospel of the grace of God to all who are led 
 astray by their delusions. Under such circumstances, it is striking 
 enough to find some of these demi-gods of the fleshlily p)ious, now 
 and then visited with compunctious misgivings as to the truth of the 
 doctrine wherewith their own minds are leavened, and whereby also 
 they are actively engaged in tainting and leavening the minds of others. 
 Such a passage as the following, which occurs in Dr. I. Watts' IVorld 
 to come, a book referred to by me in the fourth Dialogue, will be 
 perused with interest by all who have themselves ever been the dupes 
 of the popular theology, or are fond of tracing to its real origin that 
 
 * Eeliirn. Querv?— D. T. 
 
2G9 APPENDIX. 
 
 influence which the evangelical (?) clergy have acquired and possess 
 over the more serious portion of their auditories : — 
 
 "Some have imagined, that that perfect satisfaction of soul which 
 arises from a good conscience, speaking peace inwardly in the survey 
 of its sincere desire to please God in all things, and having with up- 
 rightness of heart fulfilled its duty, is the supreme delight of heaven : 
 but it is my opinion, God has never made the felicity of his crea- 
 tures to be drawn so entirely* out of themselves, or from the spring 
 of their own hoso7n, as this notion serves to imply. God himself will 
 be all in all to his creatures ; and all their original springs of blessed- 
 ness as well as being are in him, and must he derived from him .- it 
 is therefore the overflowing sense of being beloved by a God almighty 
 and eternal, that is the supreme fountain of joy and blessedness to 
 every reasonable nature, and the endless security of this happiness is 
 joy everlasting in all the regions of the blessed above."! 
 
 If the amiable respectable and eloquent author, from whose pen 
 the above statement proceeded, had been possessed of a little more dis- 
 crimination in divine things than he seems to have attained to, he 
 must have been aware, that, in writing what I have just extracted, he 
 was pronouncing sentence of condemnation on his own religious sys- 
 tem. For, that rejection of peace and comfort as derivable from within, 
 which he ascribes to the saints above, is actually the privilege of the 
 saints below. Believers do not here live upon themselves, and here- 
 after, upon God, as seems to be the notion of Watts and other po- 
 pular religionists : but they live upon God in every stage of then- 
 divine existence ; here, hy faith, and hereafter, by sight. It is God 
 manifest in Christ, as what he eternally and unchangeably is, love ; 
 1 John iv, 8 — 10 ; and not conclusions deduced from dabbling amidst 
 the filth and garbage of their own fancied spiritual experience ; that 
 speaks peace at once and for ever to the consciences (naturally guilty) 
 of the people of God. But the poor man's eyes were holden, as those 
 of thousands of his fellows are, that he should not apprehend the 
 truth as to this matter. 
 
 Appendix C. 
 
 Let me take this opportunity of recommending to the notice of my 
 readers a tract, entitled, Christian liberty : or, the abolition of the 
 whole law of Moses, for its weakness and unprofitableness , either 
 as a rule of Justification or of life. By Adelphos. Glasgow, 1837. 
 It is the production of Mr. J, Curran, a gentleman at present residing 
 in the Isle of Man. Although the author appears to have but a limited 
 and imperfect view of the case and circumstances of believers, espe- 
 
 * Query. Drawn at all ? D. T. 
 
 f World to Come, tUscourse 10th, p. 303. Manchester, 1816. 
 
APPENDIX. 2C1 
 
 cially of their being operated on and influenced, in so far as their con- 
 duct is spiritual, not by laws addressed to them, but solely by divine 
 truth dwelling in their enlightened consciences as a principle; it is im- 
 possible to go over the plain, sensible, and scriptural observations 
 with which his pamphlet abounds, without being both struck and edi- 
 fied. He has disposed in a way the most masterly of the claims 
 commonly set up on behalf of the law of Moses to the obedience of 
 Christians. 
 
 Appendix D. 
 
 Although the system of divinity, adopted and promulgated by the 
 acute and learned but eccentric William Law, be, as a whole, sadly 
 unscriptural ; yet now and then there occur in his writings passages 
 from which one would be tempted to conclude, that he was not alto- 
 gether without a glimpse of something better. Of this description are 
 the following remarkable statements, tinged, no doubt, with many of 
 the peculiarities of the mystic school, extracted from his work, enti- 
 tled, ^/2 appeal to all that doubt, or disbelieve, the truths of the 
 gospel : the first edition of which now lies before me ; — 
 
 " But let us now change the scene, and behold the wonders of a 
 new creation, where all things are called out of the curse and death 
 of sin, and created again to life in Christ Jesus ; where all mankind 
 are chosen and appointed to the recovery* of their first glorious life, 
 by a new hirth from a second Adam, who, as an universal redeemer, 
 takes the placef of the first fallen father of mankind, and so gives life 
 and immortality, and heaven, to all that lost them in Adam. 
 
 " God according to the riches of his love, raised a man out of the 
 loins of Adam, in whose mysterious person, the whole humanitv, and 
 the word of God, was personally united; the same word which had 
 been inspoken into ^dani at his fall, as a secret bruiser of the serpent, 
 and real beginning of his salvation ; so that in this second Adam, God 
 and man was one person. And in this union of the divine and human 
 nature lies the foundation and possibility of our recovery. + For 
 thus the holy Jesus becarne qualified to be the second Adam, or uni- 
 
 * Recovcrii. A mistake. The glorious life of which they are made partakers 
 through Christ, is not a restoration to Adam's original paradisaical life, hut eki-ation 
 to one infinitely higher. D. T. 
 
 f Takes the place of. Not quite correct. The proper expression is, " Christ, the 
 second Adam, is the antitype or substance of the first Adam, the fallen father of 
 mankind." D. T. 
 
 X Not recovery : for there is no recovery or restoration of Adam's original state, or 
 of the creature purity of his nature. The union of the natures of God and man in 
 Christ Jesus has heen productive, not of our being carried lack to the earthly para- 
 dise, but of our being carried forward and elevated to the paradise of God. D. T. 
 
202 APPENDIX. 
 
 versal regenerator of all that are hovnof Adam the firsts — " All that 
 were born oi Adam, had also a Jjirth from him,'' (Jesus,) "and so 
 stood under him as their common father, and regenerator of a heavenly 
 life in them." — "The same IFord that became their perfect redeemer 
 in the fulness of time," having been " in them from the beginning, as 
 a beginning of their redemption, therefore he (Jesus) stood related to 
 all mankind as dL fountain and deriver of an heavenly life into them, 
 in the same universal manner as Adam was the fountain and deriver 
 of a miserable mortality into them." P.p. 187, 188. 
 
 Jesus' " conquests over this world, sin, death, and hell, were not 
 i\\e con(\nQsis o^ a. single person that terminated in himself, but had 
 their real effect, and efficacious inerit, through all human nature, be- 
 cause he was the appointed father and regenerator of the whole hu- 
 man nature, and, as such, had the same relatio7i to it all as Adam 
 had : And therefore as Adam's fall, sin, and death, did not, could 
 not, terminate in himself, because he was our appointed father, from 
 whom we must have such a state and condition of life as he had ; so 
 the righteousness, death, resurrection, and ascension of Christ into 
 heaven did not terminate in himself, but became ours, because he is 
 our appointed second Adam, from whom we are to derive such a state 
 and condition of life as he had : and therefore all that are horn again 
 of him, are certainly born into his state of victory and triumph over 
 the world, sin, death, and hell." P. 189. 
 
 " And therefore if man was to go out oi his falleji state, there must 
 be a son of \\\isfallc7i man, who, as a head andifountain of the whole 
 race, could do all this, could go back through all these gates, and so 
 make it possible for the individuals of human nature, as being borti 
 of him, to inherit his conquering nature, and follow him through all 
 these passages to eternal life. And thus we see, in the strongest and 
 clearest light, both nhy and horn the holy Jesus is become our great 
 redeemer. 
 
 " Had he failed in any of these things, had he not heen all that he 
 was, and did all that he did, he could not have made one full, per- 
 fect, sufficient atonement and satisfaction for the sins of the whole 
 world, that is, he could not have heen and done that, which in the 
 nature of the thing was absolutely necessary and fully sufficient to 
 lake the whole human race out of the bondage and captivity of their 
 fallen state. Thus, had he not really had the divine nature in his 
 person, he could not have begun to be our second Adam from the 
 time of the fall, nor could we have stood related to him as children, 
 that had received a nem birth from him. Neither could he have made 
 a beginning of a divine life in our fallen nature, but that he was that 
 
APPENDIX. 263 
 
 God who could make nature begin again* where it had failed in our 
 first father. Without this divinity in his person, the perfection of his 
 humanity would have been as helpless to us as the perfection of an angel. 
 
 " Again, had he not been man, and in human nature overcome sin 
 and temptation, he could have been no Saviour of fallen man, because 
 nothing that he had done, had been done in and to the fallen nature. 
 Adam might as well have derived sin into the angels by his fall, as 
 Christ have derived righteousness into us by his life, if he had not 
 stood both in our nature, and as the common father and regenerator 
 of it ; therefore his incarnation was necessary to deliver us from our 
 sins, and accordingly the scriptui'e saith, he ivas manifest in thejlesh 
 to destroy the works of the devil. Again, if Christ had not renounced 
 this life,, as heartily and thoroughly as Adam chose it, and declared 
 absolutely for another kingdom in another world ; if he had not sa- 
 crificed the life he took up in and from this world, he could not have 
 been our redeemer, and therefore the scripture continually ascribes 
 atonement, satisfaction, redemption, and remission of sins, to his sirf- 
 ferings and death. Again, had not our Lord entered into that state 
 of eternal death which fallen man was eternally to inherit ; had he 
 not hvoke from it as its conqueror, and rose again from the dead ; he 
 could not have delivered us from the effects of our sins : and there- 
 fore the apostle saith, if Christ he not risen, ye are yet in your sins. 
 But I must enlarge a little upon the nature and merits of our Saviour's 
 last sufferings. It is plain from scripture that that death, which our 
 blessed Lord died on the cross, was absolutely necessary for our sal- 
 vation ; that he as our Saviour, was to taste death for every man — 
 that, as the Captain of our salvation, he was to be made perfect 
 through sifferings — that there was no entrance for fallen man into 
 paradise till Christ had overcome that death and hell, or that first and 
 second death, which stood between us and it."f P.p : 191, 192. 
 
 These extracts from one of the works of a most talented, although in 
 many respects erroneous writer, are presented to the public, not as 
 expressing accurately and perfectly my own views; for in all Law's 
 statements, particularly in those respecting Christ's having possessed 
 the same human nature that we do, I am far from acquiescing : but 
 as affording a proof that he was not entirely destitute of some idea, of 
 the shadowy jidam and his posterity having been involved in Christ 
 Jesus the substantial Adam ; and of the important and glorious con- 
 sequences which result from this fact. 
 
 * Nearly hni \ioi perfectly covreci. However, let it pass. D. T. 
 f The italics throughout the whole of these extracts from Law are as in the ori- 
 ginal edition. D. T. 
 
364 APPENDIX. 
 
 Appendix E. 
 My dear Christian friead, Mr. Richard Roe, of Dublin, having 
 drawn my attention to a tract, entitled, 21ie love of God towards the 
 worlds as manifested in the death of Christ ; extracted chiefly from 
 the Christian Witness, 2d edition : a tract which, along with others 
 from the same quarter, has been circulated extensively in the south of 
 England, as well as in Ireland, I have been induced to give it a care- 
 ful perusal. Mr. Roe is right in regarding it as a very fair specimen 
 of that fashionable evangelical system, by which the simple gospel of 
 Christ Jesus is attempted to be pushed aside. Like many other pro- 
 ductions of a similar class with which it has been my lot at different 
 times to become acquainted, it states doctrines as scriptural which are 
 exactly the opposite of what is true. God, according to scripture, 
 loves some, that he may save all ; whereas, according to it, he loves 
 all, that he may save some. Its author, instead of perceiving, that 
 spiritually salvation advances from the particular to the universal, 
 attempts to reverse the matter by making salvation to proceed from 
 the universal to the particular .- instead of perceiving that through 
 the salvation of Christ, there is the salvation of his church, and 
 through tJie salvation of his church, the salvation of the rest ; he 
 attempts to shew that through the salvation of Christ, there is the 
 salvation of all, and through the salvation of all, the salvation of a 
 part ! In other words, setting out with views of God's love to men 
 as being so universal, that all are called on to believe in it, and all 
 may if they please he saved,* he nevertheless contrives to close by 
 representing the number of those actually saved as being exceedingly 
 sfnall indeed ! Thus after, like many others of a similar description, 
 indulging in " big swelling words of vanity" respecting God's love to 
 all, it turns out in reality that, according to his notions, God's love is 
 from everlasting to everlasting only to a part of the human race. — 
 I confess that I am apt to lose patience with such theories. " God 
 loves all : and yet, it is in the power of his creatures to render his 
 love to them ineffectual .'" " Christ has do?ie all : and yet, it de- 
 pends upon a mysterious work to he done by ourselves, whether or not 
 h\s finished (?) work shall become effectual to our salvation .'" Out 
 upon such absurdities ! They may suit the meridian of the mere 
 fleshly intellect ; but let them not be heard from the lips, or proceed 
 from the pens, of those to whom it has been given, to however slender 
 a degree, to know, in the light of the mission, work, and mediation, of 
 Christ Jesu8,'that God is — not may he, or rvill he, but is — Love. 
 
 * The very essence, by the way, of the abominable systems of Pelagius and 
 Armiuius. 
 
APPENDIX. 265 
 
 Would to God ! however, tliat nonsense were all the charge that I 
 could fairly adduce against the tract in question. It lies open, alas ! 
 to a reprehension of a far more serious kind. In perusing the passage 
 which I am about to quote, one finds great didiculty in resisting the 
 conviction, that the author was writing in opposition to, nay, was ac- 
 tually bearing down, the dictates of ^is own conscience. When any 
 one speaks of "mankind — continuing to maintain their barrier 
 against God," as if, forsooth, the creature could set up any effectual 
 opposition to the roill of the Creator, we can afford to smile at the 
 idea. Not so, when he can sit down and gravely pen such statements 
 as the following : — 
 
 " It is important to observe the difference between the prepositions 
 £tc and i-jri ; as their distinct use is intimately connected with the 
 subject of God's love towards the world, and the assured salvation of 
 His church; as shewn in the following text, literally translated. 
 
 " Rom : iii. 21. — 'But now the righteousness of God icilhuut lam 
 is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets ; even 
 the righteousness of God, which is by faith of Christ Jesus towards 
 (ttc) all, and upon (tTrt) all those that believe;' not 'unto and upon 
 all them that believe,' but the righteousness of God towards all, and 
 upon all those that believe. The Jews had been convinced of sin ; the 
 Gentiles had been convinced of sin ; and thus they had no righteous- 
 ness in which to stand before God. Whether Jew or Gentile, they 
 had no hope in themselves ; but the righteousness of God through 
 faith of Jesus Christ, was not towards Jew or Gentile, but towards 
 all ; eic ttoituc. And it was moreover upofi all those that believe, 
 (cTTt Trai'rac roue Trtorsvoj^rac,) they stood in that righteousness. 
 
 "Rom: V. 18. — 'Therefore as by the offence of one, judgment 
 came towards [eic) all men, leading towards (etc) condemnation ; 
 even so by the righteousness of one, the free gift came towards (etc) 
 all men, leading towards (nc) justification of life. 
 
 " As the passage stands in the authorized version, it states that the 
 free gift came upon all men, as though it had been evi and not £<c ; 
 if so, all would have been justified. We know it is not so, nor does 
 the scripture say so. The aspect of the act is quite as wide as the 
 aspect of the sin of Adam ; but its effect is a thing entirely distinct. 
 We have in a former passage seen it to be stated to be upon ail who 
 believe. When the difference between etj and etti is noticed, it 
 makes clear what the English translation has obscured. 
 
 " It shews that the free gift was towards all in its aspect ; but that 
 its effect, and the acceptance of any under it, is something entirely 
 distinct. The accuracy and perfectness of scripture is (are) addition- 
 
 2 K 
 
206 APPENDIX. 
 
 ally illustrated. Etc (towards) seems to exhibit the natural conse- 
 quence, the effect of any thing looked at in itself; it may or it may 
 not involve the coming to the result ; taken in itself it has the effect ; 
 for the tendency of the thing is that which per se, or left to itself, it 
 would produce or arrive at. The word thus may be seen in many 
 passages of the 6th chapter of Komans." 
 
 Now the question which after perusing the above paragraphs sug- 
 gested itself to me, and which I have no doubt has suggested itself 
 likewise to the more enlightened spiritual portion of my readers, is, 
 could the author, in penning these paragraphs, really believe the con- 
 clusion to which he attempts to conduct such as submit themselves to 
 his guidance ? Could he really believe, that the admitted distinction 
 between etc and ctti* tends to establish a love of God towards but 
 not to all; that is, a love of God which " bears an aspect" to all, and 
 " which, ^ers^j or, left to itself, would produce or arrive at" its legi- 
 timate tendency ; but which, nevertheless, from the stubborn opposi- 
 tion o{ creatures, and their ability (?) to overcome the tendency of 
 the love of the Creator, turns out in the case of many to be inef- 
 fective ? If othei's can give him credit for having seriously and thor- 
 oughly believed, that he had by his philological distinction got rid of 
 the idea of God's love towards all talcing effect, I confess that I 
 cannot. 
 
 Be it observed, that I quarrel not with his translation of Rom : iii. 
 21 ; — that I object not to the distinction made by him between etc 
 
 * Some admirable critical remarks on the different significations of the Greek 
 preposition CTrt, when construed with the genitive, dative, or accusative case, have 
 just come under my notice, in a posthumous work, entitled, A literal translation of 
 St. PauFs Epistle to the Hebrews, from, the original Greek, with copiovs explanatory 
 notes, by the late Rev. George Vaughan Sampson, Sjc. London : Riviugtons, 1828.— 
 See from page 134 to page 140. The learned and ingenious author is led to the 
 dissertation in question, by the very singular and exceedingly puzzling expression, 
 occurring in Hebrews xi. 21, £7rt ro acpov ttjq pa^Sov avTOv; rendered in the 
 common translation, along with the words immediately going before, and (Jacob) 
 worshipped leaning upon the top of his staff; in the Douay version, (Jacob) worship- 
 ped the top of his rod; and by Mr. Vaughan, on grounds which are to me perfectly 
 satisfactory, antZ (Jacob) rendered worship (to God) on account of the height of his 
 (Joseph's) ensign (or staff.) Let it be understood, that with all due admiration of 
 Mr. Vaughan's glowing genius and splendid endowments, and frankly admitting 
 that from the perusal of his book T have derived some most valuable critical hints, 
 I should be very sorry to pledge myself to an unqualified approbation of a transla- 
 tion in many respects causelessly and even recklessly deviating from the simplicity 
 of the authorised version, and of notes in which from time to time an almost un- 
 bridled imagination seems absolutely to run riot. Still Sampson's, with all its im- 
 perfections, is a glorious work. It is worth a score of tame, dull, hum-drum per 
 formances of a similar kind. 
 
APPENDIX. 267 
 
 and iTTi, so far as that the former signifies tendency towards, and the 
 latter, present enjoyment of, the divine righteousness spoken of in 
 the text ; — and that I feel indebted to him for having drawn the at- 
 tention of his unlearned readers to the difference between the all, (rrav- 
 rac) towards (ftc) whom the righteousness has an aspect, and the 
 all those that believe {-KuvTaQ rove iriarevoyTag) who stand in it, or, 
 rather, z/pon {eiri) whom it rests. No ; my objection is of a graver 
 nature. 
 
 1. When quoting and translating Rom : v. 18, could it fail to strike 
 him, that either he was doing away with the actual coming down of 
 Adam's guilt and condemnation upon all his posterity ; or that he was 
 virtually admitting the fact of the free gift of Christ's righteousness 
 coming down upon the whole human race ? His translation, and the 
 argument which he would found upon it, evidently recoil upon him- 
 self. If eig in respect of Christ's righteousness signifies merely a 
 tendency which does not take effect in the imparting of righteousness 
 and life to all ; then, as the reasoning of the apostle is analogical, etc 
 in respect of Adam's transgression signifies merely a tendency which 
 does not take effect in the imposing of sin and death upon all. Or, 
 if the £te in Adam's case signifies a tendency which necessarily and 
 actually does take effect in the condemnation and death of all; then 
 so, in order to the completeness of his argument, must the tiQ in 
 Christ's case signify a tendency which necessarily and actually does 
 take effect in the Justification and life everlasting of all likewise, 
 Of these alternatives, the author must embrace either the one or the 
 other. If the former, he proclaims himself to be an Infidel ; if the 
 latter, to be a Universahst. — It will not do for him, in order to evade 
 the force of this conclusion, to say, as it is clearly his purpose to in- 
 sinuate, that etc, in so far as it has a reference to the effects of Adam's 
 transgression, signifies to ; whereas, in regard to the effects of Christ's 
 righteousness, it signifies merely towards. For, were he to do so, he 
 would be acting the part, not of a translator, but of a commentator ; 
 and of a commentator, too, who, with a view to support a favourite 
 theory of his own, was damaging the apostle's argument ; which, being 
 an analogical one, requires, that, in whatever way the word eig be trans- 
 lated in one member of the sentence, whether to or towards, in the 
 same way it be translated in the other member of it. The alternative 
 of infidelity in denying the application of Adam's sin to all, or of 
 Universalism in admitting the application of Christ's righteousness 
 to all, he must therefore chuse. And as he could not be ignorant, 
 nay, as his statements and reasonings evince that he was not ignorant, 
 of the dilemma upon which he had run himself, he lays himself open 
 
208 APPENDIX. 
 
 to the charge of mala fides or gross dishonesty, in having attempted 
 to palm upon his readers as a fair argument for the existence of a di- 
 vine tendency to love all which does not take effect, a passage of 
 scripture which, in -his own conscience, he did not believe to have the 
 meaning which he was trying to fasten upon it. 
 
 2. In his reasoning from Rom. iii. 21, he has laid himself equally 
 open to the suspicion of having proposed that as conclusive, which, in 
 his own mind, he did not believe to be so. In order to his argument 
 being valid, the distinction in the verse in question must be between a 
 tendency of the divine righteousness to some which does take effect, 
 and a tendency to all which does not take effect. This meaning, and 
 this meaning only, if his conclusion is necessarily to follow, mus,t 
 the passage bear. But is this actually the only sense of which it 
 is susceptible ? Certainly not. The eig, to, may signify, (indeed, does 
 signify,) an aspect and tendency towards which is to take effect at a 
 future period, while the cttc, tipon, may, (as it does,) point to an ef- 
 fect which has already taken place * That is, besides a distinction 
 between the righteousness of God taking effect, and not taking effect, 
 — the only distinction which the author finds it convenient to represent 
 the two prepositions as able to convey, — the two members of the 
 sentence upon all those that believe, and to or towards all, are capa- 
 ble of meaning, that the righteousness of God which has taken effect 
 in the case of some now, has a tendency likewise to take effect in the 
 case of the rest hereafter : and that it is the circumstance of its having 
 taken effect now in the case of some, which leads to its taking effect 
 ultimately in the case of all. — Now, can I believe that the author was 
 ignorant of the possibility , to say the least of it, of £7rt and eig, the upon 
 and the to, having been employed by the Holy Ghost to denote this 
 latter distinction ? I confess, that it is beyond my power to do so. 
 He could not be ignorant, that the meaning assigned by him to the 
 passage was not the only one of which it is susceptible. And if so, 
 — if he knew that tig might point to a blessing to be realized at some 
 future period, as well as to a blessing which, although there was a 
 tendency to it in the divine mind, yet was never to be realized at all, 
 his own sense of the passage, — can we respect the controversial honesty 
 of the man who could translate, reason from, and apply the word, as 
 if it had been capable only of the latter signification ? 
 
 3, and lastly. It is evidently the object of the author of the tract 
 to leave on the mind of the unlearned reader an impression, that as- 
 pect to and tendency towards, or, in a word, that towards without 
 
 * This is the same distinction which is beautifully alluded to by the apostls in 
 Heb. ii. H, — a passage already treated of in the 2nd Dialogue. 
 
APPENDIX. 269 
 
 any consideration of actual result, is the exclusive signification of the 
 Greek preposition uq. For if not, of what use is his philological 
 distinction, and to what purpose are the reasonings which he founds on 
 it ? Nay, has he not in so many words said so : for is not aspect, 
 as distinguished from effect, the sense of the word to which he actual- 
 ly endeavours to confine it ? — Now it is clear, that the author of the 
 tract is a man of education and talents. As such, he could not be 
 ignorant, that, in thus limiting the signification of eic, he became 
 chargeable, if not with direct falsehood, at least with a suppressio 
 veri and suggestio falsi. E«e undoubtedly signifies to or towards ; 
 or has the sense of the Latin prepositions ad, and in when governing 
 the accusative. But is it not well known, that it has frequently, also, 
 the sense of axpi, f^^XP'- ^"^ ^''^^» °^ usque ad, that is, that it denotes 
 not mere tendency only, but such a tendency as likewise takes ef- 
 fect ? The very common work of Macknight shews the great variety 
 of senses of which, in the inspired writings, etc is susceptible; and, 
 among others, that it denotes both the final cause, and the actual at- 
 tainment. See etc, in Essay 4th of the Preliminary Essays of Mac- 
 knight, Nos. 147 and 150. This being the case, and it having been 
 impossible for the author as a man of education to be ignorant of it, 
 was it fair in him to insinuate, with a view to get rid of God's love to 
 all taking effect, that towards, without any reference to actual result, 
 was the exchisive meaning of the preposition etc ? Was it consistent 
 with common candour, to attempt to found a most important doctrine 
 upon a representation of matters which is essentially and confessedly 
 defective ? — But thus it always has been and will be. When erroneous 
 views of divine truth are to be bolstered up, erroneous practices must 
 always be had recourse to. 
 
 Can any man taught from above, after perusing the above extract 
 and the remarks upon it which I have found myself constrained to 
 subjoin, hesitate to suspect the thorough honesty of him who was ca- 
 pable of founding an argument against universal salvation upon per- 
 verted expositions of scripture, and a philological statement, or at least 
 insinuation, which he must have known to be untrue? 
 
 How simple and delightful the meaning of Komans iii. 2 1 , &c. when 
 the Holy Spirit is pleased to shed his own divine and heavenly light 
 upon it. Never shall I forget the gratification which some years since 
 I experienced, when a sensible, enlightened, and much endeared Chris- 
 tian friend, Mr. James Smith, — a gentleman who makes no preten- 
 sions to classical attainments, — first drew my attention to its real im- 
 port. " The key," said that gentleman, " to my understanding it, has 
 been the discovery long since made to us, of the Lord Jesus having, 
 
270 APPENDIX. 
 
 while on earth, lived and walked by faith; indeed, having been the 
 chief believer, or the head of believers. See 2 Corinth : iv. 13, com- 
 pared with Psalm cxvi. 10 ; and Hebrews xii. 1, 2. This enabled me 
 at last to see, that the faith of Jesus Christ, an expression which 
 , occurs not merely in this passage but also in Galatians ii. 1 6, does not 
 signify our faith in Jesus Christ, as it is commonly but erroneously 
 interpreted to do, h\xi that personal faith of Jesus Christ through the 
 medium of which the divine righteousness spoken of in the text was 
 wrought out. Thus," added he, " I observe the same three classes or 
 orders of beings wearing^^^A and blood, set before me in this verse, 
 which I meet with in John iii. 14 — 17, and 1 Corinth : xv. 22 — 28. 
 That is, first, the Lord Jesus; secondly, his church; and, thirdly, the 
 rest of the human family. 1st. Concerning Christ it is said, that the 
 righteousness of God is by, or through, his faith ; that is, that it was 
 performed and accomplished by him under the influence of belief in 
 the testimonies of his heavenly father, Psalm cxix. 14, 22, 24, 31, &c. 
 and not from any earthly considerations. Ibid : 72, &c. For the joy 
 tJmt was set before Mm, in the word of Jehovah, he endured the cross, 
 despising the shame. Hebrews xii. 2. — 2dly. Concerning the mem- 
 bers of his church it is said, that this righteousness of God, a.ccovQ.- 
 lAished by laedins of tJie perso?ial faith of the Messiah, is upon all 
 them that believe ; or is a blessing and privilege presently enjoyed by 
 them. It has been revealed from the faith of Messiah the performer, 
 to their faith as enabled by the revelation to rejoice simply and exclu- 
 sively in his performance, — And, 3dly, concerning the rest of the hu- 
 man race it is said, that this same divine righteousness, through its 
 bestowment in time upon all who believe, reaches ultimately unto all. 
 That is, as the righteousness of God, it ultimately swallows up and 
 thereby annihilates creature guilt : making all things and persons 
 new in itself. — Thus have we the course of the divine righteousness 
 traced from its origin in him, by his performance of it : through its 
 application by him, to the members of the church ; to its termination 
 in him, as the heiw^^ for whom are all things, as well as by whom are 
 all things. Hebrews ii. 10, compared with Colossians i. 16, and Rom : 
 xi. 36." 
 
 And my friend Mr. Smith is right. It is not a mere divine ten- 
 dency to love all, which nevertheless the majority of creatures may 
 contrive to frustrate in their own case, of which the Holy Ghost is 
 here speaking ; but a divine purpose and tendency which, in spite of 
 all the enmity and waywardness of the creature, the Creator takes care 
 to carry into effect, in regard to all, — through the medium of the 
 previous salvation of the church, — in his own good time, and his own 
 
APPENDIX. 271 
 
 appointed way, 1 Timothy ii. 6, He of wliom^ and hy whom, and 
 to whom are all things, will never permit any of his gracious and 
 glorious designs to be rendered nugatory by mere creatures. 
 
 Appendix F. 
 
 It is far from being my intention to assert, that either Mr. Camp- 
 bell, late of Kow, or Mr. Erskine, of Linlethan, would approve of the 
 style of criticism which I have taken upon me to censure in the im- 
 mediately preceding article. This, however, I do say, that not only 
 is the grand and distinguishing tenet of these two gentlemen, as 
 brought out by Mr. Campbell in his numerous productions, and by 
 Mr. Erskine in his work, entitled, The unconditional freeness of the 
 gospel, the same as that of the author of the tract just commented on, 
 but that criticisms in behalf of their favourite notion, nearly if not 
 quite as reckless and blame- worthy, and therefore as inadmissible, as 
 the above, are not unfrequently indulged in by. them. Jn proof of 
 my averment, let me refer to some of Mr. Erskine's observations, con- 
 tained in the work last mentioned, between pages 150 and 168, of the 
 4th edition, 1831. After having perused with great care Mr. Ers- 
 kine's Two Essays, together with the late Dr. Andrew Thomson's 
 Sermons on the doctrine of universal pardon, with the Notes criti- 
 cal and eorpository subjoined, I am satified, that, before venturing 
 again on the thorny paths of scriptural criticism, it would not be amiss 
 for Mr. Erskine to ponder well, and endeavour to profit by, some of 
 the valuable hints given to him by his learned and logical, but dread- 
 fully unsparing antagonist. 
 
 Here let me observe, for the purpose of obviating all misapprehen- 
 sions as to my meaning, that I say not this from any particular liking 
 to the views and doctrines so ably advocated by Dr. Thomson. On 
 the contrary, it is a question with me, whether his system, or that of 
 Messrs. Erskine and Campbell, be upon the whole the more infidel. 
 Both theories assail the completeness and all-sufficiency of the atone- 
 ment ; although in diflFerent ways. Dr. Thomson, without going 
 about the bush, admits, in his usual blunt and straightforward manner, 
 ih^i faith and the effects of faith are, in some sense, the terms or 
 conditions of salvation. While Mr. Ersldne and his clerical co-adju- 
 tor, after talking bigly of the perfection of Christ's work, and almost 
 leading us to think that they had discovered the freeness of the gift of 
 life everlasting, take care in due time to undeceive us by insisting on 
 it, that this gift of Christ, (strange perversion of terms !) is merely 
 laid at our door, it depending upon ourselves, whether we shall re- 
 ceive the gift f? J or not. Well! Infidelity under the guise of reh- 
 
272 APPENDIX. 
 
 gion, Proteus-like, puts on a great variety of shapes and phases ; but 
 it always, in the long run, betrays what it is, by this infallible token : 
 that, while faith, as the gift of God, is uniformly found reji icing in 
 the salvation which on Calvary was finished by the Creator, the Lord 
 from heaven ; infidelity, as a state of the mere fleshly mind, is always 
 and necessarily conceiving, that something performed or to be per- 
 formed by the creature, whether faith, or works, or appropriating acts, 
 or evidences of vital religion, or something else it matters not what, 
 must be added by the creature to the work of the Creator, before the 
 salvation of Jesus can become effectual to him. Dr. Thomson may, 
 correctly enough in so far as words are concerned, insist ou lur uoc- 
 trine of election ; but then, when examined into, it turns out that, 
 upon his theory, it is we who elect ourselves, not God who elects us. 
 And Mr. Erskine may, with equal correctness, insist upon the love of 
 God to all ; but then, it turns out that, upon his theory, this univer- 
 sal love is the attachment of an old, foolish, doting parent, who, in 
 consequence of the stubborn and successful resistance of his children, 
 is unable to carry his wishes for their welfare into effect. Dr. Thom- 
 son's system is the Pharisaism of doubts and fears ; calling God a liar 
 in the way of that affected humility, which pretends to regard the sins 
 of us creatures as too great and enormous for the blood of the glorious 
 Creator to have washed away. Mr. Erskine's is the Pharisaism of 
 pride or carnal confidence ; arising from the determination to believe 
 that we have performed that wondrous and mysterious act of accept- 
 ing of God's love, by which we have contrived to ensure to ourselves 
 eternal life, and to enrol ourselves among the number of God's child- 
 ren ; and calling God a liar, by pretending to derive a confidence from 
 faith viewed as an act of our own, which can only spring from and 
 stand connected with faith as a manifestation to the conscience, passive 
 in the whole matter, of eternal life as the gift of God to us, through 
 Christ Jesus, his well beloved Son. 1 John v. 11. Dr. Thomson, 
 in plain and unvarnished terms, glories in the salvation of the few 
 who have been able to discover in themselves something better than 
 their neighbours : in the true spirit of his own temper and disposition, 
 sturdily and remorselessly consigning over the remainder of the hu- 
 man race to torments inconceivable, unutterable, and everlasting ! 
 While Mr. Erskine, with true mawkish sensibility, after having made 
 the infinite Jehovah to yearn over and desire the salvation of beings 
 whom he himself created, and who have no existence except in him, 
 Acts xvii. 28, finishes by representing this glorious being as obliged to 
 be contented with being able to rescue a few of his creatures, or rather, 
 upon his system, with seeing a few of his creatures able to rescue them- 
 
APPENDIX. 273 
 
 selves, from the burning fiery furnace ! — Such are the twin systems of 
 Pharisaical rehgious infideUty, which share between them the suflfrages 
 of the professedly evangelical world! Which of them, spiritually- 
 minded reader, is the more unscriptural ? Perhaps, of the two, Mr. 
 Erskine's is the worse; as being the more specious and insidious. By 
 pretending to represent salvation, (or, to give him his due, pardon J 
 as being unconditionally hestoived, there is in his theory such an ap- 
 parent approximation to truth, as not only must to the highest form 
 of the fleshly mind render it amazingly acceptable and captivating, 
 but as is even calculated for a time and to a certain degree to hood- 
 wink and ensnare — to pervert from the simplicity that is in Christ — 
 the less enlightened and discriminating class of believers. 2 Corinth : 
 xi. 3, Blessed be thy name, heavenly father, that thou upholdest the 
 members of thy church, and in due time settest their feet free from 
 such delusions ! 
 
 From these awful and wide-spreading falsifications of the divine tes- 
 timony, how delightful and refreshing to turn to the system of " glo- 
 rious old John" Barclay. Here we find ourselves upon something 
 like sure ground. True it is, that Barclay fell into mistakes. And 
 this, because a man can receive nothing, except it he given to Mm 
 from above. He saw not every thing. It was never given to him to 
 conceive of our adorable head, the Lord Jesus, in any higher charac- 
 ter than that of the spiritual or anti-typical Abraham. It never was 
 given to him to coni;eive of any farther salvation, than that of the 
 members of the spiritual Israel, or church of the living God. But he 
 did not, as the majority of professing Christians do, commit the blun- 
 der of setting up the creature as in one way or another his own sa- 
 viour. The assurance offaith^ the certainty of personal interest ^?^ 
 Christ Jesus, for which he contends, springs directly from the truth 
 itself, and not from efforts on our part to render it truth to us. He 
 never, as persons of the stamp of Dr. Thomson and Mr. Erskine under 
 one form or another always and necessarily do, enforces the necessity 
 of our "making for ourselves, a new heart and aright spirit;" of 
 our " becoming" our own " creators," and " forming ourselves new 
 creatures, created again to good works.* No. It is as already made 
 anew, by Christ Jesus himself, through the gift of faith in his own 
 revealed testimony, without any efforts, concurrence, or co-operation 
 of our own, that Barclay represents us, and all the members of the 
 church, as rejoicing in hope of the glory of God. It is this simple 
 ascription of the entire and undivided glory of salvation, not in words 
 
 * See the works of the ingenious Alexander Pirie, of Newburgh, Fife; vol : 2d, 
 page 239. 
 
 2 L 
 
274 APPENDIX. 
 
 merely, but in fact, to God alone, which renders the system of Bar- 
 clay, or that of Bereanism, defective as in many respects it is, the only 
 tolerably self- consistent, and upon the whole scriptural, system oipar- 
 tialism now in existence. Never, never, let the Bereans be induced 
 to part with it for the Rowite notions, or for any of those other ephem- 
 eral theories of assurance of faith which are incessantly springing 
 up, and clamorously demanding attention. That doctrine of assur- 
 ance, and that only, is true, which represents the believer's confidence 
 as arising directly, and arising necessarily, from the testimony of God 
 concerning Christ Jesus, carried home to the conscience by the Holy 
 Ghost. This the Bereans possess and profess to hold. No doubt, it 
 is to me, and to those who think with me, matter of regret, that our 
 dear friends have not had the eyes of their understandings still far- 
 ther opened, to see through the present salvation of the church, to the 
 ultimate salvation of all. But the withholding of this, is of divine 
 sovereignty. He who hath disclosed to them a part of his mind, hath 
 not seen meet to disclose to them the whole. If limited in their ap- 
 prehensions of divine truth, as unquestionably they are, they are at all 
 events upon the whole correct so far as they go : theirs is not a pre- 
 tendedly complete salvation of all, in which nevertheless the creature 
 must perform Ai* jpar^ of the work, before it can become a salvation 
 to any ; but they rejoice, that is, if the internal feelings of their minds 
 correspond with their external profession, they rejoice in a salvation 
 which, as divine and therefore complete, spurns any and every at- 
 tempt at addition to it from the creature ; a salvation which to them is 
 of grace in its origin, of grace in its application, of grace in its end. 
 
 Appendix G. 
 
 Tlie following extracts from a letter of my friend and correspondent, 
 the Rev. Thomas J. Sawyer, minister of the Universalist church, 
 Orchard-street, New- York, and editor of the Universalist Union, 
 will probably interest some of my readers. The letter bears date, 
 New- York, March 31st, 1838. 
 
 " It would have delighted you, I believe, to have been at our Ge- 
 neral Convention, held in Philadelphia, in September last. It was, I 
 think, just such an occasion as you would love. The number of min- 
 istering brethren present was not so great as we have sometimes seen 
 This was owing, partly to the badness of our times, and partly to the 
 fact that Philadelphia is considerably beyond the centre of our strength 
 and munbers ; New-England and New-York embracing by far the 
 larger part of the Universalist population. Still our hearts were made 
 glad by meeting with many good nun and true in the city of ' bro- 
 
APPENDIX. 275- 
 
 therly love.' I had the pleasure of seeing a brother of Elhanan Win- 
 chester, who had travelled more than 500 miles to attend the Conven- 
 tion, Throughout our country, I think the cause of Universal Grace 
 was never more prosperous The truth runs and is glorified. The 
 number of churches erected by the denomination in the past year is 
 greater, I should think, than in any preceding year. 
 
 " You have more opposition in England, I suppose, than we are 
 called to encounter in the United States. There all the powers of the 
 world are arranged against you. The whole tide of popularity and 
 prejudice, spiritual and temporal, is there to be stemmed. Thank 
 God ! he has servants able and willing to engage in such a work ! 
 
 ■ " In this country things are in many respects different. Here we 
 have no national establishment to crush us. Here we have access to 
 the public mind, both in the pulpit and through the press. Our per- 
 iodicals alone must exert a mighty influence. Books are also much 
 cheaper, and much more generally read, than among you. Of Ely 
 and Thomas' Discussion * I suppose not less than 7500 copies have 
 already been sold, and the demand continues. Occasionally we have 
 an attack from some of our opposers ; but scarcely within the reach 
 of my knowledge has such an instance occurred, without tending to 
 the furtherance of the gospel. So that we can truly say with St. Paul ; 
 ' Therein I do rejoice ; yea, and will rejoice.' 
 
 " By the way, I am thinking of a work on The Atonement, and 
 have just commenced a course of reading on that subject. When your 
 books are received, I shall be happy to see your views on this point. 
 I shall hold you to your promise, for a copy of your forthcoming 
 Dixilogues. You need not fear to speak ' frankly' of us on this side 
 the Great Water, while you speak ' friendlily,' We are all much in 
 the habit of expressing our opinions very freely." 
 
 It appears from a recent number of the Universalist Union, that the 
 Universalist population of the United States is estimated now to 
 amount to between 700,000 and 750,000 individuals. 
 
 * For some observations respecting this work, sec the .Jth Dialogue. 
 
ERRATA. 
 
 Page 18. After the words mere fleshly mind, line 5th from top, 
 
 insert, in others. 
 Page 30. Line 6th from bottom. Instead of the were, read they 
 
 tvere. 
 Page 134. Line 7th from bottom. For if, read of. 
 Page 143. Line 3rd from top. For Ike, read the. 
 Page 188. Note. In some copies, before Z>ein^, in line 2nd from 
 
 top, (Me the word human. 
 Page 212. Line 16th from top. For presented, rend prosecuted. 
 Page 230. Line 4th from bottom. Instead ot seeiny that is, lead, 
 
 seeing that it is. 
 Page 241. Line 13th from top. Before man's, insert that. 
 Page 246. Line 4th from top. In some copies, for Ibid: xir, 
 
 read Ibid: 14. 
 Page 266. Note. In lines 11th and 8th from bottom, for Mr. 
 
 Vaughan, read Mr. Sampson. 
 
 T? T> TJ A nr< A 
 
WORKS BY THE AUTHOR. 
 
 1. REMARKS, by the Rev. David Thom, Minister of the Scotch Church, 
 Rodney street, Liverpool, on a series of charges recently preferred against him, 
 before the Reverend the Presbytery of Glasgow, by certain individuals con- 
 nected mth the management of the said Church. With a copious Appendix. — 
 1825. Is. 6d. 
 
 2. MEMORIAL submitted by the Rev. David Thom, to the Presbytery of 
 Glasgow, regarding the theological points of his case. Second edition. — 
 1825. 8d. 
 
 3. A LETTER to the Rev. Richard T. P. Pope, adverting to some important 
 mistakes committed by him in his recent controversy with the Rev. Thomas 
 Maguire. By Observer. — 1827. Is, 6d. (A few copies only remain.) 
 
 4. THREE QUESTIONS PROPOSED AND ANSWERED, concerning 
 the Life forfeited by Adam, the Resurrection of the Dead, and Eternal Punish- 
 ment.— 1828. 2s. 6d. 
 
 5. RECENT CORRESPONDENCE between the Presbytery of Glasgow, 
 and the Rev. David Thom, occasioned by a second interference on their part 
 with him.— 1828. 8d. 
 
 6. The MIRACLES of the IRVING SCHOOL shewn to be unworthy of 
 serious examination. — 1832. Is. 
 
 7. The ASSURANCE OF FAITH, or CALVINISM identified with UNIVER- 
 SALISM.— 1833. 2 volumes octavo. 21s. 
 
 8. THREE QUESTIONS PROPOSED AND ANSWERED, concerning 
 the Life forfeited by Adam, the Resurrection of the Dead, and Eternal Punish- 
 ment. — 2d edition, altered, enlarged, and improved. — 1835. 5s. {Out of print.) 
 
 9. WHY IS POPERY PROGRESSING ?— 1835. Is. 6d. 
 
 Edited by the Author. 
 WITHOUT FAITH, WITHOUT GOD : or an APPEAL to GOD concern- 
 ing his OWN EXISTENCE, &c.— By the late John Barclay, A.M. Pastor of 
 the Berean Assembly, Edinburgh. — With a Preface by the Rev. David Thom, 
 Minister of Bold-street Chapel, Liverpool. — 1836. 2s. 6d. 
 
 The Author intends publishing, at no distant period, a DISCOURSE on the 
 ATONEMENT. 
 
Princeton Theological Semmary-Speer Library 
 
 1 1012 01144 7143